Question: What does it take to get bitter rivals, Google and Facebook – the two most popular and powerful entities on the planet, to put aside their differences and join forces for a common cause?

Answer: Internet censorship in America, or the threat thereof.

Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past month or so, you’ve no doubt been hearing on TV news, and reading in newspapers and on blogs about a controversial new bill called SOPA (the Stop Online Piracy Act).

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), also known as H.R.3261, was introduced in the United States House of Representatives on October 26, 2011 by Representative Lamar Smith [R-TX] and a bipartisan group of 12 initial co-sponsors. The aim of the bill is to help U.S. law enforcement and copyright holders fight online transmission of restricted intellectual property. (Source: Wikipedia)

Serious First Amendment Ramifications

New bills that police the Internet get passed all the time, so why all the commotion over this bill? Because this particular bill has serious first amendment ramifications – a potential encroachment of free speech. Even famed attorney and constitutional law expert Floyd Abrams, a paid advocate for supporters of the bill, admits SOPA would censor protected speech. In a letter sent to House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith and Ranking Member John Conyers, Abrams writes:

“Regardless of the particular standard or definition of foreign infringing sites, court-approved remedies under the Stop Online Piracy Act may result in the blockage or disruption of some protected speech. As discussed above, the bill provides a range of injunctive relief…, with a court making the final determination as to whether and how to craft relief against a website operator or owner or third party intermediaries. When injunctive relief includes blocking domain names, the blockage of non-infringing or protected content may result.” (Source:Techdirt.com )

Goodbye Internet Freedom

Opponents of the bill (including yours truly) think the bill would fundamentally change the Internet as we know it – and not for the better. Let me explain.

The idea behind SOPA came about as a way to try to eliminate piracy on the Internet. According to a recent article on PCWorld.com, online piracy costs the U.S. economy $58 billion in losses every year, including 373,000 jobs. And while I agree online piracy is indeed a serious problem that needs to be addressed, the excessive and invasive measures contained in SOPA are simply the wrong approach. The bill would unduly and randomly grant content owners the power of censorship.

That’s right, if SOPA were passed, content owners would have the power to obtain court injunctions to block access to certain websites that were simply considered “copyright infringement friendly.”

For example, if my website, Free-Marketing-Tips-Blog.com happened to have content that could be interpreted as “piracy-friendly,” my domain name could be blocked so it would be inaccessible by visiting my URL address. What the bill can’t do, however, is block numeric IP addresses. So if I were indeed a pirate, you could still access my website, or any other censored website for that matter, if you had their IP address. And while SOPA might discourage casual pirates, more determined and sophisticated hardcore pirates would likely not be dissuaded – at least not to any significant degree.

Why? Because the business of piracy is much too lucrative to be deterred by such measures. It’s sort of like burglar-proofing your front door… burglars will just come in through the back door.

Effective at Censorship

So essentially, the bill would be ineffective at what it was specifically designed to do – eliminate piracy. But would likely be very effective at censoring any suspected websites – even if the offense is unwitting and something as minor as you or one of your friends posting a copyrighted image to your Facebook page.

Heck, even a seemingly innocuous comment in a blog post could be considered piracy friendly. How preposterous is that?

There is also a concern the bill would stifle critically important technical innovation and job creation by overturning existing laws that were catalysts for the technological boom of the last decade; which could prove damaging to an already fragile and slow recovering economy.

Add to the equation the fact the bill has such vague standards and sweeping language, and you can begin to understand why so many people are up in arms over the bill.

Powerful Opposition

How strong is opposition to SOPA? According to an article on the blog PureVPN.com titled Protest Against SOPA Bill Reaches a Fever Pitch…

“An open letter against the SOPA bill was jointly written by the industry giants including Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, eBay, Mozilla, Yahoo, Zynga and AOL. The letter addressed the congressional sponsors of the bill urging them to reconsider the measures and it appeared as a full-page ad in The New York Times on Wednesday.

