The UN strikes again...

Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
13,887
Likes
220
Location
Haverhill, MA
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
I'm listening to Laura Ingrahm. She's interviewing Sen. Norm Coleman who's saying that the UN <gag> wants to control the internet. They want to assume control over the internet - China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Cuba will be in charge of the operation.

WTF??? Anyone see anything on this? There's a UN meeting scheduled for the middle of November to discuss this.

Have I mentioned lately that I cannot stand the freeking UN??? [twisted] [twisted]
 
This proposal has been floating around for about a month or so. What the want is for the US to cede control over the Internet to the UN. The complaint, such as it is, is that the US might decide to cut off certain countries if the US decides it doesn't like them.

At least that's the public reason. Some think that giving the UN control over the Internet will allow certain "freedom loving countries" such as the ones you mention to shut down web sites they don't like and track down owners of those sites.

Right now Internet names and numbers are assigned by a private, US based organization. That would change under the UN proposal.

Of course, for this to happen, the US would have to agree. Fat. Chance.

This is the same UN that wants all countries to subordinate their firearms ownership laws to the UN's dream of disarming all civilians. Yeah, that works really well. Just ask the Bosnians, Sudanese, and other folks.

Gary
 
Thanks Gary - this was the first I heard about it. I know why they want to do it - $$'s. We already give them billions - guess it's not enough. Well, all I've got to say is that they can kiss my arse. Now to write some emails to elected asshats (like it will do any good [roll] ).
 
I'm not especially worried about the proposal. As I said, the US would have to agree to it and somehow I just don't see that happening.

Besides, the UN is going to have it's hands full with the Oil for Food scandal.

Gary
 
Garys said:
Besides, the UN is going to have it's hands full with the Oil for Food scandal.

The media has already swept that one under the rug [roll] . What Coleman said is that there isn't any guarentee that the US will refuse...I think...I was typing it in as I was listening to him. He either said that, or he was repeating what someone else was saying and I didn't catch who it was. I sincerely hope that the conservatives in both Houses tell the UN to stick it somewhere dark and uncomfortable.
 
The media may be sweeping it, but there have been several arrests in the US of UN diplomats that are alleged to be involved. There's some news, but you have to haunt the political blogs to find it.

Gary
 
Old topic same feelings I send them The D-Bomb. I think we should all make one of these
http://northeastshooters.com/viewto...0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=internet

derek said:
Moderator said:
Skald said:
Last I heard the gov't is developing Internet 2 (they made it faster, better, more reliable etc.).

I say when we get Net v. 2.0 up and running, we give them v1.0.

How bout we give the EU a big FU

I'm going to get so much millage out of this pic, I just love it.


To all my EU and UN fans.........

salute.jpg
 
Prob not so much a "power" thing as it is a $$$ maker for some of those pigs. Like the oil for food program, HA!
 
Lynne said:
Anyone got an email address for the UN? [lol] [lol] [lol]
(J/k - I don't have a phantom account)

Lynne, you can always create on on Yahoo or Hotmail, that's what spammers do.

HOWEVER, any posts can be traced back to your personal machine.

If this works, it should prove my point!

Gotcha02.jpg
 
LenS said:
Lynne said:
Anyone got an email address for the UN? [lol] [lol] [lol]
(J/k - I don't have a phantom account)

Lynne, you can always create on on Yahoo or Hotmail, that's what spammers do.

HOWEVER, any posts can be traced back to your personal machine.

If this works, it should prove my point!

Gotcha02.jpg

Very slick! Correct on all 4 counts.
 
"sincerely hope that the conservatives in both Houses tell the UN to stick it somewhere dark and uncomfortable." L.


Well, I would hope that you would at least allow the moderates in on that action too. :)

Anything can happen and virtually all things (within the physical laws of the known universe) are possible, but the U.N. taking over the Internet seems unlikely, if for no other reason, there are simply too many Internet Commerical endeavors that would not allow it to happen. The status quo is just fine for many.


