Author Topic: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent  (Read 3165 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 5412

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2064
  • Reputation: +223/-78
Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« on: July 31, 2010, 09:53:05 AM »
Hi,

I subscribe to a daily report from the Casey organization.  This article was published yesterday and should scare the heck out of ever freedom loving American.  Too bad it is not in the mainstream media.

regards,
5412


Something Fishy About RightHaven Suits?
By Shannara Johnson

Cracking down on the blogosphere seems to have become the latest fashion. Since March, lawsuits were filed against at least 88 blogs, message boards, advocacy organizations, and other websites, according to various news reports.

And they're all coming from the same source: Las Vegas-based RightHaven, a firm that deals with copyright infringement.

Reason.com reports that "RightHaven's business model involves acquiring the copyrights for specific articles originally published by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, then filing lawsuits against website owners who have posted those articles without permission."

The owners of one of the affected sites called The Armed Citizen, Clayton Cramer and David Burnett, complained to Reason magazine that they never even got a chance to remove the articles in question. "With our e-mail addresses right there on the front page [of our site], all it would have taken is an e-mail asking us to remove or alter the listing so as not to infringe," said Burnett. "By not contacting any of the websites with a takedown notice beforehand, they're showing they're interested in money, not resolution."

Which Steve Gibson, CEO of RightHaven, readily admits to. "Media companies' assets are very much their copyrights," he told Reason. "These companies need to understand and appreciate that those assets have value more than merely the present advertising revenues."

With many of the targeted sites being blogs, conspiracy message boards, and government-critical websites, however, some of the victims suspect much more sinister motives behind RightHaven's attacks. The legal trouble, they believe, may be part of a larger operation initiated by the Obama administration to silence independent, critical voices on the Internet.

And browsing the evidence, this contention may be not be all that far-fetched.

Recently, Blogetery.com, a little-known Wordpress platform, was abruptly shut down by its hosting company, BurstNet, taking down about 73,000 blogs. According to CNET, "[the] service was terminated at the request of some law enforcement agency, but [BurstNet] wouldn't say which one. As for the reason, BurstNet hasn't made that clear either."

Rumors have it that the government may have gotten involved as part of anti-piracy operations, but many liberty advocates don't buy it. And who can blame them, with frustrated sound bites coming from President Obama himself, implying that unsympathetic bloggers may have a part in his inability to connect with the public.

In January, an obscure academic article from 2008 made the rounds in the blogosphere that had been written by Obama's information czar, Prof. Cass Sunstein.

Here's an excerpt:

...we suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies ... will undermine the crippled epistemology of those who subscribe to such theories. They do so by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity.

Why should you be worried about this?

Glenn Greenwald from Salon.com explains it:

Sunstein advocates that the Government's stealth infiltration should be accomplished by sending covert agents into "chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups."  He also proposes that the Government make secret payments to so-called "independent" credible voices to bolster the Government's messaging (on the ground that those who don't believe government sources will be more inclined to listen to those who appear independent while secretly acting on behalf of the Government).  This program would target those advocating false "conspiracy theories," which they define to mean: "an attempt to explain an event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role."

[.]

Sunstein's response to these criticisms is . . . as telling as the proposal itself.  He acknowledges that some "conspiracy theories" previously dismissed as insane and fringe have turned out to be entirely true (his examples:  the CIA really did secretly administer LSD in "mind control" experiments; the DOD really did plot the commission of terrorist acts inside the U.S. with the intent to blame Castro; the Nixon White House really did bug the DNC headquarters).  Given that history, how could it possibly be justified for the U.S. Government to institute covert programs designed to undermine anti-government "conspiracy theories," discredit government critics, and increase faith and trust in government pronouncements?  Because, says Sunstein, such powers are warranted only when wielded by truly well-intentioned government officials who want to spread The Truth and Do Good -- i.e., when used by people like Cass Sunstein and Barack Obama:

Throughout, we assume a well-motivated government that aims to eliminate conspiracy theories, or draw their poison, if and only if social welfare is improved by doing so.

But it's precisely because the Government is so often not "well-motivated" that such powers are so dangerous.  Advocating them on the ground that "we will use them well" is every authoritarian's claim.  More than anything else, this is the toxic mentality that consumes our political culture:  when our side does X, X is Good, because we're Good and are working for Good outcomes.  That was what led hordes of Bush followers to endorse the same large-government surveillance programs they long claimed to oppose, and what leads so many Obama supporters now to justify actions that they spent the last eight years opposing.