Apart from this letter a lot of other websites are protesting against this bill in their own way. For example Reddit, Firefox and Tumblr drew broad black lines on their websites to protest against this proposed law. When a user logs in at Tumblr he gets to see that all user-generated content has been blacked out. When users click on the gray lines to investigate, a message appears which tells them about the bill and encourages them to oppose it. Reddit and Mozilla have censored their logos which click through to instructions for contacting representatives.”

Even the Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden has spoken out against the bill in a remarkably compelling speech on Internet Freedom.

So What’s Next?

At the time of writing this article, the bill currently sits in the House Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition, and the Internet. It has yet to be introduced to the floor for a vote. A sham hearing on the bill took place on Wednesday, November 16, 10:00 a.m. in the House Judiciary Committee.

Why was the hearing a sham? Because present at the hearing were parties overwhelmingly supportive of the bill, including Pfizer, MasterCard and MPAA, while Google was the only party present allowed to voice opposition. Talk about a stacked deck.

Will the Bill Pass?

Despite the tendentious hearing, Reuters is reporting that Darrell Issa, the Republican congressional representative for California, has said that there is no way that SOPA will pass.

“There is a very broad coalition from far left to far right who realise this will hurt innovation, something we can’t afford to do. And there are other ways to accomplish what they say is their goal.

“I don’t believe this bill has any chance on the House floor. I think it’s way too extreme, it infringes on too many areas that our leadership will know is simply too dangerous to do in its current form.”

Conclusion

While Darrell Issa’s statement might seem like good news on its face, my position is, I’ll believe it when I actually see the bill die in the House. Remember, we’re dealing with politicians on both sides who are bought and paid for by corporate interests. Don’t take Internet freedom for granted. If you are against the SOPA bill, I urge you to take action by contacting your members of congress and voicing your opposition to SOPA today!

This article courtesy of SiteProNews.com

UPDATE ON SOPA
Matt Cutts Blog – Progress against SOPA
CNet – How SOPA would affect you: FAQ
TechDirt – Microsoft’s Cold Feet Over SOPA Behind BSA’s ‘Rethinking’ Its Views

CitiBank is just one of the globalist banks plundering your savings with the blessing of the privately owned Federal Reserve. Other financial institutions include: Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, and Goldman Sachs.

You can choose today whether to continue supporting a corrupt financial cartel or closing your accounts and stop supporting their global takeover of the world's financial economies.

Can you hear the wake up call?

Perhaps it's time to trade your paper money for Silver, Food, and ammunition.

Free Republic reports:
Allee Bautsch, chief campaign fundraiser for Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, and her boyfriend Joe Brown, were savagely beaten Friday night in New Orleans after leaving a Republican party fundraising dinner by a group of thugs who reportedly targeted the couple because they were wearing Sarah Palin pins.

The attackers were likely part of a group of socialists associated with the anarchist group Iron Rail Book Collective which had descended on the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans. This group prides itself on disruptive protests and actually advocates anarchy. They were protesting in front of the Hilton Hotel and at Brennan’s Restaurant, the site of a Republican fundraiser. Outside of Brennan’s these socialists waved profanity laced signs and yelled expletives at the patrons of the restaurant.

Jeff Crouere, Host of "Ringside Politics" said, "Sadly, the news media does not seem to care when conservatives are attacked because of their political views. At several tea parties, conservatives have been beaten up by liberal thugs, yet the media is obsessed with some outrageous signs. Clearly, the story once again exposes the outrageous double standard in the mainstream national news media."

Our presuppositions form the basis for our values, and these values determine what we believe and how we live our lives.

An individual is not just the product of the forces around him. He has a mind, an inner world. Then, having thought, a person can bring forth actions into the external world and thus influence it. People are apt to look at the outer theater of action, forgetting the actor who "lives in the mind" and who therefore is the true actor in the external world. The inner thought world determines the outward action.

