Of course to you it is not about trust, why would it be as you are on the side that needs to be trusted not the ones asked to do the trusting. While there are existing regs both Cable TV providers and the big Service Providers have demonstraited for as long as they have existed that they are

1. Willing to do anything they can get away with to protect their monopolies
2. Fight real competition at every turn
3. Push the regs to the max and beyound, get fined and then back off to the edge of the line.

As for Google, eBay and Yahoo benifiting financialy from neutrality you are right about that. Sure they do but how? The benifit by having hundreds of thousands of small scale publishers benifit as well by NOT having access to their content degraded at the expense of an “express lane” for those who can afford to buy one.

The model you guys want to impose is not one of “adding an an express lane” that would not be that bad. No the reality is you want to

1. Take and existing toll road that drivers are already paying for
2. Create a fast lane that costs more for everyone
3. However you don’t want to add a lane but take capacity from the existing road and segment off part of it for the new lane. In other words you want to take a 4 lane toll road, make it three normal lanes and one fast one, still charge as much to drive in what is left of the the noral lanes and charge more for the fast one.

It is really even worse then that! On this toll road the user is the driver but lets call his employer the content provider. And on this road you are charging the employer when the employee uses the road.

What that means,

As a publisher I pay for bandwith transfer when ever a user access my site

My readers pay for their access

WE ARE ALREADY BOTH PAYING

In your model now you want the employer to PAY MORE when his EMPLOYEE uses the fast lane.

The facts are the facts here and no spin will ever change them.

If you can be “trusted” then do tell me why HandOff.org is actually funded by MILLIONS OF DOLLARS and is designed to show a false image of a grass roots organization?

If you really have Grass Roots support as your site/sites claim WHERE IS IT?

I mean Savetheinternet.com (for neutrality) has the following supporters http://www.savetheinternet.com/=members

Handsoff.org (anti neutrality) has the following supporters

http://handsoff.org/hoti_docs/aboutus/members.shtml

Who has grass roots support?

Savetheinternet has the following bloggers support as well, http://www.savetheinternet.com/=blogger

Where is your support in the blogosphere? Where is all the real grass roots support you claim to have?

I have to tell you this is the fist time in my life I find myself in agreement with Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton! I am a dihard Republican and have supported Kay Baily Hutchison here in Texas with contributions and campain help for years but no more.

It really pains me to see the majority of my party sell out on this issue but the reason is clear as to why. You won’t hear this issue on talk radio or on Fox News, not yet. No one is talking about it.

Trust me that is about to change and once there is true public awareness of this you can bet you will see a big shift in momentum,

We don’t need trust, the FCC and FTC already have the authority to combat any access or anti-competative issues if there ever are any. I also disagree with your depiction of the large content providers, Google, Yahoo etc. as supporting net neutrality out of principle to benefit the common man, they have a large inancial stake in this fight and I’m pretty sure that has a bearing on their position.