Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: If They Shutted Down The Internet They'd Have Us By The Canoles

Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 3, 2011, 10 a.m. EST by eyeofthetiger (304)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Imagine if they shut down the internet no communication we'd be paralyzed then they could just round us up and do what they wished people would be walking the streets aimlessly like fatted calves I bet they do just that

67 Comments

67 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by Democracydriven (658) 12 years ago

My view of losing the internet would be resigning ourselves to the brain poison we have been living off of since the invention of Newspaper, Radio, Television and Movies. (We see and hear only what they want us to)

Think about this. Today almost everything that most people say or hear is something that was spread from the corporate media in one or more forms, or is repeated from somebody that heard it on the media. (Very view people are shaping opinions)

Today the internet is being used to broadcast things that would never be broadcast by the corporate media. Our ability to communicate to the masses is very likely a threat to the 1%. If they manage to neutralize that capability, it will be virtually impossible to communicate with the masses and organize demonstrations or spread the truth

[-] 1 points by rockyracoon2 (276) 12 years ago

yep

[-] 1 points by Democracydriven (658) 12 years ago

In my opinion it would seal the deal for shutting up anybody that was saying something that the 1% didn't like.

The 1% currently plant the seeds and create the opinions. If they want you to be known as a villain, then you will be one. If they want you to support attacking an innocent country, then you will. If they don’t want you to know about Building #7, they will not talk about it.

[-] 1 points by rockyracoon2 (276) 12 years ago

you forget the power of human imagination. we will never be controlled. if internet goes, humans will find other way to share knowledge and ideas.

many people have already stopped watching tv, msm is slowly/quickly becoming irrelevant

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

If they shut down the internet, "THEY" would be committing instant suicide. Business and Government are more dependent on the internet than individuals are, computers and their inter-connectivity are what runs the infrastructure of this society.

[-] 2 points by Democracydriven (658) 12 years ago

They aren't talking about shutting it down. They are talking about censoring and filtering

[-] 1 points by rockyracoon2 (276) 12 years ago

this is essentially the same thing

[-] 1 points by Democracydriven (658) 12 years ago

Here an article about the bill. People are afraid that in it's current form it is a smoke screen for control internet content in general

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/11/25/4079265/congress-should-kill-online-piracy.html

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

Well good luck with that. Its never going to happen because it takes away revenue from internet service providers ( the info corporations ). Windows for one would not likely be very helpful in ending a serious source of income ( their greed can get in their own way ).

[-] 1 points by Democracydriven (658) 12 years ago

As I understand it congress is currently considering a bill that will have that effect.

The following editorial appeared in the San Jose Mercury News on Monday, Nov. 21:

Listen up, Congress: There are times when Silicon Valley really can help you understand the complexities of legislation that will affect the tech industry - and the world economy. The raging debate over the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act is one of those times.

It's not just the future of the industry that's at stake here. It's national security.

Congress needs to put the brakes on the horrific piracy legislation that is hurtling toward passage at the behest of the entertainment industry. Members need to work with San Jose Rep. Zoe Lofgren and other representatives on an alternative approach to curbing the theft of intellectual property.

President Barack Obama needs to listen, too. He should tell Congress - now - that he will veto the legislation unless a compromise is found to meet Hollywood's needs without killing the Internet as we know it. And no, that is not excessive hyperbole.

Online piracy is a serious problem for moviemakers and recording studios. But the proposed legislation is both unlikely to work and likely to cripple the technology companies that, based on last week's growing job numbers, are crucial to lifting the economy toward a real recovery. Google, Facebook, Yahoo, eBay, Twitter, Zynga and dozens of other tech companies and venture firms are fighting this bill. And no wonder.

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/11/25/4079265/congress-should-kill-online-piracy.html

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

They will have to kill the right to free speech 1st before they can take the internet away from us. Still if they managed to do it. You would see more of an uprising than is happening now.

[-] 1 points by Democracydriven (658) 12 years ago

They don't have to kill the right to free speech; they just have to stifle the thing that enables it to be broadcast from the 99% voice.

I agree that it would probably cause a big uprising if they didn't do it right. The Iraq war should have caused an uprising but the majority of the people were convinced it was justified to keep us safe.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

People are beginning to wake-up. The straw finally fell that broke the camels back. I thought it would have been sooner during the insane spiraling gas prices. But it finally took a large portion of the population losing their homes and having the banks paid for those failed mortgages and being allowed to keep and resell those properties to really wake the public and make them see that enough was enough.

