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.

 

A Simple 666 Solution for Borders & Terrorism

I have the immediate answer to completely reset the process of all the undocumented aliens in the immigration of people around the world!

Assignment of an exact unalterable, individual  DNA I.D. match unlike our U.S. citizens' social security number, a lifetime government I.D. number, which can be altered, forged or changed. See the DNA World map showing how tribes historically moved over thousands of years to today.

It involves computerizing the total immigration process with the DNA of everyone. There are no duplicates or forged I.D. records because the records cannot be forged or changed. That permanent number is the international passport number and I.D. or the Mark of 666 as some call it.  Get over 666, we gave up our individual rights when we always use the Social Security number for every important transaction we conduct daily.

Currently this service is available by Ancestry.com  and their ads say, "Uncover your ethnic mix, discover distant relatives, and find new details about your unique family history with a simple DNA test with a cotton swab, a Q-tip to painlessly gather a drop of saliva from the mouth."

That initial cost under a government mandate would be trivial to the cost savings in processing hundreds of thousands of people who would be tracked with or without valid paperwork with DNA I.D. records.  Their whole ethnic background tracing their country of origin would be really valuable in tracing these mass migrations, transmittable diseases or medical records. Government welfare programs could cut down on records duplication, administration costs and processing errors too.

At this point in history with so much at stake with out of control fraud and waste with everyone wanting to get everything for free it's about time to face reality. We must start tracking these unmarked masses of humanities that are roving the earth and drowning countries in unbearable debts and social hardships. It will also assist in tracking terrorist members too.

When is enough finally enough? A mandatory law to enforce DNA I.D. records will be the most efficient method to fairly distribute resources and services to all people trully in need of help. Otherwise, no entry or no benefits. It would also protect everyone from more terrorist groups too.

What do you think?

The Muslim "N" Word is the new "F" Word

Language is a collective memory or cultural history so the meaning of words are defined by society. Just as words in English have no meaning to people that don't speak English, the words can have certain meanings in certain sub-cultures or circles.

Anti-racial cartoons in publications.Actually in the Muslim world the "N" word in Arabic is "Nikah". In Arabic it is equivalent to the "F" word, it is a word from the Quran when offensively taken basically means pejoratively "to have sex." The typical Islamist counter-argument states, "Even though this is completely false when silly Christians say that, [the term] "Nikah" is a proper and not offensive word to use." and added, "It is true that "Nikah" could sometimes also refer to sexual intercourse so it does not only have to necessarily mean "to have sex", it could also mean marriage." So in another words, this word does not have a double entendre, double meaning, when uttered or written outside the Quaran? ...Ah yeah, gotcha! So that's words like ass or cock and what sinful act they do together that's mentioned in the Bible that can't possibly be used pejoratively? 

In war torn Iraq the conquering Islamic militants have decreed that it is death to the Christians if they don't convert to Islam, pay a dhimmi tax (Sharia dhimmitude to allow infidels to live), or leave homes to flee insurgent-held areas by the end of July 2014. Christians were estimated to be a scant 5%, 1.2 Million, of the 23 million Iraqi population and have emigrated in mass since the insurgencies began late last year.

According to Abu Faris, a local Christian leader from Mosul, the Islamic State Fighters began marking the Iraqi Christians properties with the Arabic letter "N". The protesters in France show the profane symbol against Christians as they march to denounce it. 

It is reminiscent of the Nazis marking businesses and homes with the "J" word for Juden (Jews) during WW2 in Germany. It marked them as undesirables which eventually identified where to find them for transport to concentration camps for extinction. Where are over six million Holocaust Jews today? Dead.

Muslim Brotherhood

What some people call regular mainstream "Moderate Muslims" it's as if that modifier means being anything different than the "Radical Muslims." 

We hear a lot of qualifying statements about “moderate Muslims” when “radical Islam” is mentioned. Now, certainly, one can imagine that the majority of Muslims, are most likely people who just want to get on with their lives and that in western countries in particular, many keep a low profile and just live their lives with a low current of religiosity. Like people everywhere, they are trying to get through the day, and not start a revolution or ignite a war.

Even so, most are sympathetic to radical concerns or issues, even if they are not entirely seized with passion for the cause. It is generally reported that 10-15% of the Muslim world population are true radicals supporting jihad which is calculated from 170 to 225 milllion terrorists. The United States currently has a total population of 330 million citizens. So, these moderate Muslims' passive attitudes really just feed the heated passions of radical Islamists which just encourages them even further. 

Other Muslims are completely against radicalism, but 'stay on the down low' and don’t make waves. Then, there are the Muslims who become leaders and actually attempt to impress some kind of moderate change on the current situation within Islam. Many of these high-profile moderates or liberal Muslims don’t get as much press as the radicals, but they do exist, and often they live their lives under threat of death from their co-religionists.

While the world’s population is projected to grow 35% in the coming decades, the number of Muslims is expected to increase by 73% – from 1.6 billion in 2010 to 2.8 billion in 2050. In 2010, Muslims made up 23.2% of the global population. Four decades later, they are expected to make up about three-in-ten of the world’s people (29.7%).

By 2050, Muslims will be nearly as numerous as Christians, who are projected to remain the world’s largest religious group at 31.4% of the global population.

So what is the answer? It's obvious, and some will not like it--we either have to co-exist, which is totally unacceptable by the majority of Islamists or we will be reduced to dust in warfare - literally, unless we do it first to the Iranians. So, anyone heard of or have any ideas or solutions? Otherwise, let the ethnic cleansing continue until Islamists have killed every infidel or unbelieving Christian and Jew.

--isn't time to stop kidding ourselves and turn around things?

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: