You guys are bright, even brilliant. But, you're missing something. It's an agenda. For 1 world government. It's 1 the World Order.
Can you explain the ICANN transfer?
31–35 of 35 posts
Re: Can you explain the ICANN transfer?
#32> What exactly is wrong with the current setup? What exactly was wrong with the 1998 setup? ISI and Jon Postel were managing fine back then. I also don't recall a "US control over ICANN" that could be "relinquished" being part of the original ICANN proposal. I don't think that would have gone over well with the European operators at the IETF meetings. If it had been they probably would have stuck with the CCITT's x.2…
> What exactly was wrong with the 1998 setup? ISI and Jon Postel were managing fine back then. John Postel did great things for the Internet. However, to make a point or as a 'test', one day in 1998 he redirected most of the Internet's DNS root server traffic to different servers. That was the last straw - maybe the only straw. Here's the Wikipedia version, which matches my vague memory of the story: https://en.wikip…
And this may be one of the more immediate reasons for the change ... the control and behavior of the servers. The servers and what the servers do beyond their traditional/current roles under ICANN. The architecture and operational functions can be changed/controlled so as leverage being a focal point to gather and control beyond being a url/address gateway.
Reiterating what others have already said ... Obama and other despotic players on the world stage are no friend to liberty and freedom. Freedom where the least of which is freedom of speech, association, movement and private property.
Re: Can you explain the ICANN transfer?
#33In a word, islamazation.
In a last minute move Obama, a Muslim, has taken the first step, perhaps the only step, in handing over a level of censorship power to other Muslims, like saudi arabia.
The Internet is about to become disproportionately friendly to Muslims, positive about Islam and very hostile to those who would criticize it. They can use the domain power to gain other Internet powers, like censorship of site content.
It will have a chilling effect on anti Islam speech and be a Hayday for Muslim propaganda and hate and terror speech like ISIS web sites,which will no longer be taken down.
Other last minute surprises are Obama giving Iran over a billion dollars in cash and removing the freeze on their bank accounts. As you know he also tried to block the 9/11 victims ability to sue terrorist sponsoring nations.
Re: Can you explain the ICANN transfer?
#34Does anyone know if jurisdiction has anything to do with this? I'm no lawyer, but I have a small inkling this has to do with International Law and the global nature of The Internet. Personally I try to route around ICANN with things like https://www.opennicproject.org/ and things like https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns
Re: Can you explain the ICANN transfer?
#35usually this is my 1st stop to understand current topics re: ICANN etc. :: Milton Mueller at Internet Governance Project (1). his latest blog post may shed some light (2). 1. http://www.internetgovernance.org 2. http://www.internetgovernance.org/2016/09/28/its-over-yestoi...
That's a very interesting blog post. It contradicts itself multiple times. For example, in one paragraph it says that the fact that the GAO hasn't produced the congressionally mandated report for over a year must mean that there's nothing to report on. In the very next paragraph it says that the reason the GAO hasn't produced the report is probably because of "partisan gridlock."
So which is it? Have they produced no report because there is nothing to report on (which is obviously silly; there's something to report, regardless of your opinion), or have they produced no report because of partisan gridlock? If the latter, as they suggest, how does that imply that there's nothing to report on?
It would actually imply the opposite, that there is much to report on, but that political pressure is preventing them from reporting on it due to how an unbiased report would inconvenience certain political agendas.
Just imagine, a CEO sees some troubling reports about his company's stock, hearing rumors of fraud and audits and lawsuits. He orders an accountant to produce a financial report for the last 6 months by Friday. Friday comes and goes, and so does another, until several months have gone by. Finally the CEO concludes that, since his accountant hasn't produced the ordered report, there must be nothing to report, and everything is fine. ??? That's the same logic they use in this article.
This is just one example of the double-minded perspective presented in that article. The IGP is obviously strongly biased toward one political party, and they write deceptive articles to confuse the public and handwave away legitimate concerns.