FOX's John Stossel hit the nail on the head, quipping, "That's right. Obama's Regulation Czar is so concerned about citizens thinking the wrong way that he proposed sending government agents to 'infiltrate' these groups and manipulate them. This reads like an Onion article: Powerful government official proposes to combat paranoid conspiracy groups that believe the government is out to get them...by proving that they really are out to get them."
And the RightHaven case has only fueled the fears - especially since evidence points to potentially close ties between the Obamas and Gibson.

Recently targeted by RightHaven, outraged members of the conspiracy message board godlikeproductions.com (GLP) set out to get to the bottom of the matter, digging in RightHaven CEO Steven A. Gibson's background.

According to a resume found on the Net, Gibson attended the Chicago-Kent Collage of Law and graduated cum laude in 1990, and, his work history states, "Prior to establishing his own firm, Mr. Gibson was an associate at Sidley Austin LLP," a Chicago-based law firm.

President Obama's Wikipedia page, in turn, states that "In late 1988, Obama entered Harvard Law School. . . During his summers, he returned to Chicago, where he worked as a summer associate at the law firms of Sidley Austin in 1989 and Hopkins & Sutter in 1990."

Coincidence? GLPers don't think so, especially considering that Michelle Obama, too, is in the picture. "She met Barack Obama when they were among the few African Americans at their law firm, Sidley Austin . . . and she was assigned to mentor him as a summer associate." (Wikipedia)

"At the firm," the Wikipedia page goes on, "she worked on marketing and intellectual property," the latter being Gibson's specialty as well.

In other words, it would be reasonable to assume that Barack and Michelle Obama and Steven Gibson have known each other for 20 years and (of course this is conjecture) may even have been, or still be, friends. Making Gibson the perfect henchman, the conspiracists surmise, to carry out Obama's death sentence on free Internet speech and open dissent.

Tall tales or the beginning of the end for a truly free Internet? We'll see; but we will keep our eyes open to other warning signs.



Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28493
  • Reputation: +1710/-151
Re: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2010, 10:21:51 AM »
I had never heard of the Las Vegas Review-Journal before this or the warning posted on CC, what if anything is so special about it that bloggers would repost from it in particular?
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline NHSparky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24431
  • Reputation: +1280/-617
  • Where are you going? I was gonna make espresso!
Re: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2010, 11:34:55 AM »
I had never heard of the Las Vegas Review-Journal before this or the warning posted on CC, what if anything is so special about it that bloggers would repost from it in particular?

The LVRJ is the largest paper in the Vegas area.
“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.”  -Henry Ford

Offline JohnnyReb

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32063
  • Reputation: +1998/-134
Re: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2010, 11:40:50 AM »
I had never heard of the Las Vegas Review-Journal before this or the warning posted on CC, what if anything is so special about it that bloggers would repost from it in particular?

True DAT.

..but do I understand this correctly. They "own the story".

I understand that if I copy and paste their article I have infringed on the copyright...OK. But I understand this to say that if I read their article then condense it and using my own words, I've infringed on the copyrights? 
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of ‘liberalism’, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” - Norman Thomas, U.S. Socialist Party presidential candidate 1940, 1944 and 1948

"America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."  Stalin

Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28493
  • Reputation: +1710/-151
Re: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2010, 11:50:02 AM »
True DAT.

..but do I understand this correctly. They "own the story".

I understand that if I copy and paste their article I have infringed on the copyright...OK. But I understand this to say that if I read their article then condense it and using my own words, I've infringed on the copyrights? 

There is a line between the two but the location varies from time to time.  If you write a story and say they had some comment about it and the substance of what it was, no; if you take their story and reword it to only technical differences, generally that might be copyright infringement.  It really applies a lot more to columnists and purely-local stories since stories in the national media or coming from wire services or news bureaus originally are fairly tough for one paper to claim exclusive rights on.

Sparky, I figured that, but who goes to a Vegas paper of any sort for any special information value in the first place?  Or is this all going back to suppressing news on Manbearpoodle's chakra releases?  (Was that in Vegas?  Sounds like a Vegas story anyway.)     
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline vesta111

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9712
  • Reputation: +493/-1154
Re: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« Reply #5 on: July 31, 2010, 12:02:01 PM »
I had never heard of the Las Vegas Review-Journal before this or the warning posted on CC, what if anything is so special about it that bloggers would repost from it in particular?

Seems there are way to many people associated in the field of human physiology popping up.

Keep the masses of the uneducated people, the poor the criminals and dregs of society CALM. Give them shelter, food, drugs and they will follow anyone who promises them status quo.

Anyone be it a child or a drooling idiot that sees through the smoke and mirrors, Allow them to rant and rave all they want.