The U.N. has evolved into something that the victorious allies of WWII never conceived of, and it is lamentable that the original vision of what the U.N. was supposed to be about has essentially failed. The one redeeming virture that it posesses, is that it does get the nations of the world together in one place to discuss things, and on occaission has done some good in the world, usually when the U.S. and the Brits support some operation.

Having said that, I will not give a goddam dime to the UNICEF trick or treaters tomorrow night. If any of those little gobblins come around with their UNICEF boxes, the're going to get the same mini-Snickers bar as any other trick or treater.

Regards,

Mark
 
mark056 said:
Having said that, I will not give a goddam dime to the UNICEF trick or treaters tomorrow night. If any of those little gobblins come around with their UNICEF boxes, the're going to get the same mini-Snickers bar as any other trick or treater.

I haven't given a cent to Unicef ever since they passed a resolution calling me a terrorist. (Zionist=Terrorist) somewhere back in the 70's I think it was.
 
I'm not a historical guru when it comes to the internet, however, am I correct in thinking it's an invention of the US? If that's the case, then the UN can kiss our collective arses. They can go find another "oil for food" type project to hijack.
 
Lynne said:
I'm not a historical guru when it comes to the internet, however, am I correct in thinking it's an invention of the US? If that's the case, then the UN can kiss our collective arses. They can go find another "oil for food" type project to hijack.

Yup, DARPAnet. Came about when DOD was trying to figure out a communications net that would survive a nuclear war.
 
Lynne said:
I'm not a historical guru when it comes to the internet, however, am I correct in thinking it's an invention of the US? If that's the case, then the UN can kiss our collective arses. They can go find another "oil for food" type project to hijack.
Al Gore was the one who invented it. [roll]
 
isnt the internet at its core a military infrastructure?
If not for that reason alone i would imagine we would never cede control.
In the internet we created the first truly seamless global marketplace injecting billions into the global economy, and this is our thanks..
 
dwarven1 said:
Lynne said:
I'm not a historical guru when it comes to the internet, however, am I correct in thinking it's an invention of the US? If that's the case, then the UN can kiss our collective arses. They can go find another "oil for food" type project to hijack.

Yup, DARPAnet. Came about when DOD was trying to figure out a communications net that would survive a nuclear war.

ARPAnet. They didn't start calling it DARPA until a few years later. IIRC there were about a dozen nodes wat the time we got on at RAND, including UCLA, SRI, UCSB, Univ of Utah, BBN and MIT. Unless my knowledge of geography is outdated, none of those are in EUnucostan. (We did let the Brits jack in a couple of years later.) I also seem to recall that Al Gore wasn't elected to congress for another 5 years or so.

Ken
 
KMaurer said:
dwarven1 said:
Lynne said:
I'm not a historical guru when it comes to the internet, however, am I correct in thinking it's an invention of the US? If that's the case, then the UN can kiss our collective arses. They can go find another "oil for food" type project to hijack.

Yup, DARPAnet. Came about when DOD was trying to figure out a communications net that would survive a nuclear war.

ARPAnet. They didn't start calling it DARPA until a few years later. IIRC there were about a dozen nodes wat the time we got on at RAND, including UCLA, SRI, UCSB, Univ of Utah, BBN and MIT. Unless my knowledge of geography is outdated, none of those are in EUnucostan. (We did let the Brits jack in a couple of years later.) I also seem to recall that Al Gore wasn't elected to congress for another 5 years or so.

Ken

Thanks for the history and the correction, Ken.

When were you at Rand? I have a friend who's been there for the last 10+ years.
 
dwarven1 said:
When were you at Rand? I have a friend who's been there for the last 10+ years.

I was at RAND from '69 to '74, left to teach for a few years, then came back to SDC, a spin-off from RAND from '79 to '85.

Ken
 
Back
Top Bottom