[-] 3 points by rayl (1007) 12 years ago

it would be an obstacle but not the end

[-] 1 points by lizikrus (6) 12 years ago

They are trying to do that! They are trying to pass internet censoring bill!!! PROTECT IP Act and COICA.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 12 years ago

You can't just shut down the internet. Thats not how it works

[-] 0 points by DunkiDonut2 (-108) 12 years ago

There are six huge routers/servers that control all of the internet traffic around the world. When you purchase a new domain name from one company it can take up to 24 hours for the six routers to get updated with the new domain. Those six routers are controlled by the key internet players, Network Solutions as an example is one. Those routers have specific IP addresses for government use only. The rest of the sytem can be shut down down with one command. So it is very possible to shut it down.

[-] 1 points by Idaltu (662) 12 years ago

What your post and many of the comments demonstrate is the difference between the now generations based on ‘immediate gratification’ and those much older generations based on ‘individualism (the moral worth of an individual)’. The former cannot see solutions beyond their comfort zone. The latter have no boundaries and therefore all solutions regardless of discomfort are viable options such as: Admiral Farragut in 1864 when he said “Damn the torpedoes!…go ahead…full speed!”

You don’t need the internet to take down a government, what you need is moral fiber and determination of will. In simple English..”brass balls”. So with some modification we get “damn the internet!….(now you supply in this space some solutions ).

[-] 1 points by Idaltu (662) 12 years ago

What is important is that you actually took the time to work through a solution. I'll give you this much: it took 'brass balls' to work through the logic regarding pornography and then post it on this forum. You are likely to get a lot of heat in the comments from it, but that really isn't the issue is it? Because as Truman said: " if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen." In the months ahead most of the 'now generation" protesters and forum warriors will melt into the background when confronted with the prospect of losing 'personal comfort'. However, there will be a few with 'brass balls' that will lead the rest of us into new frontiers of social organization.

And just for the record Whisper: I like your determination and style.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 12 years ago

we need to build up gov not tear it down, well tear down what is broken and fix it. we need to form it with all balances in place.

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

immediate gratification great words now I'm going out to find some eager hippie chicks

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 12 years ago

This maybe really hard for you to believe but people existed just fine without computers and the internet in their home. Lots of people shop online and no one on Wallstreet wants to stop that, rest assured. However, the internet can be turned into one big catalog collection with censorship. If and when this happens, if you simply disconnect and stop paying for internet access, and enough other people do as well, then money will change hands and rules will change to get you back online. This is how to vote with your dollar. Money runs the world and it starts with YOU! In the end, it ENDS with you as well. Stop paying for it and watch the laws change to get you jacked back in.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 12 years ago

the consumer is the one in control it is the consumer who every day decides which businesses fail and which ones make it. Form consumer groups and take that power further.

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 12 years ago

YES!!!! We still have to do something about landlines, gas and electric, Monsanto, hospitals and prisons, privatization and deregulation that are cause such a drain on the economy but people can't just stop buying. But if we want factories back, we can stop buying certain things until the company shifts its practices. Everyone republican and democrats alike could vote with their dollars based on the merit of each idea to them, not some party platform where its a package we must swallow or not.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 12 years ago

it would help to have a group "focus" the people on the worse problems first, but some say attack all problems at the same time, either way we need to group up and act.

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 12 years ago

It would help to have targeted actions to support one idea and demand at a time. That way the movement could address issues central to both parties and prove its not just left-winged movement but wants the participation of EVERYONE!

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 12 years ago

sounds right to me: address issues central to both parties "the participation of EVERYONE!" lets do it!

[-] 1 points by bigbangbilly (594) 12 years ago

Actually they are keeping it monitor it. If they shut it down we could use a sneaker net. They should be untracable It have nothing to do with shoes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sneakernet

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

what's a sneaker net for catching gym shoes? it amazes me the side steps people take without having the courage to hit a problem head on the duck and cover tactics are not working sheepie go ba baaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

[-] 1 points by bigbangbilly (594) 12 years ago

Click on the wikipedia link!!!! That is why i put the link there!!!

[-] 1 points by OWSWhat (66) 12 years ago

The Gov is monitoring the net and yes they can also shut it down to

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

if they did then we would have to rely on the govt for all news they would control everything during the day people work during the evening they are all on their computers 82% of people in this country own a computer

[-] 1 points by OWSWhat (66) 12 years ago

Here is something else I just found "PRODIGAL -- the Proactive Discovery of Insider Threats Using Graph Analysis and Learning. They may even start reading our emails. It is time to show the Gov that they work for "us" and we do not work for them. The Gov has gotten way to big.

