Wednesday, October 05, 2005

The U.N.ternet...

How would you like it if you logged on to Blogger.com to write a post about some political subject, only to find out ( the hard way...) that writing about the subject that you chose was illegal?

How about if you logged onto the Internet to learn about a particular subject, and discovered that not only was access to that particular piece of information restricted, but that interest in it was against the law, and was a punishable offense?

Is this an impossible scenario?

The U.N. and the E.U. has begun to challenge the U.S. for our right to administer the Internet.

The U.S. does not really administer the internet.

"The origins of the Internet lie largely within the U.S. government, with concepts of network communication emerging in the 1970s from research at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA,) an arm of the Defense Department, along with a handful of other institutions and researchers.
Sometimes called an Internetting project - it was intended to create links among computer networks - the result became known as the Internet. For the system to function, a master list was needed to direct data to the correct destination.
Until now, the task of maintaining this master list has been overseen by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, known as Icann, a nonprofit organization based in Marina del Rey, California, that was founded on a contract from the U.S. Commerce Department."
(International Herald Tribune / Technology.)

The Internet was created by the U.S. Department of Defense, (not Al Gore...) and is now maintained by a non profit corporation called ICANN, which is supported by the U.S. Commerce Department.

Not controlled, supported.

From howstuffworks.com: (One of my personal favorite websites...)

"One of the greatest things about the Internet is that nobody really owns it. It is a global collection of networks, both big and small. These networks connect together in many different ways to form the single entity that we know as the Internet. In fact, the very name comes from this idea of interconnected networks."

Nobody owns the Internet. Nobody controls the Internet.

Not yet.

This would be a new situation, should it come to pass. The Internet works the way it works because it is a system of computers and servers that routes information to the proper destinations, without political bias.

Until this point in time, anybody, anywhere (except China...), can log onto the Internet, and learn about any subject, or say anything that they want.

One of the first things that despotic, repressive regimes do when they come to power is, they take over the Newspapers and the Television Stations. They try to control public opinion through propaganda, and restricted access to truth.

The U.N. and the E.U. want to CONTROL the Internet.

I hope that our Government will have the intestinal fortitude to tell the U.N. and the E.U. to go jump.

But if they don't, I will keep on blogging until the Goons come to take me off to the plastic shredder.

See you guys there...

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

The histories that matter: Teen girl activities: Facebook, LiveJournal, and Hot or Not
Despite the fact that I am not a teen girl, I have to admit that I do have accounts on all of these sites: Facebook, LiveJournal, and Hot or Not.
Hi, I was just blog surfing and found you! If you are interested, go see my casino related site. It isnt anything special but you may still find something of interest.

tugboatcapn said...

Well, Anonymous, I am not a Teen girl either, although I used to own one.

I have absolutely no interest in your Casino related site, however, if you know of a Teen Girl related site, I might check it out.

Thanks for spamming my blog!!

-Tug.

rich bachelor said...

Yeah anony, always glad to hear your thoughts.
That's a strange one, Cap'n. I always thought that the internet was maintained and administered by the industry, and thought that governments had nothing to do with it.
Sheesh. This could be bad.

Erudite Redneck said...

UN HQ off this continent. US out of the UN.

--ER

Erudite Redneck said...

But dang it, y'all need to get off Gore's buttocks:

From From: http://www.redrat.net/gorebush/gore_net.htm:

That Al Gore, he's quite a character, claiming that he invented the Internet, isn't he? It's an urban legend, but not the way you might guess. He never said it. Not only that, but he has every right to brag about his role in legislating the development of the Internet.
According to the Republican National Committee attack ad, Gore's claim is yet another deplorable example of his shifty character. To the pundits, the TV spot means George Bush Jr. can't run a clean campaign.

When it comes to Al Gore and the Internet, however, the GOP commercial is 100% horse puckey. He's the guy who did the most to put the Web on your kitchen table.

Gore never claimed that he invented the Internet. He said, "During my service in the U.S. Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." This just happens to be absolutely true. When most politicians still thought a byte was an example of how Johnny couldn't spell, Al Gore already had a complete vision of computers connecting to computers for the benefit of mankind.

In March, 1986, he sponsored the Supercomputer Network Study Act, a plan to figure out how to get the nation's silicon resources linked to the nation's public information needs.

