How Can Obama Ruin the Internet? - You Do Nothing!

A recent newspaper headline screamed: "Fewer American Go to the Movies." Is that a bad thing?  It's only bad if you are a movie theatre trying to fill seats in the U.S.A. In fact, the audience size as well as the venue and media choices are bigger than ever. After all, the choice on how and when to watch movies is unlimited on theatre screens, iPads, iPhones, flat screen T.V.s and video or android devices.

The point here is don't feel sorry for the film industry. They will continue to produce movies because they are making so much money with so many ways to license, distribute, market, package and bundle feature films for screening or viewing--the  CGI, Computer-Generated Imagery, digital age has now arrived.

So, how does the digital entertainment industry mirror the Internet? It certainly can draw parallels that are subtle, yet frightening in their real impact. Up into the beginning of the twenty-first century the U.S. governing board has been privately run to exert regulatory pressures on the industry. The history is interesting in itself as described in an excerpt from Wikipedia: 

"The National Board of Review of Motion Pictures was founded in 1909 in New York City, just 13 years after the birth of cinema, to protest New York City Mayor George B. McClellan, Jr.'s revocation of moving-picture exhibition licenses on Christmas Eve 1908. The mayor (son of the famed Civil War general) believed that the new medium degraded the morals of community. To assert their constitutional freedom of expression, theatre owners led by Marcus Loew and film distributors (Edison, Biograph, Pathé and Gaumont) joined John Collier of The People's Institute at Cooper Union and established the New York Board of Motion Picture Censorship, which soon changed its name to the National Board of Review of Motion Pictures to avoid the taint of the word 'censorship'."

In 1909, the National Board of Review in an effort to avoid government censorship of films  became the unofficial clearinghouse for new movies. In 1969, the Motion Picture Association of America, MPAA, as an independent-private organization, continued on with its oversight in the capacity of ratings reviews. In order to control the moral conduct in the movies, it rated the movie theatres goers on an age basis thereby limiting the box office sales with G - General, R - Restricted, NC-17 - No Children Under 17 or X - Porn ratings. Today however, with the availability to view anything anywhere, this literally neuters and narrows down the MPAA viewer controls only on theatre goers.

U.S. movie box office ticket volume fell 11% between 2004 to 2014, while 2013 domestic sales rose to $10.9 billion, due to increased ticket prices. By contrast, China's ticket sales rose to $3.6 billion as well as movie goers; it's the first time a foreign market surpassed $3 billion. 

The U.S. movie industry is highly critical of the Chinese totalitarian government's austere, deeply Orwellian, stranglehold on their societal, cultural and personal values. With almost 14 new cinema screens built every day, China censors only allow 34 foreign films per year to screen nationwide in their cinemas according to data from the MPAA, Motion Picture Association of America. Where is the creative freedom from censorship?

ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), founded September 18, 1998, is a private (non-government) non-profit type of corporation. Responsibilities are for all of the IP address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system management, and root server system management functions. The need to internationalize the governing of the Internet (among other concerns) led the U.S. government to recommend the origin of ICANN as a global, government-independent entity to manage the systems and protocols that keep the Internet going.

ICANN has a board of nineteen Directors, nine At-Large Directors, nine to be nominated by Supporting Organizations, and the President/CEO (ex officio). 

Obama recently signed an executive order transferring ICANN controls over to the United Nations and a yet unnamed group of people as an international body legislating regulations of the who, what, why and when on how the World Wide Web, WWW, runs on the Internet. 

Is the Chinese movie censorship scenario going to be the same template for the takeover and control of the ICANN? "The plan announced on March 14, 2014 would have the U.S. give up control of the "root zone file" of the Internet and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or Icann. This root of the Internet stores all the names and addresses for websites world-wide, while Icann controls Web addresses and domains. The U.S. has used this control to ensure that websites operate without political interference from any country. It's so that anyone can start a website, organize on Facebook or post on Twitter without asking permission."

All Americans should immediately reject Obama's very naive turnover or resign themselves to a horrible outcome for their Internet--it is one of the most important inventions helping everyone daily at minimal cost, with no restrictions or limits currently for all users.

