{"id":50634,"date":"2016-09-29T13:32:17","date_gmt":"2016-09-29T17:32:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/?p=50634"},"modified":"2016-09-29T13:32:17","modified_gmt":"2016-09-29T17:32:17","slug":"obamas-reckless-plan-threatens-u-s-oversight-of-internet","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/?p=50634","title":{"rendered":"Obama\u2019s Reckless Plan Threatens U.S. Oversight of Internet"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"14743736905_635a8c14e9_b-868x579\"<\/a>
\nby Roger Aronoff
\nAccuracy In Media<\/span><\/p>\n

The Obama administration is poised to surrender control of certain Internet functions to non-profit ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, on October 1. According to Americans for Limited Government\u2019s senior editor Robert Romano, opposition to this Internet giveaway has united Republicans<\/a> such as Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and\u00a0presidential candidate Donald Trump. But questions remain as to whether or not the Republicans will unite sufficiently to insist language is included in a continuing resolution that will forbid the transfer of control.<\/p>\n

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) actually stripped out this language from the continuing resolution, and a vote to end debate<\/a> on the current language, which does not fix the ICANN issue, failed on September 27. This is the latest Obama administration scandal, one that threatens the integrity of the Internet. President Obama is seeking to cede oversight of Internet protocols<\/a> to a multinational body, effectively ending unilateral American control over these functions.<\/p>\n

Romano writes that this is the \u201cLast chance to save the free and open Internet.\u201d<\/p>\n

A group of prominent national security professionals have sent a letter<\/a>\u00a0to Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joseph Dunford Jr. in opposition to the transfer. \u201cOf\u2026immediate concern to us\u2026is the prospect that the United States might be transferring to future adversaries a capability that could facilitate, particularly in time of conflict, cyberwarfare against us,\u201d they write. \u201cIn the absence of [the National Telecommunications and Information Administration\u2019s] stewardship, we would be unable to be certain about the legitimacy of\u00a0all IP addresses or whether they have been, in some form or fashion, manipulated, or compromised.\u201d<\/p>\n

The transition could affect the status of Internet domain names, including .mil and .gov. \u201cThe Administration has failed to ensure U.S. ownership and control of .MIL and .GOV in perpetuity,\u201d wrote<\/a> a coalition of citizens and non-profits this August. \u201cBoth are vital national assets.\u201d They argue that the Department of Commerce is doing \u201cprecisely\u201d what Congress \u201cforbade.\u201d<\/p>\n

One concern is that the transition will make these Internet functions subject to the desires of oppressive nations such as China and Russia. Yet the mainstream media are working to cast the change as managerial, and inconsequential. The Washington Post\u2019s Fact Checker Glenn Kessler recently gave Senator Cruz three Pinocchios<\/a> for saying that the change would \u201cempower countries like Russia, like China, like Iran to be able to censor speech on the Internet.\u201d This is because, Kessler writes, \u201cICANN says it is only a technical administrator that does not regulate content on the Internet\u201d and this claims \u201cit has power that does not exist.\u201d<\/p>\n

Similarly, The Los Angeles Times editorial board calls<\/a> Sen. Cruz\u2019s argument \u201cridiculous.\u201d \u201cThe only role the U.S. government plays today is an administrative one, checking to make sure that ICANN follows the correct procedures before any changes to the master list of domains can go into effect,\u201d they write. \u201cThat\u2019s hardly the Internet\u2019s last defense against the tyranny\u00a0of despots.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, the LA Times editorial board may be overlooking other functions of ICANN. According to<\/a> Motherboard, \u201cone of the most important cryptographic key pairs on the internet\u201d is about to be changed \u201cfor the first time\u201d by none other than ICANN. \u201cThis key ensures that when web users try to visit a website, they get sent to the correct address,\u201d writes Joseph Cox. \u201cWithout it, many internet users could be directed to imposter sites crafted by hackers, such as phishing websites designed to steal information.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to the Epoch Times, the New York-based newspaper owned and run by Chinese-Americans opposed to the Communist regime in China, \u201cAlready, the Chinese regime is moving to fill the void left by the U.S. handover\u2014and its new system for governing the internet goes far beyond the responsibilities held by ICANN.\u201d They state<\/a> that \u201cOver the last two years, Chinese leaders have drafted an authoritarian set of laws that governs every facet of the internet.\u201d<\/p>\n

