Now thats Micro Segmentation.......straight from our elected officials.

On February 10, 2014, The Wall Street Journal released an Op-Ed by Ajit Pai about how the government is attempting to push the Federal Communications Commission into newsrooms across America.  Ajit Pai is a commissioner for the FCC, therefore I would say his statements on this topic are pretty credible, and is telling the readers of America what is about to come and adding his opinion to the situation.  The FCC (which is a government agency), controls the airwaves, and they are attempting to survey what citizens "need to know," then regulate what can be aired on both television and radio to ensure that the citizens are ONLY getting the media that THEY believe is critical for us to see and/or hear.

"The FCC says the study is merely an objective fact-finding mission. The results will inform a report that the FCC must submit to Congress every three years on eliminating barriers to entry for entrepreneurs and small businesses in the communications industry."  (The Wall Street Journal)

Business competition is just that, plain and simple, competition.  If one executive looks at the media from a different angle than the other guy trying to get into the business, then that is probably why the other guy is still trying.  This concept could be placed on any number of businesses because that is how business operates.

However, if this is really an honest statement from the FCC, then what does interviewing station owners, news anchors, and directors about their "news philosophy," and how which stories are chosen to be covered on the air have to do with blocking the pathway to the communications industry for small businesses?  This statement sounds like a very poor excuse for attempting to place a virtual Government-parental-control on the nations televisions and radio stations.

Mr. Pai is making an argument against the FCC stating that he does not believe that the Federal Government should be governing what citizens should watch.  I have to proudly agree with him on this.  If I want to watch a news story about something that happened almost years ago on September 11, 2012 because I believe that it is still relevant, then I should be able to do so.  If the FCC had anything to do with it, that story, along with many others, would not see the light of day or the dark of night under the current administration.

This is a very important issue.  If this measure is enacted, all of our lives will be directly affected by it.  Some of the issues that we really care about would essentially be blocked by the government, or in this case, big brother.

There is a 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution that used to mean something and be respected, two of those rights are freedom of speech and freedom of press. That should cover the legal end of this debate, the other, personally, I do not need and will not have anyone telling me what I NEED to know and what I don't.  This is The United States of America.  This should not even be given time on the House floor.

It's A Bird, It's A Plane, Wait.......Is It The NSA?

On January 24, 2014, Fox News released an article about the Pentagon planning to deploy two large blimp like aircraft around ten thousand feet above Washington, D.C.  These are the same aircraft that have been used by the U.S. military in the Middle East as well as along the United States and Mexico border for surveillance purposes.  These aircraft are equipped with military grade, high altitude surveillance systems that can detect low flying objects, such as missiles or drones, up to 340 miles away.  The Pentagon’s reasoning for placing them above the U.S. Capital is strictly for security purposes in the event that any enemy missile or aircraft begin to approach the capital.  These aircraft have the ability to carry powerful surveillance systems capable of tracking people and vehicles up to 140 miles away.  The U.S. Army did not rule out the idea of mounting these camera systems on the aircraft.

Would this bother you if the government placed these same aircraft above our city?  Would you feel that the government would be violating your 4^th amendment right, especially after not ruling out the option of placing the surveillance system that is capable of tracking people when this is supposed to be used for “flying objects?”  

Some things such as this article do not get noticed to a lot of the public and might go unnoticed for some time.  One of the main reasons for that is that modern American citizens are not politically engaged enough to see such articles, much less any political topic.

I believe that this is a very important topic because it is leaning on, if not crossing, Americans 4^th amendment right.  We are in a time where we have the ability to track and record information such as phone calls, text messages, emails, and much more electronically through today’s technology.  The NSA (National Security Agency) claims that all attempts to monitor and record such data have been used solely for national security purposes such as against terror attacks.  I love America and I happily pay my taxes and want to live in a safe place.  With that being said, some privacy will have to be given to the government in order for them to do their jobs.  It is risk versus reward.  However, I do believe that there have been plenty of sketchy scenarios regarding the NSA and other government bodies with regards to their “national security” card they like to play so often.  If the government is going to go down this road, which it may need to in order to protect our land, then they need to get some sort of technology law in place with regards to the 4^th amendment.  As of right now, they are stomping all over it, not only with the blimp style aircraft, but with plenty of other operations that they have ongoing as we type our blogs.

4^th Amendment - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.