Posted on 09/21/2016 7:52:55 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
Condi Rice and Madam Albright are both tied to the $2.5 million lobby effort to get ICANN's internet 'transition' passed. [And evidence of 'walking around money'.]
According to professional witness testimony this lobby effort was a ... pack ... of ... lies. [This exclusive uncovers all of that.]
"Without [free speech protection] ICANN risks becoming an unregulated monopoly with no effective outside oversight and control."
-- Paul Rosenzweig [professional witness at latest ICANN hearing]
That's the fastest summary I've found yet:
... a "monopoly with no effective outside oversight".
And one thing in their crosshairs is our military websites.
They lied about that too. Contrary to their lobbying claims, there is not one legal shred of protection for .mil sites or even of .gov sites according to Senator Grassley and Rosenzweig.
Whatever they are up to, it must be too unpatriotic to mention.
.
Rigged Oversight
I inserted '[free speech protection]' for the sake of quick clarity.
Rosenzweig's actual words were: "Without THAT CHECK, icann risks becoming an unregulated monopoly ..."
'THAT CHECK' refers to ICANN's lie about an 'Empowered Community'.
An 'empowered community' could be an ant farm. It's confusing on purpose.
The 'Empowered Community' is a front, a big joke -- just a smokescreen to hide their secret 'crusade' that includes meddling with military websites.
ICANN often ignores its 'Empowered Community' when it can't mould it like potter's clay.
If you don't believe me, muck through the sordid details of Rosenzweig's testimony yourself.
[That and other links will be posted in followup.]
~~~
ICANN's BACKGROUND
[Initials: Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. Founded in 1998. Allergic to egg shells -- just had to throw that in because I'm sick of sophist trivia lectures. They are making me grumpy, okay?]
ICANN registers the internet's domain names. A 'tiny' project right? Totally 'harmless'.
Ha!
They are a monopolistic utility. The US entrusted them with monopoly powers and intellectual property rights -- property that never would have existed if not for the Pentagon's ARPANET. Just like phone books, it is difficult to imagine competition in such a registration system.
But ....
... if this contract unravels we could theoretically see overlapping domain name registration systems dueling with each other minute-by-minute. Sounds 'kool', right? Almost like a 'Firesale' that Cloward and Piven would envy.
And ICANN has 'the know-how'. This is key to remember.
They vowed in writing to be an idealistic nonprofit. And their brilliant team [led by ARPANET pioneers] created efficient software [now their copyrighted property], the largest utility on earth and run like Swiss clockwork.
The US needed very little oversight authority because the ICANN team was united and purpose-driven. Their mission was clear.
Another safeguard was geographic. ICANN's headquarters looked as though they would always remain in California.
That's where their founding 'tech guys' lived, where their bulky computer systems were coordinated, and where Federal grant money funded R & D -- it was their practical hub. The location also enjoyed a vigorous pool of college students [with computer science majors] who could get education credits on-the-job and be sized up for future employment.
Why on earth would they move?
But technology now liberates ICANN. Moving overseas is not a problem anymore.
At the same time college professors have steadily eroded American ideals such as 'freedom of speech'. We also import a high percentage of foreign students. Thus ICANN's values became fractured compared to the 'Post Cold War' decade when the nonprofit was founded.
Nowadays ICANN employees love money [which they deserve] -- their salary budget was $400 million in the past three years. They are among the best paid non-profit employees on earth.
I'm glad for them. I hope ICANN's top talent gets rich. They have been doing an outstanding job, and with this current controversy they could use some more perks and appreciation.
But US laws are a byzantine hassle -- let's face it. [Especially in California.] And while Kennedy family members might fleece their own nonprofits for millions, legislators frown on 'mere tech guys' earning too much.
As for Obama? He has done nothing to make ICANN feel patriotic pride for a job well done. Quite the opposite.
Behind the scenes this administration has egged on their leaders to envision a transformation of their nonprofit into something far more powerful than it was ever intended to be -- a 'force for good' that can not only make more money but also crusade against 'US oppression' and 'dangerous hate speech'.
I believe this 'citizens of the world' spirit stems more from ICANN's executives, not its tech guys. 'Higher' Learning has less time to indoctrinate technical majors than it does in its convoluted ideals of leadership.
But it's difficult to know for sure.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ICANN's Dealings with Albright and Condi Rice
It's reasonable to assume that Madam Albright and Condi Rice helped network with foreign power brokers.
They are, after all, running consulting firms that assist lobbyists for ICANN's transition.
Both had been 'Secretary of State'.
This is bipartizan triangulation, [D] and [R], can reach both sides of the aisle here in the US and open a variety of doors overseas.