"The alternative to continued U.S. authority is control by an international body dominated by authoritarian regimes. Do you know that Saudia Arabia has already sought to veto domain references to .gay, .bible, .islam and .wine even before this Obama changeover and was denied by ICANN? Do you see the warning signposts ahead?

"In a law review article about Icann in 2000, "Wrong Turn in Cyberspace," Michael Froomkin wrote that "It is hard to see how an undemocratic solution based on the international system in which a tyranny's vote is as valid as a democracy's vote would be a material improvement on Icann itself."

"Congress should quickly come to the same conclusion and act to save the Internet."

CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE TO TELL THEM NO TO ICANN TRANSFER!

 

Update on Friday, March 28, 2014 at 10:57AM by D.K. Dickey

Under the byline: "I told you so." or "I just said that." 

Turkey Muzzles YouTube, Media Ahead of Elections

March 28, 2014

ISTANBUL-The Turkish government blocked YouTube and restricted local media; saying it represented a threat to national security. This act was drawing international outrage days ahead of critical local elections seen as a referendum on Prime Minister Tayrip Erdogan's rule. It was censored after a leaked recording was released anonymously of Turkey's National Intelligence Organization's head, Hakan Fidan, suggesting a missile assault as justification for any public incursions or riots. The prosecutor's office said that the leak would be investigated as "an act of spying."

ICANN Rule (If it was under new U.N. Organization): Your Freedom of Speech on the Internet is allowed when no political views expressed oppose the host country. 

 Is there a real danger of placing ICANN administration under the thumbs of despots, terrorists, communists and totalitarian rulers? 

The tip of the ICANN ice berg is now showing! Beware of the danger below!

Update on Friday, May 2, 2014 at 8:56PM by D.K. Dickey

Russian Parliament Approves New Law Restricting Internet, Blogging

This article just feeds further disbeliefs about why the Internet organization, ICANN, should not be turned over to an International body, a select committee, to oversee and administer the Internet regulations. This news item shows who one of these members would be on the Internet panel.

By Wall Street Journal

OLGA RAZUMOVSKAYA

Updated April 30, 2014 1:14 a.m. ET

MOSCOW—Russia's parliament approved a package of sweeping new restrictions on the Internet and blogging. The bills drew wide criticism from local technology companies and pro-democracy activists.

The new measures come amid steps by the Kremlin to tighten its control over media and the political system in Russia, efforts that have gained momentum in recent months. Western criticism of Moscow in the Ukraine crisis has led to more attacks by the Kremlin on domestic critics.

The draft laws affecting the Internet, which are expected to be signed soon by President Vladimir Putin and take effect in August, have elicited criticism from Russia's technology sector.

"The adoption of the law will become a yet another step in increasing government control over the Internet in Russia, which will negatively impact the development of the industry," said a spokesman for Yandex, Russia's biggest search engine.

The three bills impose strict control over disseminating information on the Internet and online payments, and toughen punishment for terrorism and extremism. The one that sparked the most concern effectively equates popular bloggers with media outlets, subjecting them to greater regulation and liability.

The bill would require bloggers with 3,000 or more page-views a day to reveal their identities, fact-check content, not disseminate extremist information or information violating privacy of citizens, and abide by the rules of pre-election. 

Update on Friday, May 9, 2014 at 8:48AM by D.K. Dickey

STFU! Moscow Controls Internet Speech

LOL!  President Vladimir Putin signed into law to restrict the use of profanity to reinforce what the Kremlin calls traditional values in Russia. This line item is contained within their Internet bill to tighten controls over speech and the Internet.  

Bloggers with more than 3,000 daily page views will be subject to hefty fines for profanity beginning in August, 2114. The laws do not define what the 'foul language' is which leaves the totalitarian regime wide latitude in levying restrictions and fines.

Obama recently signed an executive order transferring in 2015 the ICANN controls over to the United Nations and a yet "unnamed group of people" as an international body legislating regulations of the who, what, why and when on how the World Wide Web, WWW, runs on the Internet.

