A special poll on Breitbart reveals
that a lot of Americans are against handing over the web to an awful body like the UN, although there's still more who may not be fully aware of what could happen:
There is overwhelming opposition to President Barack Obama’s plan to hand over control of the Internet to an international advisory body, 41 percent against with 14 percent supporting, according to the Breitbart/Gravis poll of 1,493 likely voters released Friday.
“In addition to the high oppostion, the 44 percent who are unsure really means that many, many Americans are not following the story,” said Doug Kaplan, the managing partner of Gravis Marketing, the Florida-based firm that executed the poll. The poll carries a margin of error of 2.5 percent.
Clearly, there's need to let a lot more people know about the ramifications of this awful move.
Kaplan said as a follow up, respondents, who were opposed to the handover were asked: “Is this an example of America’s weakening leadership in the world?”
Seventy-five percent of the likely voters who said they opposed the U.S. handing over control of the Internet said it was an example of “America’s weakening leadership in the world,” he said.
[...] Rick Manning, the president of Americans for Limited Government, told Breitbart News the handover should be bigger news.
“It is a big deal, because it ends First Amendment protections over the web,” he said.
“Right now, the only real protection that exists on the web is not from Facebook, Google, Yahoo or even Breitbart, but it is from the U.S. government contract with ICANN which means that ICANN cannot limit speech by arranging contracts with GoDaddy and others,” he said.
As long as ICANN is working under the cover of the federal government and the protections guarateed in the Constitution, the Internet remains free, he said.
Once the contract expires, there is nothing to stop ICANN from hiring Lois Lerner to take down all the sites that belong to the Tea Party or advocates for gun rights.
Not just Lerner. Even Islamic dictatorships could damage sites opposing their ideology. This is why I think, at the same time, that some countries with rationale should start setting up companies similar to ICANN and provide name/number service themselves. That could help add competition for the market. For now, it's simply unacceptable if the UN gets any access the internet, and that's why every sane person should oppose the move.