"Libraries, rural schools, minority institutions and vocational education programs will have access to the same national resources -- databases, supercomputers, accelerators -- as more affluent and better-known institutions," he said, according to New York Daily News columnist Lars Erik Nelson, who examined the controversy earlier this year.

At the time, what is now the Internet had only just begun to evolve from a Defense Department project called Arpanet, started in 1969 to try to make sure key computer installations would function even after a nuclear attack. By 1986, access to the network was mostly limited to government facilities and academic institutions -- some 5,000 computer hosts in all.

"Back in the '80s, Mr. Gore was the only national political figure who understood what the Internet could mean to America's future...when Apple still didn't even have e-mail," wrote Internet pioneer Jaron Lanier (who invented the term "virtual reality") in a letter published in the Washington Post April 21, 1999.

In 1991, then-Senator Gore introduced the High Performance Computing Act. Reluctantly signed into law by President Bush, who favored a more gradual approach, Gore's bill made about $2 billion of government money available for development of the Internet. Since then, the Internet has grown from 376,000 hosts to more than 72 million as a direct result of Al Gore's visionary legislation.

The very term "information superhighway" first came to public notice in the writings of Al Gore. "He deserves bragging rights," Lanier concluded.

Despite this very well-documented history, news reports fail to mention that the Bush commercial is a fake, just like so many other stories that portray the Vice President as self-invented.

Gore never said that he and Tipper were models for the main characters in Eric Segal's novel Love Story. He referred to an article in The Tennessean attributing the statement to Segal -- erroneously, as it turned out. Then Segal confirmed that he did draw on Gore for a principal character. Still the story refuses to die.

Gore never claimed that he discovered the Love Island disaster. The story was faked in a press release widely distributed by the Republican National Committee.

Robert Parry explained in Washington Monthly that Gore told a group of Concord, N.H., high school students that a girl from Toone, Tenn., had complained to him about toxic waste pollution. He investigated, held Congressional hearings, looked for other examples and came up with Love Canal.

Toone "was the one that started it all," Gore said. The GOP changed this to "I started it all." Unscrupulous right wing publications such as the Washington Times and the New York Post picked this up, and national media called Gore "delusional" "a liar," "Pinocchio," Parry says.

David Letterman jumped in with "Top 10 Achievements Claimed by Al Gore." The Concord kids, outraged by the way Gore's remarks were twisted, issued their own press release: "Top 10 Reasons Why Many Concord High Students Feel Betrayed by Some of the Media Coverage of Al Gore's Visit to Their School."

Oh, sure, those naughty Republicans are playing dirty by making personal attacks. That's a story. But it's a fact that Gore didn't lie at all, and that the ridicule is based on false reports spread by the Republican National Committee and its gullible media allies.


-- JULES SIEGEL Apdo 1764 Cancun Q. Roo 77501 http://www.cafecancun.com Fax1.530.706.8739 Tel 1-52-98 83-36-29

rich bachelor said...

Well hell, I was gonna say it, but you just got there first, didn't you?
Wonder if Maness is gonna hear that one.

Toad734 said...

They have every right to "build their own internet", right?

That would be like us saying we want to own somoene elses oil supply because it's not fair that they might sell it to someone else.

Oh wait, I guess we already do that.

alaletos said...

Thats scary like "1984,Revalatio, end times, stopping of free thought" kinda stuff.

It would take them a while to take us all away to the shredder. So, Even though none of my posts deal with topics that might be considered "classified" YET(note the yet.) cuz I dont really talk to much politics.

back to the yet. If they take our freedom to discuss such things, then whats next. Religion,one world currency.......etc. Like i said end times kinda stuff.

Even though the comment by "the press" wa very informative and well spoken. He kinda missed the point of the post. The purpose of this post wasnt to bash Gore, But to discuss that they might try to take away our freedom to bash Gore.

later.

tugboatcapn said...

Thanks for pointing that out, AJ.

That's exactly what I was going to say to ER, but since you beat me to it, I will say this instead.

ER, I'll bet that Dan Quayle can spell "potato" if it isn't mis-spelled on a card in his hand.

I'll even bet that President Bushwas not so totally engrossed in the book "My Pet Goat," that he could not possibly tear himself away from it to go and deal with the 9/11 tragedy. Perhaps he did not want to traumatize the children to whom he was reading?
It ain't like he was supposed to drive one of the Fire trucks or nothin'...

