Internet Perceived As A Threat By Government(s)
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
Anytime people gather to discuss the shortcomings or “over comings” of their governments, those governments feel threatened.
In the world of the 21st century, the Internet is akin to a global town hall. And that makes the Internet a HUGE threat to governments, everywhere. They know it -- and they hate it.
Enter the UN.
“A gathering of United Nations diplomats overseas has some in the U.S. worried about a potential takeover of the Internet by foreign powers – with others claiming such fears are wildly over hyped.
The obscure branch of the U.N. at issue is the International Telecommunication Union, whose 193 member states include the U.S. and which was convening this week in Geneva. The ostensible purpose of the conference is to seek consensus for an updating of the last set of international telecom regulations, known as ITRs, which were issued in 1988.” (SOURCE)
Ok. So … why is this a concern? Well, let’s go back to the story from Fox News: “…Robert McDowell, a commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission, has been warning that the conference is a moment of great peril for industrialized and Third World countries alike. In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal and a subsequent interview with Fox Business, McDowell accused the so-called “BRIC” countries – Brazil, Russia, India, and China – and their allies among developing nations of trying to seize the moment to strengthen international regulation of the Internet. Such a development, McDowell claimed, would imperil the Web’s historic role as an outlet for free expression and economic growth.”
If you are thinking that the statement by the FCC commissioner is really mind-boggling coming, as it is, from a member of an agency of the Obama Regime, then don’t. Take a breath. You see, Commissioner McDowell is a George Bush appointee to the FCC.
Telecommunication Union spokesman Gary Fowlie, in an interview with Fox news said: “(International Telecommunication Union) members do not want heavy-handed regulation,” Fowlie went on to say: “There are no proposals on the table that would impact access to or freedom of the Internet." (SOURCE)
Danny Weitzner, deputy chief technology officer at the White House, is reported to have recently said: “This multi-stakeholder process -- the process that the Internet community has pioneered in many ways -- I think works based on the fact that people have things they need to do together,” he told the Brookings audience. “It doesn't really work when one people tells someone else what to do. That's kind of the Marx command-and-control model.” (SOURCE)
Look. It takes no stretch of the imagination to see where the UN is headed with all this. They want to control world wide instant communications between the people of the planet … period.
There was a time, and not so long ago, that in order for there to be a successful revolution or uprising of the people against their government, the rebels absolutely MUST take control of the country’s radio and TV stations. It remains a fact today, that for tinhorn dictators (who still dot the globe) control of broadcast stations and other means of communications -- including the Internet and the print media -- is imperative in order to maintain power over their people.
Just days ago, the world learned that Iran had simply turned off the Internet in that benighted country. I’m not a technician, so I don’t know how, exactly, you do that, but the mad mullahs of Iran do … and they’ve done it.
Here, in what used to be a free America, we know the government has access to every e-mail we send … not to mention our landline phone calls and our cell phones, as well. According to Col. Ollie North, the only communications the US government does not read are smoke signals.
The facts of the matter are plain. It is only a matter of time before there is worldwide regulation of the Internet. The governments of the world, both good and bad, simply cannot allow people all over the globe to communicate with each other at will. It is far too dangerous to their hold over us. The Internet must be regulated to protect THEM. It is the same principle as dispersing a crowd of people to avoid a riot.
I submit that if Thomas Paine and Samuel Adams were alive today, they would be burning the Internet up with their rabble-rousing commentaries. Just as their fiery tomes led to the revolt against Great Britain by her colonies in America, other commentators around the globe are having similar effects upon THEIR totalitarian governments. THAT is a THREAT and it cannot be allowed to continue.
Sooner, or later, the Internet will be regulated and governed by a single international entity. Bet on it.
J. D. Longstreet