Net neutrality


Years ago, blogger Tom Paine and I were having a spot of lunch and he noted that I write in a quite personalized way on topics.

Yes I do because issues are how we see them, translated into blogposts. Depersonalized commentaries are boring and anyway, I’ve never trusted them – I’d rather know a man’s [or woman’s] bias first and go from there. Nothing wrong with bias as long as it’s honestly stated.

Soubry, Grieve and hangers on are a perfect case of pretending to strike a blow FOR democracy when in fact they are working against it and anyone pretending to be impartial when they speak or write – I don’t trust.

Around our way, we could be said to be non-specific-party Deplorable and that’s that. Which is why when this net neutrality thing came up and then more came through and then more, well … I’m getting ahead of myself.


My own site and the co-administered OoL schedule posts – any blogger of experience will tell you that it’s fine to do the occasional spontaneous post like this but in order to cover all the current issues, we need to research and schedule. Many of us are also on FB or Twitter and take feeds from many sites and aggregators.

In the case of N.O., two gents have a massive input, they’re almost gatekeepers at times and a variety of other chaps and chapesses also send things – there are two waiting to look through right now.

At OoL, the other two worthies post and schedule as they see fit, Mike tending to “research and rant” almost as an immediate reaction. Both have their own sites [see second sidebar].

In our book, it’s all A-OK how it works, otherwise we’d be swamped by material, by data and no one would brook interference from the others, we’re unherdable cats.If we ourselves don’t know what we’ll be writing, how can a watchdog or mind-controller?

There is still, for us in Britain, a certain freedom in what we can write but we’re not islands – both these blogs are behind double security of the best kind – they’re not hosted by us but by other Deplorables [who are current readers, not faceless men in the least] and not all hosts are within Britain.

All this is relevant in the light of the Net Neutrality issue in the States, which just took an FCC vote and it does affect us and by extension, you the reader, as we have a US connection – we don’t use Cloud for everything – we also have techies handling this side of things, plus legal advice.

First cab off the rank was from the Judicial Watch email feed:

The regulation of the internet issue:

Judicial Watch today announced it joined the Allied Educational Foundation (AEF) in submitting an amici curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, urging the court to hear the appeal of the 2015 case United States Telecom Association, et al. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America (No. 15-1063) and rein in the administrative power granted to the Federal Election Commission (FCC) by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Judicial Watch argues that the circuit court’s decision “undermined the constitutional separation of powers” by allowing the FCC to directly intervene in the broadband Internet economy. The amici brief also argues that the lower court’s ruling will expose the FCC to undue influence from politicians and lobbyists now and in the future.

Read the rest of that article at the link above.

Popular Mechanics has an opinion:

Net neutrality repeal will amplify the internet’s most dire and pressing flaws.

Today, the FCC Commission voted to repeal net neutrality protections by a margin of 3 to 2. The long-expected move followed popular outcry including physical demonstrations and two days of online protest in the form of a “Break the Internet” campaign which rallied giants like Reddit, Mozilla, Cloudflare, Pinterest, and Github as well as rank-and-file enthusiasts to its cause. Unlike the efforts to save the net from the scourge of SOPA in 2012 and to defend net neutrality in 2014, this movement was ultimately unsuccessful. The fundamental nature of the internet is now destined to change, and not for the better.

There is hope for the reinstatement of net neutrality regulations, most immediately through a potential Congressional review, but chances grow slimmer with each passing day. Representatives from Congress on both sides of the aisle spoke out prior to the FCC’s decision, and legislation could reinstate net neutrality rules, but inertia will be a major force. Congress has historically been unable to decisively legislate the issue and recently sided with big telecom on the matter of your privacy, not to mention lawmakers have plenty of other things to worry about. And thanks to the FCC, the position that lawmakers will be legislating from is not one of preserving regulation, but rather of whipping up something new. An extremely tall order.

So what can we expect going forward?

Read the rest of that article at the link above.

Wired also has an opinion:

The FCC Just Killed Net Neutrality. Now What?

Most immediately, the activity will move to the courts, where the advocacy group Free Press, and probably others, will challenge the FCC’s decision. The most likely argument: that the commission’s decision violates federal laws barring agencies from crafting “arbitrary and capricious” regulations. After all, the FCC’s net neutrality rules were just passed in 2015. Activists and many members of Congress, including at least six Republicans, pushed for a delay in the vote, but apart from a brief delay due to a security issue, the vote occurred as planned.

But as capricious as the current FCC’s about-face may seem, legal experts say the challenges won’t be a slam-dunk case. Federal agencies are allowed to change their minds about previous regulations, so long as they adequately explain their reasoning. “It’s not carte blanche,” says Marc Martin, chair of law firm Perkins Coie’s communications practice. “You can’t make it obvious that it’s just based on politics.” Martin says the burden of proof will be on net neutrality advocates challenging the agency.

Read the rest of that article at the link above.

Personal notes

Popular Mechanics, despite its title, often puts the establishment line on issues, which translates into leftwing at times.  Wired tends to be left-libertarian [an oxymoron and by saying that – thereby showing our bias].

I always understood net neutrality to be one of those weasel euphemisms for interference by government in what is written online.  In other words – control of our words and thoughts.

However, that’s not just the province of government, is it?  It’s also those it’s leaned on and groomed [or allegedly bribed] – the head honchos of Twitter etc.  Twitter, on December 18th, brings in its own “net neutrality” and it’s already censoring every tweet by “suspect” people, e.g. OoL and N.O. writers, contributors and readers.

And Twitter has made it quite clear it intends to pursue any of the “suspect” back to their own viewing habits in order to shut them out and/or blackmail them.

Which brings us to how on earth they would gain access to that information and the answer is right there in front of your eyes – these people [allegedly] collude, share – just look at Putin’s current assertion that the DNC, FBI, Comey and other agencies colluded in hitting the Trump campaign.

As we have seen, the Left/CINO axis in the UK and the Left/RINO axis in the US, let alone Australia, Canada and NZ, let alone any EU-influence country, are all such people.

Welcome to Nineteen-Eighty-Four, 33 years late.

How this post was put together:

I’d scheduled three Judicial Watch posts for 06:00 at N.O. when the other material started flooding in. For some reason, I woke up at 02:12, due to flooding where I live most like, checked the iPad, saw I’d need to get up and go to the computer, extracting the relevant JW section and adding the others, scheduling a new post as you see, before crashing [hopefully in five minutes] once again.  Coffee and alcohol play a part in the life of bloggers.

That’s how medium tier blogging is done. That piecemeal approach would have to worry the censors who don’t know when something’s coming and when it’s not, nor whence it’s coming.

And the more people read, the more people send. Which is why it’s utter stupidity to do as Soubry and Co are doing – defying the will of the people. This blogging thing is so organic, biological but at the same time [see China and North Korea, any Muslim nation] – one flick of a switch and any blogger is offline.

Going back in time:

1 comment for “Net neutrality

  1. Errol
    December 16, 2017 at 9:30 pm

    It’s very clear that if the Left want rid of you, they’ll get it. They don’t want freedom of speech. They don’t want dissent. They don’t want the truth.

    The Left are fascists. Fascists are violent, brutal, nasty creatures. When their war on liberty ends, they start on people. When a few million of them are dead because of plague, famine or just old fashioned mass murder – as fascists have throughout history – the Right eventually rise up and say ‘enough’. What do you do when there is no Right wing state?

Comments are closed.