So what makes these two tick?
~~~
Madam Albright
.
She is the easy one to figure out:
Albright: "Republicans spewing vicious misogyny and anti-women hate speech."
[dailycaller.com back in 2012.]
This year ...
Albright: "... special place in hell for women who don't support Clinton ..."
[Enough said, right? But I have to add -- how 'undiplomatic' of the former chief diplomat.]
~~~
Condi Rice
.
It takes some thinking to understand why a straight arrow like Condi Rice might feel righteous about aiding this transition.
~~~
[The Blaze]
Her prayer when police were shot in Dallas:
“As a nation and as a people, we need to race again toward you, into the embrace of your loving arms,” she prayed, according to TheBlaze. “Dear Heavenly Father, we pray for guidance, we pray for wisdom for our leaders, and we pray that each and every one of us will leave this place justified by faith and secure and confident in your deep, deep love for us.”
She also spoke of how bigotry, hatred and intolerance “still lingers today” and keeps so many Americans divided.
~~~
It makes sense that she's a prayerful Christian just like GW Bush. And it also makes sense that she, like GW, looks at any kind of profiling as 'bigotry'.
She called Islam 'a religion of peace and love'.
She also opposed Trump's muslim ban.
As one headline paraphrased her:
Condoleezza Rice: I Get The Security Concerns, But The US Should Accept Refugees
[unquote]
It is conceivable that she might think that suppression of 'Islamophobic' websites would be good for national security.
She might also hope that ICANN to isolate [or track down] wikileaks and other security breaches.
[ICANN execs could dangle any kind of promises to her like carrots. Their knowledge is very specialized.]
So I could easily view Condi's participation as idealistic.
I bet the leaders in ICANN never let her know about their 'war room' talks. She probably has no idea when they meet to speak candidly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ICANN's Secret Crusade
It's quite simple really. Obama is running out the clock on a key contract. After that ...
A. They will ponder hate speech enforcement. With their power to delete website property, they can either fine or wipe out any website that the globalists and their drones get mad at.
B. They lied about staying in the US and plan to move overseas to bypass US law.
C. ICANN is more than ready for a cyber-war with the US.
They have the software [along with copyrights and experience] to do anything that ANY foreign government deems legal.
To oppose them with a new counter-ICANN in the US would lead to anarchy -- the ultimate cyber-war. If Google sides with them, they would be an unbeatable team.
D. Even if we renew the contract with ICANN before October 1, I seriously doubt that Obama would lift a finger to prevent rogue members of ICANN from flying off anyway, but at least we would have the legal 'high ground' in international law.
E. ICANN's lobbyists are even spreading misinformation that .mil and .gov sites will be protected. They are clearly keeping their options open to consider meddling with US federal and military websites in ways that would enrage us.
~~~
A. Hate Speech Oversight
After that ICANN is free to fly over to one or more other nations, bypass US jurisdiction, then what? They ponder 'hate speech' oversight, such as the Swedish Plan, a global group-hug against hate speech.
[link will be provided for more in-depth]
They have spoken with the French Senate and also had secret talks with China.
That's all we know about. There have undoubtedly been many backdoor meetings in the past year or so all over the globe.
For example -- The UN would want ICANN to 'slant' internet speech to validate the World Court to create a worldwide mandate to arrest US war heroes or politicians for crimes against humanity or crimes against nature [aka 'global warming]. Even a future President. We could resist them militarily and be an 'island fortress', but foreign visits could be dangerous and trade talks could get ugly and sea mines could be 'righteously' laid along our ports. [For starters.]
Bottom line: free speech prevents a world of hurt.
Not only could ICANN regulate hate speech, they could also raise fees across the board which the UN or China or any other country could collect. [Domain name fees.]
~~~
B. Secret Plan to Move Overseas
ICANN's lobbyists have spread confusion throughout congress and in the tech community that they will remain in California.
That is a lie.
Testimony by Paul Rosenzweig:
"ICANN is a non-profit corporation incorporated in California. Some say that this is a check on ICANN’s activities, since it would be subject to suit in America’s impartial, professional court system. Indeed, in July, Assistant Secretary Strickling confidently declared “ICANN is a California corporation and will remain so.'
"I wish I were as confident as Assistant Secretary Strickling... The idea that ICANN would pack up and move has been contemplated by ICANN’s leadership.
"Back in June 2014, ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade announced, in testimony to the French Senate, that the Board had authorized him to begin, as one of five major initiatives, the creation of a 'parallel legal, international structure (maybe in Switzerland) for ICANN.'
"These changes were recommended even though some Members of Congress have explicitly opposed this outcome."
