Mandelson goes to war on teenagers downloading their music and movies...

Brown Bomber

... just days after dining with anti-piracy billionaire

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1206901/Mandelson-launches-crackdown-file-sharing--just-days-meeting-record-producer.html#ixzz0khfFiYeX

This is what happens when two Zionist agents meet in a Rothschild mansion.
This is how the world works, democracy is a sham to keep us in our place and be happy about it.

Truthrevolution

Yes i was reading that story yesterday, how convenient.After a two week "vacation" in a Rothschild resort he decides to clamp down on internet freedom of speech, blocking sites which are deemed "unsuitable".Interestingly though British internet provider talktalk are refusing to co-operate with these draconion measures and will not filter, block or give away customer information thus running risk of receiving a 250k fine.You would have to wonder though is it a publicity stunt on their behalf or do they genuinely have their customers best interests at heart?

Torakx

Maybe with a massive threat to a large amount of the population,they wish to scare everyone into accepting a fine for the ISP's so that they can hike up the internet bills and partly ban some parts of internet use.

squod

one in 12 of the population - who illicitly download music and films over the internet.

Their' chosen words are remarkable. Nay outstanding. I would have said that something one in twelve of the population do is called common. To go one step further I'd say it was fairly common. So why then would you possibly use a word like 'illicitly'?

illicit
adj
1 another word for → illegal

2 not allowed or approved by common custom, rule, or standard

It occurs to me that using inflamatory language is an attempt to appeal to newspapers to sell this as a newsworthy story. In fact it's little more than guff and guile. Fair play to Mandleson, he's some fuhken chancer.

robtri

yeah how dare he try to catch people breaking the law.......

fecking hell...... imagine that...... the bastards!!!!!!!!!!!!!

next they will be cracking down on drugs and murderers !!!!!!!!!!!

Brown Bomber

robtri wrote: »

yeah how dare he try to catch people breaking the law.......

fecking hell...... imagine that...... the bastards!!!!!!!!!!!!!

next they will be cracking down on drugs and murderers !!!!!!!!!!!

Your missing the point once again.

Mandelson is breaking the law by representing the needs of his billionaire friends and while pretending to be a public servant.

You really think he has a problem with crime? :D He is a criminal, he's had to resign twice ffs.

It was only a few short years ago the Rothschild agent met on yacht with Nat Rothschild and Oleg Deripraski, the Russian Billionaire Oligarch. A man who was refused a visa to the US for his connections to the Russian Mafia.

After the meeting Mandelson removed a trade tariff for Deripraski's company on aluminium exports into the EU, estimated at 50 Mil. Mandelson was EU Trade Commisioner at the time. Mandelson when confronted then lied about when he had first me t Deripraski, claiming he had not met him until after the EU decision until he was found out.

The man is a far bigger criminal than someone who illegaly downloads a song.

This explains it better than I can. From the Times

The European Commission imposed a tariff on Russian and Chinese aluminium foil producers in 2001 because they were allegedly dumping cheap foil into the European market. The companies were accused of selling the foil at artificially low prices, which was damaging European producers.

After a year-long investigation, the EU decided that Rusal was no longer dumping and should therefore not pay the tariff, saving the company tens of millions of dollars.

Rusal produced 72,000 tonnes of aluminium foil last year and analysts estimate that nearly half is exported to Europe.

During Lord Mandelson’s term as European Trade Commissioner, he also agreed to reduce tariffs on all imported raw aluminium.

The tariff was reduced last year from 6 per cent to 3 per cent and could be removed completely from next year.

Rusal is a leading exporter to Europe and sells about a million tonnes there a year. At current aluminium prices the tariff reduction will save about $200 million a year.

Lord Mandelson is understood to have stayed on board Mr Deripaska’s £80 million superyacht, the Queen K, in Corfu during the summer, although he has refused to confirm this.

EDIT 2: Reading that reminded me that they were also in Corfu to celebrate Rupert Murdoch's daughters birthday. All these corrupt ****ers are all connected.

robtri

as pointed out in previous threads, the rothschilds not interested in money..... they are interested in a one world government....

as they have so so so much money......

so maybe he is just cracking down on crime......

strong statment to call him a criminal.... a criminal is a convicted person of an illegal act, can you show me his conviction???