Theresa Payton, writing for<\/a> The Hill, argues that altering the U.S.\u2019s relationship with ICANN during an election season is unwise. \u201cWhen the calendar hits\u00a0Sept. 30, a mere 6 weeks before our election, the United States cannot be assured that if any web site is hacked, the responsible party will be held accountable,\u201d she writes. \u201cWe cannot be sure if a web site is valid. We cannot be sure if one country is being favored over another. These are all the things ICANN is responsible for and has worked perfectly since the Internet was created.\u201d Payton is a former White House Chief Information Officer and currently the CEO of a cyber security company.<\/p>\n

Why make the change now? she asks.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs a private organization, ICANN is not bound by the First Amendment, which ICANN\u2019s CEO and President G\u00f6ran Marby admitted in a recent Senate hearing,\u201d write<\/a> Sen. Cruz and Representative Sean Duffy (R-WI) for The Daily Signal. \u201cThe First Amendment applies only to the [American] government. So if the government is out of the picture, the First Amendment is too. And that means that ICANN would be free to regulate internet speech by restricting which websites can gain access to the internet based on their speech.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s important to remember that the devil is always in the details, and what the administration attempts to spin as a \u2018clerical\u2019 function can easily be used to bludgeon free speech,\u201d they add.<\/p>\n

\u201cSo why is Obama willing to jeopardize internet freedom?\u201d they ask. \u201cThe administration believes that continued U.S. supervision of the domain name system will prompt China, Russia, Iran, and other countries that have been clamoring for more influence in internet governance to fracture the internet by setting up their own networks, perhaps under United Nations control\u2026By ending U.S. oversight, the Obama administration will disempower the American people and empower China, Russia, and Iran, putting those regimes one step closer to their goal,\u201d which Cruz and Duffy\u00a0argue is \u201cto control the global internet infrastructure.\u201d<\/p>\n

Brett Schaefer and Paul Rosenzweig for Heritage\u2019s Daily Signal wonder<\/a> whether ICANN is too corrupt to take on additional duties. \u201cEarlier this year, ICANN was challenged in U.S. court<\/a>\u00a0regarding its failure to follow proper procedures in awarding the .africa domain name,\u201d they write. \u201cThe dilemma arose from the ICANN board\u2019s attempt to\u00a0improperly<\/a>\u00a0appease governments who had objected to the original delegation.\u201d<\/p>\n

Far from \u201crule by geeks\u201d\u2014who ostensibly have nothing to gain by appeasing global dictators\u2014Schaefer and Rosenzweig foresee the transition as \u201crule by a global monopolistic self-perpetuating elite.\u201d<\/p>\n

If the Department of Commerce\u2019s NTIA has successfully overseen the contract to date, one must ask why the transition is even necessary. This is especially true if the change is \u201cminor,\u201d as the LA Times editorial board has asserted. However, this is but another part of President Obama\u2019s consistent push for multilateral agendas at the expense of American power and sovereignty.<\/p>\n

The transition \u201chas rankled Republicans who say it could put the internet in the hands of hostile actors,\u201d reported The Hill, once again casting only Republicans, and not citizens, as in opposition to this change.<\/p>\n

This is a radical change,\u201d argued<\/a> Rick Moran for The American Thinker. \u201cI suspect we will see almost immediately that it was a mistake. But once the transfer is made, it will be too late to get it back, leaving us pretty much at the mercy of anti-freedom governments.\u201d<\/p>\n

The liberal media continue to assert that handing over a function of the Internet will have minor repercussions. That\u2019s because few in the media want to blame President Obama for, once again, damaging U.S. interests in his pursuit of the transformation of America. This is a complicated issue, but after the lies employed to sell the country on the phony Iran deal<\/a>, and on Obamacare<\/a>, Congress should block this surrender of U.S. Internet oversight\u00a0for at least as long as Obama is President.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-50634","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50634","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=50634"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50634\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=50634"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=50634"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=50634"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}