I love the timing of this particular discussion about Al Gore.
You must have written it before he opened his mouth and displayed his ignorance before the Media Conferrence...

Erudite Redneck said...

Oh, come on. justlikehim, if the rule was ever "stick to the exact topic of the post," the entire Blog-comment-industrial-complex would plumb collapse!

If I thought that the 'Net could be controlled, I'd be worried. But I don't, so I'm not.

Truth will out. So will bulls--t, actually. But truth will out. :-)

Hell's bell's, the dadgum VCR precipitated freedom in eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union! And the dang tapes and players weren't even connected!

Pity da fool dat tries to rein in the 'Net. China will find out.

:-)

--ER

tugboatcapn said...

Toad, you get a special comment all your own!

If you REALLY believe that President Bush started the war with Saddam Hussein just to get Iraq's oil, then I will point out to you that you, and everyone else who has voted for Democrats for the last 40 years, owe the people of America and the people of Iraq a HUGE apology.

It is YOUR side who will not get out of the way and let the U.S. drill for our OWN DOMESTIC supplies of oil.

It is YOUR side who will not get out of the way and let us build new refineries.

It is YOUR side who will not get out of the way and let us build "Nukular" power plants.

So if we are now forced to start taking over small, helpless, innocent Countries in order to apropriate their oil, then it is YOU GUYS WHO CAUSED IT TO HAPPEN.

Stop blaming the President for messes that your side made!

tugboatcapn said...

AJ, meet ER.

ER, meet AJ.

Maybe that will save you both some keystrokes, instead of you having to type in "thepress", or "justlikehim...'

tugboatcapn said...

Hey, ER, you want a couple of examples of how brilliant and forward thinking Al Gore is?

Go to http://bbhq.com/gorequiz.htm, and take the quiz.

My skin crawls every time I think about the fact that someone as profoundly warped as Al Gore was a heartbeat away from the Presidency for eight years, and came within a heartbeat of actually BECOMING President in 2000.

It is only by the Grace of God Almighty that he wasn't President on 9/11.

Erudite Redneck said...

Well, my same here with the current VEEP. Gah.

Yo, AJ. 'Sup? :-)

--ER

Mark said...

Rich, Me and ER have already discussed the "Al Gore inventing the internet" story.

I know his words were taken out of context at the time, but the story is still funny and I enjoy making light of it, which I did at my place and that's why ER and I have discussed it.

ER, guess what? I AGREE WTH YOU about the UN. UN out of the US and US out of the UN. Yeppers.

tugboatcapn said...

As do I, ER.

I have no use for the U.N.

They are an Anti- American organization, whose only objective seems to be to try to find ways to raid the U.S Treasury, and undermine U.S. Sovreignty.

If it were up to me, we would have pulled out of the U.N. a long, long time ago...

Hey, did anybody look at the quiz?

Daffy76 said...

I agree totally on the U.N. situation.

And I took a look at the quiz. I got six of the questions right. But it's almost impossible to tell which one said what. They're both crazy. Wait, Al Gore is a block of wood. The unabomber is crazy.

alaletos said...

Sup ER??

dead to self said...

wow losing in a way our very freedom of speech....it does make you wonder whats next religion, press, freedom to learn in general maybe? but if they ever did try to control the internet i dont think it would be easy for one hackers could hack it and protestors would be at a all time high. oh and as to the press no you dont necesarily have to stick to the subject. but rather dont go off on long tangents on a largely political subject when the main post was very little if at all bashing gore but if politicals your thing then seriously what is wrong with bush? bush has been through alot and for the most part has handled it well.well...thats my piece.

Erudite Redneck said...

I think I have just been scolded! LOL!

--ER

Toad734 said...

Tug

That is a terrible argument. When you say we won't allow you to drill for oil would you be referring to the 1 years supply of oil in ANWR? Yes there is only a one years supply of oil up there.

If we don't have enough oil as you contend, why would we need more refineries?


Why do we need all that oil? Is it because Bush gave bigger tax break incentives to people who bought huge gas guzzling SUVs than he did to the people buying hybrids?

Do you want a nuclear plant built next door to you?

Just look at the stock performances on my blog since the start of the war. You be the judge.

