December 4, 2012
While the globalist bureaucrats at the United Nations discount the possibility of a “doomsday” internet kill switch scenario, they admit that member states “already have the right, as stated in Article 34 of the Constitution of ITU [the International Telecommunications Union], to block any private telecommunications that appear ‘dangerous to the security of the State or contrary to its laws, to public order or to decency,” says Hamadoun Touré, the ITU Secretary-General.
As for the larger ITU agenda, we are left in the dark because the meetings now underway in Dubai remain secret. Much of the “accompanying proposals from the global community have been kept under lock and key, although some of the positions of nations have been leaked and published online,” writes David Kravets for Wired.
A scattering of documents produced by the globalists are available via dot-nxt.com, an information service covering internet policy and governance.
In February, with the battle smoke of SOPA and PIPA still lingering, the United Nations announced its push for internet governance by the end of the year. In 2011, Russian PM Vladimir Putin said his goal is to impose “international control over the Internet” through the ITU.
“The ITU is working to globalize the radio spectrum, latest-generation wireless technologies, aeronautical and maritime navigation, radio astronomy, satellite-based meteorology along with the internet. It is positioning itself to control next-generation networks, the technology that will replace the current free and open internet,” we explained on February 22.
The ITU treaty negotiated at the behest of the United Nations will radically modify the internet and bring it under control of the global elite. In addition to imposing cyber security mandates, it will outlaw peer-to-peer technologies and impose unprecedented economic regulations such as mandates for rates, terms and conditions. It will allow transnational corporations to charge fees for “international” internet traffic possibly on a “per-click” basis for certain web destinations.
The ITU will also end the nonprofit status of multi-stakeholder internet governance entities such as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers – in other words, UN bureaucrats answering to the globalists will control who is allowed to establish a presence on the internet. They will also control the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Society and other multi-stakeholder groups that develop and configure engineering and technical standards for the internet.
Vint Cerf, a former DARPA program manager considered to be one of the fathers of the internet, sent a message on December 2 to the ITU participants meeting behind closed doors in the monarchical emirate of Dubai.
The United Arab Emirates appears to be a logical choice for the globalists. In November, the UAE issued a decree making it a punishable crime to use “the internet to deride or damage the state or its institutions,” the BBC reported.
“Some proposals could allow governments to justify the censorship of legitimate speech, or even cut off Internet access in their countries,” Cerf wrote in a post on Google’s official blog. Cerf said more than a thousand organizations from more than 160 countries and thousands of internet users have protested the proposed control freak behavior under discussion behind closed doors.
“Only governments have a vote at the ITU. This includes governments that do not support a free and open internet. Engineers, companies, and people that build and use the web have no vote,” Cerf wrote on November 30, prior to the Dubai meeting.
The ITU has decided to fight back from behind its locked doors. ITU counsellor Richard Hill said the globalist organization is powerless to control networks and, besides, “the right to communicate are already enshrined in UN and international treaties, including Article 19 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which have been taken into account in the ITU’s constitution,” writes Matthew Broersma for TechWeek Europe.
Unlike the U.S. Constitution, the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights is not based on inalienable or natural rights. The rights it claims to extend are “only imaginary rights — as imaginary as government authority — and they only exist when and if the United Nations says they do,” writes Humans and Resources, a libertarian organization.
For now, the ITU insists it is powerless because national governments control internet access. This, however, runs contrary to the very nature of the United Nations and its globalist vision and agenda.
“Maybe, Dubai will turn out to be a harmless, if money-wasting exercise that changes nothing,” muses Dan Gillmor of the Guardian. “But given the fear and loathing the open internet has inspired among global interests that see it as a threat more than an opportunity, we should make no such assumptions.”