Truthrevolution

robtri wrote: »

as pointed out in previous threads, the rothschilds not interested in money..... they are interested in a one world government....

as they have so so so much money......

so maybe he is just cracking down on crime......

The overall aim is to crack down on internet freedom, filtering websites, getting access to peoples IP addresses, blocking dissenters and anything else which could be deemed a "threat".As usual we have the sugar coating excuse that they are cracking down on crime...

robtri

Truthrevolution wrote: »

The overall aim is to crack down on internet freedom, filtering websites, getting access to peoples IP addresses, blocking dissenters and anything else which could be deemed a "threat".As usual we have the sugar coating excuse that they are cracking down on crime...

considering they are only targetting illegal websites, or websites providing illegal material.... i would disagree.......

have we any information on non illegal websites been targetted???????

Truthrevolution

robtri wrote: »

considering they are only targetting illegal websites, or websites providing illegal material.... i would disagree.......

have we any information on non illegal websites been targetted???????

The legislation allows Home Secretary to place a "technical obligation on internet service providers" to block whichever sites it wants.....

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldbills/001/10001.13-19.html#j158

squod

Having some control over the web would lead to having authority or 'ownership' of some kind. There's all kinds of fools at this. Many more fools will show idots like these an open door. So they can 'buy back' something that was never for sale in the first place.

studiorat

Truthrevolution wrote: »

The overall aim is to crack down on internet freedom, filtering websites, getting access to peoples IP addresses, blocking dissenters and anything else which could be deemed a "threat".As usual we have the sugar coating excuse that they are cracking down on crime...

What about the freedom to create copyrighted content and have some protection from it being ripped off?

robtri

Truthrevolution wrote: »

The legislation allows Home Secretary to place a "technical obligation on internet service providers" to block whichever sites it wants.....

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldbills/001/10001.13-19.html#j158

are you sure.... thats what i says.... I read it different than you.... i read it as a crack down on internet crime....

Truthrevolution

robtri wrote: »

are you sure.... thats what i says.... I read it different than you.... i read it as a crack down on internet crime....

A technical obligation to limit internet access in view of ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION - that more or less gives them a free hand.

Alternatively they could just deem sites like prison planet or jim corr a threat to national security thus giving them the authority to filter the websites out....

studiorat

Truthrevolution wrote: »

A technical obligation to limit internet access in view of ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION - that more or less gives them a free hand.

And what about internet piracy? Is it not an effort to stop people being ripped off by illegal downloads?

Torakx

Probably that too.
Why not kill two birds with one stone.

robtri

Truthrevolution wrote: »

A technical obligation to limit internet access in view of ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION - that more or less gives them a free hand.

Alternatively they could just deem sites like prison planet or jim corr a threat to national security thus giving them the authority to filter the websites out....

Torakx wrote: »

Probably that too.
Why not kill two birds with one stone.

so can you tell me about which websites have been "filtered out" as you so put it... under this Legislation???

or are you just guessing as to what can happen....

in other words is this opinion or fact......

Torakx

Im just saying what is possible.I havent researched any of this topic.
what i do know is that nobody should consider only what is implied by a lisbon treaty for example or any other statement regarding laws and acts.
You need to read the fine print aswell and figure out what leeway they have given themselves as appose what they say they are trying to do.
For example take a look at Obama's speeches you will see before he was president he said he was going to take alot of troops out of afghanistan.
When he got into office he put more troops in instead.
The difference i see between a lie from a president and an act or law passed is that they have to write it down and therefore are alot more carefull how its worded because it will be scrutinized to be passed.

So that is why i said probably that too,because its quite possible that is the case.
For me to research the real answer i would try to start finding out who profits from it.

studiorat

Truthrevolution wrote: »

Alternatively they could just deem sites like prison planet or jim corr a threat to national security thus giving them the authority to filter the websites out....

I doubt if anybody thinks prison planet or jim corr are threats to national security of any country. That's just giving them way to much credit.

How about banning these Home Workshop Firearms?

