Kurt Nimmo
February 25, 2010

Earlier this week, Microsoft had the whistle-blower website Cryptome erased from the Web. All the sprawling transnational corporation had to do was file a DMCA notice alleging copyright infringement on Cryptome’s proprietor John Young and Network Solutions did the rest — it locked up Cryptome’s domain name, thus disappearing the site from the Web. Cryptome had posted a Microsoft surveillance compliance document that the transnational corporation gives to law enforcement agents seeking information on Microsoft users.

John Young’s website was removed from the internet without court order or due process.

No court ruling was required. Microsoft merely instructed Cryptome’s ISP to pull the plug.

In 2009, when the Senate was debating a cybersecurity bill and senator Jay Rockefeller lamented the existence of the internet, many people argued that the government would be hard-pressed to shut down the internet, even if Obama had the authority to flip the switch during a national crisis, as the proposed bill suggested. The government, however, would not darken the entire internet, as some suggested, but would rather remove certain sites deemed to be threats to national security according to our rulers.

Domain names are kept in databases maintained by various Network Information Centers (NIC) as part of the Domain Name System. Some name registries are government departments while others are co-operatives of internet service providers (for instance, Network Solutions). The system is currently dominated the United States, Canada, Europe and Japan.

In 2004, a United Nations summit was held in New York on globalizing the system. Then U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan argued that the system “must be made accessible and responsive to the needs of all the world’s people,” in other words the globalists who established and run the United Nations behind the scenes. In 2005, the European Union argued in favor of wresting control of the internet away from the United States.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • {openx:49}

Meanwhile, the U.S. government has launched a major propaganda effort with accompanying legislation to push the idea that the internet is under attack by nefarious forces. Earlier this week, on the heels of a so-called cyber security bill overwhelmingly passed in the House, Rockefeller held a hearing where witnesses offered dire warnings about the alleged vulnerabilities of U.S. digital networks, which are largely owned and operated by firms in the private sector.

“We’ve got to give the president the right to intervene,” Rockefeller said. “That’s controversial. That’ll always be controversial.”

Censorship and squelching the First Amendment, of course, will always be controversial.

In April of 2009, Rockefeller and co-sponsor Olympia Snowe introduced legislation (the Cybersecurity Act of 2009) containing language that would allow Obama to shut down the internet in the event of a cyber attack on critical infrastructure.

Earlier this month, Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) hosted Cyber ShockWave, a simulated cyber attack on the United States. “Cyber ShockWave highlighted the immediate, real dangers of cyber-terrorism by bringing together a bipartisan group of former senior administration and national security officials playing the roles of Cabinet members,” a BPC press release explained on February 17.

Last week, CNN ran a two-hour production, We Were Warned: Cyber Shockwave, based upon exclusive television access to the BPC cyber “war game” scenario. Politicos participating in this slick propaganda campaign suggested nationalizing private sector corporations and federalizing the National Guard in response to a cyber attack.

Jay Rockefeller laments the existence of the internet.

The televised scenario pinned the blame for a cyber attack crippling U.S. infrastructure on terrorists operating out of Sudan. However, as Homeland Security has made abundantly clear, the government is not worried about shadowy and hypothetical terrorists in eastern Africa. It considers its own citizens to be terrorists, a point underscored by a DHS report on “rightwing extremism” leaked to the alternative media last year.

In the event of another staged terrorist attack on the United States, Obama will not shut down the entire internet. The New York Times, the Washington Post, and other major Operation Mockingbird players will not go dark during such an event — they will be required to peddle the official fairy tale in the same way they did on and after September 11, 2001 — that fate will be reserved for the alternative media, in particular Infowars and Prison Planet.

The Cryptome/Microsoft case reveals how effortless this process will be. All the government needs to do is remove the domain names of selected websites from the domain registry database and Jay Rockefeller will get his wish that we’d be better off if the internet — or rather certain sites on the internet — never existed.

CNN’s cyber terrorism propaganda program. See the rest here.

The Reopen America Back to School Special is now live! Save up to 60% on our most popular items!

Related Articles