Posted on 09/29/2016 11:12:55 AM PDT by VitacoreVision
A report by a United Nations organization calls for the international body to seize control of information shared over the Internet should the governments of member nations fail to pass sufficient cybersecurity regulations.
In the document, called “Trends in Telecommunication Reform: Smart Regulation in a Broadband World,” the UN’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU) points to the specter of an attack on the cyber infrastructure of a country as justification for the world body’s assumption of regulation and monitoring of traffic on the information superhighway.
That frightening prospect was first reported by the News Limited Network out of Australia. Paola Totaro and Claire Connelly write:
A draft of the proposal, formulated in secret and only recently posted on the ITU website for public perusal, reveal that if accepted, the changes would allow government restriction or blocking of information disseminated via the internet and create a global regime of monitoring internet communications — including the demand that those who send and receive information identify themselves.
Their summary is accurate. Citing “the increased use of online applications and services to communicate and do business (such as social media, cloud services, e-payment and other m-banking services),” the ITU proposal calls on “stakeholders” (read: countries that are members of the United Nations) to increase their regulatory control over the Internet lest the threats to cybersecurity become an unmanageable problem.
In what likely comes as no surprise to those familiar with the UN’s policy of consolidating power through the eradication of national sovereignty, the ITU draft proposal would grant the government of any member nation the right to throw the "kill switch" on the Internet should that government suspect that information being exchanged threatens their own or a fellow participating country’s national security.
Although the document admits that when it comes to policing the Internet, “the principles of privatization, competition, and liberalization have been of central importance over the past two decades,” the time has now come, the UN body insists, for government to assume “greater responsibilities” over the flow of information through the Internet.
Thankfully, a coalition of civil rights groups, labor unions, and large cybercorporations have come together to oppose the UN’s plan to police the Internet.
As reported by Common Dreams, this coalition
opposes the plan by some telecommunications companies and countries including China and Saudi Arabia. If approved, it would allow the UN's International Telecommunications Union to charge users for services such as email and restrict access to the internet and monitor activity online.
The International Trades Union Conference, representing 6.2 million union members in Britain, wrote that the proposal could "restrict political freedoms and harm civil society." Such changes would hit users from developing countries particularly hard, according to the ITUC.
The website for Stop the Net Grab warns:
The internet as we know it is at risk. Unless we act now, our right to freely communicate and share information could change forever.
In less than four weeks’ time, the International Telecommunications Union (or ITU), a United Nations agency, is planning to adopt new rules to clamp down on the fundamental freedoms of citizens online.
And:
So far the proposal has flown under the radar, but its implications are so serious that we must act quickly to show the ITU and its member countries that citizens will not stand by while our right to communicate freely is undermined.
Chris Disspain, CEO of auDA, told ITWire that a drive to consolidate power is behind the UN’s net grab. He also said that, "for some countries it is about a belief that they can control things more easily if they go through the UN."
Later in the ITWire piece, it is reported that Greenpeace and the ITUC sent a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to "express their 'deep concern about a potentially very damaging change to the governance of the Internet.'”
As for the reaction from Congress, Common Dreams reports:
At a hearing last May of a U.S. House Energy & Commerce Subcommittee, Republicans and Democrats were united in their opposition to any move by Russia and China to transfer control of the Internet to the U.N., according to Steve Elwart of the Koinonia Institute, a subject matter expert for the Department of Homeland Security.
President Obama, as The New American has reported, isn’t willing to wait on Congress to pass any measure addressing the alleged precarious state of U.S. cybersecurity.
Promises of the White House’s imminent issuing of the edict have been coming for months. The Associated Press (AP) obtained a leaked draft version of the order, but indicated that the source of the document didn’t disclose when the president would sign the order.
Greater evidence of the imminent issuing of the order came on September 19, when Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said the executive order granting the president sweeping power over the Internet is “close to completion.”
