ICANN A FReeper List of Those Who Opposed (Vanity)

The Westerner

[The Westerner]

For future reference, a list of congressmen or major public figures who opposed transfer of ICANN to foreign control is important. Granted that some senators are taking a stand now, for political reasons, but FReepers can put that on the list as background information. Please keep your post brief so the list can be skimmed quickly. Or separate the name and your comment with a paragraph.

Some FReepers have argued that the impending transfer on October 1, 2016 is akin to giving Communist China the Panama Canal--or worse: because they who control domain name listings, control Free Speech.

Some FReepers have argued that this is a non-issue based on their technical understanding of how the internet functions. If Free Republic owner Jim Robinson can clarify the validity if this argument, it would be helpful to those of us who don't really understand the technicalities.

My concern is that sites like this will either be taken down or fees and regulations and taxes will shutter them. The totalitarians have been searching for a way to take down Drudge, for example. Now, a United States politician will have clean hands if that happens. Very convenient. Without the internet, this year's revolutionary Presidential election would not be happening. If Americans did not have citizen journalists reporting in real time on the news or broadcasting their personal videos on Youtube, if we on Free Republic were not conversing and thinking aloud and researching, we would have no choice but a Clinton or Bush Presidency. But we have worked hard to vette our aspiring leaders, even fighting amongst ourselves about nominees. American are still free and able to speak without fear of being put in jail, for the most part...

The reason I am posting this thread is that I believe without Free Speech, America is lost. The Founders created a Bill of Rights solely as a punctuation mark to the Constitution. They desired to shout in CAPS to future Americans that these Rights are Inalienable, meaning cannot be taken away by future laws or tyrants. There is a reason the Primary or #1 Right listed is Free Speech because without Speech, all others cannot stand. I feel, like so many of us, that we are just barely holding on to Freedom. Please help us create this list for the future so we can know who understood and who was willing to fight against Obama and his cohorts plan to relieve us of the burden of Freedom. As he said to Putin, "I'll have more flexibility after the election". Who could have dreamed that his plan included ceding control of our internet?

[The Westerner]

This is my first vanity in 16 years of non-lurker status (been here since Drudge mentioned Free Republic on talk radio in the 90's). Other FReepers have been posting articles on the ICANN transfer for a very long time. They have been a tireless crew, so here is my contribution to their effort. If you wish to post long arguments, please go to one of those threads. Let's try to keep our posts shorter so researchers can glance through it quickly. Or use paragraphing to separate the name of those who fought this transfer from your comment or links. Thank you JimRob and JohnRob for creating this sleek platform and for fighting to keep our Republic Free. We don't agree on every issue, but I am grateful to have access to the collected wisdom of thousands of Individuals from all over our country as congregate and talk amongst ourselves. Thanks to all who contribute to this thread.

[The Westerner]

Arthur, thank you for your help on getting this thread posted!

[The Westerner]

ping

[The Westerner]

Would you ping your list to this thread? Any and all help compiling this list will be appreciated.

[dware]

I contacted my traitor, er, I mean, congressman, regarding this. Here was his (Scott Tipton, R - CO) reply:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding H.R. 5418, the Protecting Internet Freedom Act. This dialogue is important to me as your representative in Washington, and I appreciate your input.

President Obama’s administration announced in March of 2014 that the U.S. would give up its authority to oversee the internet’s domain name server (DNS). The administration spent the past two years preparing to turn over authority of the to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). The administration has stopped actively overseeing the group and has allowed ICANN to abuse its monopoly over internet domains.

Since taking office I have found many of the unilateral actions of the President and his appointees to be troublesome. While the Executive Branch does have certain authority to operate independent of Congress at times, a decision of this magnitude should not be made without a vigorous debate between, and the approval of, the people’s representatives in Congress.

H.R. 5418, introduced by Representative Sean Duffy of Wisconsin, would prohibit the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information from allowing the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to turn over the authority of Internet DNS functions to ICANN, whose stakeholders include many non-American government entities whose respect for the freedom of information and speech is severely lacking.

This legislation has been referred to House Committee on Energy and Commerce, of which I am a member. Should H.R. 5478 or any related legislation come before the House of Representatives for a vote, please rest assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind.

In plain words, "This makes us look like we're doing something, but, like typical GOP traitorous pols, we don't give a spit!"

[Freedom56v2]

This is my first vanity in 16 years of non-lurker status (been here since Drudge mentioned Free Republic on talk radio in the 90’s). Other FReepers have been posting articles on the ICANN transfer for a very long time.

