New York Times Calls for Internet 2

The New York Times’ Week in Review (February 14th, 2009) has published an article in which the writer, John Markoff, asked (in the headline), “Do We Really Need a New Internet?” He goes on to answer that question with an unmistakable “yes.”

But, far from advocating improvements to the existing internet, Markoff has called for “a ‘gated community’ where users would give up their anonymity and certain freedoms in return for safety.”

He goes on to quote Stanford engineer Nick McKeown as saying, “Unless we’re willing to rethink today’s Internet, we’re just waiting for a series of public catastrophes.” Could these “public catastrophes” include engineered false-flag attacks on the internet, carried out by our own Department of Defense? After all, who best knows the internet’s vulnerabilities than the people who created it in the first place?

Even more reminiscent of the 9/11 false-flag attacks is Markoff’s quoting of Rick Wesson, CEO of Support Intelligence, a computer consulting firm, who says, “”If you’re looking for a digital Pearl Harbor, we now have the Japanese ships streaming toward us on the horizon.” Yep. Except they’re not Japanese, are they?

If there is any doubt in your mind as to what lies in store for the internet and where it is coming from and why, listen to this June 2008 segment on the “end of the internet” from the Alex Jones radio show.

More Evidence of Pentagon War Against the Internet

Kurt Nimmo

Infowars
January 7, 2009

(snip) from full article here: http://www.breakthematrix.com/BreakTheMatrix/More-Evidence-of-Pentagon-War-Against-the-Internet

“As far as the Pentagon is concerned the internet is not all bad, after all, it was the Department of Defense through DARPA that gave us the internet in the first place. The internet is useful not only as a business tool but also is excellent for monitoring and tracking users, acclimatizing people to a virtual world, and developing detailed psychological profiles of every user, among many other Pentagon positives. But, one problem with the current internet is the potential for the dissemination of ideas and information not consistent with US government themes and messages, commonly known as free speech. Naturally, since the plan was to completely dominate the “infosphere,” the internet would have to be adjusted or replaced with an upgraded and even more Pentagon friendly successor.

A renowned Russian author, Dmitry Glukhovsky, told Russia Today the internet may very well be in decline. “Glukhovsky predicted that the network would become clogged with traffic and may grind to a halt in the near future,” writes Steve Watson. “We have previously warned that the rumors of the internet’s decline have been much exaggerated and used as a pretext for calls to designate of a new form of the internet known as Internet 2.”

Of course, Internet 2 would be greatly regulated and only “appropriate content” would be accepted by an FCC or government bureau. Everything else would be relegated to the “slow lane” internet, the junkyard as it were.

In tandem with broad data retention legislation currently being introduced worldwide, such “clean slate” projects may represent a considerable threat to the freedom of the internet as we know it. EU directives and US proposals for data retention may mean that any normal website or blog would have to fall into line with such new rules and suddenly total web regulation would become a reality.” (end snip)