In testimony before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Napolitano said that the order is still “being drafted” and vetted by various high-level bureaucrats. But she also indicated that it would be issued as soon as a “few issues” were resolved. Assuming control of the nation’s Internet infrastructure is a DHS responsibility, Napolitano added.
“DHS is the Federal government’s lead agency for securing civilian government computer systems and works with our industry and Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government partners to secure critical infrastructure and information systems,” she informed senators.
Napolitano’s report on the role of DHS squares with the information revealed in the seven-page version of the order the AP has read. According to the report of their findings:
The draft order would put the Department of Homeland Security in charge of organizing an information-sharing network that rapidly distributes sanitized summaries of top-secret intelligence reports about known cyberthreats that identify a specific target. With these warnings, known as tear lines, the owners and operators of essential U.S. businesses would be better able to block potential attackers from gaining access to their computer systems.
The new draft, which is not dated, retains a section that requires Homeland Security to identify the vital systems that, if hit by cyberattack, could "reasonably result in a debilitating impact" on national and economic security. Other sections establish a program to encourage companies to adopt voluntary security standards and direct federal agencies to determine whether existing cyber security regulations are adequate.
The president’s de facto re-routing of all Internet traffic through federal intelligence officers deputizes more than just DHS as cybertraffic cops. The AP reports that “the Pentagon, the National Security Agency (NSA), the director of national intelligence, and the Justice Department” will all cooperate in the surveillance — in the name of national security, of course.
Evidence of President Obama’s impatience was found Thursday in a story published by the Washington Post that reported, “President Obama has signed a secret directive that effectively enables the military to act more aggressively to thwart cyberattacks on the nation’s web of government and private computer networks.”
Although unpublished as of press time, that directive, Presidential Policy Directive 20, reportedly “lays out a process to vet any operations outside government and defense networks and ensure that U.S. citizens’ and foreign allies’ data and privacy are protected and international laws of war are followed.”
The citing of “international law” as authority for such an unconstitutional exercise of authority is nothing new. As has happened so frequently during the Obama administration, government — national and international — demands that liberty be sacrificed on the altar of national security.
As for execution of the UN's plan, the 193-member ITU will meet December 3-14, 2012 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
That chart looks real pretty, with lots of good stuff for everybody. But they don’t tell you that to achieve it you’ll have to decrease the Earth’s population by 85% or so...
Democrats and Obama passed Net Neutrality to pave the way for this UN takeover of the Internet. Obama is giving away internet control to the UN. It will mean censorship and taxing of U.S. internet customers by foreign countries :
http://www.dailywire.com/news/8483/obama-about-take-over-internet-heres-everything-aaron-bandler
Cruz has been fighting it. I suggested an alliance of Trump with Cruz after Cruz endorsed Trump but no one listened. I’m a Trump supporter
Great Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenet
freepers can meet up on the freenet
What you say is true
Democrats and Obama passed Net Neutrality to pave the way for this UN takeover of the Internet. Obama is giving away internet control to the UN. It will mean censorship and taxing of U.S. internet customers by foreign countries :
http://www.dailywire.com/news/8483/obama-about-take-over-internet-heres-everything-aaron-bandler
I’m a Trump supporter
Great Info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenet
freepers can meet up on the freenet
Right?! Oh the information tucked in there is very concerning. It’s much more than just Agenda 21.
This is a sample
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg10
GOAL 10 TARGETS
10.1
By 2030, progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the bottom 40 per cent of the population at a rate higher than the national average
10.2
By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status
10.3
Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard
10.4
Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social protection policies, and progressively achieve greater equality
10.5
Improve the regulation and monitoring of global financial markets and institutions and strengthen the implementation of such regulations
10.6
Ensure enhanced representation and voice for developing countries in decision-making in global international economic and financial institutions in order to deliver more effective, credible, accountable and legitimate institutions
10.7
Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies
10.a
Implement the principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries, in particular least developed countries, in accordance with World Trade Organization agreements
10.b
Encourage official development assistance and financial flows, including foreign direct investment, to States where the need is greatest, in particular least developed countries, African countries, small island developing States and landlocked developing countries, in accordance with their national plans and programmes
10.c
By 2030, reduce to less than 3 per cent the transaction costs of migrant remittances and eliminate remittance corridors with costs higher than 5 per cent
It cetainly does that, no matter how many Ed. Boards say otherwise.
