The Communicators: Two Views on New Net Neutrality Rules

[RBEFoundation]

watch?v=arM5cPovZb4&feature=pl­ayer_embedded

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “watch?v=arM5cPovZb4&feature=p­layer_embedded?”

Hmmm, yeah, Naomi Wolf has the untarnished reputation of never twisting facts to suit her agenda. (NOT!)

I asked for EVIDENCE, not more hype. Is that too difficult a concept to grasp? And no, I don’t mean wild conspiracy theories; more conjecture and FEAR based arguments, which have no basis in reality.

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed ohh shit, now I see the problem we are having here. You don't understand the definition of the word theory. So,

Which do you believe is being true;

1. Conspiracy Hypnosis give to us by clearly incompetent government give to us IN ONE FUCKING DAY!

2. Conspiracy Theory given to us BY THOUSANDS of scientists after YEARS OF RESEARCHING IT AND MAKING EXPERIMENTATIONS?

I really hope you know the difference between theory and hypnosis.

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “You don't understand the definition of the word theory.”

According to you; notwithstanding, I DO, absolutely, understand the concept of certain proof (best evidence) and thus far you’ve failed to provide any. Kindly do so, so that OTHERS know you’re not some “conspiracy” whack-job?

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed ohh yeah, I know psychology too, surprised? I know in many people's minds a "whack-job" is associated with "conspiracy" and it has been painted through the media as being a bad thing.

I'm talking facts here, lets discuss 9/11 smarty pants.

Are you telling me, right here and right now that you are somehow better and know more than thousands of structural engineers and scientists with 20/40 years of experience???

[RBEFoundation]

@RBEFoundation guess what?

I'm a computer expert! You want to challenge men on this level too? OHH SHIt it is going to be a lot of fun! I'm going to make you look like a shitless little kid.

Want to try me ?

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “I'm a computer expert!”

Ya don’t say? Well then it shouldn’t be hard to provide evidence to counter my take on things, should it? Do tell, we’re all ears!

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “...I know psychology too, surprised?”

No not particularly consider these exchanges. In fact, that possibility is the closest thing to reality you’ve indicated, but then medical experiences notwithstanding...

Are you or are you not going to grace us with indisputable proof? Oh and please try to stay on topic; I realize that is difficult for one with no facts to support their views, but do try nonetheless.

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed I'm trying to provide the prove, the whole picture is made up of many facts. Lets focus on 9/11 and discuss it shall we? As a lot of what is going on right now is based based on and around 9/11.

You asking for facts?

If I'll ask you for facts of existence of "Moore's Law", you won't be able to provide any without going into details of hardware+software evolution and new discoveries in science.

So, lots of facts! Lets focus on 9/11 ok?

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “You asking for facts?”

Hmmm, perhaps you’re finally getting the message.

Yes FACTS to support the Net Neutrality position would be wonderful, provided they aren’t misconnected with other matter (ahem, like 911) that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with what ISPs may or may not do in the future.

...Proceed.

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed "ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with what ISPs" really? now, I'm wondering where your facts are coming from because last I checked, if the government orders ISPs to do what it needs and when it needs (legally, by passing the law saying they can do it), having criminal government in power may turn out to be very bad for all of us...

Don't you think?

P.S. I didn't even touch on the matter of environmental crisis we are in! That's whole new fucking topic.

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “I'm wondering where your facts are coming from...”

Undoubtedly, I’ve not set-forth any FACTS other than you’ve consistently failed to provide any that support the Net Neutrality mantra. You’re fixated on this notion that 911 has something to do with Net Neutrality legislation, yet there isn’t a stitch of independent EVIDENCE to support that view.

Oh and please don’t cite Alex Jones as a credible source (hate to see you embarrass yourself, any more than you’ve already).

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed your are not hearing me, I don't know who you are but you are not listening and doing it on purpose (I might be wrong, not claiming anything)...

Alex Jones is one of the sources, he is fixated on conspiracy alone and thinks by exposing whoever is behind will solve the problem, I'm not. There are far more problems we need to address, scientifically, not politically.

P.S. whoever is behind really afraid of Alex Jones so he is a political figure now either you like it or not.

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “Alex Jones is one of the sources...”

Ouch! I feel for ya; that blows your whole foundational argument (warned ya). You’re clearly one who wants to connect 911 as an INSIDE JOB, resulting from a vast conspiratorial (shadow government) effort to dominate liberty. (All together now... Illuminati!) So sorry, I stopped believing in boogiemen along time ago.

Ah-ya! Whatever floats your boat, Bumpkins. Good luck at that tin-foil-hat convention.

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed no, not illuminate, just bunch of greedy assholes seeking control. And no, I'm not connecting anything, FACTS ARE.

