Obama’s Reckless Plan Threatens U.S. Oversight of Internet

[Vigilante]

You fucking Lefty maggots would love this.... CENSOR the right sites only, and let the people only hear the lies from the MSM!

Canada Free Press ^ | 09/28/16 | Roger Aronoff

Liberal media continue to assert that handing over a function of the Internet will have minor repercussions. Few in the media want to blame President Obama for, once again, damaging U.S. interests in his pursuit of the transformation of America

The Obama administration is poised to surrender control of certain Internet functions to non-profit ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, on October 1. According to Americans for Limited Government’s senior editor Robert Romano, opposition to this Internet giveaway has united Republicans such as Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and presidential candidate Donald Trump. But questions remain as to whether or not the Republicans will unite sufficiently to insist language is included in a continuing resolution that will forbid the transfer of control.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) actually stripped out this language from the continuing resolution, and a vote to end debate on the current language, which does not fix the ICANN issue, failed on September 27. This is the latest Obama administration scandal, one that threatens the integrity of the Internet. President Obama is seeking to cede oversight of Internet protocols to a multinational body, effectively ending unilateral American control over these functions.

 

[JakeStarkey]

vigilessentials, the company is subject to state and federal laws.

Do you know that?

 

[Vigilante]

vigilessentials, the company is subject to state and federal laws.

Do you know that?

Yes JakeAss that does lots of good when control is out of country!

 

[Ozone]

to explain how stupid this issue is... the internet is up and running, it works so let's use it, but let's not forget that the internet is itself but one possible way to make a computer network. and for what the icann does, it's a glorified switchboard, not an all-powerful god.

 

[JakeStarkey]

vigilessentials, the company is subject to state and federal laws.

Do you know that?

Yes JakeAss that does lots of good when control is out of country!

Control is in Los Angeles. You did not know that, either. If hq moves, then a guardian acceptable to US courts is appointed. Bet you did not know that.

 

[turzovka]

vigilessentials, the company is subject to state and federal laws.

Do you know that?

Yes JakeAss that does lots of good when control is out of country!

Control is in Los Angeles. You did not know that, either. If hq moves, then a guardian acceptable to US courts is appointed. Bet you did not know that.

The fact it was Obama's wishes is enough for me to know it is another unAmerican maneuver.

The guy is a bona fide traitor to the oath he took for the office. 10 times worse than even Hildebeest.

 

[JakeStarkey]

vigilessentials, the company is subject to state and federal laws.

Do you know that?

Yes JakeAss that does lots of good when control is out of country!

Control is in Los Angeles. You did not know that, either. If hq moves, then a guardian acceptable to US courts is appointed. Bet you did not know that.

The fact it was Obama's wishes is enough for me to know it is another unAmerican maneuver.The guy is a bona fide traitor to the oath he took for the office. 10 times worse than even Hildebeest.

Are you the lurk from Opus Dei? tur, the company has to obey American law. Srsly.

 

[Vigilante]

vigilessentials, the company is subject to state and federal laws.

Do you know that?

Yes JakeAss that does lots of good when control is out of country!

Control is in Los Angeles. You did not know that, either. If hq moves, then a guardian acceptable to US courts is appointed. Bet you did not know that.

Really...The U.N,international Communications Union is in Geneva, so you think it will be HERE?

 

[JakeStarkey]

vigilessentials, the company is subject to state and federal laws.

Do you know that?

Yes JakeAss that does lots of good when control is out of country!

Control is in Los Angeles. You did not know that, either. If hq moves, then a guardian acceptable to US courts is appointed. Bet you did not know that.

Really...The U.N,international Communications Union is in Geneva, so you think it will be HERE?

The hqs is in LA, vigilessentials: the company that runs the names. It is subject to US law.

 

[turzovka]

vigilessentials, the company is subject to state and federal laws.

Do you know that?

Yes JakeAss that does lots of good when control is out of country!

Control is in Los Angeles. You did not know that, either. If hq moves, then a guardian acceptable to US courts is appointed. Bet you did not know that.

The fact it was Obama's wishes is enough for me to know it is another unAmerican maneuver.The guy is a bona fide traitor to the oath he took for the office. 10 times worse than even Hildebeest.

Are you the lurk from Opus Dei? tur, the company has to obey American law. Srsly.

Oh, please. You think this has anything to do with the latest crap coming from the White House?

My comment is based on 8 years or more of deception, lies, cronyism, immoral designs of various nature, et al.

I am neither blind nor stupid. If Obama wants it, we surely do not.

 

[Vigilante]

vigilessentials, the company is subject to state and federal laws.

Do you know that?

Yes JakeAss that does lots of good when control is out of country!

Control is in Los Angeles. You did not know that, either. If hq moves, then a guardian acceptable to US courts is appointed. Bet you did not know that.

