Comment Re:Getting what you paid for (Score 1) 427
Actually, if you read what I stated, you'd know that what you claim I stated is not at all the same thing. I said that Limiting volume implies CONTROL. This control is a foot in the door. This "movement" is designed to get that foot in the door. This will bypass the argument that the Government has no business controlling private networks (in any capacity.) It will dictate that Government DOES have business controlling private networks (in capacities that it so decides.) This will *lead* to control of content. For you see the Government is using the FCC to bring about these net regulations. What other mandates are given to the FCC? Censorship. Then in the legislative branch, you have Democrat politicians discussing openly and actively pursuing this "Fairness Doctrine" and legislation like that.
Please tell me what you get when you put all of that into a blender and hit "mix?"
I'll tell you. Absolute control of the flow of information by content control.
It's not really a conspiracy "theory" anymore. It's now just a conspiracy. The more you argue in favor of Government regulating the Internet, the further along you advance that conspiracy. Even if you have good intentions and believe the legislation is of good intent. You're being used. First they came for the ISPs..?
Please tell me what you get when you put all of that into a blender and hit "mix?"
I'll tell you. Absolute control of the flow of information by content control.
It's not really a conspiracy "theory" anymore. It's now just a conspiracy. The more you argue in favor of Government regulating the Internet, the further along you advance that conspiracy. Even if you have good intentions and believe the legislation is of good intent. You're being used. First they came for the ISPs..?