Are the international panel members that will administrate the proposed 'United Nations ICANN Organization' oversight going to be inclusive with like-minded thinkers as in Russia? If so, we are in "Deep SH*T" since this is the case.  Then, look out for them levying onerous user financial burdens like punishing excesses of access fees, service rates and government licenses.

Look out for the ICANN panel members' stringent U.N. Internet guidelines to curb free expression and discourse.  This is all from the "civil rights advocate nations" like China, Myanmar, Iran, Albania, Cambodia, etc.--only kidding, I wish I was, but it is the harsh fact!

Get Out Your Voice & Email Your Representatives!

 ~ It is a Non-Partisan Issue ~

~ Americans Owe their Freedom to our Laws -  So does the Internet ~

To Email your U.S. Congressional Representatives. 

Click on: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/map Enter your home "Zip Code" and it will list by their Names and Internet sites. Click on to their individual "Official Website" and type into their email message box: "Do Not transfer ICANN to UN" and send--it's that easy and it will take a second to do it too! 

You Are Crazy if You Don't Email Congress!

Please Send this out to your Friends Now!

Ready for a Obamacare Single Payer System?

 

*Federal Spending Categories – The data is published by the Congressional Budget Office, and represents the average percentage of federal spending (not including interest expense) in each of the indicated categories for the period 2011-2040. As of 2011, our actual budget 'overall discretionary spending' is 30%, which can be argued back and forth within the colorful political debates on the floor of Congress. However, our 'total mandatory spending' is 70%, mandated by law, in which 40% are Medicare and Social Security entitlements while 20% are apportioned for the Department of Defense and the Veteran's Affairs, Education and agriculture and 10% for SNAP - Food stamps and Medicaid. It is not a negotiable budget with discretionary expenses and is extremely volatile to political pressures from various special interest lobbyist groups in Washington, DC.

Please note the shift from 2011 Actual Budget period ended compared to the 2011-2040 Projected Budget pie chart shown above that indicates even more allocation to Social Security for an ever-aging population. This is where the House and Senate must work out a 'balanced budget' under our Constitutional Laws - one that both sides can finally agree upon.

The Wild Card: Affordable Healthcare Act - Obamacare is not a funded entitlement program like Medicare. Under penalty of IRS law: It is taxed and paid annually by all citizens under 65 years old for funding comprehensive health insurance coverage for all patients.

Three Affordable Healthcare Act outcomes:

1. Taxpayers fund the entire Act going forward. 

2. Taxpayers do not fund the Act entirely while running a deficit.

3. Taxpayers fail to fund Act which is converted into 'Single Payer'.

Warning: If the Affordable Healthcare Act payments from enrollee taxes fail to fund that entire program; then upon the conversion to any proposed 'Single Payer Health Care' program, all congressional budgets are bankrupt and worthless too.

Remember: The Congressional debt reduction and spending budget debates are generational due to different time horizons (age) and expected benefits (payouts). The young payers are ordered to pay higher rates under penalty of law for their IRS health tax bills to support older beneficiaries. All future payouts for their own retirement benefits, theorectically, will be paid by upcoming younger health care payers. Young payers, the 'invincibles', are very skeptical about even needing health insurance and then doubt in ever receiving those retirement benefits too.   

• Older people look at their immediate needs from retirement savings, social security, Medicare and healthcare programs.
• Younger people look at their future needs for IRA savings accounts, investments, health insurance while planning ahead with social security and Medicare programs.

Recommendation: It's time to elect a majority of Republicans in the Senate and the House in 2014 ...and for the President not working across the Congressional aisles: In the Executive branch - it's time for a  Republican there in 2016 too! 

The Malaysia Flight 370 - 239 On Board to Where?

Conspiracy theories abound with wild conjectures, speculations and outlandish claims. However, in the middle of this brouhaha, a Retired Air Force General, Thomas McInerney, has made a measured, reasonable case for the who, what, why, where and how variables as this Malaysian Airlines incident has been unfolding. Gen. McInerney served as a pilot, commander and strategic planner in the U.S. Air Force. His insider knowledge in the avionics field, airline procedures, familiarity of commercial and military aircraft capabilities, personal connections with individuals in the DOD and the military complex adds up to a solid expert with excellent analysis supporting his assumptions. 

