July 24, 2013 by MARCO TORRES
When censorship fails there is always a fallback strategy to muzzle the population – going straight to the source. In this case internet service providers (ISPs) are the companies that offer users around the world access to the Internet. There are many websites which pursue censorship strategies to prevent specific information from getting through to the public domain. Google, facebook, youtube are among many of the largest sites in the world which employ sophisticated information suppression techniques. The problem is, it hasn’t worked very well, so ISPs now plan to block specific websites and search terms they consider offensive under the guise of initiatives to block pornography and other sexually offensive material. But it won’t stop there.
Just two years ago, a University of British Columbia Professor made headlines when he stated that censorship has become a worldwide norm and that new laws will control what you read or see on the internet. Not many paid attention to him, but they are now.
Ron Deibert (PhD, University of British Columbia) is Associate Professor of Political Science, and Director of the Canada Centre for Global Security Studies and the Citizen Lab at the Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto.
As a political scientist at U of T he was involved in several collaborative cyberspace R&D projects. He is also a co-founder and a principal investigator of the Information Warfare Monitor and OpenNet Initiative projects. Mr Deibert will be speaking at SC Congress Canada in June.
“We hold a mirror to state-based and other forms of Internet filtering, going back to 2002,” he said. “Every year we test in over 70 countries using field research and technical interrogation methods.”
Generally speaking in the early part of 2000s, governments either didn’t care or were oblivious to what was happening on the Internet. Today censorship has become a worldwide norm. In addition countries are applying next generation controls.
“They’re engaging in offensive activities and surveillance implementing new laws that bring in a climate of censorship, and in some cases forcing ISPs to do the policing for them.”
By controlling the flow media, nations have learned how to control the flow of information. Regardless of whether its attempting to convince the masses that the sun is bad for us or mercury, radiation, plutonium and pesticides are good for us, they’re all lies to manipulate public opinion.
China has taken things one step further which could be a sign that other nations will follow in due time.
Prime Minister David Cameron has announced that by the end of 2013, most households in the UK will have pornography blocked by their internet provider unless they choose to receive it. The new measures will apply to both existing and new customers. Mr Cameron also called for some “horrific” internet search terms to be “blacklisted”, meaning they would automatically bring up no results on websites such as Google or Bing.
He also warned he could have to “force action” by changing the law and that, if there were “technical obstacles”, firms should use their “greatest brains” to overcome them. Does this sound familiar?
What Cameron is not revealing is that the technical infrastructure for internet censorship has been planned worldwide for more than 8 years in the U.S., Canada, U.K., Australia and several other developed nations and it won’t stop at pornography. For example, the largest industries in the world will be able to bid to have specific terms axed and it will be as simple as adding those terms to complex algorithms to ensure they don’t produce results from websites which contain negative information about their products or services.
Want to find out more about the dangers of pasteurized milk? Or what about information related to vaccines and the relationship to autism? Genetically modified foods? They will all be axed or the filters will steer the user towards information that floods results with opinions from the mainstream arena.
True health claims for natural health will be restricted. It doesn’t matter what textbooks or research may say. If ISPs are instructed to axe a specific term or series of terms, you simply won’t see them come up. This is an act of censorship, in violation of the “freedom of thought, belief, and expression” guaranteed by the constitutional rights and freedoms of every nation.
Analysts who study technology trends see the censorship happening all over the world. “This is not something confined to strictly one or two nations,” said technology expert Wilfred Pande. “The U.S., Canada, and Europe are all seeing some level of censorship on the internet and television which prevents users from seeing or hearing specific information their governments do not want them to hear.”
Even the most open, democratic governments have sought laws and new forms of surveillance that many see as a new wave of censorship — and that includes the United States.
The U.S. government asked Google for data on its users more than 31,000 times in 2012 alone, for example. And the government rarely obtained a search warrant first, Google recently revealed; in nearly all cases, the company ended up turning over at least some data.
The heightened surveillance is enforced under the guise of protecting intellectual property rights, preventing cyberespionage, fighting child pornography, and protecting national interests such as nuclear power plants from hackers.
The Canadian government proposed Bill C-30, known as the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act. Proponents claimed the measure was designed to combat the exploitation of children, but it required Internet service providers to create monitoring systems that would allow the police to intercept and track all online communications — without a warrant. The public reaction was so fiercely opposed to Bill C-30 that Canadian authorities were forced to withdraw it earlier this year.
Just last month, Australia’s corporate watchdog admitted to inadvertently blocking access to about 250,000 innocuous websites in addition to the 1200 it had already accidentally censored.
ASIC made the concession in a statement at an senate estimates hearing after it caused controversy by interpreting a 15-year-old law in the Telecommunications Act as giving it the ability to block websites.
“When we started there were only a handful of countries that filtered Internet content. Now there are over 30. Many are imposing requirements on ISPs to filter access to content. Not only is it legitimate for governments to intervene, but also they’re becoming more aggressive.”
Which leads to another factor — the militarization of the Internet. There’s a lot of hype and exaggeration about the idea of cyberwar. Yet there’s a ripple effect. With the creation of the US military Cyber Command it is now overt.