Or Home made explosives?

studiorat

Brown Bomber wrote: »

EDIT 2: Reading that reminded me that they were also in Corfu to celebrate Rupert Murdoch's daughters birthday. All these corrupt ****ers are all connected.

Yup, they are all in the Media business. Quelle suprise!
I guess Paul Dacre and the Viscount Northcliffe weren't there, hence the newspaper article.

Truthrevolution

studiorat wrote: »

And what about internet piracy? Is it not an effort to stop people being ripped off by illegal downloads?

If you have to take-away/restrict peoples freedoms in the name of fighting crime, then the criminals have won havent they.

Truthrevolution

robtri wrote: »

so can you tell me about which websites have been "filtered out" as you so put it... under this Legislation???

or are you just guessing as to what can happen....

in other words is this opinion or fact......

The digital bill legislation was only passed a few days ago so they havent targetted anybody just yet but do keep a close eye on things over the next few months.

The elites have always wanted to clamp down on internet activity, heres J. Rockerfeller briefly discussing it.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8PCmLPPVnA&feature=player_embedded

r3nu4l

I'm not normally one for conspiracy theories but there is no doubt that this is more than just coincidence to my mind. The internet has been a blessing nd a curse to 'Big Government' but this is less to do with the NWO and all that and more to do with simple business and economics...something altogether worse than 'Big Government'

Truthrevolution wrote: »

Yes i was reading that story yesterday, how convenient.After a two week "vacation" in a Rothschild resort he decides to clamp down on internet freedom of speech, blocking sites which are deemed "unsuitable".Interestingly though British internet provider talktalk are refusing to co-operate with these draconion measures and will not filter, block or give away customer information thus running risk of receiving a 250k fine.You would have to wonder though is it a publicity stunt on their behalf or do they genuinely have their customers best interests at heart?

I'm a TalkTalk customer Love my TalkTalk broadband

Truthrevolution

r3nu4l wrote: »

I'm not normally one for conspiracy theories but there is no doubt that this is more than just coincidence to my mind. The internet has been a blessing nd a curse to 'Big Government' but this is less to do with the NWO and all that and more to do with simple business and economics...something altogether worse than 'Big Government'

The biggest threat to the NWO families is the internet

robtri

Truthrevolution wrote: »

The digital bill legislation was only passed a few days ago so they havent targetted anybody just yet but do keep a close eye on things over the next few months.

The elites have always wanted to clamp down on internet activity, heres J. Rockerfeller briefly discussing it.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8PCmLPPVnA&feature=player_embedded

yeah yeah.... watch this space..... just like the lisbon treaty......
and the imaginary forced conscription and other stuff people where shouting about....

studiorat

Truthrevolution wrote: »

If you have to take-away/restrict peoples freedoms in the name of fighting crime, then the criminals have won havent they.

What freedoms are being restricted?

The only thing I can see here is people trying to hang on to the status quo which is restricting the freedom to create content without it being stolen.

Truthrevolution

robtri wrote: »

yeah yeah.... watch this space..... just like the lisbon treaty......
and the imaginary forced conscription and other stuff people where shouting about....

Forced conscription?? lol there needs to be a war first.....

Look im sorry to disapoint but the digital bill is really only in its infancy.If we expose it for the scam that it is (or has the potential to be) then hopefully we can prevent a draconion clampdown on internet activities, which is what these things can escalate to, thin end of the wedge and all that.....

Truthrevolution

studiorat wrote: »

What freedoms are being restricted?

The only thing I can see here is people trying to hang on to the status quo which is restricting the freedom to create content without it being stolen.

The legislation is wide open to reach out into all areas of internet activity.

robtri

Truthrevolution wrote: »

Forced conscription?? lol there needs to be a war first.....

Look im sorry to disapoint but the digital bill is really only in its infancy.If we expose it for the scam that it is (or has the potential to be) then hopefully we can prevent a draconion clampdown on internet activities, which is what these things can escalate to, thin end of the wedge and all that.....

yeah there's no war going on now.... and that wasnt was being throwen around, it was foced conscription without war......

nothing draconian about this legisalation... unless you support illegal downloading, file sharing and other criminal activities??? do you???