 

Time: 05:12

Retired Air Force General Thomas McInerney isn’t backing away from his thriller novel-like suggestion that the missing Malaysia Airlines flight could have very well landed in Pakistan — and he says his theory is based on more than mere conjecture. A former military officer is claiming the U.S. government "knows a lot more" than it is publicly revealing about the Malaysian jetliner that went missing more than a week ago.

Retired Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney said on Fox's "The Kelly File" that he suspects some type of criminal behavior and that it is possible the plane landed somewhere. He said all airfields in the area should be checked, including in Pakistan and in eastern Iran. Many have said it was a suicide pact to fly it out over the open ocean and crash, but according to Gen. McInerney their religion does not allow for it unlike their suicide bombers unless it is in the act of jihadi martyrdom. Since no known groups or people have come forward with any jihadist martyr declarations it has been ruled out.

The highly likely scenario is it's a high-jacking instead and his theory is based upon the fact that after the last radar contact with the plane that it took off Northeast, not Southwest as some have conjectured. The confusion of where it went afterwards was compounded by alleged fishermen spotting a low flying aircraft cruising low over the water in a southward direction and later subsequent satellite photos locating 'possible' crash debris floating far south in the Indian Ocean. This gave them more time to head in the opposite direction unnoticed without interference of search aircraft looking for it and then hide it. The 7,000 mile range fuel tank capacity certainly could fly the distance from Kuala, Lumpur to Beijing, China as well as to either Pakistan or Iran too.

This route could be flown on a sea track undetected by staying away from the shore lines outside the 200 mile international zone buffer where radar in the area is not reliably present. It further means that the jetliner easily could have flown undetected right up into Pakistan airspace, where al Queda leader, Osama bin Laden was hidden in a compound by the corrupt Pakistan government's ICI Agency, Inter Services Intelligence, near an active military base for ten years, a miles and a half from Islamabad, their capital. Iran is another excellent choice to fly into and hide a jetliner too. Gen. McInerney also added that the aircraft, by now, has been moved into a hanger or safely in an area hidden in either country by now.

"I know the U.S. government knows a lot more than they're talking about. And clearly, the NSA has a lot of data they're going through now ... I'm confident that the U.S. government has a much better picture than the Malaysian government and the Chinese government," McInerney said.  By the way, he said his own scenario outcome is at a 75% reliabiltiy rating. What is yours? 

Dispelling Mysteries Around Washington Myths

 

The above on-line banner is the 'Official Affordable Healthcare' banner page that was displayed to expose the myths spread by others about the Obamacare Program. It has become more of a warning sign that shows what myths by the President himself that have been spread during the rollouts. 

“No matter how we reform health care,” Obama said, “we will keep this promise: if you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period.” Obama's healthcare statement was rated as a Four Pinocchios 'Whopper'. This was reported as the 'biggest lie of the year' which was repeatedly made by President Barrack Obama. There have been no requests for any fact reviews, so the rating stands as final.

Now here is the story behind this well publicized 'Four Pinocchios' rating system. Although subjective, it offers anyone the opportunity to refute or challenge the Washington Post's dubious honor.   

The Washington Post's famous 'Honesty Ratings' is scored from one to four Pinocchios. From an award-winning journalism career that has spanned over more than three decades, Glenn Kessler in his role as the Post's fact checker has covered foreign policy, economic policy, the White House, Congress, politics, airline safety and Wall Street.  

The Pinocchio Test

Where possible, the Washington Post adopts the following standard in fact-checking the claims of a politician, political candidate, diplomat or interest group.

 One Pinocchio

Some shading of the facts. Selective telling of the truth. Some omissions and exaggerations, but no outright falsehoods.

 Two Pinocchios

Significant omissions and/or exaggerations. Some factual error may be involved but not necessarily. A politician can create a false, misleading impression by playing with words and using legalistic language that means little to ordinary people.

Three Pinocchios

Significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions.

 Four Pinocchios

Whoppers.

 The Geppetto Checkmark

Statements and claims that contain “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” will be recognized with the Washington Post's prized Geppetto checkmark.

