War On You: Breaking Alternative News » censorship

CNN Pulls the Plug on Live Feed of Soldier Talking About Voting for Ron Paul

WarOnYou — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 10:14:04 +0000

CNN Pulls the Plug on Live Feed of Soldier Talking About Voting for Ron Paul

January 4th, 2012

Military personnel from the Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, have until recently been working in CNN’s hq in Atlanta.

CNN is up in arms about our report in the last issue of CounterPunch concerning the findings of the Dutch journalist, Abe de Vries about the presence of US Army personnel at CNN, owned by Time-Warner. We cited an article by de Vries which appeared on February 21 in the reputable Dutch daily newspaper Trouw, originally translated into English and placed on the web by Emperor’s Clothes. De Vries reported that a handful of military personnel from the Third Psychological Operations Battalion, part of the airmobile Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, had worked in CNN’s hq in Atlanta.

De Vries quoted Major Thomas Collins of the US Army Information Service as having confirmed the presence of these Army psy-ops experts at CNN, saying, “Psy-ops personnel, soldiers and officers, have been working in CNN’s headquarters in Atlanta through our program, ‘Training with Industry’. They worked as regular employees of CNN. Conceivably, they would have worked on stories during the Kosovo war. They helped in the production of news.”

SOPA: Internet Giants Consider ‘Nuclear Option’

WarOnYou — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 08:58:21 +0000

SOPA: Internet Giants Consider ‘Nuclear Option’

January 3rd, 2012

Via: Cnet:

The Internet’s most popular destinations, including eBay, Google, Facebook, and Twitter seem to view Hollywood-backed copyright legislation as an existential threat.

It was Google co-founder Sergey Brin who warned that the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect IP Act “would put us on a par with the most oppressive nations in the world.” Craigslist founder Craig Newmark, Twitter co-founders Jack Dorsey and Biz Stone, and LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman argue that the bills give the Feds unacceptable “power to censor the Web.”

But these companies have yet to roll out the heavy artillery.

When the home pages of Google.com, Amazon.com, Facebook.com, and their Internet allies simultaneously turn black with anti-censorship warnings that ask users to contact politicians about a vote in the U.S. Congress the next day on SOPA, you’ll know they’re finally serious.

True, it would be the political equivalent of a nuclear option–possibly drawing retributions from the the influential politicos backing SOPA and Protect IP–but one that could nevertheless be launched in 2012.

“There have been some serious discussions about that,” says Markham Erickson, who heads the NetCoalition trade association that counts Google, Amazon.com, eBay, and Yahoo as members. “It has never happened before.”

For Bloggers at Risk: Creating a Contingency Plan

WarOnYou — Mon, 26 Dec 2011 08:57:12 +0000

For Bloggers at Risk: Creating a Contingency Plan

December 24th, 2011

Via: Electronic Frontier Foundation:

Therefore, all bloggers–whether well-connected or just starting out–should consider creating a plan in the unfortunate event they are detained. That said, there are numerous resources bloggers can use to stay informed when other bloggers in their country are detained, harassed, or surveilled; when their government is monitoring phone conversations or Internet activity; and when detainees are being compelled to give up information, such as passwords, to authorities.

With that in mind, EFF together with Global Voices Advocacy have created a set of questions to consider. This list is by no means exhaustive, but should offer a starting point from which bloggers can develop their own contingency plans.

Money talks: GoDaddy begins to back away from SOPA after boycott

WarOnYou — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 09:13:59 +0000

Money talks: GoDaddy begins to back away from SOPA after boycott

December 24, 2011

Print Version

By Madison Ruppert
Editor of End the Lie

This is proof that we – as in all Americans that are connected to the internet – can actually have an impact on legislation simply by leveraging our collective buying power, at least to some degree.

After a massive boycott which began Thursday through the social news aggregation website reddit, the domain name registrar GoDaddy has backed down from their open support for the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

Their official press release said that while GoDaddy obviously believes combating online piracy is a major issue, they believe “we can clearly do better,” according to Warren Adelman, GoDaddy’s new CEO.

“It’s very important that all Internet stakeholders work together on this. Getting it right is worth the wait. Go Daddy will support it when and if the Internet community supports it,” the statement said.

The case of GoDaddy is quite interesting because they made a 180 degree turn in an astonishingly brief time period.

On Thursday night, GoDaddy emailed a statement to Ars Technica stating, “Go Daddy has received some emails that appear to stem from the boycott prompt, but we have not seen any impact to our business [sic].”

