Soros-funded group urges media run by government
( SO WHAT'S NEW??? LIKE IT'S NOT YET CONTROLLED BY THE CFR, etc.??? DS)
Marxist-led study has close ties to Obama White House officials
Posted: May 19, 2010
9:58 pm Eastern
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
Free Press founder Robert W. McChesney
A newly released book, meanwhile, documents Free Press has close ties to top Obama administration officials.
"The need has never been greater for a world-class public media system in America," begins a 48-page document, "New Public Media: A Plan for Action," by the far-left Free Press organization.
"Commercial media's economic tailspin has pushed public media to the center of the debate over the future of journalism and the media, presenting the greatest opportunity yet to reinvigorate and re-envision the modern U.S. public media system," argued the Free Press document, which was reviewed by WND.
The Free Press study urges the creation of a trust fund – largely supported by new fees and taxes on advertising and the private media – to jump start the founding of a massive government-run public media system that will ultimately become self-sufficient.
"We should redeploy and redouble our resources to keep a watchful eye on the powerful and to reliably examine the vital issues that most Americans can't follow closely on their own," Aaron stated.
Free Press is a well-known advocate of government intervention in the Internet.
A new book, "The Manchurian President," documents the founder of the Free Press, Robert W. McChesney, is an avowed Marxist who has recommended capitalism be dismantled.
The book, subtitled "Barack Obama's ties to communists, socialists and other anti-American extremists," also documents the close ties between Free Press and leading Obama administration officials. The new work was written by WND senior reporter Aaron Klein and co-author Brenda J. Elliott.
McChesney is a professor at the University of Illinois and former editor of the Marxist journal Monthly Review.
In February 2009, McChesney recommended capitalism be dismantled.
"In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick-by-brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles,'" wrote McChesney in a column.
The board of Free Press has included a slew of radicals, such as Obama's former "green jobs" czar" Van Jones, who resigned after it was exposed he founded a communist organization.
Obama's "Internet czar," Susan P. Crawford, spoke at a Free Press's May 14, 2009, "Changing Media" summit in Washington, D.C, revealed "The Manchurian President" book.
"Manchurian" shows Crawford's pet project, OneWebNow, lists as "participating organizations" Free Press and the controversial Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN.
Crawford and Kevin Werbach, who co-directed the Obama transition team's Federal Communications Commission Review team, are advisory board members at Public Knowledge, a George Soros-funded public interest group.
A Public Knowledge advisory board member is Timothy Wu, who is also chairman of the board for Free Press.
Like Public Knowledge, Free Press also has received funds from Soros' Open Society Institute.
Issues of restrictions on speech are not limited to Crawford.
WND previously reported Obama's "regulatory" czar, Cass Sunstein drew up a "First Amendment New Deal" – a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would include the establishment of a panel of "nonpartisan experts" to ensure "diversity of view" on the airwaves.
WND also reported that in a recently released book, "On Rumors," Sunstein argued websites should be obliged to remove "false rumors" while libel laws should be altered to make it easier to sue for spreading such "rumors."
In the 2009 book, Sunstein cited as a primary example of "absurd" and "hateful" remarks, reports by "right-wing websites" alleging an association between President Obama and former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers.
Sunstein also singled out radio talker Sean Hannity for "attacking" Obama regarding the president's "alleged associations."
Ayers became a name in the 2008 presidential campaign when it was disclosed he worked closely with Obama for years. Obama also was said to have launched his political career at a 1995 fundraiser in Ayers' apartment.
Meanwhile, in a lengthy academic paper, Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban "conspiracy theorizing," WND reported.
Among the examples of speech that should be banned, Sunstein offered, is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.
Sunstein also recommended the government send agents to infiltrate "extremists who supply conspiracy theories" and disrupt the efforts of the "extremists" to propagate their theories.
Earlier this week, a video at Breitbart.com showed Sunstein proposing Congress hold hearings about mandates to ensure websites post links to a diversity of views on issues.
"The Manchurian President," meanwhile, which just hit the New York Times best-seller list, alleges Obama has deep ties to an extremist nexus that has been instrumental not only in building his political career but in crafting current White House policy.
With almost 900 citations, "The Manchurian President" bills itself as the most exhaustive investigation ever performed into Obama's political background and radical ties.
Klein began investigating Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign and broke major national stories. He first exposed the politician's association with Ayers in a widely circulated WND article.
The story prompted the Nation magazine to lament, via the CBS News website, that "mainstream reporters now call the Obama campaign to ask about Klein's articles."
It was in a WABC Radio interview with Klein that Ahmed Yousef, chief political adviser to Hamas, "endorsed" Obama for president, generating world headlines and sparking controversy. Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain and Obama repeatedly traded public barbs over Hamas' positive comments.
Klein was among the first reporters to expose that Obama's "green jobs" czar, Van Jones, founded a communist organization and called for "resistance" against the U.S. government. The theme was picked up and expanded upon by the Fox News Channel's Glenn Beck, leading to Jones' resignation last September.
Elliott, meanwhile, is a historian, author and investigative researcher known for her blogging during the 2008 presidential election about William Ayers, Tony Rezko and other controversial figures linked to Obama.
