As is the case with most diabolical things, this one sounds so plausible and maybe even reasonable. An idea wrapped in supposed good intentions and of course fairness – an internet "ministry of truth" to be run either by the U.S. Federal Government or the (wait for it) United Nations.
And just what would this agency do – well protect all of us against "misinformation and rumors" that somehow find their way to our wonderful information superhighway – the internet.
I guess that would include the forcing of a company – say a healthy juice company – to take down their "misinformation" concerning the factual and known health benefits of the juice because the FDA has decided that any such statements make the juice a "drug" and all of a sudden you are selling an "unapproved drug" and not a health drink juice.
Would that not be just the sort of thing that we need to be protected against – the terrible fact that this juice was actually good for you and could help you with this list of things and has been used for many of those very things for decades or even centuries! We must be protected from such information by the nanny state government – we can not be ever told the truth – we "can’t handle the truth" especially when it goes against what our nanny government wants.
This has so many terrible consequences for all of American that it is staggering. What we take for granted today – to be able to have health and supplement choices may actually not be available to us if this concept is put into place and any such agency actually is formed.
Another important aspect of this agency is that it "would have to be an independent federal agency that no president could countermand or anything else because people wouldn’t think you were just censoring the news and giving a different falsehood out."
And just WHO is it that is spouting these easy sounding phrases – none other than former President Bill Clinton! The very same man who lied to the American public about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. Now we should certainly place our trust in what he says – of course.
Hmm, if a similar agency had been there during his tenure in office as president, would he have been convicted during his impeachment trial in the Senate – one has to wonder. But one also has to shutter at what such an agency would actually mean.
Clinton went on to say that such an oversight agency would operate something like the BBC or our own National Public Radio and its scope would be narrowly defined to "not express opinions" and to identify "relevant factual errors".
Ok, right, we can certainly trust a government agency to get all the facts correct and make sure the information is correct – just look at the "truths" our government has recently given us on the Gulf Oil Spill mess, on Obama’s laughable birth certificate, or Obama’s declaration that the entry into Libya is just a "kinetic action" and we will "not put troops on the ground". Yes we can rely on what our government says, they never lie to us about anything.
But, WOW, wouldn’t that be wonderful to have all of the facts corrected on all of these stories and more (or so they would declare). But just who would be these individuals be who would get to determine what a "factual error" would be and then presumably correct the facts to the right ones? And what right ones – oh, you mean the ones that the government wants all of us to believe and not the actual facts that exist – those "right ones". Does this sound a lot like what the government of Russia did for decades or what the Chinese government does to this day?
But is that not what our free press is supposed to do? Tell the actual facts good and bad. Well, it used to be what our mainstream free press did – sometimes very well indeed. Sadly, that is a far cry to what most media and reporters have sunk to today – mostly a paid mouthpiece for the propaganda that our very own government puts out along with a flood of actual misinformation. All done in the effort to keep all of us as confused and unaware of what is really going on as is possible to do.
Interestingly, Clinton’s cry for this new agency comes right on the heels of similar sounding rhetoric by none other than Obama’s info-czar Cass Sunstein. What he says is that all Web Sites should be FORCED to link to opposing viewpoints or contain pop-ups filled with government information.
I guess Mr. Sunstein has no use at all for the principal of Free Speech – and wants to make very sure that the government gets a chance to dump their lies, half-truths and doublespeak on us even when we are trying to sort through everything to find some truth. And even though not all web sites, even this one, should be taken as absolute – to be forced to link to opposing views flys in the face of the entire principal of free speach. And it is just simply a total load of hot air – but very dangerous hot air indeed.
But it looks as if the wind is blowing in this direction. The government wants and must have control over information, otherwise they will not be able to spread their misinformation as easily. There are too many others out there in the cyber world who are telling the truth and government lies simply can’t stand up and eventually are exposed to the light of real truth.
We can no longer trust the major media or any of the major new casts – all of them are bought off or corporate controlled to such an extent that real honest news is a thing of the past today with few exceptions. An example – while European news is actually covering the Bilderburg conference in St. Moritz, Switzerland and what is going on, our news media is barely mentioning it anyplace. The fact that what happens there effects the entire planet is just not important enough for our news people. The much more important story is of Congressman Wiener’s misadventure. You can find all kinds of stories about that in the newspapers and on the evening news cases.
The suggestion by Clinton for this kind of an agency falls right in line with many members of our Legislative branches and the Federal Communications Commission in what they want to do – control the internet and its information.
It was in April that the House Republicans led an effort to pass legislation aimed at preventing the FCC from imposing so-called "net neutrality" regulations on the World Wide Web.
Representative Greg Walden, R-Oregon said:
"These regulations would have given the FCC immense power to censor the web by allowing it to regulate any interstate communication service on barely more than a whim and without any additional input from Congress."
One of our founding fathers and the creator of our U.S. Constitution, Thomas Jefferson who became our third president, said "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." And that is never truer than today.
It is because of our lack of vigilance and the willingness of far too many of our population to "let someone else fix it" that has allowed such a giant expansion of governmental power and authority – a great deal of which was never granted to them in the first place. They simply took the power and since most did not object kept right on going to today.
If we want to continue to have and keep our freedom to say and speak our minds, if we want to be able to tell our leaders and government that no we do not agree on that, if we want to be able to simply live – then we had better keep our "head in the game" as a popular Disney movie says or we will find that our head is on the chopping block and our voice is forever silenced.