EU wants 'Internet G12' to Govern Cyberspace

EU wants 'Internet G12' to Govern Cyberspace

euobserver.com

The European Commission wants the US to dissolve all government links with the body that 'governs' the internet, replacing it with an international forum for discussing internet governance and online security.

The rules and decisions on key internet governance issues, such as the creation of top level domains (such .com and .eu) and managing the internet address system that ensures computers can connect to each other, are currently made by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names Numbers.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.infowars.com

Here we go! The internet G12! Everything in the news lately has been pointing at this, an internet entirely governed and censored by TPTB!

EU information society commissioner Viviane Reding has suggested a new model for overseeing the internet from October 2009, that is when the Commerce Department agreement runs out.

She is calling on Obama to to fully privatise ICANN and set up an independent judicial body, which she describes as a "G12 for internet governance," ...a "multilateral forum for governments to discuss general internet governance policy and security issues."
euobserver.com

Hummm this sounds strangly like the G20 Economic Summit wording and point 19!

It is coming folks, I tell you it is afoot!

Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians.

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 View a PDF of Bill gives the president the ability to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.

www.informationliberation.com...

The alternative to mainstream media, which is the Internet, is by definition untrustworthy because it doesn't have gatekeepers. It lends itself not to imagined corruption, but to real corruption. Ironically, the continual distrust of our supposedly unreliable mainstream media has given us a new media that is, by its very definition, unreliable.

www.wfs.org...

The future of the internet, according to author and “web critic” Andrew Keen, will be monitored by “gatekeepers” to verify the accuracy of information posted on the web. The “Outlook 2009″ report from the November-December issue of The Futurist reports that,

“Internet entrepreneur Andrew Keen believes that the anonymity of today’s internet 2.0 will give way to a more open internet 3.0 in which third party gatekeepers monitor the information posted on Web sites to verify its accuracy.”

News Source

euobserver.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Supporting Articles:

oldthinkernews.com...

www.wfs.org...

www.prisonplanet.com...

www.infowars.com...
Related ATS Thread

[edit on 8-5-2009 by burntheships]

what exactly does this mean ?

reply to post by binkatonka


It boils down to this: the future of the internet, will be monitored by “gatekeepers” to verify the accuracy of information posted on the web.

End of free speech, the end of uncensored posts, the end of blogs....etc. Everything will be controlled by the Goverments.

www.wfs.org...

reply to post by burntheships


They cannot stop emails can they.

Its going to be interesting what they can actually do. We seen from the recent thing in mexico, even the bbc where duped by people that pretended to be from mexico, and they put info on there site.

So will the bbc be censored, who knows. So they should remember even the bbc is putting out false info on things like the swine flu. So how do they control everything?

What in the real world can they really do, can any technical person clarify for us.



[edit on 5/8/2009 by andy1033]

has it actually come into you that this ment for traffic logistic s and against cyberwarfare hackers, crackers&whizzkids? free speech is still one if not the most important right in this part of the world ..and the European Parliament is also a guard on that(voting next month)

[edit on 8-5-2009 by Foppezao]

reply to post by andy1033


Edit to add: Yes, they can censor and even block e-mails. AOL has been caught doing it already. Proof I suspect AT&T (Proof) (More Proof) has done it also, based on personal experience. So the answer unfortunately is yes!

There are ways to restrict the access to the internet, and anything beyond that. I am sure that they will suck the IP providers into this...as we have already seen most of the big ones experimenting with "metered" usage.

This might explain what they are planning to do:Article published by the Futurist

In his new book, The Cult of the Amateur, (Currency, 2007) blogger and Internet entrepreneur Andrew Keen explores today's new participatory Internet.
He argues that too much amateur, user-generated, free content is threatening not only mainstream media—newspapers, magazines, and record and movie companies—but our very culture. We asked Keen what today's Internet trends mean for the future of our increasingly Web-driven society.

Question

THE FUTURIST: Summarize the basic premise of your book for us; what do you see as the great danger in the way the Internet is allowing millions of content creators to undermine established media?

Answer

The relationship between the rise of new media and the crisis of old media is causally complex. It would be a dramatic oversimplification to argue that the only reason mainstream media is in crisis is because of the Internet. They are intimately bound up with one another and are cause and effect, in some respects. But people stopped trusting and reading newspapers before the invention of the Internet. People, particularly in the U.S., have problems with all sorts of authority, with or without the Internet. It's a reaction against cultural authority.

