Ready to Lose Your Internet? ...Really? ...Yeah!

For God's Sake! - For Your Own Sake! - Tell Congress to keep the Ban on this Obama Bill!

 HAPPENS BEFORE OBAMA LEAVES OFFICE - THE OCTOBER SURPRISE!

The Obama administration has again announced the end to the U.S. stewardship open Internet; Russia and China will take advantage of the American ICANN surrender too.  Authoritarian regimes want to grab control recognizing the 'different modes and methods in Internet management'.--code for a major subversion of the Internet and restriction to freedom of speech. 

Meanwhile, Obama is stealthly trying to pass his 'Executive Order' on the down-low and bypass congressional oversight once again; it will be far from the 'modest change in policy' that Obama claimed in March, 2014.  Is Obama aware of the major damages?  Of course not, he is again clueless!--How many more times must the public take that silly clueless excuse and just admit he knows what he is doing?        

Sands in an Hourglass."Like sands in the hourglass, so are 'The Days of Our Lives'."--to borrow the line from a popular daytime soap opera introduction. Since 1965, it is one of the longest-running scripted television programs in the world. It is even older than the Internet--my how time flies!

FACTOID: On October 24, 1995 the Federal Networking Council, FNC, unanimously passed a resolution defining the term 'Internet'. This definition was developed in consultation with members of the internet and intellectual property rights communities.

RESOLUTION: The Federal Networking Council (FNC) agrees that the following language reflects our definition of the term 'Internet'. It refers to the global information system that -- (i) is logically linked together by a globally unique address space based on the Internet Protocol (IP) or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons; (ii) is able to support communications using the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) suite or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons, and/or other IP-compatible protocols; and (iii) provides, uses or makes accessible, either publicly or privately, high level services layered on the communications and related infrastructure described herein.

"The Internet has changed much in the three decades since it came into existence. It was conceived in the era of time-sharing, but has survived into the era of personal computers, client-server and peer-to-peer computing, and the network computer. It was designed before LANs existed, but has accommodated that new network technology, as well as the more recent ATM and frame switched services. It was envisioned as supporting a range of functions from file sharing and remote login to resource sharing and collaboration which had spawned electronic mail and more recently the World Wide Web, Internet telephone and Internet television.

"The most pressing question for the future of the Internet is not how the technology will change, but how the process of change and evolution itself will be managed. The architecture of the Internet has always been driven by a core group of designers, but the form of that group has changed as the number of interested parties has grown. With the success of the Internet has come a proliferation of stakeholders - stakeholders now with an economic as well as an intellectual investment in the network. [Those major multi-national stakeholders have taken their suppressive political underpinnings to threaten the global Internet freedom of speech that have been advanced since the beginning by the United States ICANN organization.] 

"We now see, in the debates over control of the domain name space and the form of the next generation IP addresses, a struggle to find the next social structure that will guide the Internet in the future. The form of that structure will be harder to find, given the large number of concerned stakeholders. At the same time, the industry struggles to find the economic rationale for the large investment needed for the future growth, for example to upgrade residential access to a more suitable technology. If the Internet stumbles, it will not be because we lack for technology, vision, or motivation. It will be because we cannot set a direction and march collectively into the future."

Like those 'sands in the hourglass' our Internet freedoms are quickly slipping right between our fingers to be lost forever. With our U.S. Federal Communications Commission, the United Nations, the European Union, the various sovereign nations, partisan coalitions and special interest groups they all have strict regulatory agendas to curb current Internet freedoms. Can they all get along?--Read about the U.N. Security Council...

Look at the ridiculous farse exhibited by the United Nations Security Council, its members are so stacked up against any United States participation. Under the Charter, the Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. It has 15 Members, and each Member has one vote. Under the Charter, all Member States are obligated to comply with Council decisions. The Permanent Five members, P5, are China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.  Each of the permanent members has power to veto, enabling them to prevent the adoption of any "substantive" draft Council resolution, regardless of the level of international support for the draft. 

All substantive United States' resolutions are null and void by design. --And so after reviewing over 70 years of poor performance of the U.N., do we now give up U.S. control of our Internet and all set a direction to march collectively into the global future?? 

WATCH YOUR INTERNET BILL GO UP!

OR

EMAIL SENATORS & CONGRESSMEN NOW!