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-reckless-plan-threatens-u-s-oversight-of-internet/
UN Agenda 2030: A Recipe for Global Socialism
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/22267-un-agenda-2030-a-recipe-for-global-socialism
UN Seeks “Unprecedented” Amount of Data to Impose Agenda 2030
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/22898-un-seeks-unprecedented-amount-of-data-to-impose-agenda-2030
This whole internet thing had 11 years of planning and here we are the day before the cut off saying make phone calls. I wish and hope that's enough.
Like never before, not just for the sake of our Supreme Court, but also to keep these wheels from turning in full speed (and there's serious momentum going) we need someone who will not allow the UN to be the puppet master over the USA. We cannot be part of this global agenda. I pray Trump puts an end to this.
My understanding is that after nobama gives away the Internet there's no way to get it back. The giveaway is scheduled for 12:01am, Oct 1, 2016. That's Saturday morning.
I called Marco Rubio’s office over a month ago about this. The guy that answered the phone said don’t worry about. It is not going to happen. I knew then that it was a done deal. The internet is gone. If Free Republic.com lasts 90 days after October 1st, they will be doing good.
This country has been an oligarchy for a long time. It is only recently that they have shown their fangs, they have been very cautious for many years.
Just another reason why it’s NOT a good idea to have authoritarian governments in charge of Internet domain control...
Indonesia’s Government Wants To Make Memes A Crime
The country’s citizens are opposed to the vague proposition which is meant to prevent cyberbullying -
http://www.vocativ.com/363615/indonesia-memes-crime/
Bush family is globalist from way back. Traitors.
“When control of the Internet is handed over, will Free Republic and other conservative news sites disappear?”
It will allow the development of new capabilities for non-US actors to cut off particular sites like this one, or to transparently cut over users view to an imposter spoof site.
Regulations may be imposed, such as disallowing anonymity.
Dictatorships will gain new tools to censor and monitor inside their countries. Terrorists and foreign intelligence services will gain enhanced capability to hide their activities.
The executives of UN activities can be (and are) freely corrupted, as there is no police authority within the UN. It was established as a debating forum, not a world government. As such, it lacks checks, balances or controls on abuse.
If Trump could put an end to it, they would put an end to Trump.
Since at least Wilson, we had a few interruptions that slowed the obvious down, but now it is pedal to the metal.
I have no doubt who will get the most votes in November but I have no confidence that that person will become president.
It has plenty of checks and we sign them.
Never say never.
Declare a new epoc, on a new system. You want to do business here: change.
Of course the only way that will happen, is if we actually we have people with balls in charge.
People make fun of conspiracy theories and of course there are some really ridiculous ones but there have been many Machiavellian things going on in our country for more than a century. Consider this list:
JFK assassinated in 1963
Bobby Kennedy assassinated in 1968
Martin Luther King assassinated in 1968.
Gerald Ford two assassination attempts in the seventies.
Ronald Reagan assassination attempt in 1981.
That makes three assassinations and three assassination attempts within eighteen years. Looks suspicious.
Whoever controls our government it isn’t us. Both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders were right—our elections are rigged.
It sounds kind of out there when we say that the media is controlled but why wouldn’t it be when every oligarchy controls the media. People who own the mainstream media are part of the oligarchy. They control the major media and the chokepoints of information such as the Associated Press which takes in news stories from newspapers around the country but only releases the stories that they want to be national stories. Those stories that are not released are withheld from the nations newspapers so that the nation does not know about them. Everything is about the narrative another word for propaganda.
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.