-- Rosenzweig
~~~
C. ICANN more than ready for a cyber-war
Repeating for emphasis:
They have the software [along with copyrights and experience] to do anything [with websites] that ANY foreign government deems legal.
Imagine the problem a President Trump would face.
ICANN's experience dates back to Jon Postel. He was more than their founding 'tech guy', he was their legend. Even his death is considered a mysterious plot.
Before there was an ICANN Postel ran the early internet's domain name registration system as one of ARPANET's pioneers.
When ICANN was founded they set up their headquarters near his California home. And he built up the talented team they are today.
They enjoy more expertise with domain name registration than the rest of the world combined.
Being a nonprofit they will make money no matter how bad the internet gets. In fact, messing it up might be some foreign governments' agenda.
They could find hackers from hell and some of the leftists in Google might slip them some code now and then on the sly.
Ultimately we could build firewalls or a rewiring system they can't penetrate. But before that happens ICANN is capable of crashing the worldwide economy if that's what it takes to reach their holy grail of 'hate speech oversight' or whatever else they seek to achieve.
They could also build nationwide intranets to completely isolate China and other oppressive regimes. That might seem fair, but who cares about fairness to governments? We should care about letting people get informed and be whistleblowers.
D. ICANN would have a much easier time if their IANA contract expires. Then any nation they deal with will arguably have more legal legitimacy than US law. Once the barn door opens, out go the horses.
E. Misinformation that .mil and .gov sites will be protected.
Why did they lie about our military's websites?
Take it to the bank -- ICANN lied:
During Wednesdays's hearing Senator Grassley found no solid reason to believe that our .gov and .mil websites will be left alone. That was his take, and it was backed by professional witness testomony ...
... such as Paul Rosenzweig:
"[The assurances were] made through an exchange of letters. Not only are the letters non-legally binding, they actually acknowledge the possibility that at some point a separation of the IANA function from ICANN might threaten the stability and security of the US government’s top level domains. I can’t speak for other observers, but for me, as a lawyer, an exchange of letters is a way of avoiding a contractually enforceable obligation. I know why ICANN would prefer that course of action – I have no idea why the NTIA [Obama administration] would accept it on behalf of the US government." -- Rosenzweig
That's more than a lie, isn't it?
ICANN wants as much leeway as possible. Why?
They are up to something obviously.
Not only our government websites ...
... but also our MILITARY websites.
The End
‘Who paid that kind of money to get ICANN’s internet “transition” passed???’
ICANN makes good money — $600 million in the past three years through fees. For all I know there could be federal funding on top, and there could also be under-the-table contributions and informal money to them.
China was helping ICANN out in all manner of ways [note earlier post] which was one reason why Cruz Lankford and Mike Lee were sending them open letter questions. ICANN stalled them for answers BTW.
Yes, I didn’t think of what they’ve done already. But they could make it worse and with Google’s help make it more difficult to find anything useful.
Yeesh, what a mess. Thanks for the list.
The first sentence is true. I don't think the second sentence follows. They collect the fee and do basically nothing. The TLD registrars run the DNS for their domains, but they do it through the root servers:
https://www.iana.org/domains/root/servers It would be hard for ICANN to muck with the root servers, but I'm not sure about their business relationship. Probably something like a peering arrangement.
“The first sentence is true. I don’t think the second sentence follows. They collect the fee and do basically nothing.”
The fees require a database of all domain names.
And the Swedish plan assumes that individual domain names are affected.
Secondly, I can’t imagine Sessions and Grassley and Gohmert being overly concerned about a minor shift in domain names:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3394704/posts
They plan on ICANN specifically being used to ‘oversee’ the internet. For example, a fine for ‘hate speech’. Collecting a fee? Well, that fee could be a million dollars a month or more.
Please note the testimony of Paul Rosenzweig — I wrote summaries of it and link to it directly.
Final point — ICANN has multiple branches. One such branch processes the IP address — the number code of each domain name.
The Address Supporting Organization (ASO) deals with policy making on IP addresses.
IANA (part of ICANN) does top level domains and they delegate the rest. Basically it is flat out impossible to have one database with all names and DNS assignments. Further, the majority of domains have no unique IP address, the DNS points to a shared IP.
The bottom line is when I alter my DNS setting at godaddy the setting goes into their DNS server which propagates to others. If ICANN / IANA wanted to cut off godaddy they would have to convince the 13 different root servers to go along. That won't happen.
So ICANN cannot stop people from lookup up my domain and getting to my shared or unique IP. Nor can they stop godaddy from providing that service to me. What they can do is collude with google or any other unscrupulous company to limit traffic to my site in various ways. They probably have many ways to promote spam sites over real sites for profit, but outright censorship is just not feasible.