A Real Spin in an Airplane - A Tall Tale of a Story

THE GULFSTREAM G550

LEGENDARY QUALITY, FLEXIBLE PERFORMANCE

The G550 has the efficiency to fly 6,750 nautical miles/12,501 kilometers nonstop, but also is capable of operating out of short-field, high-altitude airports. Payload is a plus, too. The G550 can transport up to 18 passengers and still has the range to fly nonstop more than 12 hours.

The Whole Story

Famous Quotes:  …You already know the end of the stories!

• ·         Obama said, "You can keep your plan & your Dr." ... 
• ·         Bill said, "I did not have sex with that woman"…
• ·         Hillary said, "It's a video that started the attack that killed the Ambassador" …
• ·         Loretta said, “We talked for half an hour about grandkids and golf”…

A Field-base operator (FBO) is a commercial business granted the right by an airport to operate on the airport and provide aeronautical services such as fueling and parking. Unidentified personnel who worked at the FBO in Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport called a TV anchor at the local ABC Station who verified the meeting. A second independent source at the airport said Loretta and Bill were alone together on board AG Loretta Lynch’s jet for half an hour.

Question: Why would AG Loretta Lynch go to Phoenix first which is 600 miles South of Aspen and then go North to Aspen from Phoenix? Anyone check on the actual flight plans of both planes?

Well, let’s see... AG Loretta Lynch was headed to Aspen, Co from Washington DC for a speaking engagement, a distance of around 1500 miles in almost a direct line from East to West. The Government plane she was flying in was more than likely a G550 with a range of 6750 miles.

She did not need to stop in Phoenix for fuel because if she would have flown direct, fuel would not be necessary. In fact, if you do the math, the G550 has the range to make that direct round trip route without refueling.

Question: Why was Bill Clinton’s plane waiting for AG Loretta Lynch’s plane to land in Phoenix when she was going to Aspen?

Also remember now, AG Loretta Lynch does not have any grandkids and doesn’t play golf. ...Hmmn!

The meeting was either planned to put the Clinton Fix on or to decide on which golf course Bill played on in Phoenix.

 

Europe's Hard Questions to Syrian Refugees!

Several observations have raised glaringly obvious facts that no one has even mentioned yet. After all, these people are not duly registered immigrants but are refugees that live in temporary tent shelters in camps while awaiting for their repatriation back to their home countries.

The daily mainstream television newscasts and even the cable broadcasts don't mention or tweet any negatives. All of the financial welfare program are real hardships to those sponsor European nations along with the intrusion of Muslim cultural and Islam religious values upon the indigenous Christian populations of the affected areas.

With all that said, the European Union has finally had it chickens come home to roost. Their had smug attitudes about letting the United States fight terrorism and pay with its own blood and treasure which was just fine, it was no sweat or cost to their countries. Their little or no help for the past decade at all to militarily joining in to take down the Muslim terrorists finally caught up with them; especially after Obama constantly repeated he had his 50 members of "coalition partners" that were shoulder to shoulder with him to fight these Islamic terrorists. These coalition partners could have contained these terrorists to their own lands but instead just sat out the war while the U.S. fought it and are now paying the price today.

So, it was no surprise to most Americans that Obama in keeping his campaign promises just up and left the region and pulled out most all of the U.S. troops. The entire region immediately collapsed and imploded into total chaos, mass executions and murders, religious persecution and total societal destruction. I have to admit that no one hears anything from the White House about Obama's monumental military action's aftermath; it was one of Obama's worst foreign policy mistakes. If the U.S. doesn't lead, it doesn't happen!

Inquiring Minds Want To Know...

Can someone please explain the following regarding the Syrian refugees arriving in European destinations from worn torn regions?

1/ How come they all seem to have endless supplies of money to pay the people traffickers? Some say personal savings, others say I.S.I.S. funds. The refugees had to pay human traffickers $500 to $1,300 for a spot on a boat with some reported paying up to $4,000. 
 
2/ Why do most refugees appear to have working mobile phones? Some use GPS to safely find way out, others say I.S.I.S. personnel coordination.
 
3/ How do most refugees appear well dressed and fed and do not seem to be suffering the effects of malnutrition?  Interesting that no one has addressed this observation yet.
 
4/ Why are most of the fleeing refugees men of military age? They all seem to be able-bodied men who would be fighters taking back their homelands in Syria--some say they're imbedded cells of I.S.I.S. insurgents. 
 
5/ Why are other Muslim nations not helping their fellow Muslims? (Saudi, Kuwait, U.A.E. Indonesia, but to name a few) They're wary of questionable religious, political motives of any Syrian refugees that can possibly destabilize their countries.
 