---

Thank YOU for posting this :)

[Mariner]

The ICANN transfer present no risk, none, to the Internet or those who use it or publish on it.

I've been in the business for 40 years and you can either take my word for it, or do your own research.

Or, remain ignorant like a democrat.

[Freedom56v2]

Here are the 33 Co-Sponsors of the Protection of Internet Freedom Bill to prohibit transferring ICANN. Behind each member is the date they Co-Sponsored. * means and Original Co-Sponsor

Rep. Salmon, Matt [R-AZ-5]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [R-WI-5]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Gohmert, Louie [R-TX-1]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Fleming, John [R-LA-4]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Culberson, John Abney [R-TX-7]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Babin, Brian [R-TX-36]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Joyce, David P. [R-OH-14]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Burgess, Michael C. [R-TX-26]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Young, David [R-IA-3] 06/22/2016
Rep. Bridenstine, Jim [R-OK-1] 07/01/2016
Rep. Barton, Joe [R-TX-6] 07/01/2016
Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6] 07/01/2016
Rep. Duncan, Jeff [R-SC-3] 07/14/2016
Rep. Brat, Dave [R-VA-7] 09/07/2016
Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2] 09/07/2016
Rep. Flores, Bill [R-TX-17] 09/07/2016
Rep. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN-7] 09/07/2016
Rep. Brady, Kevin [R-TX-8] 09/07/2016
Rep. Posey, Bill [R-FL-8] 09/07/2016
Rep. DesJarlais, Scott [R-TN-4] 09/09/2016
Rep. Ratcliffe, John [R-TX-4] 09/13/2016
Rep. Huelskamp, Tim [R-KS-1] 09/13/2016
Rep. Williams, Roger [R-TX-25] 09/13/2016
Rep. Sanford, Mark [R-SC-1] 09/13/2016
Rep. Weber, Randy K., Sr. [R-TX-14] 09/13/2016
Rep. Westerman, Bruce [R-AR-4] 09/14/2016
Rep. Poe, Ted [R-TX-2] 09/15/2016
Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-4] 09/15/2016
Rep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-4] 09/20/2016
Rep. McKinley, David B. [R-WV-1] 09/20/2016
Rep. Marchant, Kenny [R-TX-24] 09/20/2016
Rep. Hudson, Richard [R-NC-8] 09/20/2016

[Freedom56v2]

Gee thanks for trolling the thread...

There have been numerous articles written on the subject that have been posted here on multiple threads that refute your position, so perhaps you should do some more research or just let us be active on this issue without your snark comments like being an ignorant democrat. So helpful...NOT

Congress has prevented this move for at least 2 years, so let’s encourage them to prevent this transfer once again until we have a President who actually believes in the sovereignty of the United States.

[Freedom56v2]

Sounds like he needs to be encouraged to bring this HR5418 to a vote and vote for the bill! Duffy aide told me best way to bring bill to vote is ask Reps to push so that it be voted on in this session...

[Freedom56v2]

Here are the Co-Sponsors of the Protection of Internet Freedom Bill SB3034 Sponsored by Ted Cruz. Following the name is the date they co-sponsored. * means an original co-Sponsor

Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]* 06/08/2016
Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK]* 06/08/2016
Sen. Sasse, Ben [R-NE] 06/15/2016
Sen. Cotton, Tom [R-AR] 06/22/2016
Sen. Burr, Richard [R-NC] 09/07/2016
Sen. Sessions, Jeff [R-AL] 09/07/2016

[Freedom56v2]

Addition:
HR5418 is Sponsored by Sean Duffy R-WI.

Here are the 33 Co-Sponsors of the Protection of Internet Freedom Bill to prohibit transferring ICANN. Behind each member name is the date they Co-Sponsored. * means and Original Co-Sponsor

