On August 5, 1999, President Clinton signed yet another Executive Order--this one on establishing a "working group" (made up of--you guessed it--Janet Reno and her various colleagues of the politically correct persuasion) to "study" how "Unlawful" Internet conduct can be policed.
Does this mean we can kiss free-speech on the Internet--the last bastion of free-speech in this politically correct society--goodbye?
Further, Clinton's cronies in political correctness have 120 days to set this up and distribute it for review!
Now, folks, we know how slow the government state of bureaucracy works. They have 120 DAYS??? Is it possible they have already written up this "study" and is it already possible they have come up with policing recommendations? Knowing Clinton's propensity for having mechanisms in place before he even sanctions things like "studies" and other protocols used correctly by more honest politicos who really do want to study the situation first, I don't doubt it. Nor do I doubt that the wording used in his document is more of the same Clintonese nonsense. You know, Newspeak?
For instance: (I am going to play news commentator here--I will report what Clinton says, and then tell you what he is really saying)--
"(1) The extent to which existing Federal laws provide a sufficient
basis for effective investigation and prosecution of unlawful
conduct that involves the use of the Internet, such as the illegal
sale of guns, explosives, controlled substances, and prescription
drugs, as well as fraud and child pornography."
This, of course, means spying--something I guarentee you is already being done, since the government has access to every website and every e-mail that transpires. Illegal sales of guns? On the internet? Right! Now, if you want to buy an "illegal" gun, don't you do it on the black market, and to heck with the internet? Explosives? So, does that mean if you buy fertilizer, the govt. can investigate you? Controlled substances? Ha! Imagine buying marijuana or cocaine on the Internet! (When I stop laughing, I will continue!). Now we come to "Fraud and child pornography," the ultimate hypocrisy of these hardened hypocrites. "Fraud," of course, is what they say it is (and, given Clinton's redefinition of "is", you can bet your bippy on this!), and as for child pornography--how can the most immoral president ever be counted on to stop this evil practice, especially when some of his UN cronies are guilty of this themselves? Mark my words--there is child pornography on the internet now, and there will be child pornography on the internet after (well after) this EO takes effect.
"(2) The extent to which new technology tools, capabilities, or
legal authorities may be required for effective investigation and
prosecution of unlawful conduct that involves the use of the
Internet;"
To what extent? Does this mean we will soon have the Orwellian "telescreens" in our homes? Does this mean, like Intel's Pentium III Processor, Apple's Steve Jobs will be turning out processors that allows your privacy to be invaded? Does this mean us "think different" Mac owners will eventually be forced to upgrade to processors that invade our privacy for the FBI's sake? Is this the final step before we really do have the Orwellian "Thought Police"?
"(3) The potential for new or existing tools and capabilities to
educate and empower parents, teachers, and others to prevent or to
minimize the risks from unlawful conduct that involves the use of
the Internet."
Here we go with that nauseating "empower parents, teachers, and others" theme. By now you know that Clinton uses the word "empower" to mean "make sure (the group empowered) behaves the way we want them to and has the expectations we want them to." Now, when was the last time you heard or saw Clinton stand up for parents? Isn't Clinton the same President who has tried to give us the "UN Rights of the Child," which basically takes away the right of a parent to bring up his/her children in a way he/she sees fit and replaces this with state up-bringing of the child? Teachers? When his "Outcome Based Education" buddies are busy turning teachers into "facilitators" totally unable to establish any kind of discipline in the classroom? Others? Now we cut to the chase! "Others" means law enforcement, "hate crime" SPLC-type watch groups, "religious persecution" monitors and other guardians of the "new world order." And "minimize risks" means to shut down web sites and domains of those of us who say what we think on the internet. Should I, as editor of (the "politically incorrect") OmegaZine!, count the days until the Thought Police shuts me down?
"(b) The Working Group shall undertake this review in the context of
current Administration Internet policy, which includes support for
industry self-regulation where possible, technology-neutral laws and
regulations, and an appreciation of the Internet as an important medium
both domestically and internationally for commerce and free speech."
Please, do not be fooled--don't look at what Clinton says here. Look at what he has done so far to quash "politically incorrect" free speech. Number one on the list is how he is using the IRS to shut down one of the Internet's best daily news organs, World Net Daily, a project of the IRS- targeted Western Journalism Center. And look at last year, when the FBI was trying to shut down another excellent news source, "The Winds.org," (which shut itself down because they were tired of speaking out against Clinton's fascism and nobody seemingly listening.) When Clinton says that "current Administration Internet policy" "includes support for
industry self-regulation where possible, technology-neutral laws and
regulations, and an appreciation of the Internet as an important medium
both domestically and internationally for commerce and free speech," the man is only doing what he does best: LYING!
"Sec. 2. Schedule. The Working Group shall complete its work to the greatest
extent possible and present its report and recommendations to the President
and Vice President within 120 days of the date of this order. Prior to such
presentation, the report and recommendations shall be circulated through the
Office of Management and Budget for review and comment by all appropriate
Federal agencies."
Which means--knowing how slowly the bureaucracy works--that prior to 120 days, the report has to be "circulated through the
Office of Management and Budget for review and comment by all appropriate
Federal agencies." This in and of itself will take at least 120 days! Now, if this doesn't sound like the report has already been created...
My further recommendation: Read Joseph Farah's "Between the Lines" World Net Daily analysis as well as an analysis from a "left-wing" standpoint at The Electronic Frontier Foundation
The document having the citations above can be viewed at Text of Clinton Executive Order on Internet Conduct