6/ How come the two boys and their mother drowned off the Turkish coast can be returned for burial to the place they fled so quickly, what is believed to be I.S.I.S. held territory?
 
7/ Could it be some are being paid to come to Europe as a way to increase the Muslim population and get I.S.I.S. fighters embedded in Europe? We all know life is cheap from an I.S.I.S. viewpoint so the loss of a few lives along the way has no meaning for them as long as it benefits their cause. 

Update on Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 3:59PM by D.K. Dickey

In response to my questions I have received a response from a loyal reader who has certainly been one vocal voice from within my liberal friends. Here are his answers backed by his extensive experience while working in the region for many years--It's well worth reading too!

I thought I would give you my opinion and try to answer your questions. As a note, I have a Syrian friend whose families are caught up in the cross fire.  Newar has taken in his wife's family into their home in Riyadh, his family are still [in] Syria.  Newar and his familiar [family are] living a horror we can never imagine.

Can someone please explain the following regarding the Syrian refugees arriving in European destinations from worn torn origins?

1/ How come they all seem to have endless supplies of money to pay the people traffickers?

A) Many of the people interviewed were professionals and business owners.  This is probably not a random representative sample, but you can assume those who have the money will try to leave.

B) The refugees hoc'ed [hocked] their life's possessions to leave. Gold jewelry and coins are used frequently as a means to save and can be easily converted to euros.  When I was in the Middle East I was surprised to see how many places you could buy gold and number of non-wealthy middle easterners a buying gold.

C)  Family is huge with Muslims.  Relatives are likely helping each other to get out of harms [sic] way.

2/ Why do most refugees appear to have working mobile phones?

Cell phones are as common as sandals In the Middle East.  The lowest paid Indian laborer on my project making less than $500 per month had a cell phone.  

3/ How do most refugees appear well dressed and fed and do not seem to be suffering the effects of malnutrition?

 Food is available; this is not the trail of tears. [Well said]

 4/ Why are most of the fleeing refugees men of military age? They all seem to be able-bodied men who would be fighters taking back their homelands in Syria. (Need to add Iraq and Afghanistan)

 I disagree with your assertion that more than 50% of the refugees are able bodied men, but that's an argument for another time.  Currently the ground situation is a mess and begs the question who would the untrained men fight for or with, the Syrian, Iraqi or Iranian military fighting ISIS and their own people, the Kurds, Shia or Sunni militias or with a local tribal unit?  Alliances within the Middle East are very fluid, the enemy of my enemy is my brother is how alliance are formed and go back hundreds of years. [excellent points] 

The alliances are based upon religion, sect, clan and family and not country. This is not unlike how the U.S. was like in 1861 when Robert E Lee turned down the command of the Union Army and said he could not raise his sword against Virginia.

5/ Why are other Muslim nations not helping their fellow Muslims? (Saudi, Kuwait, U.A.E. Indonesia, but to name a few) 

Agreed, Saudi claims they have taken in 2.5 million Syrians, but most are guest workers and not refugees. The GCC countries have contribute [sic] some money, but could do more.  Jordan has been overrun by refugees. In 2013 I was in Jordan and saw several camps run by the UN and at that time Jordan was hosting over 500,000 people. 

Their is a simple reason the refugees are not going to Saudi Arabia, it's Saudi Arabia. [Great insight point]

6/ How come the two boys and their mother drowned off the Turkish coast can be returned for burial to the place they fled so quickly, what is believed to be I.S.I.S. held territory?

Photos are powerful and can be a change agent.  Khobani was the home of the mother and child and was the center of heavy fighting,  but was liberate [sic] by the PKK earlier this year.  Remember family and home are very important to Muslims.

7/ Could it be they are being paid to come to Europe as a way to increase the Muslim population and get I.S.I.S. fighters embedded in Europe? We all know life is cheap from an I.S.I.S. viewpoint so the loss of a few lives along the way has no meaning for them as long as it benefits their cause. 

Yes this is a distinct possibility, but do you throw the baby out with the bath water.  We also have home grown terrorist inspired by ISIS and others. Not all Muslims are terrorist.    

What you didn't mention was the migration of North Africans crossing the Mediterranean to Italy. Thousands have drown making the crossing.  The desire to make a better life for yourself and family is powerful and you will risk death to achieve this goal.  This refugee crisis should teach us that securing our borders and managing immigration is much more complicated than building a wall and 15 second sound bites. Remember, in the eyes of the Native Americans we are illegal immigrants.