Really...The U.N,international Communications Union is in Geneva, so you think it will be HERE?

The hqs is in LA, vigilessentials: the company that runs the names. It is subject to US law.

The U.N. runs it and it is headquartered in Geneva... JakeAss!

 

[JakeStarkey]

The company is in LA and subject to American law, vigilessentials.

 

[Vigilante]

The company is in LA and subject to American law, vigilessentials.

The headquarters with 91 people is in Geneva...just waiting, JakeAss!

 

[JakeStarkey]

ICANN | Archives | Accountability and Transparency Frameworks and ...
https://archive.icann.org/en/accountability/frameworks.../legal-corporate.htm

Feb 15, 2008 - ICANN is a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, and is subject to both the state laws of California, and United States federal laws.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Vigilessentials?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

ICANN | Archives | Accountability and Transparency Frameworks and ...
https://archive.icann.org/en/accountability/frameworks.../legal-corporate.htm

Feb 15, 2008 - ICANN is a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, and is subject to both the state laws of California, and United States federal laws.

That means squat. What control does California have on the private dealings of a company influenced by the United Nations? We will lose dot com and dot mil to start.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Here is a video that explains why we cannot allow Obama to give away the Internet to countries who have no use for our 1st Amendment. This is a must watch from
Stefan Molyneux:

 

[JakeStarkey]

ICANN | Archives | Accountability and Transparency Frameworks and ...
https://archive.icann.org/en/accountability/frameworks.../legal-corporate.htm

Feb 15, 2008 - ICANN is a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, and is subject to both the state laws of California, and United States federal laws.

That means squat. What control does California have on the private dealings of a company influenced by the United Nations? We will lose dot com and dot mil to start.

California and the USA have the legal control on the company.

This issue is a non-issue, and it only makes you people look silly.

 

[waltky]

How are we supposed to keep our edge if the gov't. keeps givin' it away?...

Four States Sue to Stop Obama Administration’s Internet 'Giveaway'
September 30, 2016 - Attorneys general from four U.S. states have filed a lawsuit to stop the Obama administration from handing over control of the internet to an international governing body.

The White House had planned to officially hand the reins of the internet address system over to a group of international stakeholders on October 1, but the states’ fears the move could be unconstitutional threatens to block one of Obama’s top tech initiatives. The attorneys general for Arizona, Oklahoma, Nevada and Texas all signed on to the lawsuit this week that argues the Obama plan to hand over control of the internet in an illegal transfer of U.S. government property, and any such giveaway would require congressional approval. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a non-profit group that handles oversight of internet domain names. Since its creation in 1998, ICANN has been under the control of the U.S. Department of Commerce, but the Obama administration began plans in early 2014 to relinquish that control, with the process coming to completion Friday.

ICANN is the authority that controls domain names for websites and individual IP addresses for internet users. Opponents of the transfer fear that it will lead to censorship of the internet, should countries with poor free speech records like Russia or China somehow gain control. “Trusting authoritarian regimes to ensure the continued freedom of the internet is lunacy,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement. “The president does not have the authority to simply give away America’s pioneering role in ensuring that the internet remains a place where free expression can flourish.” Supporters of the transfer say it is a bipartisan initiative that’s been in the works for years, and any last-minute attempts to block it would be seen by the international community as an act of bad faith.

The logo of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN​

Assistant Secretary of Commerce Larry Strickling said at a conference earlier this year the best way to preserve internet freedom is to relinquish control from the U.S. government to those stakeholders who use and operate the networks that comprise it. “Free expression is protected by the open, decentralized nature of the internet, the neutral manner in which the technical aspects of the Internet are managed and the commitment of stakeholders to maintain openness,” said Strickling. Texas Senator Ted Cruz began pushing back against the ICANN transfer months ago, but - despite receiving recent support from Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump - failed to muster much backing among his congressional colleagues.

Cruz tried to block the internet transfer with an attachment to a high-profile spending bill, but with another potential government shutdown looming, the Senate chose not to include Cruz’s plan in a budget deal approved Wednesday. Members in the House of Representative also chose to pass on Cruz’s plan. In the lawsuit filed Wednesday, the attorneys general allege the Obama administration’s plans violate the U.S. Constitution’s Property Clause, which says that only Congress has the power to dispose of property belonging to the U.S. The plan also violates the free speech amendment by “chilling free speech," the suit says. The states "will lose the predictability, certainty, and protections that currently flow from federal stewardship of the Internet and instead be subjected to ICANN's unchecked control," the lawsuit alleges. The suit is asking for a court order to block the transfer, but no hearing date has yet been set. So far, no federal judge has issued a ruling that would stop the plan from taking effect Friday.

Four States Sue to Stop Obama Administration’s Internet 'Giveaway'