URGENT REPORT Obama - ICANN - Internet Free Speech Switch Will Be Turned OFF October 1st 2016
Jimstone.is | Sep 29 2016
The details are surprising; this is one report you really should read.
I have discovered a lot over the last week, and it is a huge topic. How do I start? I guess I could start by saying that ICANN does not have control over the entire internet. They have control over approximately 95 percent of it, but if people are made aware ahead of time, the remaining 5 percent could provide the spark that brings it all back to life. And as luck would have it, ICANN HAS ZERO JURISDICTION IN ICELAND.
Iceland is an island more than geographically; they are an island when it comes to the internet as well. And if you look for a website that has a .is extension in the ICANN database, it will not show up. I just discovered this yesterday. I was at first scared, thinking they were going to flip the switch because my own website was not even listed there; but as it turns out, if you go to the actual ICANN website itself, their search tool of ICANN registered websites has nothing from Iceland in it AT ALL. ICELAND IS A SAFE HAVEN FROM SHUTDOWN FOR AS LONG AS THEIR OWN DOMAIN MANAGEMENT PEOPLE REMAIN GOOD.
BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE! This screen capture below says it all!
At present, Alex has this redirected back to a spot on the main Infowars server because he does not want to maintain two servers, but he will quickly learn if he goes down to put something at the root .tv location (the way it was a while ago).
Keep in mind that if you search for a website with anything other than ICANN's own tool, it will show up. Obviously, prisonplanet.tv will show up in a domain search anywhere anyone actually registers domains. People who register domains have to have searches which include the entire internet. Prior to yesterday, I did not know the internet had various jurisdictions and that ICANN did not control it all. I am sure that will be an eye-opener for more than just me.
What websites could go down after the ICANN handover? Anything that has a .com extension, a .net extension, a .org extension, .gov – basically the web as people know it can be shut down.
Drudgereport.com can be shut down.
Infowars.com can be shut down.
Breitbart.com can be shut down.
Rense, Icke, Stormfront, whatreallyhappened, investmentwatch and others can be shut down.
There are scant few people on the web that had the foresight to protect themselves from an internet takedown, and Alex Jones is one of them.
What will happen if ICANN goes rogue? The truth movement will get smashed hard enough to allow a theft of the election to go mostly unreported. The timing is beauty. It sure looks like a plot. But will ICANN really go rogue on day one? Don't bet on it, because they don't want a rebellion. Emergency backups that are sufficient to save it all are in place. Screwing with the web will be a risky endeavor. Only the worst of desperation would be enough to trigger a widespread shutdown.
Do I feel comfortable? HELL NO! Half of what was sent in donations over this issue is already spent, and the balance will also be spent on this, even with the good news.
Because even if ICANN does not take action over the portion of the web they do not control immediately, you can safely bet that they will have their fingers into everything eventually, and absolutely will have the world in their death grip eventually. The only thing I am going to change about my tactics is that I am dropping it to 4 servers on 3 hosts instead of 5 servers, with 10 (or so) domains paid out for three or four years, and – rather than spend on server time in additional locations – will instead extend the life of a couple of domains out to 10 full years. That is what common sense says should be done, because if new rules go into place that make it too difficult to renew an existing domain, or register a new one, a 10-year lifespan on an unused reserve domain set up TODAY could be an absolute godsend.
HERE IS MY ICANN ADVICE: IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING UNDER ICANN JURISDICTION, IF YOU ARE A .COM, IT WOULD BE BRAINLESS OF YOU TO NOT SPEND $150 RIGHT NOW FOR YOUR ONE DOMAIN TO BE EXTENDED FOR A DECADE. YOU HAD BETTER DO IT NOW.
If your entire lifeboat consists of one domain (which in my opinion is rock stupid), you had better patch the hull because there is a hurricane in the forecast.
SR 1144 – On Oct 1, Obama Will Illegally Give Up Control of the Internet - ICANN - NTIA
URGENT !!! FINAL Day Of FREE SPEECH Over The INTERNET - Four States Sue Obama Over #ICANN Deal
SR#1210 – 6 Days Until Internet D-Day? Obama Gives Away Control & Oversight - IANA - ICANN
US prepares to cede key role for internet
Rob Lever • September 29, 2016
When an agreement with the US Commerce Department runs out, ICANN will become a self-regulating non-profit international entity (AFP Photo/Andrew Cowie)
Washington (AFP) - The US government is set to cut the final thread of its oversight of the internet, yielding a largely symbolic but nevertheless significant role over the online address system.
Barring any last-minute glitches, the transition will occur at midnight Friday (0400 GMT Saturday), when the US contract expires for the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which manages the internet's so-called "root zone."
When the agreement with the US Commerce Department runs out, ICANN will become a self-regulating non-profit international entity managing the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, the system for online "domains" such as .com.
US and ICANN officials say the change is part of a longstanding plan to "privatize" those functions, but some critics complain about a "giveaway" that could threaten the internet's integrity.
Christopher Mondini, ICANN's vice president for global business engagement, said the change will have no impact on day-to-day internet use, and will assure the global community that the system is free from government regulation and interference.
"This is a new kind of governance model," he told AFP.
The system will be managed through a "multistakeholder" model in which engineers, businesses, non-government groups and government bodies serve as checks against any single entity.
If any of the groups that make up ICANN see the organization veering away from its mission, Mondini said, "they can initiate measures to self-correct."
- 'Byzantine' structure -
Some US lawmakers who see risks with the model have sought to stop the transition, arguing it would allow authoritarian regimes to have greater control over the internet.
Republican Senator Ted Cruz has been seeking to block what he calls a "radical" plan to give away control of the internet.
ICANN "is not a democratic body," Cruz told a hearing earlier this month.
