Pam Geller blows a kiss
Posted on 12/28/2010 4:48:36 PM PST by American Dream 246
It was hardly noticed at the time, but its consequences could be catastrophic. Late last September, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which assigns internet domain names, approved a huge change in the way it operates. Europe and North America will now have five seats on its Board of Directors, instead of ten, and a new "Arab States" region will have five seats as well.
How big a deal is this? ICANN at the same time took a reference to "terrorism" out of its Draft Applicant Guidebook. Why? Because Arab groups complained. And so now jihad terror websites can grow and prosper, as ICANN has removed its own ability to police them.
This has been a long time coming.
Back in October 2009, I warned of a seismic transformation in internet regulation and free speech. Under the transnational-happy Obama administration, the U.S. relinquished control of the net at that time. ICANN ended its agreement with the U.S. government.
If not America, who? Now we know the answer to that. The new agreement gave other countries (including dictatorships and rogue nations) and the U.N. the ability to set internet use policies. At the time, I wrote, "[W]atch for Sharia law to find its way into this."
Well, that didn't take long. The ICANN action in September gave the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) and other unfriendly nations a prominent internet role -- something they never could get during the administration of George W. Bush.
News analyst Daniel Greenfield explains:
The OIC has already effectively used the UN to push its censorship agenda. But the UN is virtually toothless when it comes to the United States. However if the Muslim world can dominate ICANN the way it dominates the UN General Assembly, then free speech on the internet is dead.
In practice, the new arrangement makes it much easier for Muslim countries to dictate what stays on the internet and what doesn't. The removal of the material about "terrorism" was just muscle-flexing; there is much more of that kind of censorship coming. If this stands, anti-jihad sites like my own site AtlasShrugs.com and the JihadWatch.org site run by my colleague Robert Spencer will likely lose their domain names. It will become harder and harder to find the truth about jihad activity, or any resistance to it, on the internet or anywhere else.
Why is this necessary at all? Why should the U.S. relinquish control of its own invention? The internet was our extraordinary gift to the world. We kept it free. And now, like some depraved drunk, we are tossing it away and relinquishing control to the vultures and destroyers.
The new "net neutrality" rules approved last week by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will just make that easier as well. Columnist Jonathan Gurwitz explains:
Net neutrality is anything but neutral. It takes the operation of the Internet away from the heterogeneous and diversified interests of the private sector that has created it and concentrates it in the hands of an unelected and unaccountable board of political appointees atop a federal bureaucracy.
"Few proposals in Washington have been sold employing such deceptive language - and that's saying something," observed James G. Lakely, the co-director of the Center on the Digital Economy for the Heartland Institute, a free-market think-tank. "But few public policy ideas can boast the unashamedly socialist pedigree of net neutrality."
Lakely charged that FCC chairman Julius Genachowski, an Obama crony, wants to "claim for the FCC the power to decide how every bit of data is transferred from the Web to every personal computer and handheld device in the nation." While net neutrality advocates advertised their plan as one that would ensure a "free and open internet," in reality, net neutrality was an attempt to limit the freedom of internet users by subjecting what had always been a free-market give-and-take to government regulation. In short, the FCC would control how all information reached personal computers.
An internet censored by Muslim ideologues and controlled by the feds. Do you see your freedom of speech slipping away?
John Bolton said at an appearance at Duke University in 2009, "[I]t's not American strength that's provocative, it's American weakness." Now we are reaping the poisonous fruit of Obama's skulduggery: Islamic takeover.
Uh...new Congress?...
Thats a pretty lofty, unsubstantiated allegation....what evidence do you have?
If we lose the internet, it’s all over folks.
More of Obama’s Hope and Change !!
His own words and actions.
Finally, the White Crib, the FCC (Fatwa Communications Consortium), and the Just Us Department come clean as to their intentions.
c’mon, you can do better than that!
That’s plenty good in my book. what the hell are you looking for? a signed confession? Are you really so stupid or are you just trying to be funny?
bfl
Go and check out posting #2, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2648666/posts
I do know that the OIC’s “UN” has been very interested in taking over the internet..... and that Obama is VERY supportive of the UN and their vision of “globalization”.
The posting may still hold merit.
Americans take the 1st Amendment for granted.
They’re about to find out what its like not to have it.
Decades of voter apathy are taking their toll.
It sucks that we who care about freedom are losing it because the majority doesn’t.
The current hardware the 'internet' is run on is owned by a large number of mostly capitalistic companies. Hardware comes, and hardware goes. There is probably still an AS400 mail relay out there that does reverse bang notation translations.
ICANN is a naming organization. Period. It has the canonical name:ip address list.
I can do it all without them. I can run my own DNS server. Or anyone can.
Currently in the works is a P2P distributed DNS list that is somewhat separated from ICANN.
Knowing how things really work is important.
/johnny
“They’re about to find out what its like not to have it.
Decades of voter apathy are taking their toll.”
Empire Sacking 101: First plunder then enslave.
It seems to me that it would be easy to set up a separate “Internet2” if necessary, which would leave the old Internet to the socialists and muslims (who will screw it up royally). The Internet is a network without actual physical assets. The assets lie in the servers and communication lines which belong to private companies. A lot of IP addresses would need to be changed so that the sane parts of the world would have their own web, using the existing servers and comm lines, independent of the socialist/muslim crap-house.
I like how you said it, but I have no idea what you said.
:^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.