Clearly their brazen attempts at stifling the internet community’s resolve and thus the boycott did not pan out as they had hoped, as their press release today has proven.

While they won’t explicitly admit it at this point, there was a great deal of high-profile support for the boycott including Wikipedia’s Jimmy Wales who said via Twitter, “I am proud to announce that the Wikipedia domain names will move away from Godaddy. Their position on #sopa is unacceptable to us.”

GoDaddy has also said that they are going as far as to remove their past posting which expressed support for SOPA from their website, although Gizmodo revealed that everything is not quite what it seems.

Unfortunately, it appears that declaring victory in this small battle is a bit premature at this stage.

Gizmodo’s Sam Biddle reportedly spoke with GoDaddy’s CEO Warren Adelman, who has only been in the position for a week, about SOPA and their stance on it.

Biddle writes that in fact Adelman isn’t against SOPA, but instead he just believes that SOPA is not “ready in its current form.”

However, Adelman refused to elaborate to Biddle on what exact aspects of the bill he, and thus GoDaddy, took issue with.

Biddle points out that this is quite strange given that Adelman himself admits that GoDaddy helped write the legislation, something that has become far too common in today’s world, in my opinion.

“At a certain point we became involved where we provided commentary and provisions on this legislation that addressed areas that people had concern around,” Adelman said, but when Biddle pressed for Adelman to elucidate which areas GoDaddy helped with, Adelman wouldn’t comment.

Adelman perfectly exemplified my distaste for the corporate role in the democratic process in stating that he believes GoDaddy’s influence is “part and parcel of democracy.”

Biddle closed his Gizmodo article with an incredible line that perfectly sums up the feelings of myself and many others, “Shady domain registration services helping draft legislation that regulates their businesses—The American Way.”

Unfortunately, corporate control over what should be representative government has indeed become the American way.

Instead of joining the ranks of the many internet pioneers who are outright anti-SOPA like Google, Facebook, AOL, etc. they instead appear to be stepping “out of the ring entirely” according to Biddle.

GoDaddy stated that they would be willing to revert to their original position and support SOPA if there was what they called a “consensus” amongst “internet leadership,” while refusing to explain what such a consensus would even look like.

Biddle rightly points out that since giants like Google do not look like they’re going to change their position in the immediate future, it is impossible to imagine “internet leadership” coming to a consensus any time soon.

Interestingly, Biddle wrote, “Adelman refused to go on the record to say GoDaddy is against SOPA,” which makes me think their move might have been purely ceremonial in an attempt to stave off a major boycott.

Given that fact, I think it would be best if those planning on engaging in the boycott do not preemptively plan to stop their actions unless GoDaddy will explicitly state that they are indeed against SOPA.

Biddle reflects this in writing, “it’s safe to say GoDaddy is going to keep its foot in its mouth in a state of PR neutrality and watch the rest of the battle play out, scared into the corner by the threat of lost business and a horrendous reputation.”

The take-away point here is that business can, in fact, be swayed by large-scale, coordinated boycotts and I find it quite reassuring that GoDaddy would back away from supporting SOPA, even if they won’t go as far as to outright oppose it.

It’s also important to note that GoDaddy has openly admitted they took a role in manipulating legislation – something which is far too often denied by corporations and their lobbies – which I think is nothing short of disgusting.

If we continue to boycott GoDaddy and expand the boycotts to even more corporations that are supporting SOPA, I believe that we might in fact be able to put significant economic pressure which could very possibly force them to back down from the draconian internet freedom-crushing bill.

For more information on SOPA, read my previous coverage:

Congress tries to pull a fast one: SOPA markup not delayed until 2012 after all

In less than 24 hours Congress could vote to change the internet forever

Save the internet and boycott these companies

Rupert Murdoch Lobbies Congress To Restrict Internet

WarOnYou — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 17:16:58 +0000

Rupert Murdoch Lobbies Congress To Restrict Internet

December 9, 2011

Print Version

Source: Huffington Post

News Corp. honcho Rupert Murdoch threw his weight behind Congress’ attempt to restrict the Internet, personally lobbying leaders on Capitol Hill Wednesday for two measures that purport to combat piracy.

Murdoch’s media empire is among some 350 large corporations that have come out in favor of the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House, as well as the Protect IP Act in the Senate.

