this is absolutely ridiculous..how can people of congress even allow something like that to go down? Im emailing them...and we should start a myspace campaign or any popular website campaign to get people aware of this ridiculous measure

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/bin_laden_on_th.html

http://www.flight77.info/

UPDATE 5/24/6

not all 9/11 skeptics are conspiracy theorists. you don't need to think a missile hit the pentagon to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. hard-core conspiracy theorists (CTs) set up shop within the 9/11 truth movement very early. CTs get their joy from promoting and inventing theory (not in seeking accuracy) where accuracy gaps exist. since 9/11 is so full of accuracy gaps, CTs have flourished heavily. it is frequently difficult to know if you're communicating with a CT, or someone who is sincerely interested in filling in the 9/11accuracy gaps with information gained from actual investigation.

most, if not all CTs hang out on the planet called, 'anything other than a 757 hit the pentagon'. it is on this planet that CTs have built their cities. they ARE a movement - it's the '9/11 conspiracy theory movement'. this movement should not be confused with the '9/11 truth movement' - they are very different movements.

one of the more popular cities on planet 9/11 CT is called, 'scholars for 9/11 truth' [the only wikipedia definition i've ever seen being considered for deletion]. this is a relatively new organization, and support the highly dubious judicial watch. while having many well-meaning members, there is no denying that 'scholars for 9/11 truth' neither acts in scholarly ways, nor do they promote accuracy (also known as 'truth'). instead S911T hump to no end the notion that something other than a 757 hit the pentagon.

Yizzo. I hope you realize that this information war can be fought in the streets. I hope you speak to people and spread the url's of websites like this by posting them in different places. I like to blog bathrooms with a message taped to the door. We can't just be angry. We have to do something other than scream at the internet.

These companies are retarded. If this goes through people will just switch to satelite. These rules do not effect satelite internet providers right?

I was worried about this until my room mate said it doesn't matter we can just switch to satelite internet

I think the internet has done it's job regarding 9/11 truth. I think what we need to do now is spread the message to those who don't visit the internet. It's time to take our message to the people by talking to them directly or leaving messages everywhere we go. The people out there have to see that the movement has left the internet. We can reach more people as a group than CNN if we all do our part.

>Don't be silly, satellite is just a >type of carrier. What they're talking >about is changing the way the network >itself works. If the Internet is >going to be tiered and censored, it's >going to be that way regardless of >how you connect to it.
>OP | 05.24.06 - 1:05 pm | #

Exactly. The technology won't change, but the LAWS will: One day soon you put up an anti-Bush or anti-War poster on the Internet and you get busted. One day soon you will be forced to identify yourself fully when connecting (rfid-chip etc.), allowing draconian regulations and fines. Soon you'll not be able to insult Bush or anyone else on the net anymore, because they will sue you in court based on your id.

" I know this comment may sound weird..but we need a reverse-mole. Do you know how the government and big corp.'s usually place a mole/spy into a grassroot/rebellious organization, well we need one too...except we need someone, or serveral people, to start, or become part of a major corporation or a powerful position in the government and sort of be a "sleeper" and start havoc from the inside out."......I think this a very good idea and I have been thinking about this very concept for over a year now. Destroy them from within. This should become part of our stratigy. It would be a good topic for discussion at the Chicago conference.

And don't forget Bill Gates' recent "don't worry, we'll always have email" bullshit. Another corporate pawn who doles out millions in charity each year so as to appear to be not a member of the "bad guys."

A concentrated campaign to qualm fears over internet browsing restrictions. As if government clamp-downs on the masses having access to objective news sources is "no cause for concern."

Yeah, we'll just mass-email 100 million people and get blacklisted for spamming.

If they do mess up the internet, we could allways boycott. EVERYTHING, CABLE, INTERNET, PHONE, RADIO.

Man that's a trippy idea.:)

http://www.sharkeater.com/pnac.mov

I love this video.

Osama bin Laden just called me to say hi. He said he's not in Pakistan, but in D.C. instead.

If http://www.spoofcard.com would stop selling to him, we'd know where he is!!!

Interesting info from a pro-Bush website
(http://www.csicop.org/hoaxwatch)

WTC1 had no sightseeing deck, but WTC2 had:

"...WTC2's observation deck, that deck is not open until 9:30 am. The first plane hit at 8:49."

Maybe this explains the locked emergency exit doors on the WTC roofs.
(I guess Larry Silverstein had the key to them...)

>
> Osama bin Laden just called me to >say hi. He said he's not in >Pakistan, but in D.C. instead.
>Jon Gold | Homepage | 05.24.06 - >3:15 pm | #
>
Seriously, the neo-cons are desperately trying to tell us he's in Iran now. But the MSM failed to pick the story (Iranmania.com etc.) up.