Truthrevolution wrote: »

The legislation is wide open to reach out into all areas of internet activity.

if you are doing anything illegal.... and why shouldnt it if its illegal....

karlm37

This whole story immediately stinks of bulls**t due to it's Daily Mail link... There's a link beside it to a story about Kerry Katona seeing Stephen Gerrard in a zoo... :rolleyes:

Anyway, nothing strange here really, he meets Geffen, who is obviously anti-piracy, they discuss piracy, (which, don't forget, is illegal) he's persuaded (possibly by a back-hander:P) and introduces this Legislation which is long overdue really.

People can't just assume that they're gonna use this to censor the whole internet, it's Legislation related to piracy and i reckon it will be used as such.

And despite the Daily Mail sensationalism, one in twelve UK citizens will not be fined £50,000!

My name is URL

studiorat wrote: »

And what about internet piracy? Is it not an effort to stop people being ripped off by illegal downloads?

The only reason they're being ripped off is because their lables turn a simple business model into a multi-faceted money grab for hangers on.. the way music etc is distributed nowadays is influenced more by those sharing it than it is by the label selling it

Adapt or die

robtri

My name is URL wrote: »

The only reason they're being ripped off is because their lables turn a simple business model into a multi-faceted money grab for hangers on.. the way music etc is distributed nowadays is influenced more by those sharing it than it is by the label selling it

Adapt or die

hey breaking into houses and robbing stuff is commonplace in many cities... better stop cracking down on that illegal business as well....

adapt or die..... sorry thats retarded...

Truthrevolution

robtri wrote: »

yeah there's no war going on now.... and that wasnt was being throwen around, it was foced conscription without war......

nothing draconian about this legisalation... unless you support illegal downloading, file sharing and other criminal activities??? do you??

TBH No i dont think that file sharing should be illegal.If you are a member of a website/group then you should be free to share things with other people in that group, a bit like being in a book club or movie club where people share what they have freely with other members.Granted its on a much larger scale but i dont think the onus should be on Joe public to bear the brunt of an inconvenience to record labels or film production companies.

Torakx

Its all just bussiness.
If you have enough money you can ban anything within reason and sometimes without.

robtri

Torakx wrote: »

Its all just bussiness.
If you have enough money you can ban anything within reason and sometimes without.

so are you saying you support piracy and criminal activity???

robtri

Truthrevolution wrote: »

TBH No i dont think that file sharing should be illegal.If you are a member of a website/group then you should be free to share things with other people in that group, a bit like being in a book club or movie club where people share what they have freely with other members.Granted its on a much larger scale but i dont think the onus should be on Joe public to bear the brunt of an inconvenience to record labels or film production companies.

so you have a problem with not paying for stuff thats not yours....

would you go into HMV and pick up some dvd and put them in your bag without paying...

I think the issue here is not a CT... it is that you are annoyed because you think you have some right to stuff you havent purchased.. and they will be clamping down and stopping you downloading....

Truthrevolution

robtri wrote: »

so you have a problem with not paying for stuff thats not yours....

would you go into HMV and pick up some dvd and put them in your bag without paying...

I think the issue here is not a CT... it is that you are annoyed because you think you have some right to stuff you havent purchased.. and they will be clamping down and stopping you downloading....

Have you ever borrowed DVDs/music from a friend or associate?

squod

These people are just trying to get a foothold, some control over teh internet. I believe it has fuhkall to do with piracy.

robtri wrote: »

so are you saying you support piracy and criminal activity???

Honestly I can't understand this argument. Taping stuff off the radio and video recording stuff off the tele was all the go twenty years ago. I never once heard ''the industry'' sounding off to those who made video recorders (so-ny) or what ever.

I buy music & films more than the average person IMO, I take everything I hear from ''the industry'' with a pinch of salt.

Brown Bomber

Mandelson met Libyan Lleader Gaddafi's son in Rothschilds Villa a week before Megrahi the "Lockerbie bomber" was released.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8205435.stm

Another strange coincidence or a pattern?

thecommander

Truthrevolution wrote: »

...a bit like being in a book club or movie club where people share what they have freely with other members.

The difference is that when you lend someone a book or DVD you dont get to use it at the same time as their is only one physical copy. Digital music is nothing like this.