Rem870 said...

Toad,

That is a very misleading statistic you have quoted there. The USDOE estimates there to be 10.4 billion barrels of recoverable oil in the ANWR. If all of that oil were recovered at one time and made available, that supply would meet the petroleum needs of the USA for approximately one and a half years. That is not the plan. Expected production is anticipated to be around 1.4 million barrels per day - roughly one quarter of million more barrels per day than is currently produced by the combination of Texas and Lousiana. At 1.4 million barrels per day, the reserve could be expected to last 20 years.

Another example which is closer to home for Tug and I is offshore drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. There are vast natural gas resources (although I am not so sure that the oil reserves are very great). Environmentalists continue to balk at a venture in the Gulf as well as ANWR.

The US (and the rest of the world) is in trouble if we continue to go about our business as if fossil fuels will not run out. My graduate engineering work is involved with alternative solutions to fossil fuel powered vehicles (ships, specificly). It will take a long time to overcome this nation's dependence on oil (and other fossil fuels) - I have researched this topic thoroughly. In the meantime, we need to take advantage of every asset we have in this nation. Republicans and Democrats alike need to get on board - the dems need to ease up on their environmental restrictions and the repubs need to get their heads out of the sand and admit that a problem is afoot. It is going to take both sides working together to beat this thing.

Erudite Redneck said...

Here, here, Rem. A voice of reason. (ER said from the heart of the booming mid-continent oil patch).

--ER

tugboatcapn said...

Thanks, Rem.
You dealt very effectively with Toad's point.

My comment was designed mostly to irritate Toad and I fully expected him to spout that statistic, which he did.

That is one of his standard answers to the ANWAR situation, and like most of his statistics, it is flawed.
I do not know if you are familiar with Toad, or not, but he routinely uses flawed or made up statistics, takes comments, quotes, and scripture wildly out of context, or uses insults and personal attacks to derail arguements.

He is very effective at proving weak points with flawed logic.

(He will respond to this comment with a string of personal attacks against me, the tone of which will be "Oh Yeah? Well you do it too! You made a personal attack against me! You're just as bad!" Stuff like that. Which is fine.)

I usually either ignore him, or stir him up just to mess with him.

I'm used to him.

tugboatcapn said...

Oh, and Rem...
I fully agree with you.

We have a SERIOUS problem brewing, and we are never going to solve it by pointing fingers, making excuses or ignoring the problem.

I read another statistic recently, (I will try to locate it and post a link to it here soon..) Which said that if every car in America were suddenly converted overnight to a hybrid, that in four years we would be in the same fix we are in right now.
Using Toad's logic about ANWAR, we are wasting our time worrying about hybrid cars, they will only buy us about four years, and the cars would not even be paid off by then.
We cannot conserve our way out of this situation.
Conservation will help, certainly, and should be a part of the solution. But we must find ways to produce our fuels domestically, and we must find ways to increase our supply as our economy grows, whether we are talking about Fossil Fuels or Alternative Fuels.

EVERY OPTION SHOULD BE ON THE TABLE.

This is much too important an issue to play politics with.

pecheur said...

Yeah i heard about this also.

Son of Lilith said...

Cap'n, I have read your blog before but this is the first time I'm commenting.

I read the article you linked to and it seems to me that it's not the CONTENT that will be regulated but the ADDRESSES of websites. Apparently the countries in question are upset at the US having something of a monopoly over the domain names.

I didn't see anywhere in the article where they were attempting to control what was displayed on the Web.

Toad734 said...

Rem:

The fact of my statistic remains; we go through over 7 billion barrels of oil per year; if there are 10 billion barrels in ANWR, that is a little over a years worth of oil.

Also, the ANWR oil would be much more expensive to get to than is the oil in TX, LA, the Gulf, Venezuela or Mexico. None of those areas have to deal with permafrost or such a delicate eco system.

As I am sure you will agree it's not the dependence on foreign oil which is causing so much trouble, it's the dependence on oil period.

Tug:

As you can see REM backed up my statistic of how much oil is actually there; it is indeed just over a years supply; actually it would be less that a years supply by the time we could actually extrapolate that oil. So no, my numbers are correct. Of course we wouldn't just use all of that oil for 1 year and nothing else.

tugboatcapn said...

Toad, I did not say that your particular statistic was inaccurate.