Both measures would require Internet operators to police activity online, and would mandate Internet giants like Google and AOL (the parent company of The Huffington Post and an opponent of the bills) and credit card companies to take down sites that have content deemed to be in violation of copyright rules.

Read More…

India to ban ‘offensive’ Internet material

WarOnYou — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 07:48:22 +0000

India to ban ‘offensive’ Internet material

December 6, 2011

Print Version

Source: RawStory

India on Tuesday vowed to ban offensive material from the Internet after Facebook, Google and other major firms told the government they were unable to screen content before it was posted.

Communications Minister Kapil Sibal said talks with the Internet giants had failed to come up with a solution following complaints that he had lodged three months ago over “unacceptable” images.

“My aim is that insulting material never gets uploaded,” Sibal told reporters in New Delhi. “We will evolve guidelines and mechanisms to deal with the issue.

“They will have to give us the data, where these images are being uploaded and who is doing it.”

Sibal said the government supported free speech and was against censorship but that some material on the Internet was so offensive that no one would find it acceptable.

He said he had shown some of the worst images to the Internet companies, who had said they could not control all distribution.

Read More….

A new law in Wisconsin will force protesters to pay for the police’s so-called “protection.

WarOnYou — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 08:55:40 +0000

First off it’s double taxation. You’ve already paid for their services. Secondly, this just further proves how wrong the decision made by the Supreme Court made in the Citizen’s v United case is. When money is required to have “free speech” it’s obviously no longer free and infringing your 1st amendment rights. The very reason that the poll tax had to be disallowed is the very reason this law must fail as well; it infringes on your equal protection rights.

This is just another attack on our constitutional rights and I hope our WI friends are up for the battle.

December 4, 2011

Print Version

Source: InformationLiberation

Protesters in Wisconsin will not only be maced by their “protectors,” but they’ll be stuck with a bill for the “service” they received.

From NPR:

The Wisconsin State Capitol building has been the scene of protests since February, when Gov. Scott Walker started the process of passing a law that severely limits collective bargaining for public employees in the state.

Yesterday, the Walker administration took a step that is likely to antagonize protesters further. His administration enacted new regulations that would require permits to protest at the Capitol and other state buildings.

The controversial part is that the bill allows officials to charge groups for the security and clean-up costs of such events.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports the policy went into effect Thursday:

“State law already says public officials may issue permits for the use of state facilities, and applicants “shall be liable to the state . . . for any expense arising out of any such use and for such sum as the managing authority may charge for such use.”

“But Edward Fallone, an associate professor at Marquette University Law School, said the possibility of charging demonstrators for police costs might be problematic because some groups might not be able to afford to pay.

“‘I’m a little skeptical about charging people to express their First Amendment opinion,’ he said. ‘You can’t really put a price tag on the First Amendment.’”

The Sentinel reports that the policy also states that police “could require an advance payment as a requirement for getting a permit and also could require liability insurance or a bond.”

According to the AP, protests during the collective bargaining debate cost the state $8 million in extra police protection.

WTAQ, a local news station, reports that some First Amendment experts expressed concern about the law:

“Chris Ahmuty of the American Civil Liberties Union said he could see agencies charging or requiring insurance depending on whether a group opposes them. He also said the policy leaves too much discretion to the Capitol Police.

… “Media attorney Bob Dreps of Madison said the state can put some regulations on the time, place, and manner of free speech. But he said it would be “laughable” to define a rally as having four or more people.”

Governor Walker’s administration told the Sentinel the point of the new regulation is “to provide equal and continual access for all Wisconsinites to their state buildings in a way that is reasonable and safe.”

Seeing as how the state is in the position of a monopoly provider when it comes to “security,” it stands to reason the cost of their “services” are going to go up over time and the quality of their “services” will get perpetually worse. The state is free to set any price they wish for their “security.”

While people are rightly outraged over this incident, how is it any different from the government forcing people to pay taxes to pay for every “service” the state supposedly provides?

Senator Joe Lieberman Asks Google for a Terrorist Flagging Button on Blogger

WarOnYou — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:30:12 +0000

Senator Joe Lieberman Asks Google for a Terrorist Flagging Button on Blogger

November 26th, 2011

lol

Via: The Verge:

Well, Joe’s at it again, and this time, it really is as embarrassing as it sounds. The Senator has taken pen to paper and written a letter to Google asking that its blogging platform Blogger be equipped with a flagging feature… for terrorists. This is largely because Jose Pimental, a man suspected of attempting to build a pipe bomb to attack the US military hosted his blog on Blogger. Now, there are a lot of terrible Blogger blogs to be sure, but is this really the best way to deal with such a problem?