Truthrevolution

thecommander wrote: »

The difference is that when you lend someone a book or DVD you dont get to use it at the same time as their is only one physical copy. Digital music is nothing like this.

You can photocopy books, you can copy music and you can even copy DVDs, you dont need the internet to do this.

Torakx

Not to worry im sure they will get rid of paper books as an eco friendly option new eco laws or something then photocopying can be illegal.

thecommander

Truthrevolution wrote: »

You can photocopy books, you can copy music and you can even copy DVDs, you dont need the internet to do this.

Then you're not loaning it are you?

Lab_Mouse

the argrument over copyright has been going on since twin tape cassette's have come out.I had a tape by a band called black flag(or it could of been the dead kennedy's not sure) which had one side blank so that you could copy music just to piss off the major record labels!

For me personally I wont download music/software/movies or games when I can pay for them.

Having said that the record companies are greedy bastards so I can see why some might go with the f you way of doing things .

Here's a link from the games forum about DRM and piracy some interesting articles being linked which kinda have a bearing on this discussion

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055875696

robtri

squod wrote: »

These people are just trying to get a foothold, some control over teh internet. I believe it has fuhkall to do with piracy.



Honestly I can't understand this argument. Taping stuff off the radio and video recording stuff off the tele was all the go twenty years ago. I never once heard ''the industry'' sounding off to those who made video recorders (so-ny) or what ever.

I buy music & films more than the average person IMO, I take everything I hear from ''the industry'' with a pinch of salt.

i agree the industry is a joke and all wrong....

BUT they have the right to protect what they (incl the artists signed to them) created......
you wouldnt walk into a shop and just take the DVD and not pay for it....

there is no Ct in protecting what you created,

My name is URL

robtri wrote: »

there is no Ct in protecting what you created,

Do you honestly think that there is no coercion or conspiracy between groups such as the RIAA/MPAA etc & law makers?

Truthrevolution

thecommander wrote: »

Then you're not loaning it are you?

At least by doing it this way you dont have to deal with draconion laws being enforced upon you

robtri

My name is URL wrote: »

Do you honestly think that there is no coercion or conspiracy between groups such as the RIAA/MPAA etc & law makers?

Do i believe that RIAA/MPAA and law makers WORK together - yes they do,

BUT i do not beileve a CONSPIRACY THE0RY exsists here.. this forum is for conspiracy THEORIES not conspiracies....

just so we clear... i conspire with my collegues to put a proposal in place to get money for projects in work from the CEO.
BUT there is no conspiracy THEORY there......

Truthrevolution

robtri wrote: »

Do i believe that RIAA/MPAA and law makers WORK together - yes they do,

BUT i do not beileve a CONSPIRACY THE0RY exsists here.. this forum is for conspiracy THEORIES not conspiracies....

just so we clear... i conspire with my collegues to put a proposal in place to get money for projects in work from the CEO.
BUT there is no conspiracy THEORY there......

The conspiracy is that two freemasons rendez-voused at Rothschilds Corfu mansion to cut a deal whereby there would be a stepping stone legislation towards draconion regulation of the internet, at least i think that is what the OP is getting at....

squod

robtri wrote: »

BUT they have the right to protect what they (incl the artists signed to them) created......

Yes they have. However, giving them such power over internet access is way over the top. There also willing to cast the first stone when they're clearly engaed in some kind of price fixing n' stuff.
http://hmv.com/hmvweb/simpleMultiSearch.do?searchUID=2254779601134490856&pGroupID=0&adultFlag=false&primaryID=0&simpleSearchString=craig+david&btnSubmitSearch.x=0&btnSubmitSearch.y=0
http://hmv.com/hmvweb/simpleMultiSearch.do?searchUID=-6275013428063550247&pGroupID=0&adultFlag=false&primaryID=0&simpleSearchString=We+Are+Scientists&btnSubmitSearch.x=33&btnSubmitSearch.y=9

Standing up for these people is the wrong course of action, giving them a foothold is absolutely wrong as I said before.

My name is URL

robtri wrote: »

this forum is for conspiracy THEORIES not conspiracies....

I don't know what to say about to that other than 'srsly'?

I guess the militant skeptics will welcome your idea though!