This is a frequent topic of debate on a tech site I regularly visit: slashdot.org.

Some of their articles on it: http://tinyurl.com/syg8y

Here's one summary from a comment that explains what is happening:

...its about this: Lets say you have an ISP (we'll call it "Comcast"). Lets say that Google has an ISP, let's call ("AT&T"). Let's say, for illustration's sake, that Comcast's network doesn't directly connect to AT&T's network, but they both connect to another backbone provider (we'll say "Verizon"). So the connection from you to Google looks something like this --

You Comcast Verizon AT&T Google

Currently, you pay Comcast for a certain level of bandwidth in each direction, Google pays AT&T for a certain level of bandwidth in each direction, and Comcast and AT&T each have an agreement with Verizon covering the bandwidth of their users being transferred, in each direction, over Verizon's network, which instead of cash is likely an in-kind ("I'll carry your users packets, you'll carry mine") agreement. Every bit of bandwidth is paid for, in cash or in-kind, on every network that carries it, and he who asks for more capacity is paying more for it.

What the telcos want is to allow Comcast and Verizon to demand that Google negotiate, individually, an additional payment to them each directly, or face having Google's packets dropped when travelling across their networks -- and they particularly want that ability to impose those charges on people providing services, surprisingly enough, that compete with ones where telcos already are the main provide (VoIP competing with regular telephone service) or want to dominate (like video-on-demand, or advanced portal services like Google.)

Just replace "Google" with "small, strapped-for-cash blogger" and you can see what the problem is.

The good thing is Google and other large portal companies are on the same side of the debate as bloggers.

Net neutrality is poorly named. How about Internet Freedom act?
Much better, and it actually sounds like it's going to accomplish something.

Should we all be as one team, the 9/11 movement, we've got a fair amount of time to agree on one candidate for the next Presidential election. I guess if you stay with Dem side, you may see Hillary as your choice, and Rep may see Jeb Bush. Oh, it is so far away, that it need not concern us. I'm one of the above and I'm jumping ship. If a bunch of us do it on one day, it can make an impact. Libertarian, Green Party, Independent, your choice. George and Dick's party is coming to an end.

If you have to vote, then Libertarian is the only way to go if you are concerned about government abuses like 9/11. Only the Libertarians know that government doesn't work, centralized command and control of money, laws, standing armies, and anything else leads towards absolute power and absolute corruption, and the problem is not so much as someone abusing power, as much as it is giving any person or small group of persons power over you and your life, giving them the temptation and incentive to abuse the power.

Only by taking power and money away from government and allowing individuals to save, invest, spend, or give away the money they earn as they so choose, can we live in a society with the least amount of potential for abuse of power. Government has a monopoly on force. And government has been shown time and time again over history to be the greatest abuser by far regarding force. In the 20th Century alone, I believe hundreds of millions of innocent civilians were murdered by their OWN governments. This includes the WWII Nazi Holocaust, Pol Pot in Cambodia, genocide of Armenians in Turkey, Stalin's purges, and many other ugly episodes in history.

Only the Libertarian party stands consistently for severe rollback of the power and funding of government.

Unfortunately, the Greens are simply for reshuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic. The sinking ship is monopoly force by government.

There are only two good votes:
1. Vote Libertarian
2. Don't vote at all, making your non-vote a repudiation of the whole concept of those elected by the "majority" infringing on the natural rights of the "minority." In fact, in our current system, those who are elected are a corrupt oligarchy who stay in power due to a rigged system, and those whose rights are infringed upon are virtually all of us.

For more about natural rights and individual freedom, check out:
www.fff.org
www.lewrockwell.org
www.lp.org

Thanks man. Voting day coming up, and I'm switching parties. It is difficult befriending a murderous regime. A large contingent of Muslims have been offended. Some of them have not forgotten their 'grudge.'
Prepare emergency reserves...

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/26/177215&from=rss

House Committee Approves 'Net Neutrality' Bill
Posted by Zonk on Friday May 26, @01:39PM
from the hold-the-celebrations dept.
The Internet Politics
An anonymous reader writes "Ars Technica is reporting that the US House Judiciary Committee approved a bill yesterday that will prevent broadband providers from charging extra fees to websites for delivering their content to users." Ars's response is only guarded optimism, unfortunately. From the article: "The fate of the bill is not clear, as there are now two competing bills vying for the attention of the House floor. HR 5252, the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act, was overseen by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and is expected to be considered by full House. That bill is seen by some proponents of 'Net neutrality as being too weak, particularly after a Committee vote tossed aside an amendment put forth by Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) that would have enshrined the principle of network neutrality into US law. There is speculation that today's bill, HR 5417, could be proposed as an amendment to HR 5252."