 

An Upside-Down Pinocchio

A statement that represents a clear but unacknowledged “flip-flop” from a previously-held position.

 

Withholding Judgment

There will be many occasions when it is impossible to render a snap judgment because the issue is very complex or there are good arguments on both sides. In this case, we will withhold our judgment until we can gather more facts. We will use this website to shed as much light as possible on factual controversies that are not easily resolved.

*** The Washington Post's Pinocchio Policy ***

All judgments are subject to debate and criticism from Washington Post readers and interested parties, and can be revised if fresh evidence emerges. The Post invites anyone to join the discussion on their pages and contact the Fact Checker directly with tips, suggestions, and complaints. If you feel that the Post are being too harsh on one candidate and too soft on another, there is a simple remedy: let the Post know about misstatements and factual errors the Post may have overlooked. 

Figures Don't lie, But Liars Do Figure!

Obama travels around the country comparing the 'rich fat cats' to the 'main street folks' that are, "Just at or below the poverty level." How many times have we heard him use it to define the income divide between the 'rich people' and the 'poor folks?' Read directly below from the U.S. Census Bureau site about where the phrase 'poverty level is to be used or not used, especially since it is considered a loosely defined reference in a legislative situation where precision is important.

The U.S. Census Bureau also reports, "Income and poverty estimates are from several major national household surveys and programs."..."It is important to understand that different surveys and methods, which are designed to meet different needs, may produce different results." Now that's all very instructive when deciphering the statistical data.

In a North Dakota newspaper of 1884, the oldest citation found, an anonymous reader wrote, "Figure Don't lie, But Liars Do Figure". So, I guess when Obama is stretching the truth or simply lying the 'FPL phrase' also comes in real handy too.

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) -  U.S. Census.gov Site
"According to the Department of Health and Human Services, "The poverty guidelines are sometimes loosely referred to as the 'federal poverty level' (FPL), but that phrase is ambiguous and should be avoided, especially in situations (e.g., legislative or administrative) where precision is important."

PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF WEIGHTED AVERAGE POVERTY THRESHOLDS FOR 2013
	Size of Family Unit				Estimated Threshold
	1 person (unrelated individual).............					$11,892
	Under 65 years ................................					12,119
	65 years and over ............................					11,173
	2 people ............................................					$15,156
	Householder under 65 years …............					15,676
	Householder 65 years and over ..........					14,095
	3 people .............................................					$18,552
	4 people .............................................					23,836
	5 people .............................................					28,235
	6 people .............................................					31,932
	7 people .............................................					36,267
	8 people .............................................					40,269
	9 people or more .................................					47,990
	Note: The preliminary estimates of the weighted average poverty thresholds for 2013 are calculated by multiplying the 2012 weighted average thresholds by a factor of 1.014648 the ratio of the average annual Consumer Price Index for All Consumers (CPI-U) for 2013 to the average annual CPI-U for 2012.  These estimates may differ slightly from the final thresholds that will be published in September 2014 with the release of the official poverty estimates for 2013.

At Poverty Levels: 2012 - All U.S. FAMILIES Total: 80,944 million - 25% of pop. 

The latest U.S. Census 2013 figures for total U.S. population is: 317.6 million, 64% or 203.2 million are white (Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish) despite major changes due to illegal and legal immigration since the 1960s and the higher birth-rates of nonwhites.

A March, 2013 CNN Money report stated: The top 10% of taxpayers paid over 70% of the total amount collected in federal income taxes in 2010, the latest year figures are available, according to the Tax Foundation, a think tank that advocates for lower taxes. That's up from 55% in 1986.

The remaining 90% of taxpayers bore just under 30% of the tax burden. And 47% of all Americans pay hardly anything at all. If you add back in the 25% of household that are below the poverty level who pay none, then that 47% is really only a measly 22%, hardly anything at all.

It does not take a mental giant to figure out that the generous Obamacare program will not be paid out on the backs of the rich.

Hello, you 90%, deduct the 25% below the poverty level and it leaves only 65% really paying that 30% of the tax burden; but, look out for huge tax increases you will pay for Obama's federal benefits programs.