Do you agree to take the challenge of thousands of scientists? Or maybe me at computing?

If you have short term memory problems, this is not my problem but as I mentioned earlier, whole picture how 9/11 is tied up to Net Neutrality comes from 9/11 and suggesting one more time, you want facts, lets start from the hypotheses given to us by the government?

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “...whole picture how 9/11 is tied up to Net Neutrality comes from 9/11...”

Yes Virginia, the core of madness and consequent products are eventually made known; clearly as a ballgame dog huckster. (Tin foil! Get your tin-foil-hats here, tin-foil! Get `um while they’re hot! Tin foil, here!)

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed if it was some sort of humor, you suck at it (no offense).

You know, I don't have time for this, take care man, Happy Hew Year, best of luck with everything and most importantly, don't stay in fear :)

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “...I don't have time for this...”

Ah yes, quintessential wisdom when one cannot compete with FACTS. (Irrespective just moments ago, “RBEFoundation” was fully prepared to take time and show how stupid I am.)

Say it ain’t so, Bumpkins! Say it ain’t so! :D

[RBEFoundation]

On Google search for "attack on net neutrality"

About 1,330,000 results (0.10 seconds)

P.S. used search, took me 5 seconds, there are millions of sites to go through, GET FUCKING BUSY YOU NEED A LOT OF CATCHING UP TO DO!

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “On Google search for `attack on net neutrality’”

Again, been there done that and even THOSE SOURCES can’t provide more than you have... Absolutely NOTHING of substance, other then FEAR and conjecture!

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed yeah yeah, repeat that I'm in fear 100 more times, maybe you'll believe it yourself.

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “...repeat that I'm in fear 100 more times, maybe you'll believe it yourself.”

Too late I already do. :D

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed Good for you, believe whatever you wish to believe, I don't care. I care what other people will think when they read it ...

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “I care what other people will think when they read it...”

Yes and thus far you’ve done an absolutely masterful job of demonstrating the strength of your arguments. I’m certain others will be impressed. (Sarcasm off.)

[4lx123]

These "protectionist" regulations give assurances of future profitability for at@t, verizon, and Time Warner. I wonder why big businesses only subscribes to free-market capitalism when it suits them?

[alfredgrech]

We Americans do not appreciate unelected bureaucrats regulating anything that they were not specifically authorized to regulate by congress. Something is not better than nothing. What do we have elected representatives for? Where is the debate? where is the vote? Bureaucrats in charge equals dictatorship. We HATE dictatorships and dictators.

[buellfreak]

You will be paying MUCH more for the services which will now be filtered by the communication company that now OWNS it. Who are the "Investors" they keep talking about? Who are they associated with? I would wager that its large corporations lobbying our politicians in order to gain control.

[maxangleofdangle]

Confusing. What does it all mean? Whatever, we all need neutral access to the advertisement tsunami so need the bandwidth, wired or wireless. The sooner and closer we get to the cable TV paradigm of more ads, all the time, the better. More ads means more demand for products and services which boosts the economy and creates tons of jobs. I don't mind paying $100-150 or more a month for the privilege do you?

[RBEFoundation]

@maxangleofdangle excuse me, what planet are you from? What economy? What privilege? Internet is at the moment democratic 100%, what these jerks are trying to do is to take it over... you'll be paying few hundreds bucks for few hundreds websites with complete monopoly on everything.

Right now you are paying relatively few bucks for billions of websites with the possibility to make your own.

Get fucking real.

[alwaysright10000]

@RBEFoundation I'm pretty sure that was bitter sarcasm.

[RBEFoundation]

@alwaysright10000 I hope so too :)

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “Right now you are paying relatively few bucks for billions of websites...”

Yup TRILLIONS of unimpeded packet exchanges everyday, with less than a half-dozen instances of willful interruption by ISPs in comparison. The latter poses no significant threat-trend or indication of nefarious intent on the part of ISPs, hence; no need for unauthorized government intervention.

Yours APPEARS to be a sky-is-falling based argument.

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed my APPEARS to be realistic argument. When the government is based on secrecy, tortures people behind the scenes, lies, pushes draconian laws, pushes for couple of more wars on top of 2 already illegal ones and when Internet folks trying to expose it the government trying to shut them down by taking control over the Internet and sky isn't falling?

Get fucking real too.

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation : “Get fucking real too.”

Hmmm, yeah, good counsel you ought to take that up yourself.

You provide NOTHING in the way of substantial evidence to support your claims for Net Neutrality; no evidence other than FEAR, no documentation other than subjective opinion, conjecture as fact and hysteria in place of reason.

...Clearly I’m not the one in dire need of grasping reality.