"The principle of free speech is not concerned with the content of a man's speech and does not protect only the expression of good ideas, but all ideas. If it were otherwise, who would determine which ideas are good and where forbidden? The government?"The last truly free platform for free speech is the internet. Some of us got here earlier than others but most wi-fi-diehards landed and planted themselves on the net because in the informational battle space there was no leftwing censorship wall that you find in big media, newspapers, television etc. You shut us down, and we are done. Cooked! Like the Ramadan goose.
"Once a country accepts censorship of the press and of speech, then nothing can be won without violence. Therefore, so long as you have free speech, protect it. This is the life-and-death issue in this country: do not give up the freedom of the press -- of newspapers, books, magazines, radio, movies, and other forms of presenting ideas. So long as that's free, a peaceful intellectual turn is possible." Ayn Rand
Truth be told, we are in the fix we are in because the media abdicated its role as public servant in news dissemination and turned itself over to the Obama media? Madison avenue marketing machine is Newsweek editor: "Obama is sort of G-d."
If not for media malfeasance, the man of mystery would not be sitting oval.
The war is in the informational battlespace. The net is the front line in the war of ideas. Obama is attempting to disarm us. This is deadly. And if course, Obama, in his charming despotic manner, will admonish the lemmings and explain how this is good for us.
So of course Obama had to get his dirty paws on it. The net broke ever story on the seedy, dirty malevolent rise to the most powerful office in the world. The media not only refused to investigate the Mansourian President, they refused to cover the big stories when we did (the forged COLB, the illegal campaign contributions from terror states and foreign countries), his Muslim education.
Headline hat tip rut
Julius Caesar of the Internet Wall Street Journal hat tip Rut
The FCC puts another industry under political control.
A federal appeals court ruled last month that the Federal Communications Commission lacks the authority to regulate the Internet. No worries, mate. This week the Obama Administration chose to "reclassify" the Internet so it can regulate the Web anyway. This crowd is nothing if not legally creative.http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/05/julius-caesar-of-the-internet-obama-puts-the-web-under-fed-control.html
For the past decade, broadband has been classified as an "information service" and thus more lightly regulated than traditional telephone services. This has led to an explosion of new investment and Web innovation, but it hasn't sat well with Democrats who want more control over the telecom business, as well as with some Web companies (Google) that want more leverage over Internet service providers like Time Warner or Verizon.
FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski did their dirty work this week by announcing that he plans to reclassify broadband lines so his agency can regulate them under rules that were written for Ma Bell in the 1930s. This means subjecting the Internet to new political supervision—from the federal government and 50 state public utility commissions. The goal is to put one more industry under Washington's political thumb.
Even Bill Clinton's FCC, under Chairman Bill Kennard, had refused to go this far. "Classifying Internet access as telecommunication services could have significant consequences for the global development of the Internet," said Mr. Kennard in a 1998 speech. "We recognized the unique qualities of the Internet, and do not presume that legacy regulatory frameworks are appropriately applied to it."
Mr. Genachowski says he's merely hewing to the political middle, pursuing a "third way" on regulation that will "allow the agency to move forward with broadband initiatives that empower consumers and enhance economic growth, while also avoiding regulatory overreach."
But Mr. Genachowski's promise to put in place safeguards so broadband companies are subjected to "only a handful" of phone regulations is hardly reassuring. Even if he keeps his word, what prevents future FCC Chairmen from reversing course? If Google or some other big political donor doesn't get its way, its lobbyists will descend on the White House or Congress, which will lobby the FCC, which may well do their bidding.
Our reporting suggests that something like that may have happened in this case. All indications early this week were that the FCC wouldn't take such a drastic step. But when a Washington Post story reported that news, the liberal "consumer" lobbies went to the barricades, and Mr. Genachowski's team sequestered itself from other FCC commissioners for most of Tuesday. Late Wednesday, he broke the "reclassify" news. Perhaps they all had overnight epiphanies.
In any case, Mr. Genachowski has provided no evidence that the current regulatory approach is failing. The Supreme Court's 2005 Brand X decision reconfirmed cable broadband's current classification as an information service, and that regulatory certainty has led to a burst of capital investment and competition.
In the past five years, U.S. companies have invested $576 billion in communications equipment and structures, according to Bret Swanson of Entropy Economics. Add computers and software, and U.S. capital expenditures on information technology since 2005 have totaled $2.2 trillion. Telecom accounts for nearly half (47%) of all non-structure capital investment in the U.S.
The FCC decision adds a new element of political risk to these investments, which can only make companies more cautious. At a minimum, the FCC action will be challenged in court and introduce years of uncertainty at a time when the economy needs all the risk-taking and investment it can get.
At worst, it will lead to a new era of political meddling in Internet investment, bandwidth allocation, and no doubt much more. Google and others who are cheering now may not like where this ends up when, say, religious right groups start demanding FCC content regulations during the next GOP Administration.
Autos, health care, energy, Wall Street and now telecom. Is there any American industry this Administration doesn't want to run?