"It is a corporation with a Byzantine governing structure designed to blur lines of accountability that is run by global bureaucrats who are supposedly accountable to the technocrats, to multinational corporations, to governments, including some of the most oppressive regimes in the world like China, Iran, and Russia."
Heritage Foundation president Jim DeMint echoed that sentiment, saying in a tweet that President Barack Obama "wants to cede US control of our free, secure internet to foreign regimes who don't value freedom of speech."
- 'Strengthening' internet -
Supporters of the plan counter that critics' harsh rhetoric fails to recognize how the internet has functioned and thrived over the years.
"This transition has been built upon a bipartisan consensus for almost 20 years through multiple administrations," said Kathryn Brown, president of the Internet Society, which was created by some of the internet's founders.
"The transition will further strengthen the internet as a stable, resilient and secure tool for empowering billions of people across the globe for decades to come."
Google senior vice president Kent Walker also endorsed the shift, saying it would "fulfill a promise the United States made almost two decades ago: that the internet could and should be governed by everyone with a stake in its continued growth."
Six Democratic US lawmakers meanwhile warned of the dangers if Washington fails to follow through on its pledge to disengage.
"The internet belongs to the world, not to Ted Cruz," Senators Brian Schatz and Chris Coons, and Representatives Anna Eshoo, Doris Matsui, Frank Pallone and Mike Doyle said in an article for the TechCrunch news site.
"If the Republicans successfully delay the transition, America's enemies are sure to pounce. Russia and its allies could push to shift control of the internet's core functions to a government body like the UN where they have more influence."
Any delay could fuel interest in a rival numbering system that could fragment the internet into possibly unconnected networks, they added.
Cruz and his allies have unsuccessfully sought to attach an amendment to a government funding bill aimed at halting the transition.
The transition should go forward even if it is "imperfect," said Daniel Castro, vice president at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.
"US government interference at this point would undermine global consensus and reduce confidence in the multistakeholder model at a time when these attributes are needed most," he said in a blog post.
The transition "marks a key 'constitutional moment' for internet governance," he added, "and the United States should ensure it is on the right side of history."
Do we want U.N. to control Internet?
Phyllis Schlafly | 04/07/2014
U.S. control of the Internet's basic functions has kept the Web free for Americans and for the entire world. And it's up to us to keep it that way.
As Ronald Reagan said during the great Panama Canal controversy in the mid-1970s, "We bought it. We built it. We paid for it. We intend to keep it."
Within two years after the U.S. Senate ratified the treaty to give away our canal, angry voters defeated two dozen senators who voted for that treaty and induced eight more to retire. Reagan's triumphant 1980 victory over both the Democrats and the Republican establishment included the support of a new Republican Senate.
Where is the Republican leader who is smart enough to follow Reagan's example and thereby pave a route to the White House? Where is a leader who will protect and defend America's control of the Web, which is such a prime example of America's technological exceptionalism?
President Obama tried to hide the news of his abandonment of our control of the Internet by having an assistant secretary in the Department of Commerce issue a low-key press release in those late Friday afternoon hours where embarrassing news is often buried. Was this an April Fools joke?
The U.S. created the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and has kept control over the technical procedures that allow computers around the world to connect to Web addresses. ICANN has managed the Internet's Domain Name System since 1998, ensuring that the Internet runs efficiently without political pressure from any country.
Now the Obama Commerce Department wants to give ICANN away and even invite Communist China and Russia to help us police the Internet. That's like telling the fox to guard the chicken coop because those countries don't believe in free speech and don't even allow their own people to have free access to the Internet.
That could be the most dangerous use yet of Obama's now-famous pen. It's also a great opportunity for some Republican to stand up for America like Reagan did, and reap the political reward.
There has to be political capital lurking in a pro-America policy position that is already espoused by the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, the Heritage Foundation and Bill Clinton. Clinton warns that other countries "have been trying to take this authority from the U.S. for the sole purpose of cracking down on Internet freedom and limiting it and having governments protect their backsides instead of empowering their people."
Pundits can debate whether Obama had the constitutional right to give away our Internet power with the stroke of his pen, but there's no question about the constitutional authority of Congress to veto what he did because the Constitution plainly gives the Commerce power to Congress.
Unfortunately, giving away the Internet is another key part of Barack Obama's plan to diminish America's power and prestige in the world. He wants to spread around world power to our enemies as well as our friends, just as he seeks to spread the wealth around in our country.
Obama's defenders argue that his action is just part of a plan to support the "multi-stakeholder" model of Internet governance. That's a buzzword to conceal the the transfer of real control of the Web to many countries, companies, U.N. and globalist groups, none of which respect our First Amendment right.
Rep. Anna Eshoo, the top Democrat on the House Communications and Technology Subcommittee, said, "While the Internet was a product of American genius, no government or intergovernmental organization should control its future." What nonsense! Of course America should control the valuable property we built!
Some Democrats are whining that "stakeholders deserve" a voice and a role in the governance of the Internet. No, they don't. We built it; it's ours. And all stakeholders and countries are better off if the U.S. controls the Web rather than foreign or United Nations globalists who did nothing to build the Internet into such a valuable asset.
Among the many deceitful arguments used by the globalists is that taking the Internet away from the U.S. will advance us toward a goal of "no government control of the Internet." If the United States doesn't keep control of what we invented, the Internet will end up under Chinese or U.N. control.
And one more problem: For years the U.N. has searched for devious ways to tax individuals. Turning the ICANN domain-name system over to a bunch of global bureaucrats who did nothing to develop the Internet would give them an assortment of new ways to tax us.
Why you should be against the ICANN handover
Hours left before Obama's Internet giveaway 'irreversible'