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed are you kidding me??? No evidence? Start from looking into 9/11 evidence, that's going to be the start, then into LOTS of documentaries and documents exposing all previous wars based on lies, then look at current trends and political arguments. You don't have to be genius to understand what is going on.

I understand your position, it is easier to be ignorant and happy and realistic and trying to solve the problem.

P.S. I'm not in fear, I'm actually working on solutions.

[RBEFoundation]

@RBEFoundation "then realistic and to look for solution", sorry, typo. Really, what planet are you from?

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “Really, what planet are you from?”

The one you evidently FEAR most... REALITY!

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “I'm not in fear...”

Yeah, like a small child isn’t afraid of the dark... Claims WITHOUT a stitch of evidence in support indicates FEAR, far more than not.

Thus far you’ve utterly failed to provide anything but opinion and (here’s that word again), FEAR to support your arguments. Show us internal ISP memos documenting their plans, point to a consistent TREND indicating a restrictive aim; something, other than hype and FEAR?

Can’t? Then your position fails miserably.

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed hold on, why the fuck are you assuming? I can't?, just because this small box doesn't allow me to post a lot doesn't mean I can't, second, I just told you to research 9/11, can you use search? Why I have to babysit you and search for you? Want me to provide tutorials on how to search? I can provide.

Stop pushing that I have fear, you don't even know my name not to mention what I do know and don't.... in other words, do not assume, research first then we'll talk!

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “I just told you to research 9/11...”

Been there done that, and find the 911 Trufer movement about as misguided as those who promote Net Neutrality. Once again, other than ancillary tripe that has absolutely NOTHING to do with ISPs... What evidence can you provide to support your claims? If you had the goods, I’d say now would be as good a time as ever to expose them?

Can you or can’t you? Real simple question, even you might be able to grasp.

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed "even you might be able to grasp"? So, before you were accusing me of some inappropriate style of an argument and now what you do? When people have nothing to say they reserve to personal attacks? What's up with your argument now? So, you researched 9/11 and saying it is unfound??? You? Against thousands of scientists with 20/40 years of experience? YOU WILL BE MY PERSONAL HERO IF YOU'LL BE ABLE TO HANDLE 5 OF THEIR QUESTIONS WHEN THEY'LL THROW THOUSANDS AT YOU.

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “When people have nothing to say they reserve to personal attacks?”

My comment only demonstrative of your attitude thus far -- one seemingly overly engrossed by suspicion and conjecture. Either you get it or you don’t, but please try not to divert from the fact that your position is wholly and utterly weak.

Again, provide supportive EVIDENT to sustain your, ahem, FEARS or don’t. Readers of this exchange can make up their own minds, who is in error and whom is in FEAR!

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed my position is weak? You are not playing chess here, I have no position, I rely on facts.

P.S. I just gave you millions of facts (well, Google did) and posted a movi, can post more (which I have a feeling you'll say you seen even thought it came out today and I'm sure you going to say it has no facts)...

You now, regardless of how many facts I'll show you, it is impossible to argue with ignorance and childish attacks.

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “...regardless of how many facts I'll show you, it is impossible to argue with ignorance and childish attacks.”

Hmm, yeah, well hate to break the news to ya. But you’ve not provided factual evidence of anything other than CONSPIRACY THEORIES and conjecture. But as to your latter point, above, I wholly agree.

[RBEFoundation]

@PoliticallyBlazed now, give me the definition of "conspiracy", I would love to hear your explanation!

[PoliticallyBlazed]

@RBEFoundation: “...give me?? the definition of ‘conspiracy…’”

Sure, got a mirror?

[stephenawolfe]

I've been hearing a lot of contradictory information about 'Net Neutrality' from my friends. After watching the video and looking into this further, it's my understanding that the Net Neutrality rules recently passed by the FCC keep ISPs from slowing or blocking Internet content. So, for someone like myself who likes watching Netflix online or shopping eBay without restriction, these new rules are good, right?

Is my understanding of this correct?

[nstikskll]

so as they say "it is striking a balance" that would suggest to me that a majority of people favor one side to the other, so to strike a balance means to remove a portion of the favored side. once again completely going against free market values.

[screwopenborders]

@nstikskll look it up and fact check please. there is too much gossip when it comes to Net Neutrality. The reason why you hear so much disinfo is because the companies want to limit bandwidth on lower paying customers or block them all together, NN prevents this. If you call free market capitalism taking down advertisements or websites of competitors then I have an issue with that.

[MEpianist]

@nstikskll Free market values are opposed by reality. Look up what Adam Smith said about monopolists.

[nstikskll]

@MEpianist forgive me my suspicion, but Washington has always only created problems to champion, so that their friends can make boat loads of money, i see it as a way to limit political rivals, and silence descent. i am on the side of no one in that vile place, i just fear for our own liberty..