November 16, 2005
Internet Gets Eleventh-Hour "Call from the Governor..."
Recalcitrant blogger checking in with an exciting tidbit for internet denizens:
This is great news; a stay of execution, of sorts. While I am thrilled to hear that the United States will retain "control" over the internet's addressing system - for now - I blanch at the thought that an idea of giving the shit to the United Nations ever even made it on to the table in the first place. What the fuck? Somebody actually thought it might be a worthwhile avenue of exploration, leaving the ultimate control of the internet to nations like Cuba and North Korea and China and Iran, those fucking bastions of intellectual and political freedom? I mean, seriously. Hell, the fact that the United Nations is holding this "Internet Summit" in Tunisia is a statement in itself. Tunisia's, like, the second most internet-censored nation on earth, after China, or something. No, really. Look it up if you don't believe me. Google "tunisia internet". It's chilling.
So, no offense, but if you're reading this from Cuba or North Korea or China or Iran, I'd like you to know that your governments are fucked and I have no desire to have them at the reins of my World Wide Web. If you don't like it, build your own. Or man up and overthrow, my international governmentally and/or ecumenically oppressed-and-bethugged homiez. But...oh, wait. That's right...if you're there, in Cuba or North Korea or China or Iran or, well, Tunisia, then I'm pretty sure you're not up in here, either, thanks to your government's policies on information and the internet! Which leads me back to the original thank you, Jesus moment. It would be idiotic, potentially disastrous, and just downright fucking stupid to put the Internet's addressing system in the hands of the United Nations. Why we were even considering it simply dumbfounds me. Fidel, Jong-Il, telling you what you can and can't read? Wen Jiabao controlling what you buy and sell? Some fucking mullah on your mouse, fatwaing your sorry ass for surfing the nasty?
I get the shivers just thinking about it.
The mere thought that such a clusterfuck organization like the UN would be considering the idea of controling the free flow of information worldwide should cause rational people everywhere to shudder with apprehension that they ever could.Posted by: Gmac on November 16, 2005 09:28 PM
I'd rather have Al Sharpton control Federal Discretionary Spending.Posted by: rightisright on November 16, 2005 09:35 PM
I wouldn't let the UN be in charge of licking my asshole clean after a spastic, drunken, prune-burrito dump. With an Ex-Lax chaser.
Those wet ends would not only fuck up a wet dream, they would make it international law that you couldn't even have wet dreams, and then accept bribes for allowing you to cum in your own shorts, and then sell those shorts to NAMBLA as Cum Roll-ups.Posted by: Bane on November 17, 2005 01:44 AM
What? I thought Al Sharpton did control Federal Discretionary Spending! Sure as hell looks like it.
Koffing Anus at the helm of the WWW? How precious and internationalist. Next Dem prez and we're probably screwed.Posted by: Bogdaddy on November 17, 2005 07:24 AM
We invented it, we paid for it, so fuck'em.Posted by: maggot on November 17, 2005 11:46 AM
Here, here, maggot. I'm with you...it belongs to the American taxpayer.
Not the US government.
I vote NO ......keep your damn EU/UN hands off MY PROPERTY.
1. You are incapable of running your own countries...n'est pas, France.
2. You can't even agree on a EU constitution.
3. The Third World .. well, is the Third World, need I say more?
4. It takes the UN months to decide on the wording of a simple statement..albeit a statement that does nothing...just offers an opinion.
5. The whole world fucking hates us...and I hate you back!
WRITE YOUR SENATORS TODAY TO KEEP THEIR BLOODY HANDS OF THE INTERNET AND IN THE CONTROL OF ICANN.
PERIOD.Posted by: Maggie on November 17, 2005 11:58 AM
As far as I know, nobody in the US wants to give up control of the root servers. Well, nobody's willing to say it in public, anyway.
No, this is a power grab by the UN, wanting to TAKE the servers.
Just wanted to clarify that.Posted by: Rick C on November 17, 2005 01:54 PM
Rick C, the following is a list of World Heritage sites that our government has turned over to the new world order to
Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and
Personally, I'd rather be pro-active rather than reactive in defending what belongs to the American People.Posted by: Maggie on November 17, 2005 02:12 PM
Well, the idea of giving control to the UN never did make it on the table.
The UN wanted to take control (or more accurately, I guess, ask really really insistently for us to hand it over); but AFAIK the US never even considered letting them.
There's no way we can really stop the UN from wanting to try and demand control over the interwebs. We can, however, simply not give it to them, which seems to be the likely outcome of any future demands - and for the best, too.Posted by: Sigivald on November 17, 2005 03:34 PM
It was mostly spin from the media. Went something like this:
UN: Give us control of the internet!
UN: Pretty please?
UN: We'll build our own and break everything!
UN: But breaking everything would be bad.
Tellem fuckem, the weasels.
The UN power pimps know that the worldwide free interchange of ideas and the ability to look through the windows at free world societies is the end of their money grubbing power hungry asses.Posted by: Henry Blowfly on November 17, 2005 10:22 PM
For funny if it weren't true look at the Tunisian conference check:
An excellent blog, and this is a scary storyPosted by: Chris on November 18, 2005 08:11 AM
Wow - there truely is a lot of hatred in the US right now reading your comments.Posted by: D on November 18, 2005 06:04 PM
Post a comment
All content © Rob Smith