Friday, September 30, 2016

Hours Before Obama's Internet Giveaway 'Irreversible', FCC Commissioner: 'You Should Be Worried'




Hours left before Obama’s Internet giveaway ‘irreversible’




It was the late Phyllis Schlafly who, earlier this year, characterized President Obama’s plan to give away U.S. oversight of the Internet’s domain name system as “like telling the fox to guard the chicken coop,” trusting the likes of Cuba, Venezuela and China to ensure the continued freedom of the Web.


The transfer of oversight to an obscure non-profit called the Internet Association for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN, set for Saturday, “could be the most dangerous use yet of Obama’s now-famous pen,” the conservative icon said at the time.
On Thursday, after months of Congress has failing to halt Obama’s move, four states took action on their own.
The lawsuit by Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma and Nevada against the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the Department of Commerce and others seeks a halt to the plan.

The lawsuit isn’t the only opposition that has arisen in the fourth quarter.
A coalition of 77 national security, cybersecurity and industry leaders wrote a letter to Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, just days ago asking for intervention.
“As individuals with extensive, first-hand experience with protecting our national security, we write to urge you to intervene in opposition to an imminent action that would, in our judgment, cause profound and irreversible damage to the United States’ vital interests,” the letter said.
“Indeed, there is, to our knowledge, no compelling reason for exposing the national security to such a risk by transferring our remaining control of the Internet in this way at this time. In light of the looming deadline, we feel compelled to urge you to impress upon President Obama that the contract between NTIA and ICANN cannot be safely terminated at this point.”
Just a few days earlier, GOP senators, including Chuck Grassley, Ted Crux, Roy Blunt, Richard Burr and Ron Johnson, released a statement opposing the giveaway.
“It is profoundly disappointing that the Obama administration has decided to press on with its plan to relinquish United States oversight of crucial Internet functions, even though Congress has not given its approval. For years, there has been a bipartisan understanding that the ICANN transition is premature and that critical questions remain unanswered about the influence of authoritarian regimes in Internet governance, the protection of free speech, the effect on national security, and impacts on consumers, just to name a few,” they said.

“Without adequate answers to these questions, it would be irresponsible to allow the transition to occur in 15 days simply because of an artificial deadline set by the Obama administration.
“In fact, Democrats at both the state and national level have echoed many of these concerns. For example, former President Bill Clinton has warned that ‘[a] lot of people who have been trying to take this authority away from the U.S. want to do it for the sole purpose of cracking down on Internet freedom and limiting it and having governments protect their backsides instead of empower[ing] their people.’
“The issue of Internet freedom should unite us Americans – Republicans, Democrats and independents alike. Partisanship and political gamesmanship have no place when it comes to the Internet, basic principles of freedom, and the right of individuals in our great nation and across the globe to speak online free from censorship.”









Pai said, "This proposal is to essentially give up the US oversight role that it’s had for the last 20 years, basically for the entire commercial lifespan of the Internet to a company called ICANN, which is an international organization, which includes a number of foreign countries. And, it’s an unprecedented move, and one that, as Mr. DeMint pointed out, is irreversible. Once we give up this oversight role, we can’t get it back."

He added that Internet oversight is a case of, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Pai further stated, “[I]f you cherish free expression, and free speech rights generally, you should be worried, I think, when there's — this oversight role's going to be ceded to potentially, foreign governments who might not share our values."

Pai, and others vehemently critizing Obama's Internet giveaway are not saying that as of October 1, 2016, readers will not be able to access their favorite sites, they are saying this giveaway is "irreversible" and the beginning of the end of Americans' free speech as we know it because control will be handed over to a global body, including many countries that have no free speech rights.

According to Epoch Times, a NY based newspaper owned by Chinese-Americans opposed to the Communist regime in China, "Over the last two years, Chinese leaders have drafted an authoritarian set of laws that governs every facet of the internet."

Senator Ted Cruz wrote on September 21, 2016, "ICANN is not bound by the First Amendment, which ICANN’s CEO and President Göran Marby admitted in a recent Senate hearing. The First Amendment applies only to the government. So if the government is out of the picture, the First Amendment is too. And that means that ICANN would be free to regulate internet speech by restricting which websites can gain access to the internet based on their speech."