Give them an access to their own soap box be it in a demonstration or on the internet---Then find ways to make fun of them, give them curtsy names, like tin hat people or point and laugh at them.

One has to give a name to the enemy be it Tea Bags and then hooking on the Gay expression for that term.---Deep down once this idea is implanted in our minds it will be hard to NOT think of gay sex when the name comes up.

It is only when people who have impeccable credentials and much experience comes out to open the door to what is behind it and who is there that people in power discredited by any means possible. Then Web sites are shut down, indiscretions exposed.

Even the best of our leaders have some mortal failings, you better believe that someone has found these and if they have to will set up these people to highlight their { Gasp } moral lapses.

Oh yes, we could be reading a text book on Russion Brain Manipulators and/or Science Fiction that has an odd way of down the line in some way becomes reality.

None of us are immune to manipulators of any kind.   Only way to keep from being caught up in all this is to stay under the radar, as long as we are thought of as harmless kooks we will be somewhat free er then the lock step Zombies.

 Keep an eye out for those that are thrown under the bus, we have today 2 people being messed with who are not doing one darn thing different then the people crying " Off with their head ".

And who was it that said that in America one can sue a ham sandwitch?

Offline Thor

  • General Ne'er Do Well, Troublemaker & All Around Meanie!!
  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13103
  • Reputation: +363/-297
  • Native Texan & US Navy (ret)
Re: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« Reply #6 on: July 31, 2010, 04:01:05 PM »

Sparky, I figured that, but who goes to a Vegas paper of any sort for any special information value in the first place?  Or is this all going back to suppressing news on Manbearpoodle's chakra releases?  (Was that in Vegas?  Sounds like a Vegas story anyway.)    


There were quite a few posts that I removed that had links to the LVRJ and associated media outlets. (I had even posted one, myself, from the Herald Democrat, a  local paper which is also owned by RightHaven.) All in all, I think that RightHaven is ignoring the "Fair Use" clause and to what end?? Maybe 5412 hit the nail on the head??
"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation."- IBID

I AM your General Ne'er Do Well, Troublemaker & All Around Meanie!!

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."-Thomas Jefferson

Offline 5412

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2064
  • Reputation: +223/-78
Re: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« Reply #7 on: July 31, 2010, 08:50:16 PM »
There were quite a few posts that I removed that had links to the LVRJ and associated media outlets. (I had even posted one, myself, from the Herald Democrat, a  local paper which is also owned by RightHaven.) All in all, I think that RightHaven is ignoring the "Fair Use" clause and to what end?? Maybe 5412 hit the nail on the head??

Hi,

To me the article made sense, just another Obama connection trying to take away our freedom.  I have heard from some friends on this one and they say that posting the stuff from the paper is a copyright infringement; however posting the link is not.  While I am not a lawyer, I have written a few textbooks, and it makes sense to me.

I do recall owning some copyrights and trademarks and the procedure is to contact the offending party through your lawyer and demanding they "cease and desist" using your material.  I gather that did not happen in this case.

One will notice that it was only conservative stuff coming down if I understood the article correctly.

regards,
5412

Offline Thor

  • General Ne'er Do Well, Troublemaker & All Around Meanie!!
  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13103
  • Reputation: +363/-297
  • Native Texan & US Navy (ret)
Re: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2010, 11:37:45 PM »
Hi,

To me the article made sense, just another Obama connection trying to take away our freedom.  I have heard from some friends on this one and they say that posting the stuff from the paper is a copyright infringement; however posting the link is not.  While I am not a lawyer, I have written a few textbooks, and it makes sense to me.

I do recall owning some copyrights and trademarks and the procedure is to contact the offending party through your lawyer and demanding they "cease and desist" using your material.  I gather that did not happen in this case.

One will notice that it was only conservative stuff coming down if I understood the article correctly.

regards,
5412

The "Fair Use Clause" states that one cannot post an entire article from any online paper without permission. Excerpts and links were supposed to be OK.
"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation."- IBID

I AM your General Ne'er Do Well, Troublemaker & All Around Meanie!!

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."-Thomas Jefferson

Offline 5412

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2064
  • Reputation: +223/-78
Re: Obama shutting down the voice of dissent
« Reply #9 on: August 03, 2010, 03:31:46 PM »
The "Fair Use Clause" states that one cannot post an entire article from any online paper without permission. Excerpts and links were supposed to be OK.

Hi,

Thanks for the explanation.

Wonder why I never go to meet Ann Coulter, I have posted a lot of her stuff.

regards,
5412