In 1969 the US Depertment of Defense Defense/Advance Research Project Agency created what would become the Internet we all love and know today, it was called ARPANET. Created to keep ongoing government communication after a catastrophic nuclear attack knocking out all land based telecommunications, ARPANET was a major milestone in not only the military, but technology in general. Little did its creators know what it would eventually turn into.
Using this technology, and creating new tech along the way, the Internet became fully commercialized in the US by 1995. Before then the US government had a strong grasp on the Internet, but in the present day the Internet is as we know, open and free. Anyone who has connection to this beautiful technology can do whatever they please, legal or illegal (until you get caught). Although it seems many people are running into censorship problems by companies that run websites and networks on the Internet, mainly conservatives and those critical of government. This is the road I'm going down. There is this not so little non-profit organization called ICANN. ICANN mainly controls and manages Domain Name System and Internet Protocols around the globe, which is a lot already. This organization is a direct result of a proposal from the US National Telecommunications and Information Administration, a sub-division of the US Department of Commerce. Known as "The Green Paper" NTIA called to privatize the management of the Internet Domain Name System, and in 1998 along came ICANN. Now from the moment of ICANN's creation to present day, the US has maintained authority over ICANN in a Memorandum of Understanding between the US Department of Commerce and ICANN. President Barack Obama is about to shred this deal, and let ICANN do whatever they please and are in a way "for sale". This is leaving many to worry the UN, EU, China, or even Russia will make a deal, or multiple, with ICANN. Trust me there is plenty of reasons to be worried. The UN would be the most likely to assume authority, or make some deals with ICANN, and those deals could ruin the Internet we know and love today. ICANN can control nearly any website and any server connected to the Internet, and the US constitution and values have long protected users, innovation, and creativity on the Internet, and let's not forget about cyber security. Other nations may and could influence censorship and biased algorithms throughout the Internet and there will be nothing the US can do about it. As you know some nations hate the idea of an open and free Internet such as: China, Russia, Iran, Turkey, and a few nations in the EU are catching on slowly, but surely like France and Germany. The EU has already made several antitrust cases against US companies that operate websites and networks on the Internet, and some fear more will follow once the US cedes control of the Internet. A new memorandum of agreement will probably be drafted, if this transition is done, between ICANN and the International Telecommunications Union. The ITU is the UN's NTIA. Simple as that. Why should we as Americans want other nations influencing the way we experience the Internet? We'll have no say in it, we'll juts have to accept it how it is. The US controlling the Internet now has always protected the freedom of the Internet. Listen I know, the Internet spans the globe, but why cease control of it to the globe when it's already controlled by the land of liberty? Let nations to continue to decide for themselves how the run the Internet in their country, and not have the power to push that influence on others. As much as I hate to say it, after what he did to Trump at the Republican Convention, but Ted Cruz may be our only voice to stop Obama. Congress can act to block Obama's plan if they can get enough votes to do so. It looks good on the GOP side, which I see no reason why any GOP congressman would not vote for it. Unless they're the typical cucks that really don't care and have the companies lobbying for it in their pockets, that's always a problem. 99.9% of the time the democratic congressman love wahetever Obama proposes. Here is Ted Cruz making the case at the Protecting Internet Freedom Subcommittee Hearing:
I mentioned companies that lobby for this above, and the ones that do shouldn't really surprise anyone. Twitter, Facebook, and Google have urged congress, in a signed letter, to support Obama's plan, and all three of them have one thing in common, censorship. It's like it's all connected to the globalist elite agenda, and the biggest medium to share and create ideas is the Internet. The letter from the companies, according to Reuters, said "it's imperative" that Congress let's Obama cease authority of the Internet. That is fishy if you ask me.
Other companies that signed the letter were: Amazon, Cloudflare, Yahoo, and several other technology trade firms according to Reuters. Sadly, it's all in the hands of Congress now, because Obama is going to pull the trigger on this if left unchallenged. Another sad thing is, like a bullet, once you pull the trigger and shoot you can't get it back, and I mean if Trump gets elected I don't think there will be anything he can do to get the Internet back. With Trump though, anything for America is possible. This is not a good thing, with something as big and powerful as the Internet, which has been protected by the United States since it's birth is about to be absorbed by globalist forces. To think ICANN is going to stay neutral is a stretch in the type of world we live in right now, but it is possible nothing will happen, and if Congress can't block this, then that's all we can rely on, is hope. We must hope that Ted Cruz, the GOP, and any uncucked Democrats block this transition. The globalist elites on both sides of the aisle need to get on board and realize the risks of this transition. That is the thing too, there is no actual benefit to the US or really even the globe. When ICANN came about due to the NTIA's proposal in 1998, the US has kept authority over ICANN and the Internet, and the Internet has been a free, open, and creative place for all in any nation that allows it that way. Why give it away if there is no reason to do so? President Obama needs to listen the people on this matter too, and not the special interest groups that want this to happen. After all he is the president for the people by people. A recent Rasmussen Reports survey found that the majority of Americans oppose this move, but to think Obama cares about the American people is a joke within itself. Another poll, conducted by Breitbart/Gravis found only 14% support the transition while 41% do not support it. Our great nation invented this great piece of technology we call the Internet, we are the reasons ICANN exists, and to just give it all up without even a debate or discussion about it, is not only wrong, but very suspicious. It just seems like something is going on here. We're going to have to sit and see what happens, and if the worse does happen, all we can do is hope that nothing changes.
Sources:
http://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_arpanet.htm http://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_darpa.htm http://www.ntia.doc.gov/legacy/ntiahome/domainname/domainname130.htmhttp://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2016/most_still_oppose_end_to_u_s_control_of_internet https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/icann-mou-1998-11-25-en https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/09/freedom-fighter-ted-cruz-leads-charge-to-keep-the-internet-away-from-liberal-censors http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-governance-idUSKCN11I2OT http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/30/exclusive-breitbartgravis-poll-reveals-americans-strongly-oppose-obamas-internet-handover/
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
All
Archives
October 2020
|