[NOTE: Although European colonists were technically illegal immigrants to the "indigenous Indian" tribes [not Native Americans], they were in fact also immigrants too. Many tribes' accounts also describe coming from elsewhere by boat, far earlier in time than the Bering Strait theory claims. Others migrated long distances, such as Athapascans coming from what is today Alaska to the southwest, where they became Apaches and Navajos. So who was first means it's genealogy is muddled as all those who followed are immigrants to that first tribe's land.]  

My comments: These all are strong reasons for the whys of a Syrian immigration, however unlike in the days of yore no income taxes were levied on sovereign citizens of the host country to support hoards of wandering peoples. Those who came made their own way, under their own resources and without any government largess to support their vagabond dreams for a new life. Furthermore, there were no municipal or public facilities built to house any refugees. These immigrants were expected to embrace their new homeland and government if even allowed to become citizens while many of these peoples over the centuries have been turned out and pushed back into returning to their home countries.

Realistically these Muslim nomads carry within themselves a religious zeal to absolutely refuse other religions from freely practicing theirs according to their Islamic teachings. The only true believer is a Muslim, others are infidels who must convert or submit as a second-class of people under Islamic Dhimmitude by paying a tax to work and live or be stoned to death.

Will this burgeoning swell of Muslim humanity bloat host countries with their religious intolerances to cause religious Sharia Law to topple secular Civic Law? These, after all, are real consequences created as it's happening now throughout Europe. In England these two parallel legal universes coexist as Islamic law has blossomed to take precedence over English jurisprudence.

Take a look at who led aggressions in religious battles:

Cap & Trade Tax is Coming Up! - Higher Fuel Costs!

I worry more about the proliferation of global graphitti than global warming in an ice field.

After watching some of the Global Warming "documercials" with dramatic, alarming pictures of enormous ice walls cracking and caving into the ocean; it's obvious they're selling indelible impressions to casual viewers on an impending catastrophic flood of sea levels leading to total world obliteration. Far from the truth, though, these documercials fail to differentiate that ice calving is the result of expansion not contraction which are chunks of ice that break off glaciers and fall into water creating floating icebergs. The melting and growth of sea ice, in contrast to land ice, does not affect sea level.

Factoid: Academy Award and Nobel Prize winner, Al Gore's 2006 movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" documents this dishonest documercial format of half truths and lies about global warming.

In one scene filmed, a mother polar bear and cub are described as drowning on a broken-off melted Alaskan ice cap floating helplessly out to sea. It was later exposed as a bogus scenario. I realize a polar bear can drown... if, say, it's exhausted and swimming over 50 miles. But basically, these bears can swim 15 miles easily, at a speed of 6 miles an hour, and they use the edge of an ice floe as a platform from which to hunt. An on site photographer reported that those bears afterwards dived off to swim back to shore--talk about an inconvenient truth!

It is uncertain to NASA observations, however, whether the world's two major ice sheets--Greenland and Antarctica--have been growing or diminishing. Together, Greenland and Antarctica contain about 75% of the world's fresh water. 

"Global warming could therefore be expected initially to increase both melting and snowfall. Depending on which increase dominates, the early result could be either an overall decay or an overall growth of the ice sheets. This is of particular importance because of the huge size of these ice sheets, with their great potential for changing sea level." [It leaves any computer software models literally out in the cold because it could be either scenario A or B depending on mother nature, not anything due to man's logic to decide the actual global change to expect--only time will tell.] 

An interesting corollary is that the Greenland ice sheet is warmer than the Antarctic ice sheet and as a result, global warming could produce serious melting on Greenland while having less effect in the Antarctic. In the Antarctic, temperatures are far enough below freezing that even with some global warming, temperatures could remain sufficiently cold to prevent extensive surface melting. It then leads with an assumption of a null outcome, negative results to support any significant overall global net change.

All this technical talk is exactly what the EPA, Environmental Protection Agency. as a federal bureaucratic organization does not want the voters to understand. As an administrative and enforcement arm of a very liberal, progressive government, it promotes the Washington political agenda. They must raises more taxes on high earner taxpayers including hiding from the stupid middle class an income tax increase too, and so want to enforce a "Cap and Trade" policy to tax "greenhouse emissions", the hydrocarbons emitted from coal-fired power plants and automobiles by restricting oil production and by forcing the public to curb personal utility power usage. Of course, Al Gore and his political cronies have invested heavily in promoting this Cap and Trade program too.

