Internet Crashes Will Be Hard To Stop After Obama's Internet Giveaway

Daily Caller ^ | October 24, 2016 | Eric Leiberman

[SaveFerris]

[Freedom56v2]

am trying to do several things now

Like fighting the big fight against the outage that wasn’t?

However, I would suggest, Zippy, that you take some time to learn the facts on the issue before attacking me and putting a turd in first post.

So you wish to dictate which post I choose to point out your paranoia?
Why? Isn’t there something else you might more easily control?
Your bowels perhaps?

Oh, and if you care to put your credentials forward regarding your academics, experience, and English expertise, I suspect I will exceed them.

I’m Batman and I’m not crying wolf or harping on about the sky falling.

Cheers.

---

Cheers to you, too, Zippy. Still waiting for those credentials...

Since you like to break it down:

bushwon: I am trying to do several things now...

Zipgun: Like fighting the big fight against the outage that wasn’t?

~~Are you not able to read?? I stated multiple times that none of the experts said that the internet was going down permanently...However, this article (as well as others) seems to draw a line to the fact that there was an outage, and stopping outages going forward is directly related to the transfer...But we are all supposed to listen to you, prince of snark—again, what is your expertise?

~~Actually, prior to the deadline, I did try to stop the transfer—spent hours posting articles, talking to people in Washington, etc...I failed, but I ask you, Zipgun, what exactly have YOU personally done recently to guard and promote liberty and freedom besides post snarky trollish comments on an internet forum?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

bushwon: However, I would suggest, Zippy, that you take some time to learn the facts on the issue before attacking me and putting a turd in first post.

Zipgun: So you wish to dictate which post I choose to point out your paranoia? Why? Isn’t there something else you might more easily control? Your bowels perhaps?

~~I am not dictating what you post...however there is such a thing as being obnoxiously rude—which your reputation supports...BTW, actually, I am in full control of my bowels as I take probiotics. My bowels are just fine, thanks to Natren Healthy Trinity, but thank you for asking.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

bushwon: Oh, and if you care to put your credentials forward regarding your academics, experience, and English expertise, I suspect I will exceed them.

Zipgun: I’m Batman and I’m not crying wolf or harping on about the sky falling.

~~Seriously?!? This is your response to claiming your superior expertise and intellect? Batman?? What does that have to do with anything? So posting articles citing experts who are concerned about the internet transfer is crying wolf?

~~Hmm, I bet you were one of the normalcy bias morons who criticized those of us warning early on about Obamacare and the immigration issue as crying wolf too...Sheesh!!

Should the internet go down for good, your snarky comments are one thing I would not miss!

---

For anyone interested in actually reading up on the subject here are some articles~~Arthur Wildfire! March and other Freepers have posted many too:

The Westerner:

“GIVING AWAY CONTROL OF THE INTERNET OR ANY PART OF IT IS SHEER LUNACY”, JIM ROBINSON

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3473894/posts

---

From bushwon:

Here is video by a CYBER-SECURITY EXPERT, who in addition to the FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai , security expert Frank Gaffney and foreign affairs expert Ambassador John Bolton are very concerned...No mention of new internet bringing it back, Trump stopping it...I posted numerous articles on their comments as well as phone numbers of people to lobby to stop this—do a search...

Watch:

Video below, this cyber security expert, Morgan Wright, on For the Record Thurs, Sept. 28, with Britt Hume...Morgan Wright, says after Oct. 1, there is no putting the toothpaste in the tube...Brave New World where we don’t know if the address entered is really where we are going...

Starting at 22 minute mark~about 4 minutes...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1jGZnDzr_4

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/09/28/fcc-commissioner-on-internet-oversight-switch-if-you-cherish-free-expression-you-should-be-worried-this-is-irreversible/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/09/28/frank-gaffney-obamas-attempt-slip-irreversible-internet-surrender-under-radar-three-days-fix-this/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://dailysignal.com/2016/09/15/us-has-duty-to-ensure-internet-freedom-cruz-says-at-hearing-on-obama-plan/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/white-house-transferring-internet-control-is-limited-government/article/2602610?custom_click=rss

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/09/obamas-key-internet-giveaway-advocate-cant-give-a-straight-answer-on-free-speech-concerns

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/09/22/john-bolton-within-ten-years-internet-know-will-end/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/21/donald-trump-comes-out-against-obamas-united-nations-internet-takeover/

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/technology/296840-changing-who-controls-icann-jeopardizes-our-presidential

[Freedom56v2]

Sorry, I am not going to debate this issue with you...the time for debate was prior to October 1.

I don’t know your expertise, but I have read so many articles on the subject and my common sense tells me that if Obama wants it, and Mr. Trump and Jim Robinson don’t, it is not a good idea to transfer control...

