Posted on

TRUMP OPPOSES PRESIDENT OBAMA’S PLAN TO SURRENDER AMERICAN INTERNET CONTROL TO FOREIGN POWERS

-donald-trump-candidacy-speech-thridgewoodblog

September 22,2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, Presidential candidate Donald Trump opposes President Obama’s plan to cede control of the internet .

“Donald J. Trump is committed to preserving Internet freedom for the American people and citizens all over the world. The U.S. should not turn control of the Internet over to the United Nations and the international community. President Obama intends to do so on his own authority – just 10 days from now, on October 1st, unless Congress acts quickly to stop him. The Republicans in Congress are admirably leading a fight to save the Internet this week, and need all the help the American people can give them to be successful. Hillary Clinton’s Democrats are refusing to protect the American people by not protecting the Internet.

The U.S. created, developed and expanded the Internet across the globe. U.S. oversight has kept the Internet free and open without government censorship – a fundamental American value rooted in our Constitution’s Free Speech clause. Internet freedom is now at risk with the President’s intent to cede control to international interests, including countries like China and Russia, which have a long track record of trying to impose online censorship. Congress needs to act, or Internet freedom will be lost for good, since there will be no way to make it great again once it is lost.” – Stephen Miller, National Policy Director

5 thoughts on “TRUMP OPPOSES PRESIDENT OBAMA’S PLAN TO SURRENDER AMERICAN INTERNET CONTROL TO FOREIGN POWERS

  1. The US created the Internet and it expanded around the world. We seeded it and it grew.

    The infrastructure of ISPs, routers and telecommunication lines was done by businesses and governments around the world. The means of adding domains to the Internet is overseen by ICANN, an international consortium.

    We started it but we do not have control.

    If we do somehow have control, why does ISIS heve recruiting websites and access. Why didn’t we throw them off of our Internet? Why don’t we stop Russia from hacking us on our Internet?

    It belongs to everyone and it is out of control.

  2. This is a misleading headline.
    1) We are NOT giving up control of the Internet. We are joining other nations in using a standard protocol to establish a uniform naming convention for internet sites, or DNS. This will help prevent authoritarian countries from exerting too much influence over the Internet by putting control of key Internet domain name functions in the hands of the global community of Internet stakeholders — specifically industry, technical experts, and civil society — instead of an intergovernmental organization
    2) This was proposed by a bipartisan group of engineers and tecnologists – not Obama. This group has made it clear that we will not accept a proposal that replaces its role with a government or intergovernmental organization.

  3. Misleading is what some people do best.

  4. Re: “The means of adding domains to the Internet is overseen by ICANN, an international consortium.
    We started it but we do not have control. “

    Yes and no…. mostly no.

    The USA controls Internet domain name functions but contracts out ($0 contract) to ICANN the actual management.
    So, yes, ICANN currently “oversees” this important (and very specific and limited) function, but it is “overseen” by the USA – the owner/controlling entity.

    The current system allows the USA to maintain control on the scope and mission of ICANN – restricted to Internet Domain Name functions. It is also able to make changes to improve domain name functions and restrict ICANN from increasing its influence and scope over this crucial part of the internet (and restricting ICANN from getting control over other parts of the internet).
    .
    By handing over control of domain name functions fully to ICANN and “converting” control of ICANN to multi-national stakeholders you introduce multiple problems:
    a) very real possibility of politicization of a non-political function
    b) “groups” (i.e. multi-national) inherently argue and consensus based management does not always produce the best solution
    c) ICANN will want to flex its muscles and increase its mission and scope of control over the internet
    This has already started. the “new” ICANN proposal has a vague (able to be broadly interpreted) “commitment to internationally recognized human rights”. Just what exactly does this have to do with the ICANNs traditionally technical mission and how will this “commitment” be implemented. Strap yourself in – this is just the beginning of the ICANNs power grab.
    The proposal also changes the “Government Advisory Committee (GAC)” – which will become multi-national – such that it will have direct (not just advisory) participation in ICANNs operations. Under the “new” ICANN MUST implement GAC proposals that are unanimously agreed to by the board. – That’s a lot of power and power that most (all??) advisory boards do not have.
    .
    So…
    USA giving control of DNS to a new multi-national ICANN WILL change the power, scope and mission of ICANN and will generally have a negative impact on the USA with regards to the internet – an area of national security, commerce and communication.
    .
    Ironically, “giving control of the internet to the world to make it more free since it belongs to everyone” will result in a more restrictive internet.

  5. 10:23 (“this is a misleading headline….”
    .
    1) Not true
    – We ARE giving up control of the internet (the DNS system).
    The USA “owns” the DNS functionality. It contracts the ICANN to implement these functions (according to the USAs directives) – we are giving up that ownership.
    After the change the ICANN will be its own organization.
    – The new ICANN (by its new charter) will be “ruled / run” by a more powerful multi-national Government Advisory Committee – those are the “global community of internet stakeholders” — NOT ” industry, technical experts”, and “civil society” (whatever that is).
    There currently is an (old) Government Advisory committee (multi-national) but it is purely ADVISORY.
    .
    BTW, we already use “a standard protocol to establish a uniform naming convention for internet sites, or DNS.”
    .
    2) true, but Obama understands that this change will result in LESS control by the USA and will weaken us and will be a useful organization to reduce USAs power in the world and help usher in Obama’s promised “fundamental change in America”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.