[-] 0 points by newearthorder (295) 12 years ago

Maybe we should occupy Earth's orbit. If we could get some cash we could put up a satellite that would give us all a television channel, a satellite radio station, and our own internet.

[-] 0 points by DunkiDonut2 (-108) 12 years ago

There are six huge routers/servers that control all of the internet traffic around the world. When you purchase a new domain name from one company it can take up to 24 hours for the six routers to get updated with the new domain. Those six routers are controlled by the key internet players, Network Solutions as an example is one. Those routers have specific IP addresses for government use only. The rest of the sytem can be shut down down with one command. So it is very possible to shut it down.

[-] 0 points by karenpoore (902) 12 years ago

Occupy city groups have already formed and the movement would continue.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 12 years ago

Did you mean " cajones"?

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

if you want to be vulgar about it I guess yea people love vulgarity cause they're nothing more than animals

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 12 years ago

People are animals, mammals to be exact.

[-] 0 points by Scout (729) 12 years ago

but other animals dont kill for sadistic purposes the same way humans do - so we are actually worse than other animals

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

Yea we are disgusting scum bags

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 12 years ago

speak for yourself.

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

yea we are disgusting scum bags

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

You're right! That's what they used to do in the 80's before the Internet existed. And, imagine, if we had to read books again! I don't even want to think about it. We need to add this demand: Internet must never be taken away no matter what! Quick, run to your local GA and table this!

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 12 years ago

i almost just blew you off about the angels line, considering i never used that word except maybe speaking about the better angels of men. let it be known that a scientist who religiously believes in his findings is no different then a religious person who snubs his nose at science. models are models even if they are spelled wrong.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

You did use the word angels. Read your first comment in the other thread. You said angels, when you meant angles. My whole diatribe was about that. Didn't you get it yet?

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 12 years ago

no, i was stuck in my own pomposity.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

There is a huge difference between the scientist and the religious man.

The scientist publishes his work in peer-reviewed journals so it can be checked by other scientists. If his work doesn't turn out to be valuable, then it won't take long before the critic sets him aside. He might continue to believe in his claims, but he'll be alone and the whole world will know better because of his critics.

The religious man doesn't give us anything to criticize. His material cannot be checked for factuality. There are no experiments that can proof the existence of God.

The scientist is brave enough to present a theory that can be falsified, while the religious man hides behind his unfalsifiable dogma.

Out with the God of the gaps arguments already! It's time for a new age. An age without the bothersome and tiresome angels of the sky.

Angels in the skies are always angels in disguise. Angel eyes speak angel lies.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 12 years ago

true religious people, like Jehovah's Witnesses, have found balance and don't dabble in politics, giving scientists the lea way to influence policies. If you are having trouble convincing people of Climate Change's adverse effect on us, you cant blame people who don't effect policy. Thrasymaque, meet Socrates and be prepared to get owned.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

I met him a long time ago. Read my description on my user page for more info.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 12 years ago

i know, i research my intellectual adversaries well.

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

well they have the power to do it they did that in Egypt and everyone flooded the streets let's face it the internet is now more important than the telephone 75% of my life and time is through the internet I use it for work, meeting friends, shopping, planning trips, and social events The internet has even replaced the post office eventually the post office will be a thing of the past

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 12 years ago

The internet is only as important as you make it.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

True indeed. I don't use it for online banking. Never have. I mostly just use it for email, porn, and a Facebook chat here and there. Did I say porn?

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 12 years ago

Lol that's funny. Whenever I go to work on someone's computer I always tell them they wouldn't have this problem if they'd quit surfing all those porn sites.

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

yea right you must live in a cave eating raw chicken legs

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 12 years ago

Lol hardly,I'm just saying it's only as important as you make it. You can apply that to a lot of things.

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

when's the last time you went out and asked someone a question? and all you got was a blank stare? people don't use brains anymore they use the internet everyone out there has their heads up their doo pas

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 12 years ago

Today. If all you get is blank stares you need to look at who you're talking to. As for the last statement I refer to that as Cranial-Rectal-Inversion.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

You mean we are going to send physical objects through the Internet by using teleportation so the post office will have to close? When do you believe this will happen? Are you a conspiracy theorist?

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

you know what I meant

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

Oh right! The post will still exist, they'll just pick up the packages at our house after we fill in their annoying little forms online instead of the post office. They'll pick up and deliver; not only deliver. Ya, that does make sense. Internet is indeed getting to be more and more important. Thank you for clearing that up.

[-] 0 points by eyeofthetiger (304) 12 years ago

then you've got the problem little sarcastic postal girl

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

I wasn't being sarcastic. I do think post offices are nearing extinction for the reason I described above.