Thank you for the time.
What happens if two entities are registered with the same domain name/IP address?
What is the safeguard?
The reason I ask that is because I’m assuming there’s a ‘Big Ben’.
Back during the Steam Age everyone referred to the city’s big clock to set their pocket watches. London’s big clock had a name: Big Ben.
Not hard at all for software to ID differences in the sites and ask the user. Straightforward nefarious spoofing is trickier though.
You’ve been making me reach and clearing things up. Thank you.
Okay, each .[blank] [such as .com] is run by a registry via ICANN’s permission.
ICANN’s delegation process:
Registry Operator Code of Conduct.
That can be modified after Sept 30.
So long as Obama controls the Justice Department, ICANN has full legal authority over all registries. So this IS a serious matter.
After Obama leaves office? Other nations can still keep ICANN as their legal overseer and link up with China as the hub. [China already has the infrastructure in place.]
Thus, if Trump doesn’t get along with their ‘hate speech’ suppression — cyberwar due to an international dispute.
We could even end up needing a firewall from nations that defer to ICANN.
For IP addresses it is a lower level routing function. Like I said, the vast majority of domains have no unique IP or no IP whatsoever. To change that a domain owner logs into their registrar's website and then that website allows them to change their DNS settings to point to whatever IP they want. I can send any of my domains to any IP address that I feel like. What will happen on the other end depends on the SW on the other end.
A webserver will typically look at the incoming domain name and respond appropriately (with nothing in my case). But I should try pointing one of my domains to a google or bing address to see what happens.
Many many domains are pointed to single IPs which are running web servers configured to look at the incoming domain name (your browser always sends that along in the request). Then they look up the appropriate page for that domain name. That's how most ordinary people with domains can run their 10 or 100 or 10,000 domains all on one server with one IP. They might even share that server with other people with other domains. I do that at dreamhost.
I also have various servers at linode and digital ocean that each have their own IPV4 assigned and my domain on those hosts is the only one tied to that host. I have others with no domain tied to it and I access those via the IP address.
Urg ...
I goofed up on an important word up above.
Obama’s Justice Department could accomodate defacto authority so that ICANN can accomodate the UN’s directives against hate speech.
Since that is treaty-based, many federal justices would claim their hands are tied — out of their jurisdiction.
It would be a comfort being if we can change our IP addresses — a ‘bunch’ of numbers which you can type into the box instead of a web address.
I hope you are right about that.
But when ICANN coordinates with a tyrannical regime [such as Obama’s or Hillary’s], that backdoor option could be closed through altering the Registry Operator Code of Conduct
If they did that to me, the first thing I would do is get a very high priced lawyer and advertising firm to get my IP address out to the public. Or if I were not wealthy (that's basically my case) I would take to the broader internet and get people to link to my IP. Then my server provider could try to cut off my IP.
Unlikely, but suppose they did. Next step is to put my content on my dreamhost server and get people to link to that. Then I might get kicked off of that (unlikely). Let's say that happens. Next I would get on some server in the Netherlands or somewhere that never kicks anyone off. Granted I would be in unsavory company but it is extremely unlikely that my account and content would be erased from that server. I can do all of that without my "banned" domain by using some other domain, or more like a subdomain where the domain owner allows unlimited subdomains, or just using IP addresses.
Thank you, Palmer. You cleared things up.
[Sigh of relief.]
Yes, Trump can easily fix this so far as the US websites go.
It’s still going to be one heck of a mess.
I have at least 1/2 dozen unique IPV4 addresses that I control directly. Anyone can type those into their browser and see my content. Inconvenient obviously, especially if nobody knows those addresses. That’s the whole point of DNS.
So basically, their tyranny would backfire on them and people in the US would be reminded how important free speech is.
Thank God!
It could end up a gigantic mess until Trump is sworn in. And other regimes overseas will find their online freedom demolished.
But if Hillary wins? She has her internet gatekeeper here in the US.
Other posters should learn from your example, Palmer.
In a way you were right — I overestimated ICANN’s technical power.
Their power is merely legal. So here in the US Trump can put a top to a lot of problems.
But that only affects governments which respect free speech.
But if a tyrannical regime wants to destroy free speech, ICANN can adjust its ‘Registry Operator Code of Conduct’ in coordination with a China-based hub.
For example, the UN could tell ICANN to alter those codes of conduct. The US, Panama, and other nations could ignore the UN, but ICANN might do what the UN tells it to.
‘Trump can put a top to a lot of problems.’
What’s that idiot talking about? Put a top?
He needs sleep: “put a stop”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.