Talking Points Memo acquired the letter and published it earlier today. “Pimentel’s Internet activity — both his spreading of bomb-making instructions links and his hate-filled writings — were hosted by Google” writes Lieberman, going on to add that, unlike YouTube, “Blogger’s Content Policy does not expressly ban terrorist content nor does it provide a ‘flag’ feature for such content.”

Google has not yet responded to Senator Lieberman’s request for the Blogger kill switch.

UN Report Offers Smoking Gun Proof of NATO and US Lies about Libya

WarOnYou — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 05:55:28 +0000

UN Report Offers Smoking Gun Proof of NATO and US Lies about Libya

November 1, 2011

Print Version

Source: NSNBC - Dennis South

Here is a type of “smoking gun” proof that NATO and the U.S. has been operating through a smokescreen of lies, as well as intimidation. Please read the following January 4, 2011 report of the 16th Session of the United Nations General Assembly Human Rights Council, Universal Periodic Review:

Report of the Working Group on the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya [Document A/HRC/WG.6/9/L.13]

Before NATO and the U.S. started bombing Libya, the United Nations was preparing to bestow an award on Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, and the Libyan Jamahiriya, for its achievements in the area of human rights. That’s right–the same man, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, that NATO and the United States have been telling us for months is a “brutal dictator,” was set to be given an award for his human rights record in Libya. How strange it is that the United Nations was set to bestow a human rights award on a “brutal dictator,” at the end of March.

So, I ask a question. Who is this “brutal dictator” that the United Nations General Assembly Human Rights Council was preparing to bestow an award to, for human rights, sometime at the end of March? So, they would have us believe that they knew that he was a “brutal dictator,” yet decided to give him an award for human rights?! Astounding! Astounding the lies that we’re being told by the media, NATO and the U.S. government. Absolutely astounding! Not surprising, but astounding! But more astounding still, is the fact that, time after time after time, much of the American public–without questioning–believes every single word that comes from the “news” media.

It is noteworthy to read the following couple of sentences from the General Assembly’s report:

“Several delegations also noted with appreciation the country’s commitment to upholding human rights on the ground. Additional statements, which could not be delivered during the interactive dialogue, owing to time constraints, will be posted on the extranet of the universal periodic review when available.”

In a footnote of that report, there is a list of countries that praised Colonel Gaddafi and the Libyan Jamahiriya (state of the masses), in support of the General Assembly Human Rights Council’s decision to bestow this award upon Colonel Gaddafi.I simply present the list. The reader can look at the list and make his or her own judgement regarding the credibility level, or perceived credibility level, of any of the particular countries listed:

Denmark, China, Italy, The Netherlands, Mauritania, Slovenia, Nicaragua, The Russian Federation, Spain, Indonesia, Sweden, Norway, Ecuador, Hungary, South Africa, The Phillippines, Maldives, Chile, Singapore, Germany, Australia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Angola, Nigeria, Congo, Burundi, Zambia, Rwanda, Burkina Faso, Senegal, Cote d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Zimbabwe.

If you have been paying any attention to the news, you will note that a few of the above-listed countries suddenly made an about-face, and decided to start supporting NATO and the U.S. in their war of aggression. Why? Why else!? Money. That’s always the bottom line, and there’s no doubt that it will all be exposed, at some time in the future, just as was exposed the lies that the U.S. government told its citizens, and the world, about “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq. And those same countries were just about to bestow an award on Colonel Gaddafi, for human rights, after having carefully studied Libyan society. So, what’s this about the “brutal dictator?” It’s what my big brother would call it: CHEWED UP GRASS [Bullshit!! For the delicate amongst you, pardon my colorful language].

Also published on Scott Net

Syria Using U.S. Made Web Surveillance and Censorship Systems

WarOnYou — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 07:15:27 +0000

Syria Using U.S. Made Web Surveillance and Censorship Systems

October 29th, 2011

These boxes are probably rooted by NSA. The Syrians are clueless enough to have allowed them to phone home, so, my guess is that Uncle is on board too.

Via: Cnet:

Blue Coat Systems has confirmed that its devices were being used by Syria to censor the Web and said it is investigating how they got into that country despite a strict U.S. trade embargo, The Wall Street Journal reported today.

The appliances were “transmitting automatic status messages back to the company” Blue Coat executives told the newspaper.