[edit on 8-5-2009 by burntheships]

reply to post by Foppezao


I have heard many reports from users here on ATS that the E.U. already censors the internet. While we may not know exactly how...it is pretty simply done.

For example, in this case it is done on the servers. If it can be done here in the U.S. it can be done anywhere!

My Space Censors Prision Planet


[edit on 8-5-2009 by burntheships]

It would be far easier to just not let people on the internet than it would be to verify the information posted. Think of the number of posts made to ATS on a daily basis:

New posts: Past 24 hours: 4,980
New posts: Past 7 days: 32,901
New posts: Past 30 days: 141,329

Just shy of five thousand posts in 24 hours, now apply that to the many communities out there, then add in blogs, facebook, myspace, orkut, twitter, flickr, etc. Then you have youtube's comments, and other such side tracks of information. There is simply not enough money floating around to staff an organization to be 'gatekeepers' to verify information posted on the internet. Chances are this is nothing more than twisted quotes taken way out of context, I mean how much faith can you put in the information spouted on Infowars of all places?

this is interesting. controlling .com domains would be a difficult time for us. what if they block for instance ATS domain website from people like us?

reply to post by Helig


This article is actually in the
euobserver.com... PP just did a write up on it. The actual ICANN agreement will expire this October 2009. There will be some new contract...and the E.U. and President Obama have both set the stage for a takeover. Preident Obama already has this in the works.

Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor.....
The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.
The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.

www.informationliberation.com...

ATS is a perfect example of "user generated content" and exactly the kind of content that would be first on the list.

Let's not be naive about this. I am wondering if the bailouts woke anyone. up. Does anyone really think the Govemment will let you know ahead of time that they are planning to censor the internet? Hummmm........

[edit on 8-5-2009 by burntheships]

reply to post by burntheships




I can see this coming, especially since the next G20 summit is in September 2009 and they want to impliment this in October of 2009.

It sounds like another Obama treaty is coming. First one on gun control with Mexico now this.

We are entering a new era!

I dont like feeling helpless. It's not my nature but these things seem beyond our control.

Any measures to do this could easily be defeated.

The internet savvy people in China have been getting around this for a long time.

The easiest way is to use a proxy somewhere in the world that does not block content. Here is a funny one, not sure where it is located though boratproxy

If you want to get more techical, you can open an SSH session to a remote server in say Uganda and then tunnel all browser traffic throught the encrypted tunnel.

Very similar to a VPN.

if they want to control .coms can the domians just transfer to dot something else ?
or does it not work like that ?

reply to post by wonderworld


It seems near certain now. I know there are ways around some of this...but it is looking like "they" may even attempt to make it an act of terrorism to have your own servers to circumvent the "GovernNet"

As with the Patriot Act that opened this can of worms up, the threat of inprisionment does wonders for squelching the voices of the people!





[edit on 8-5-2009 by burntheships]

This will not happen. The internet was developed here, sorry chaps. The EU(etc) has been wanting us to give up control for some time, this is not new. Everytime we tell them to shove off. I expect nothing but more of the same.

National security. Been hearing these two words a lot lately.
All they do is national security this and national security that..

Yes i agree the internet was invented in the US if the EU wants to control something let them start there own system.
The internet is about the only freedom left if they do take control the end is near, for freedom of anyhow.
It would seem almost impossible to set up something like internet free world, like radio free europe back in WWII.
I heard Rockefella? wants to get rid of internet, maybe be better to get rid of Rockefella donw load him to other side of moon and erase all files, destroy link.
To me the internet is greatest thing to happen for the people of late, now they want to control it, and the EU in gereral didn't like the Nazis, they are the Nazis. Control freaks, why fix something that I can't see is broken.

[edit on 8-5-2009 by googolplex]

Scanning the headlines with the search term being:
EU wants 'Internet G12' to govern cyberspace

No less than the first three pages on google are compised of this headline only. www.google.com...

This is indeed an outrageous move on the part of the E.U. Only thing is I have a well founded suspicion that President Obama might cooperate.

Jimmy Carter gave away the Panama Canal, I can see Obama handing over the internet!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fa94dfaad26b.jpg[/atsimg]
Source Credit