V.P. Al Gore invested tens of millions of dollars in green energy projects not because they work, but the profit potential of 'credits' generated by EPA regulatory controls he can command. So, Al Gore and other wealthy investors establish the marketplace for a Cap & Trade Exchanges to buy and sell  "energy credits." You will be limited to how much electricity you use or save through Federal government mandated allocations, you are literally fined with excess usage levies; but, if you use less, you can sell your unused credits in the Cap & Trade Exchange--Hello, Al Gore? By the way, they say that this practice provides an alternative source to create an additional supply, say what?

China Pledges Help in Terrorism Fight

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said, "China seeks to play an active role in Afghan reconstruction and reconciliation."

Boy, those headlines are reassuring, China finally gets it! ...Uh oh, hold on, I thought so, there are some slight wrinkles nearly unnoticeable there in those headlines. It seems it isn't to help the United States, but it's to help Afghanistan. Oh well, it's still a magnanimous gesture towards settling war to bring peace into the region since they share a strategic narrow border. What else could it be, right?--Wrong.

Mao Tse Tung & President NixonThe old saying, "You don't get anything for nothing." is certainly prescient here. It is with that foresight from past Chinese diplomatic encounters since President Richard Nixon discovered that ulterior Mandarin motives always prevail in any Manchurian negotiations. Haven't you ever heard of "saving face"?

Factoid: Afghanistan has asked China on several occasions to open their northern border in the Wakhan Corridor for economic reasons or as an alternative supply route for fighting the Taliban insurgency. Historically, Marco Polo traversed this rugged, deep, narrow valley pass sandwiched between Afghanistan and Chinese provinces considered even today as the only viable land passage in spite of its extremely rugged mountainous terrain. However, China has resisted, largely due to unrest in its far western province of Xinjiang, which borders the Wakhan Corridor that could supply ongoing anti-Beijing anarchists. In December 2009, it was reported that the United States had asked China to open the corridor with no end results. Is that some more of the unreported Obama foreign relations policies successes? 

Afghanistan natural resources: coal, copper, iron ore, lithium, uranium, rare earth elements, chromite, gold, zinc, talc, barites, sulfur, lead, marble, precious and semi-precious stones, natural gas and petroleum. In 2010, U.S. and Afghan government officials estimated that untapped mineral deposits located in 2007 by the US Geological Survey are worth between $900 billion and $3 trillion. 

The biggest find, however, is mining the 1.4 million tons of 'rare earth elements' such as lanthanum, cerium and neodymium in one place. There are 17 rare earth elements which are typically dispersed and not often found concentrated as rare earth minerals in economically exploitable amounts, so that is what is remarkable about Afghanistan.  

 Despite being one of the poorest nations in the world, Afghanistan may be sitting on one of the richest troves of rare earth minerals in the world, valued at nearly $1 trillion. It is in extremely high demand in manufacturing of high tech military hardware, computers and various electronics such as cell phones, television displays and communications which are exponentially growing.

So, China strategically is encouraging new investment of Chinese enterprises to mine these minerals in this land-locked country even with its arid, war-weary devastated countryside from years of Russian occupation with surrounding mountainous terrains. This is really why China is helping to build Afghan anti-terrorism capabilities by training local militia and police with arms and boots on the ground to protect their own national interests such as: 

• In 2007, a Chinese government-owned company paid $3 billion to lease a 2,600-year-old Buddhist site for 30 years and plans to extract over $100 billion worth of copper from the area.

• In 2011, China became the first foreign country in decades to sign a oil exploration deal in Afghanistan when it inked a $7 billion pact.

• In 2013, China announced preliminary talks to construct a direct road link, Wakhan Corridor, to China across the remote 47-mile border between the two countries.

Obama losing shirt in cards with Hu of China.This is part of a trend that has been welcomed by the U.S. officials in the Obama administration. It is interesting that the Obama administration has not raised much fanfare about this U.S. capitulation to the Chinese government by the American people as Afghanistan is bought and paid for by our blood, sweat and treasure. No wonder the Chinese like to deal with the Obama administration.

In the meantime, the United States withdraws its troops as facilities, equipment and municipal infrastructures such as power plants, dams and roads are left behind for the Chinese to use in Afghanistan. After all, China needs them to corner the market on these strategic rare earth minerals to attain military superiority over the United States. Is this another Obama foreign policy blunder or a side deal cut with China to shore up and build up his feeble Obama Presidential diplomatic legacy?