“What’s different is that armed forces of governments are tasked with building doctrines to fight and win wars in this domain,” said Mr Deibert. “Many of these governments are looking to the underworld of cybercrime to give them an advantage. Both the attacks on Estonia and Russian-Georgian conflict involved the exploitation of cybercrime that were directed by Russian authorities, and also piled on by well-known criminal botnets.”
There is an arms race in cyberspace, and criminals are caught up in it.
“Now we have huge cold war behemoths partaking. That alone is an important force. Not just in terms of how the market is organized by defense expenditures, but also by the technology — deep packet inspection or computer exploitation tools.”
At least four countries including Canada, the United States, Australia and the U.K plan to ensure the ISP blocks are in place by 2014.
Why Is This Happening?
Because the greatest powers that run the mainstream media expected that people would continue to prescribe to the doctrine of television which is completely owned and controlled by corporatism. However, the internet is now overtaking mainstream opinion. It’s a game changer of monumental proportions. People are finding out the truth by the millions and it’s spreading like wildfire on the internet. Isn’t it too late then to implement this strategy? I would state a resounding yes.
It is subtly communicated that one should stay within the collective and never challenge the message, for doing so may be considered an aggression towards culture. The message is, “Be a good consumer; always obey authority; you know nothing; listen only to experts; be content and never question or express new ideas.” This signal is being broadcast across millions of screens, indoctrinating the unconscious minds of those who choose this as their only reality. Self-censorship occurs when these individuals become so deeply indoctrinated that they are afraid to discuss any information outside the paradigm of television-created culture; they police their thoughts to ensure they won’t conflict with this culture. Sadly, many people’s reality today does not allow any outside information to process, instead it is written off as conspiracy or blatant lies. Our consciousness has been destroyed so much that fiction has become reality. An entire lifestyle of poisonous foods, pharmaceuticals, and fluoridated water are accepted as safe and sold to us at the cost of our health and well being.
Advertisers and psychologists of the billion dollar culture creation industry manufacture trends through the proliferation of insecurities; and manipulating desires and emotions. These concepts are also employed to control how individuals think about politics, as well as the possibilities and limitations within society. Those welding power within our streams of mass communication market their plans into each generation as individuals adopt specific ways of thinking and never suspect that all the major events and trends within their lifetime are actually planned by an elite few before they are even born. In our society today, culture is created from the top down. Virtually all forms of culture are created by the ruling class to build a false sense of reality, ensure social compliance, and control the future course of cultural evolution.
Predictive programming is a tool used by the establishment to acclimate the public to new ideas, trends, beliefs, and threats. It is used through television by including certain situations or ideas within the plots of many fictional shows, familiarizing the viewer with these concepts no matter what they may be watching. When similar situations occur or like ideas are circulated in the world we think that these particular things are quite natural for we have unknowingly been made familiar with them through television. By viewing nearly any popular show on television, one can see the same propaganda that will be aired on the nightly news. Propaganda on a wide array of subjects has been interwoven into a great number of television shows. Just a few of these subjects include global warming, vaccinations, torture, terrorism, national security, the militarization of police, and the degradation of the family unit. Through predictive programming, television shapes culture and prevents individuals from asking questions.
Primary Source of News Is Now The Internet
The primary source of news and information is the Internet, by far and the alternative media is taking over. Less than one third of people use television to get their news, while less than 10 percent turn to radio or newspapers.
Research has shown that some people are unable to make appropriate lifestyle changes because they are lacking in knowledge of medical issues. In fact, one in five people – 19 percent – admit they have ‘no idea’ if their diet is healthy, and half are clueless as to the benefits of eating fruit and vegetables. Where do you think they turn to when they have questions?
A significant 56 percent of 25 to 34-year-olds consult the internet for health advice, and just 16 percent go to their doctor.
According to Andrew Liu, head researcher for the Online Diagnosis Project, “the internet is now the primary point of inquiry for adults and even teenagers with health concerns, and the accuracy of self-diagnosing online is quite surprising,” said Liu.
The most common inquiry is searching for symptoms and seeking natural therapies for those symptoms. Liu says this is the most impressive part of his research. “What is most remarkable is that people are not self-medicating with black market drugs, but they are seeking alternative therapies, treatment, supplementation, herbs, and natural remedies to cure or ease their condition,” he added.
More than 78% of men and women seeking health advice from the internet can properly diagnose their condition in less than 8 minutes.
The internet is changing the entire landscape for medical opinion and diagnoses. People are taking power into their own hands when it comes to their health and governments, big pharma and the medical community can’t stand it.
It’s one of the biggest reasons the internet must be censored and filtered to give big business an edge.
People are finally realizing that they cannot be informed about the realities of the world by biased news sources that currently dominate media. The only way to get any truth about world issues and your health is to research unbiased, independent news sources which have little or no influence from direct advertisers, with no revenue and financial incentives from outside organizations. The biggest problem with mainstream media, is that it is controlled by half a dozen conglomerates which influence every single editorial decision made. They plan to translate this control to the internet, but it can’t and won’t work the same way, regardless of the technology put forth.
There are too many ingenius technology enthusiasts that have defeated every technology system ever invented and known to censor information. If blocks from ISPs are implemented, millions will change the internet as we know it to something else. This is an information war that we will win. I guarantee it.
Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.