Breitbart Editor-in-Chief and SiriusXM host Alex Marlow asked Bolton about the impending surrender of Internet control to a multinational body, which Bolton saluted Senator Ted Cruz and some of his colleagues for making an “heroic effort” to block by inserting legislation into the continuing resolution for federal government funding.
“It didn’t happen,” Bolton said regretfully about Cruz’s efforts. “I don’t know why. I don’t know whether the Republican leadership in the Senate and the House were not receptive to it. It’s inconceivable to me, inconceivable, that we’re about to let this happen, because it is completely correct that once we let go, we are never going to get it back.”
It’s only a short period of time before the whole thing is taken over by the U.N., or U.N. specialized agencies, 190 members. The Internet as we have known it is about to disappear, and I think that has national security implications. It certainly has implications for freedom of communication internationally.
I understand why Barack Obama wants to take it out of the control of the United States and give it to the rest of the world. That’s consistent with the way he’s handled foreign policy for the last eight years – and, by the way, consistent with the way Hillary Clinton will handle it. What stuns me is that there wasn’t more Republican opposition.



15 comments:

David Pearson said...

So what does this moron gain from giving it away? Further demonizing America? Communist countries control our internet, they control our rights. What a moron!!!!

Bruce Bridges said...

I believe he wants to censor the Internet, but is blocked from doing so by the First Amendment. So this allows him to get around that obstacle by letting his fellow dictators do the dirty work for him.

Scott said...

Exactly. Bruce nails it - the whole purpose and basis of this is censorship. Ive been saying this - the globalists need censorship of net and gun confisgation.

Caver said...

Its not just him, its the entire US Gov....our congress and senate. Why let this happen when it would have been so easy to stop. I can only think of 3 reasons...
1. Your hidden goal is taking this country down
2. You are being threatened, blackmailed, or bought off
3. You know our time is very limited and its just not worth the fight

Got to give Senator Cruz and his cohorts credit where its due. They stood up, they tried.

Prayer, Church. Prayer.

ally said...

:) yes we pray. Can someone (maybe Scott, I know you are busy) make an email address where we can locate each other again if they start to manipulate the web? I can do it but I'm nit to technical oriented abs in still just using an old cell phone.

Jen S. said...

I've become a fan of this blog for the past several months. Though I don't participate in dialoguing as much, I have thoroughly enjoyed and learned from all of your comments and wisdom and look forward to meeting you all very soon.

Scott, I'd like to propose the following, but only with your blessing. I know that many of us have become very attached to this blog and its community, and we are uncertain about what lies ahead. Let me know if this poses a problem, Scott.

SUGGESTION:
I hope this doesn't offend anyone, but I took the liberty to create an email address. If you would like to be added to the email list, please email the following information to scottspupdate AT gmail.com:





I will compile the information into a list and distribute to everyone on the list periodically.

Scott, let us know if you're a GO on this. Please, everyone, wait until we hear from Scott to start emailing your information.

Looking up,
Jen S.

Scott said...

I personally don't think there is any problem with this - but lets get some comments from other folks...To me it sounds like a good idea, but I don't know what I don't know.

Lets get some more feedback before progressing - and thanks for coming on and offering this - it sounds to me like a good idea at first blush

WVBORN56 said...

I'm in thanks for the offer Jen

Caver said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
GG2013 said...

Hi Everyone-

Thank you for trying to come up with a way to have many come together in case of a set-back. For us here, we prefer to keep our information private with Scott and the few who know us.

In the past there was a lot of trouble with false names to the point of it being a select group 'catfishing' in a way. With the baiting, lies and deceptions and the disingenuous behavior that continued for so long, it's not worth the risk to us to give out any more information than needed. For this reason we graciously decline.

Please know we are very grateful for the site and all the updated news. The positive updates and comments that help guide us in our walk is truly priceless. Though I can't post as often as I used to, please know you are all thought of often. Be safe and well. I look forward to the day when we all can meet personally.

God Bless!!

GG

Sorry if this duplicated. I am having a problem getting my phone to load this. Please delete the others if many come through. :)

Mrs.C said...

Patterns are so dog on interesting, aren't they dear Gigi :)

carol said...

I like the idea. What and when r the chances of this site being removed?

ally said...

You know I'm for it lol. Can't let the infamous "them" break up this crew.

Lance M said...

I agree with GG. My thoughts may change in the coming days.

Thanks,
Lance

Dave Aldrich said...

Trying to catch up here after being away from the internet for the weekend. I'm okay with the email list idea.