“Blue Coat says it doesn’t monitor where such ‘heartbeat’ messages originate from,” according to the report. “Computer code reviewed by the Journal indicates that Syrians were also using other Blue Coat products, raising questions about how the tools came to be used this way and whether Blue Coat has violated the trade embargo.”

Reports began trickling out this summer that the devices were being used by Syria to monitor its citizens’ Internet activity in a crackdown on opposition that has left thousands of protesters dead and injured.

Last month, Blue Coat told ZDNet UK that company policy forbade the sale of equipment to the Syrian government.

Fourteen of the Blue Coat devices were shipped to Dubai late last year destined for the Iraq government, and at least 13 of them were found in use in Syria, company executives said.

PROTECT IP Act Breaks The Internet

WarOnYou — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 07:12:57 +0000

PROTECT IP Act Breaks The Internet

October 28, 2011

Print Version

PROTECT-IP is a bill that has been introduced in the Senate and the House and is moving quickly through Congress. It gives the government and corporations the ability to censor the net, in the name of protecting “creativity”. The law would let the government or corporations censor entire sites– they just have to convince a judge that the site is “dedicated to copyright infringement.” The government has already wrongly shut down sites without any recourse to the site owner. Under this bill, sharing a video with anything copyrighted in it, or what sites like Youtube and Twitter do, would be considered illegal behavior according to this bill. According to the CBO, this bill would cost us $47 million tax dollars a year — that’s for a fix that won’t work, disrupts the internet, stifles innovation, shuts out diverse voices, and censors the internet. This bill is bad for creativity and does not protect your rights.

PROTECT IP Act Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

And Now: The Rogue Websites Bill Introduced in U.S. House

WarOnYou — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 06:44:33 +0000

And Now: The Rogue Websites Bill Introduced in U.S. House

October 27th, 2011

The “Stop Online Piracy Act” would target foreign websites for take down. I wondered what this actually meant, from a technical perspective, so I gave the proposed legislation a very quick look.

It turns out that the government wants to force U.S. Internet service providers to block access to the sites. There would be a ban list that the ISPs would have to enforce. The ISPs would also have to modify their DNS records to prevent the foreign sites from resolving:

A service provider shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures designed to prevent access by its subscribers located within the United States to the foreign infringing site (or portion thereof) that is subject to the order, including measures designed to prevent the domain name of the foreign infringing site (or portion thereof) from resolving to that domain name’s Internet Protocol address. Such actions shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order.

This is, in effect, what China, Iran, North Korea, etc. do with their national firewalls. The difference with the U.S. version is that they would force individual ISPs to carry out the bans, rather than implementing them in a centralized way.

If you think that this is just about fake Gucci purses, just wait…

Via: AFP:

US lawmakers introduced a bill on Wednesday that would give US authorities more tools to crack down on websites accused of piracy of movies, television shows and music and the sale of counterfeit goods.

The Stop Online Piracy Act has received bipartisan support in the House of Representatives and is the House version of a bill introduced in the Senate in May known as the Theft of Intellectual Property Act or Protect IP Act.

The legislation has received the backing of Hollywood, the music industry, the Business Software Alliance, the National Association of Manufacturers, the US Chamber of Commerce and other groups.

But it has come under fire from digital rights and free speech organizations for allegedly paving the way for US law enforcement to unilaterally shut down websites, including foreign sites, without due process.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Occupy Wall Street protesters: City will now require permits

WarOnYou — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 02:49:02 +0000

Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Occupy Wall Street protesters: City will now require permits

October 22, 2011

Print Version

Source: NY Daily News

Mayor Bloomberg said Friday that he’s going to start turning the screws on the Occupy Wall Streeters.

The city is planning to take a harder line on demonstrators camping out in Zuccotti Park – and insist on permits every time they want to march through Lower Manhattan, he said.

“We will start enforcing that more,” Bloomberg said on his weekly radio show.

The protesters have a Constitutional right to demonstrate and have mostly been “peaceful,” the mayor added.

“There’s not been any of the kind of craziness you see elsewhere,” he said. “You may not like it, but these people have generally obeyed the law.

