• Louis Vuitton Outlet
  • Tiffany Co Outlet
  • Hollister Co Outlet
  • Oakley Outlet
  • Ray Ban Outlet
  • Gucci Outlet
  • Prada Outlet
  • Michael Kors Outlet
  • North Face Outlet
  • Abercrombie & Fitch Outlet
  • Chanel Outlet
  • Canada Goose Outlet
  • Lululemon Outlet
  • PJS Jacket Outlet
  • Moncler Outlet
  • Burberry Outlet
  • Longchamp Outlet
  • Hermes Outlet
  • UGG Outlets
  • Nike Outlet
  • Jordan Outlet
  • Toms Outlet
  • New Balance Outlet
  • MBT Outlet
  • Christian Louboutin Outlet
  • All Brands Belt
  • All Jersey
  • Authentic Louis Vuitton For Cheap
  • Authentic Discounted Louis Vuitton
  • Louis Vuitton 25 Speedy
  • Louis Vuitton Australia Online Sale
  • Louis Vuitton Speedy 35 With Shoulder Strap
  • Louis Vuitton Bag Styles
  • How Can You Tell A Real Louis Vuitton Belt
  • Louis Vuitton Blue Tote
  • The Scriptorium

    11/16/2005

    U.S. to retain oversight of Web

    Filed under: — Jennifer Rast @ 3:13 pm

    This is expected, but good news. The U.N. will not succeed for now in taking over the internet and imposing their superior oversight skills (ehem. . .Oil for food) on the rest of us. Basically, the groups attending the conference in Tunisia agreed to form another debate club, which will undoubtedly spend copious amounts of money on travel, conferences, and a whole forest worth of reports, but will have no policy making powers. Some U.S. Senators are not so sure the new group will be as powerless as it seems, however.

    Several U.S. congressmen remain skeptical. Rep. John T. Doolittle, California Republican, with two other members of Congress, has introduced a resolution urging that the U.S. remain in charge of the Internet’s day-to-day operations.
    “Whether they call it a ‘board’ or a ‘forum,’ it’s clear that the ultimate goal of the U.N. is still to wrest control of the Internet,” Mr. Doolittle said last night.


    Mr. Gross said the new international forum, which Greece has offered to host in 2006, will be used to discuss issues related to Internet governance, from dealing with spyware and viruses to developments in electronic learning and health initiatives. It will not have any policy-making power.

    The E.U.’s response to the decision certainly makes me wonder how much influence the forum will end up having:

    “This is a very good result in terms of the internationalization of Internet governance and the more cooperative model of Internet governance,” he said. “This is a great move from unilateralism to cooperation, and the EU appreciates the huge movement made by the U.S. on this issue.”

    Hopefully, this new forum won’t be used to put pressure on the U.S. and other countries to begin regulating the internet and filtering content. It’s obvious by who supports U.N. control of the internet that the ultimate goal is exactly that.

    Many nations, including China, Brazil, Cuba and Iran, have sought to end the U.S. government’s oversight role, and the European Union recently proposed phasing out the Commerce Department’s oversight of ICANN.

    These countries could easily work now toward spreading internet access to the third world countries they claim to be so concerned about. Whether the U.N. controls the net, or a non-profit in California, the network will still have to be expanded and people will still need computers. Only a gullible liberal would believe that countries like Iran and China are really interested in more people gaining access to the very information they work so hard to censor. With countries like Iran supporting global governance of the net, it’s obvious that censorship would certainly target Christian and Jewish websites, and the U.N. would likely condemn any sites that don’t promote a humanist/socialist worldview. Given the opportunity, the U.N. could always convince half of America that these sites must be banned by simply claiming that the U.N. charter demands a separation of church and global governance. Barry Lynn, the ACLU and Michael Newdow would delight in seeing a whole new front open up in their war on religious people.

    UPDATE: Steve at the Jesus is Lord blog finds further evidence that the pro-global governance crowd’s goals are about far more than giving everyone access to the internet.

    Both Shalom and Abbas later addressed the UN assembly each speaking about their grievances towards the peace process and the need to fight terror on the internet.

    Now, Abbas has never made a move to fight terrorism in his life, especially in his own country, and he enables Hamas and other terrorist groups, so what could he possibly mean by “fight terror on the internet”. Who would a terrorist or a terrorist supporter consider to be a terrorist? Probably the people they’re actively trying to kill – Jews and Christians. Thank God these people weren’t granted the ability to fight us “terrorists” on the internet.

    Factoid: Tunisia, where this conference to decide who will govern the internet is being held, regularly jails individuals for expressing their opinions on the Internet and suppresses Web sites critical of the government. Interesting location for a summit on internet governance, no?

    For examples of how the countries listed in this article feel the internet should be governed, read this article.

    One Response to “U.S. to retain oversight of Web”

    1. Busterwants2fish Says:

      All conservative websites, Christian websites, and all websites that celebrate the bill of rights would be censored immediately. When China and Cuba want something, that’s good reason why it shouldn’t happen.