Tuesday, March 18, 2014

US Cedes All Remaining Control of Internet

The Left has long had an ax to grind against both our freedoms of speech and press. Through the UN, they have lobbied for some time set the stage for restrictions on what communications Americans (and like-minded individuals from other nations) can make available for reading on the Internet.

While we are assured that no government will control the Internet, control will be given to interest groups such as NGO's and will be enforced through the UN. Leftist plutocrats and oligarchs such as George Soros will have the final say in what is considered appropriate content.

The restrictions will, as usual, be barely noticeable at first, but in time will consist of blocking of content that is deemed to be anything of the following:

-Hate speech. This will include anything that is not pro-Islam or supportive of massive immigration to Western countries. As the old British would say , anything that supports national sovereignty will be "right out".

-Health risks. This will certainly include anything that supports private ownership of firearms.

-That which contributes to social disorder. This will put a stop to, for example, citizens of Anglophone nations who desire to cooperate on a political scale in an effort to restore our traditional rights. It will likely include articles or posts such as those which were largely responsible for preventing  the attack on Syria which at one point seemed unstoppable.On the other side of the coin are Leftist states such as Venezuela, which will be free to crack skulls of their own citizens with virtual impunity and almost  zero coverage.

-That which fosters unnecessary fear. This will mean that any articles or posts that address worldwide Marxism or the big players behind this movement will be blocked.

-That which suppresses necessary information or movements. This will mean that any article or post that exposes global warming/climate change as a lie, supports development of energy from domestic hydrocarbon sources, or provides a clear picture of enforcement issues will be blocked.

I am sure that there will be more restrictions. Instead of being spied on only by the NSA, we will now be watched by any agency that is pleased to do so.


"The decision was announced nonchalantly, in trademark Washington fashion on a Friday afternoon: The U.S. government will cede its last bit of control over the Internet.

The government has maintained that influence through contracts with the organization that administers the Internet, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN. But a Commerce Department agency announced Friday that it would relinquish control over ICANN, presumably when its contract expires in September 2015. The office said it wants the group to next convene "global stakeholders" to come up with a transition plan -- a transition to what remains unknown.

But that sudden and highly controversial decision was years in the making, and it arguably dates back close to two decades. Further, despite the Internet being hatched in the U.S., the move to transfer control to the "global" community has accelerated in recent years -- under heavy pressure from foreign governments.

It came as little surprise, then, that United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday praised the U.S. Commerce Department's decision.

"The Secretary-General takes note of this important development," a statement from Ban's office said, calling for all stakeholders to pursue a "single, open, free, secure and trustworthy Internet."

But whether that goal can be achieved is the big question. The decision Friday by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has raised concerns that, in the void left by America's transfer of oversight, other nations that don't share the United States' commitment to free speech and expression could make a grab at Internet influence.

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai said Tuesday that the current model of Internet governance has been a "tremendous" success, and he cautioned against moving too quickly to change it.

"Any proposal to change that model therefore demands rigorous scrutiny, including close congressional oversight. In particular, those advocating change must prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that their proposals would not increase the influence of repressive foreign governments over the Internet," Pai said in a statement. "If I am not convinced that a different governance structure would preserve Internet freedom, I will strongly oppose it."

Robert Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a nonpartisan tech-focused D.C. think tank, wrote on his organization's website that the U.S. was effectively giving up its "bodyguard" role.

"While on the surface this may seem like a simple administrative decision that gives more control over this key Internet function to more stakeholders, it could actually have far reaching negative implications for the freedom and security of the Internet," he wrote......."

No comments:

Post a Comment