Rep. Salmon, Matt [R-AZ-5]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [R-WI-5]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Gohmert, Louie [R-TX-1]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Fleming, John [R-LA-4]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Culberson, John Abney [R-TX-7]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Babin, Brian [R-TX-36]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Joyce, David P. [R-OH-14]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Burgess, Michael C. [R-TX-26]* 06/09/2016
Rep. Young, David [R-IA-3] 06/22/2016
Rep. Bridenstine, Jim [R-OK-1] 07/01/2016
Rep. Barton, Joe [R-TX-6] 07/01/2016
Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6] 07/01/2016
Rep. Duncan, Jeff [R-SC-3] 07/14/2016
Rep. Brat, Dave [R-VA-7] 09/07/2016
Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2] 09/07/2016
Rep. Flores, Bill [R-TX-17] 09/07/2016
Rep. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN-7] 09/07/2016
Rep. Brady, Kevin [R-TX-8] 09/07/2016
Rep. Posey, Bill [R-FL-8] 09/07/2016
Rep. DesJarlais, Scott [R-TN-4] 09/09/2016
Rep. Ratcliffe, John [R-TX-4] 09/13/2016
Rep. Huelskamp, Tim [R-KS-1] 09/13/2016
Rep. Williams, Roger [R-TX-25] 09/13/2016
Rep. Sanford, Mark [R-SC-1] 09/13/2016
Rep. Weber, Randy K., Sr. [R-TX-14] 09/13/2016
Rep. Westerman, Bruce [R-AR-4] 09/14/2016
Rep. Poe, Ted [R-TX-2] 09/15/2016
Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-4] 09/15/2016
Rep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-4] 09/20/2016
Rep. McKinley, David B. [R-WV-1] 09/20/2016
Rep. Marchant, Kenny [R-TX-24] 09/20/2016
Rep. Hudson, Richard [R-NC-8] 09/20/2016

[Dacula]

Just shot a message out to my congresscritter Jody Hice. Not that he will ever do anything.

[Mariner]

"There have been numerous articles written on the subject that have been posted here on multiple threads that refute your position,"

And you, nor anyone else can cite a real risk.

ICANN is a menial, administrative function. And the repository for the name resolutions of record.

If they remove an entity from the database of record for any nefarious purpose the Internet will explode into multiple national fragments...something the big companies will not allow under any circumstances.

I'll say it again, only the ignorant who don't know how the Internet works fear this. That includes the US Congress.

What is the refutation you reference?

[Freedom56v2]

Again, I told you to do research. look at all the articles that have been posted...there is risk—security risk, economic risk, and political risk...But you say I am supposed to just trust your opinion.

You are welcome to sit and do nothing, but stop sniping those of us who care about this issue.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

No real risk?

No one can?

So all of those senators are idiots?

ICANN Transition Even Endangers ‘.gov’ and ‘.mil’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3469586/posts

http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/download/09-14-16-rosenzweig-testimony.

ICANN transition insider Paul Rosenzweig warns:

1. Foreign powers will “indisputably have increased influence”.
2. Transition a “leap in the dark”.
3. ICANN planning to move overseas. [and ICANN lied]
4. ‘.gov’ and ‘.mil’ “not assured by any enforeable mechanism”. [and ICANN lied.]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There was a slick lobbying campaign in DC — that’s why this appears so harmless:

ICANN’s Secret Plot: rigged oversight, designs on .mil, $2.5 mil in lobbying
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3471830/posts

FR Exclusive

Condi Rice and Madam Albright are both tied to the $2.5 million lobby effort to get ICANN’s internet ‘transition’ passed. [And evidence of ‘walking around money’.]

According to professional witness testimony this lobby effort was a ... pack ... of ... lies. [This exclusive uncovers all of that.]

“Without [free speech protection] ICANN risks becoming an unregulated monopoly with no effective outside oversight and control.”

— Paul Rosenzweig [professional witness at latest ICANN hearing]

That’s the fastest summary I’ve found yet:

... a “monopoly with no effective outside oversight”.

[snip]

[Mariner]

A lot of statements about fear and supposed risk.

Not a single plausible scenario about real potential events with real impact.

Even in the most outlandish scenario where ICANN were to eliminate .mil and .gov, all US name servers could add them as independent domains.

Either this man does not understand the internal workings, or he has another agenda.

[Mariner]

"a “monopoly with no effective outside oversight”.

No more so than they are today.

They have over 100 "stakeholders" who govern them.

While they can technically act against those stakeholders, the stakeholders have ALL the marbles.

Transport. All the name servers. All the websites.

ICANN is little more than a gentlemans agreement to be a clearing house for registration of names and the IP addresses they resolve to.

[Freedom56v2]

I wish to apologize for the way this thread is going...I know you wanted a concise listing of supporters of the Bills, but instead you are getting a debate thread because some are refuting the issue...

I hope you will not let this deter you from posting more threads on this subject, or any other.

If you like, you could re-post the thread with salient posts that adhere to your thread request.

[HalfIrish]

menial, administrative function. And the repository for the name resolutions of record

I see. So you have no problem with these menial foreign administrators knowing your name and address when you post something that enrages them.

Carry on, sport.