As we consider a person's actions, it is helpful to have an understanding of their world view. The beliefs a person holds and the actions they take will make more sense when considered within the boundaries of their world view. Their beliefs and actions will generally be consistent with their world view.

Learn more about the New World Order

The holiday of Christmas is celebrated to mark the widely Christian accepted date of the birth of Jesus. Although the origin of the Merry Christmas greeting is open for debate, it is often thought to have originated just a few years after his birth, making it one of the oldest and most often celebrated holiday. Typically, greeting cards use the phrase Merry Christmas as an announcement of the card’s message as well as by individuals either upon greeting on when saying goodbye.

Although not all religions follow the traditional holiday among Christians, it is one of the most celebrated of holidays. While some may doubt its religious roots, they are vastly outnumbered by those that do. This explains why the use of the Merry Christmas greeting continues despite a few objections.

Wishes For A Merry Christmas Offer Peace And Reflection
The traditional greeting is often used to offer friends and families hope for a new year, especially with the New Year celebration coming a week after the holiday. The perception is that wishing someone a merry Christmas is also offering hope that they also have a happy New Year.

Christmas time is often used to express hope for a new beginning, marking the birth of Jesus, and is one of the most avidly celebrated of the religious holidays. Religious orders of Christian denomination use the holiday as a means of re-introducing their members to the reason for the season in hopes that a merry Christmas celebration will bring them back into an active membership status.

For many however, merry Christmas is simply a greeting used through the holiday season as a means of showing they belong to the group that believes in the season. However, for many, such as Ebenezer Scrooge, it is a time of overindulgence and a celebration practiced by those trying to show others their importance.

Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said,

"If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.' "

Here is how they do it," Lamm said:

"First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country." History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar, Seymour Lipset, put it this way: "The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy." Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, and Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans."

Lamm went on: Second, to destroy America, "Invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds."

Third, "We could make the United States an 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: "The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentricity and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together." Lamm said, "I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America enforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities."

"Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high school"

"My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology.' I would get all minorities to think that their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population."

"My sixth plan for America's downfall would include dual citizenship, and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other — that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds

were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. "E. Pluribus Unum" — From many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'Pluribus' instead of the 'Unum,' we will balkanize America as surely as Kosovo."

"Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits; make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity.' I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century – that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' halt discussion and debate. Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology,' I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them."

In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. Profound silence followed. Finally he said. "Lastly, I would censor Victor Davis Hanson's book Mexifornia. His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don't read that book."

There was no applause. A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly, yet pervasively across the United States today. Discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system and national cohesiveness. Barbaric cultures that practice female genital mutilation are growing as we celebrate 'diversity.' American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as corporations create a Third World in. America – take note of California and other states — to date, ten million illegal aliens and growing fast. It is reminiscent of George Orwell's book "1984." In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building: "War is peace," "Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength."

Governor Lamm walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that our nation and the future of this great democracy is deeply in trouble and worsening fast. If we don't get this immigration monster stopped within three years, it will rage like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially The American Dream.

On January 24, 2008, the FCC published a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" in the Federal Register which, if ultimately adopted, would impose a back-door version of the discredited "Fairness Doctrine" upon America's airwaves.

The FCC's proposed regulations claim that radio station "programming — particularly network programming – often is not sufficiently culturally diverse" and that the FCC seeks "to ensure that broadcasters serve their communities, especially traditionally underserved audiences," such as non-English speakers, whether or not these people actually exist.

The FCC's proposed regulations also suggest a new requirement that all "licensees should convene and consult with permanent advisory boards."

These advisory boards "should include representatives of all segments of the community," a requirement which would empower self-appointed "community leaders," such as representatives of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) or the Center for American Islamic Relations (CAIR), to discourage commercial radio stations from airing discussions of controversial matters such as the costs of illegal immigration or the meaning of jihad.

English First has established a web site, http://www.keeprushontheair.com, containing the relevant FCC documents and a citizen's petition to the FCC. The deadline for FCC reply comments is June 11, 2008.