Read Full Article

Financial Giants Put New York City Cops On Their Payroll

WarOnYou — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:46:34 +0000

Financial Giants Put New York City Cops On Their Payroll

October 12th, 2011

Via: CounterPunch:

If you’re a Wall Street behemoth, there are endless opportunities to privatize profits and socialize losses beyond collecting trillions of dollars in bailouts from taxpayers. One of the ingenious methods that has remained below the public’s radar was started by the Rudy Giuliani administration in New York City in 1998. It’s called the Paid Detail Unit and it allows the New York Stock Exchange and Wall Street corporations, including those repeatedly charged with crimes, to order up a flank of New York’s finest with the ease of dialing the deli for a pastrami on rye.

The corporations pay an average of $37 an hour (no medical, no pension benefit, no overtime pay) for a member of the NYPD, with gun, handcuffs and the ability to arrest. The officer is indemnified by the taxpayer, not the corporation.

New York City gets a 10 percent administrative fee on top of the $37 per hour paid to the police. The City’s 2011 budget called for $1,184,000 in Paid Detail fees, meaning private corporations were paying wages of $11.8 million to police participating in the Paid Detail Unit. The program has more than doubled in revenue to the city since 2002.

The taxpayer has paid for the training of the rent-a-cop, his uniform and gun, and will pick up the legal tab for lawsuits stemming from the police personnel following illegal instructions from its corporate master. Lawsuits have already sprung up from the program.

Boston police impose curfew for protesters

WarOnYou — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:45:02 +0000

Boston police impose curfew for protesters

October 11, 2011

Print Version

Source: Boston.com

Boston police moved in and began arresting scores of Occupy Boston protesters who refused to leave a large part of the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway early this morning.

At 1:20 a.m., the first riot police officers lined up on Atlantic Avenue. Minutes later, dozens of sheriff vans and police wagons arrived and over 200 officers in uniforms and riot gear surrounded the Greenway.

Police Superintendent William Evans and Commissioner Edward F. Davis watched from across the street. Evans gave the crowd two minutes to disperse from the park, warning that they would be locked up if they did not comply.

The crowd of protesters, energized by the sudden appearance of the Boston and Transit police officers, chanted, ‘‘The people united will never be defeated,’’ “This is a peaceful protest,” and “the whole world is watching.’’

About 10 minutes later, the first officers entered the park and surrounded the group. Evans, using a loudspeaker, gave one more warning and then each protester was individually put on his or her stomach, cable-tied, and dragged off as others tore down tents and arrested and detained people on the fringe of the park.

Read full report here

War On You: Breaking Alternative News » censorship

CNN Pulls the Plug on Live Feed of Soldier Talking About Voting for Ron Paul

CNN Pulls the Plug on Live Feed of Soldier Talking About Voting for Ron Paul

Related Posts:

SOPA: Internet Giants Consider ‘Nuclear Option’

SOPA: Internet Giants Consider ‘Nuclear Option’

Related Posts:

For Bloggers at Risk: Creating a Contingency Plan

For Bloggers at Risk: Creating a Contingency Plan

Related Posts:

Money talks: GoDaddy begins to back away from SOPA after boycott

Money talks: GoDaddy begins to back away from SOPA after boycott

December 24, 2011

Related Posts:

Rupert Murdoch Lobbies Congress To Restrict Internet

Rupert Murdoch Lobbies Congress To Restrict Internet

Related Posts:

India to ban ‘offensive’ Internet material

India to ban ‘offensive’ Internet material

Related Posts:

A new law in Wisconsin will force protesters to pay for the police’s so-called “protection.

Related Posts:

Senator Joe Lieberman Asks Google for a Terrorist Flagging Button on Blogger

Senator Joe Lieberman Asks Google for a Terrorist Flagging Button on Blogger

Related Posts:

UN Report Offers Smoking Gun Proof of NATO and US Lies about Libya

UN Report Offers Smoking Gun Proof of NATO and US Lies about Libya

Related Posts:

Syria Using U.S. Made Web Surveillance and Censorship Systems

Syria Using U.S. Made Web Surveillance and Censorship Systems

Related Posts:

PROTECT IP Act Breaks The Internet

PROTECT IP Act Breaks The Internet

Related Posts:

And Now: The Rogue Websites Bill Introduced in U.S. House

And Now: The Rogue Websites Bill Introduced in U.S. House

Related Posts:

Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Occupy Wall Street protesters: City will now require permits

Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Occupy Wall Street protesters: City will now require permits

Related Posts:

Financial Giants Put New York City Cops On Their Payroll

Financial Giants Put New York City Cops On Their Payroll

Related Posts:

Boston police impose curfew for protesters

Boston police impose curfew for protesters

Related Posts: