USA INTERNET SURRENDER DAYS AWAY... Why is there not outrage???

[OKCHunter]

It's Dec 31st, 1999, too. I'm just not seeing THAT much control from domain name registration, and I don't see the US standing by and letting someone do those kinds of things. I could be wrong, but oh well. We'll see when it all comes crashing down, I guess, won't we?

I hear you but why would we give up any advantage we have?

 

[tRidiot]

Well, there is the whole "being part of a global community" trying to foster goodwill and cooperation thing. I don't know 100% the ramifications, personally. But we will see.

 

[davek]

A little action?
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.go...mplaint_-_FILED.pdf?cachebuster:77=&utm_name=

 

[_CY_]

A little action?
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/files/epress/Net_Complaint_-_FILED.pdf?cachebuster:77=&utm_name=

about time!

=======

State AGs sue to stop Obama's internet transition
09/29/16 09:49 AM EDT

Four Republican state attorneys general are suing to stop the Obama administration from transferring oversight of the internet to an international body, arguing the transition would violate the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit — filed Wednesday in a Texas federal court — threatens to throw up a new roadblock to one of the White House’s top tech priorities, just days before the scheduled Oct. 1 transfer of the internet’s address system is set to take place.

In their lawsuit, the attorneys general for Arizona, Oklahoma, Nevada and Texas contend that the transition, lacking congressional approval, amounts to an illegal giveaway of U.S. government property. They also express fear that the proposed new steward of the system, a nonprofit known as ICANN, would be so unchecked that it could “effectively enable or prohibit speech on the Internet.”

The four states further contend that ICANN could revoke the U.S. government’s exclusive use of .gov and .mil, the domains used by states, federal agencies and the U.S. military for their websites. And the four attorneys general argue that ICANN’s “current practices often foster a lack of transparency that, in turn, allows illegal activity to occur.”

“Trusting authoritarian regimes to ensure the continued freedom of the internet is lunacy,” said Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in a statement. “The president does not have the authority to simply give away America’s pioneering role in ensuring that the internet remains a place where free expression can flourish.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/state-ags-sue-to-stop-internet-transition-228893

 

[Podman]

Obummer will just use an executive order to do it if somehow it gets shot down.

 

[_CY_]

Meet the New Authoritarian Masters of the Internet

 

[mr ed]

maybe they will limit liberal viewpoints and increase porn!

 

[John6185]

What advantage is it to The United States if the Internet is "given away?" Obama has done a lot of things that haven't been advantageous to this country and little has been done to check him. It is past time that these intuitive politicians nesting in Washington do things that are of a positive nature for this country!

 

[Blakew]

just another step closer to a totalitarian government that rules the world with food stamps and free cell phones. Not me! i have a foil hat and can survive (country boy) in the woods. No one in our governemt will put a stop to the nato agenda I assume because RUN THIS COUNTRY!

 

[Blakew]

INTERNET MATTERS!