This article, as well as many others, supports the premise that it was a bad idea to transfer any type of control, and it will impact free speech cost, identity theft etc.

I suggest you look what I have posted below—Look at the second item..a video post by an expert. Look thru the other articles noting people such as Cruz, Trump, Bolton, Gaffney, etc. unequivocally stating that all aspects of internet control should remain here.

For anyone interested in actually reading up on the subject here are some articles~~Arthur Wildfire! March and other Freepers have posted many too:

The Westerner:

“GIVING AWAY CONTROL OF THE INTERNET OR ANY PART OF IT IS SHEER LUNACY”, JIM ROBINSON

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3473894/posts

From bushwon:

Here is video by a CYBER-SECURITY EXPERT, who in addition to the FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai , security expert Frank Gaffney and foreign affairs expert Ambassador John Bolton are very concerned...No mention of new internet bringing it back, Trump stopping it...I posted numerous articles on their comments as well as phone numbers of people to lobby to stop this—do a search...

Watch:

Video below, this cyber security expert, Morgan Wright, on For the Record Thurs, Sept. 28, with Britt Hume...Morgan Wright, says after Oct. 1, there is no putting the toothpaste in the tube...Brave New World where we don’t know if the address entered is really where we are going...

Starting at 22 minute mark~about 4 minutes...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1jGZnDzr_4

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/09/28/fcc-commissioner-on-internet-oversight-switch-if-you-cherish-free-expression-you-should-be-worried-this-is-irreversible/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/09/28/frank-gaffney-obamas-attempt-slip-irreversible-internet-surrender-under-radar-three-days-fix-this/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://dailysignal.com/2016/09/15/us-has-duty-to-ensure-internet-freedom-cruz-says-at-hearing-on-obama-plan/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/white-house-transferring-internet-control-is-limited-government/article/2602610?custom_click=rss

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/09/obamas-key-internet-giveaway-advocate-cant-give-a-straight-answer-on-free-speech-concerns

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/09/22/john-bolton-within-ten-years-internet-know-will-end/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/21/donald-trump-comes-out-against-obamas-united-nations-internet-takeover/

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/technology/296840-changing-who-controls-icann-jeopardizes-our-presidential

[Freedom56v2]

All your poptarts are belong to us!

---

Oh, and if they are online/on internet, they might be watching you...

Lighting, Dishwasher, Dryer, Clock Radio, Heat/AC, Security Alarm, Remote
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/household-products-spying/story?id=19974898

CIA Chief: We’ll Spy on You Through Your Dishwasher
https://www.wired.com/2012/03/petraeus-tv-remote/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/09/internet-of-things-smart-devices-spying-surveillance-us-government

[TheNext]

THE SKY IS FALLING

www.WebSite.com.TheNext
www.WebSite.org.TheNext

www.WebSite.com.inetBob
www.WebSite.com.inetTwo
www.WebSite.org.ManyInternets

There will just be many internets. Is is not a big problem. The UN Dictator will just own their own.

People will choose which internet they want.

It is good Obama sold the internet, because that highlighted the vulnerability. The solution will be Multi-Internet just like universes, Multi-verse.

No worries. :-)

[Freedom56v2]

Excellent Graphic!!

[shibumi]

"People will choose which internet they want."

I am opting for Necronet the internet of Underverse -

[Dallas59]

No debate but the internet as a whole can not be "controlled". It is a network of networks. Go back to the 50's or 60's with maBell phones. Did Bell own all the phones in the world? The phone company in Russia was connected to the phone company in China and China was connected to Australia and Australia was connected to India and India was connected to Russia and so on. They were networks connected to other networks. Russia could not control the US phones nor could the US control Chinese phones nor could the Chinese control India's phones. Same with the internet. China controls it's internet network same as the Russian control it's network but neither can control each others. The US can't control the internet and never could. ICANN can't control content of websites and never could. ICANN simply registers domain names (.org,.com,.whatever) Russia and China can certainly gripe about what is said about them on the net but they can do nothing. They simply have no control over another countries internet network and laws and never can. The only bad that can happen is a divided internet where you can't look at China's internet or China can't look at Russia's internet and both of those can't connect to the US.

There are representatives from 171 countries on ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) who advise ICANN’s 20-member board. And yes, this includes representatives from countries like Russia, China, and the U.K. and US But it’s important to note that ICANN cannot be easily swayed by the influence of a single or even multiple countries. Any recommendations made by the GAC must be unanimous—so if even one country objects to a proposed action, the recommendation will not be allowed to move forward.

Will the transition cause widespread internet censorship? ICANN is solely a technical administrator—and according to a public statement from ICANN the organization does not have the ability to regulate internet content in the first place.