What I said was that it was flawed.

Nobody expects ANWAR by itself to be THE end-all solution to the energy problems of the U.S.

Maybe it is only one year's worth of oil if we only used oil from ANWAR. (Which is unrealistic and misleading, and the reason that you use that statistic the way you do is to minimize the importance of drilling there. I don't buy it.)

My point is that the Lefty environmentalists do not want us to drill ANYWHERE.
If ANWAR is only one year's supply, and if we can find one year's supply in 99 other places, then we have bought ourselves 100 years of time in which to research alternative fuels, hybrid cars, mass transit, cyberjobs, teleportation technology, WHATEVER.

What we do not have the luxury of doing right now is skewing statistics in such a way as to allow half of us to stand around and scream about how the sky is falling, and insist that we do absolutely nothing about it.

tugboatcapn said...

Welcome, Mr.Robbins, and thanks for chiming in.
Always happy to meet new people.

Of course they would not come out and announce that they want to control content, but what they DO want to do is control domain names and control the direction of web traffic.

And if you control direction of web traffic, you can control access to information, and content.

Erudite Redneck said...

"Tug said, watchin' for Blackhawks over his house ..." :-)

--ER

Son of Lilith said...

It certainly is a dangerous gateway to have open, but ideally some sort of compromise could be reached. It would take both sides of issue to give and take though.

Toad734 said...

Tug:

We already have alternative fuel, we already have Hybrids, we already have mass transit. It's the Oil and Auto companies themselves who lobby to get free subsidies and tax incentives on gas guzzling cars and to keep those cars and the price of fuel at an affordable (barely) rate to increase consumption/sales.

I really don't see the Texas guy whose family was built on oil to do anything to change this. If Willie Nelson can drive a tour bus on bio-diesel, if the city of Chicago can run all their municipal vehicles on 100% ethanol, if Toyota and Honda can make efficient hybrids then so can everybody else. Hmmm, who stands to loose from this scenario? The auto and oil industry; both of which are already on the government’s payroll and vice versa.

tugboatcapn said...

This illustrates a problem that you have Toad.

Government subsidies and corporate welfare are not the reason that there are so many SUV's.

The reason that there are so many SUV's and so few Hybrids is that people WANT large SUV's and they are not really excited about Hybrid cars yet.

I know I don't want one. Do YOU drive one?

When there is a big demand in the market for Hybrids, then everybody will make them.

It may be true that we already have Hybrids, and Alternative Fuels, and Mass Transit, but these things are far from perfect, and as yet, there is really no demand from the public for any of that stuff.

When the public demands it, then it will happen, and the Government really has no hand in making it happen, NOR SHOULD IT.

By the way, I burn Diesel fuel for a living (I have conservatively burned a quarter of a Million gallons of it over the last few years...), and I probably burn as much or more gasoline than anyone here.
Petroleum products are still VERY affordable (just look at the traffic on the highways...) As a matter of fact, the most expensive part of petroleum products is the taxes.

Besides that, Democrats were in power for eight years in a row before the EEE-VIlL George W. Bush came along, and the Clintons did absolutely nothing to get the ball rolling on any of this stuff.
And before you point out that Clinton was dealing with a Republican Controlled House and Senate, remember that President Reagan had a Democrat controlled House and Senate, and the Democrats did nothing about any of it. HAVEN'T done anything about any of it. EVER.
Except stand in the way (at every opportunity) of possibly relieving our dependance on foriegn sources, and Bitch about the fact that it is a problem in order to gain political advantage.
You are fighting a losing battle on this one Toad.
Democrats created the energy problem, and Republicans are going to have to be the ones who solve it, over the screaming objections of the other side. (Your side.)
That's the way things are.
Sorry to have to break it to you.

Mike's America said...

UGH!! You got a Toad virus... The US controls the internet and yet Toadies are free to spread Michael Moore agitprop?

Hey, let's go steal some of that Iraqi oil... I'm getting tired of paying them $60 a barrel for it...

Get some new material Toadie...

Anyway... to the point:

You just KNOW were going to hand over the internet just as soon as some "let's make them like us" UNophile gets back in office.

And you can BET China and Iran will chair the commission to oversee it.

Linux Unix said...

For more in formation about collection agency houston, check out the collection agency houston blog.