And the fact remains that countries like Russia and China already impose internet censorship within their own borders—and that’s unlikely to change whether or not ICANN remains under U.S. authority. ICANN departing from American control does not mean it will fall under the rule of a different regime. It will be a fully independent company with no government control. ICANN will continue to operate its day-to-day functions (domain names) as usual, but as an entirely privatized entity that no longer reports to a governmental department.

[Freedom56v2]

With all due respect, did you read any of the articles I posted to you or any of Arthur Wildfire! March research? Both differ with your opinion...Sorry I disagree and so do many others.

[Freedom56v2]

Not sure what all you are exactly trying to say.

Assuming /sarc as none of the links work ;)

[Dallas59]

The US does not and has never controlled the internet, ICANN does not control the internet and never has. It is a network of networks.

The domain name system solely ensures that the domain names we use for websites and emails are globally consistent – if you type in an Iranian domain your browser knows where to find it. A lot of other aspects of Internet operations, such as routing, are completely separate from this. And generally, the internet consists of about 50,000 different private networks worldwide that use the Internet protocols to interconnect. All of them operate their own part of the Internet. All of them could bypass ICANN if they needed to or wanted to. Some do. They all use a common domain name root because it makes the system globally compatible.

ICANN officials have stressed, it doesn’t make sense to suggest a country controls the internet which is comprised of a set of privately operated networks which agree to exchange traffic using a common set of protocols. There is no central point of control of the internet at all. So, the idea that the U.S. is somehow giving up control through a contract that its entire purpose is to allow the administration of a set of identifiers is just sort of ludicrous. ICANN is not a governing body. The UN is not a governing body. ICANN is a large, professional corporation with more than 350 employees in seven offices around the globe. Global stakeholders, including U.S. businesses, end users, technical experts, public interest organizations and academics, oversee ICANN but not internet content.

[Freedom56v2]

With all due respect, I appreciate your reply, however, the articles to which I linked disagree with your conclusions...I am providing links...Where are yours assuring that there will be no changes when others are saying just the opposite? Frankly, no offense, but some of what you say sounds like it came off the ICANN website page...Why should I trust them? Again, read some my links and those by Arthur Wildfire! March.

You did not answer my question as to whether you read the links—I have a dozen threads under my name that basically refute what you are saying...I have a sneaking suspicion you did not read them as you did not reference them.

You know, just sayin’, but you are on the side of Obama, UN, Soros, and the Technocrats—Zuckerberg, Gates, Schmidt, et al. They really wanted this ICANN transfer just as they really want net neutrality too—do you? I pretty much know my position supports freedom, liberty, and national sovereignty when I am running against their grain...

As I stated a few posts ago, I did not want to debate this, and this has turned into a debate. I have a big problem with the transfer and obviously you are one who has no problem with it...My posting this thread was really a comment on the transfer taking place due to citizen inaction, a category into which you would obviously fall as you have no problem with it and actually seem to support...

I am sticking with the conclusions of the threads I posted which state the transfer is problematic for one reason or another.

BTW, I hope in 10 years, John Bolton, Frank Gaffney, and others are proven wrong and you are correct.

[humblegunner]

Too long, didn’t read.

Brevity is the soul of wit and I see you’re only halfway there.

[Freedom56v2]

Of course you wouldn’t...Like I care LOL

As I said, post really is for readers seeking to learn about the issue rather than post ignorant snarks.

[Freedom56v2]

Oh, and since you were so “helpful” to point out my not capitalizing “I,” let me share that you forgot a comma between 2 independent clauses joined by a conjunction...Just sayin’.

Cheers.

[humblegunner]

You are indeed helpful.

Now go back to saving the world.
They need you.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

‘The US does not and has never controlled the internet, ICANN does not control the internet and never has. It is a network of networks.’

First off, Dallas, you would need to believe that Senators Jeff Sessions, Grassly, and Mike Lee are fearmongers regarding ICANN. You would also have to call DONALD TRUMP a fearmonger on the issue.

And secondly: your claim is completely uninformed:

Registry Operator Code of Conduct.

The federal government had legislated ICANN to hold that legal power. But through their renewable contract they had authority to keep ICANN reined in. It was a rare success story in recent federal legislation — now expired thanks to uninformed opinions such as yours.

[Freedom56v2]

> “The biggest concern is that countries who don’t value internet freedom, who silence online speech and censor the web, will be able to directly shape internet policy,” Drew Johnson, national director of Protect Internet Freedom, told TheDCNF.

This was the goal all along. Some central authority controls it now. Who is the question though we can guess.

---

Had missed this post, but it is enlightening! Thanks for posting it.

Watched video at your source, Project Internet Freedom, very funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcYyK6MhIfM

Unfortunately, not sure how much success they are having with their efforts though...

https://www.protectinternetfreedom.com/our-team/