http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/internet-transition-icann-227864 https://www.cruz.senate.gov/internetcountdownclock/

https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2782 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-08/playboy-wins-top-eu-court-fight-over-web-photo-copyrights
Censorship via suing over linking between sites that haven't explicitly given permission to link. Example might be if i made a link to Mel Gibson, i could then get sued for making that link, and referencing sites or sharing such information will be squashed. This all is connected with the TPP which was quietly made and in secret and the large bill never had time to be sifted through for it's potential effects to be challenged. Only 5 of the 29 entries involve anything to do with trade.

https://www.publicknowledge.org/news-blog/blogs/shhhh-tpp-secret
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/What-Drives-Governments-to-Keep-TISA-TPP-and-TTIP-secret-20150612-0001.html
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150605/11483831239/revealed-emails-show-how-industry-lobbyists-basically-wrote-tpp.shtml

OP - why do you believe this, actually?

If there was an easy control to "hand over;" then there surely would not be "dark net" that hosts illegal arms sales and peodofilia?

I vote shutting down internet child abuse and illegal arms sale as the first priority of those whom "control" the internet - but it is not that easy, is it?

Not that privacy should not be a high concern, only I'd slightly compromise mine if it meant catching child abusers - only I'd never compromise a lot in modern society: because then my compromise would not be used for noble aims.

The easiest way to censor and control, is to block everything you don't want there. And the only things to be left is large corporate sites, and news outlets that are currently lying to our faces and have no integrity because they were bought out and are repeaters from a source that wants to control the message.

Wow, rt, you have really gone conspiracy theorist in the last few years.

Handing over the ICANN to an international board won't suddenly allow other countries to censor speech in the USA. That's not even remotely what the ICANN does. Please, please go read up on it. ICANN doesn't even run the root DNS bank, so there's SFA that ICANN could do even if two or three countries out of 162 somehow got enough sway to make their rules stick.

The lawsuit about linking that you refer to is just an example of "owners of things can keep other people from profiting from them". That's - depending on the angle of approach - one of a variety of flavors of intellectual property law. Again, this has nothing - nothing even remotely - to do with ICANN.

And if the TPP is your problem, then again, stop bringing ICANN into it. There's nothing linking the two by anything more than the thinnest hair. ICANN is in charge of providing naming services. It has nothing to do with content. It has nothing to do with lawsuits.

Pretty please, start making some sense.
Which ICANN cannot do

The easiest way to cencor and to control is to limit the absolute acceptable range of the debate strictly, yet to encourage the debate at the fringes most vigorously.

Noam Chomsky, paraphrased, I think.

Take Jeremy Corbyn or Bern Sanders - do you think they are or were fairly presented by the mainstream media?

I think not - and the reason is pushing the limits of acceptable debate to be wider, to possibly encompass anything - the paradigm being materialism. (Or neo-liberalism)

So when you bother about maybe stopping actual child abuse, when I'd block not the debate about the sexual impulse, wihtout ever accepting the crime - please. Condemnation of criminality of dark net is not at odds with activism of exposing corporate hypocracy.

I think. And u?

As if it had most of the power?

If threads can be named likes this and last, why isn0t there a thread yet talking about the red menace? Or have we accepted the existence and the presence of the slavs fully?

I'd rather I was totally wrong on all this and admit that. But I don't think so. Too many things don't add up. Too many things stand out way too much anymore.

You know I'm watching enough of what you'd call conspiracy theories, but at no point does it look like lies. Everything I've watched has pointed to the same things. We'll probably know even more next week.

Look, most of what you're posting in your other thread, I can't talk about with great detail. But I know more about networking than your average bear. If you really want to know why this ICANN thing is a red herring, I'll help out there. I love getting people to go from "uneducated opinion" to "educated opinion" even if they end up disagreeing with me. This ICANN thing is ridiculous, man.

Things often in isolation you don't see the bigger picture.

If I were to tell you I'd take you down by removing your finger, you'd laugh at me. But if I manage to take away each of your fingers, slowly (say once a year) you will quickly have issues. When you run out of fingers (and toes) it goes to removing other things.

A takeover is usually done slowly with little resistance to each individual part, with little bits done at a time. What I posted here is heavily Internet/TPP related. While the other forum is by far the rest of it. I am not trying to hijack the thread, but speak my fears directly related to the thread.

Besides, what if it's more than ICANN that's being moved? What if only ICANN is cited? I don't know I am trying to find the TPP documents to see what the actual agreement about handing over the internet is and I'm having trouble finding the documents to reference or read. I'm trying to find this out while voicing my fears.

If I'm totally wrong I'll happily and enthusiastically admit it. But as i said, I don't think I am. We won't know til later, unless it's all stopped now.

edit: one click away during my searches. Fun...

https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/about-us/who-we-are/treaty-making-process/trans-pacific-partnership-tpp/text-of-the-trans-pacific-partnership

Now to sift through it all. There's too much, however there are a few sections for PIPA/SISPA or whatever it's called shoved in there.

Hoookay. Last in, first out.

The reason you're having a hard time finding TPP documents to cover the ICANN handover is because the TPP has nothing to do with ICANN. You've actually been given the link to the ICANN documentation regarding the handover. See cogadh's post, #24. You could go there and find what you need.

You can't slippery slope your way through life. There's nothing to suggest that it'll be somehow more than ICANN. ICANN isn't a gateway drug to Lenin's preserved butt cheeks. The problem with the sources you're citing is that they're assuming that the people who read them won't know what's what, and won't bother learning. So they make hyperbolic, ridiculous assertions.

You'll be happy to say you were wrong once we know? When will you know? What's your goalpost? You aren't doing anything but spouting fearmongering if you don't have an end state to confirm or deny your hypothesis. What's yours? Or are you going with the conspiracy theorist's friend: "we can't know what it does until it does it, then once we've seen it, it proves that we were right all along."?

With how things are currently looking, I'd say WW3 (or another cold war) is the current goalpost.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/07/war-2.html

http://www.inquisitr.com/1683775/2015-predictions-world-war-3-cold-war-2-arctic-oil-russian-nuclear-war/

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/03/financial-experts-world-war-3-coming-unless-stop.html

Alright, I don't know anything about inquisitr, but washingtonsblog is another 9/11 truther blog that puts OpEd pieces inline with its actual researched news. It's really hard to trust a site that draws so much of its audience and revenue from conspiracy theories, because it becomes more hassle than its worth to sift each article for what's been done well and what's pandering.

So your goalpost is a war in an undefined future time, and from those articles, it's either because of not enough money and bankers wanting more, or too much money and a hawkish government gone awry. And in neither case is there a timeline offered. Do you see how setting a goalpost that moves freely is no better than not having one at all?

Well, if there's war, we'll know it was from this. And if there isn't, well, just wait. There might be war later.

This is sloppy thinking, or incomplete.

If Hillary becomes president, expect WW3 within 2 years (or sooner). It's not sloppy, it's quite simple.

As much it is not my place to say - except I lived and worked some in the AZ, - if Trumph is the darling of Putin of Russia, what should be so wrong in Clinton not being so?

I'd perso loved Sanders, for the record.

Accepting a compliment hardly makes them buddies. But safe to say Trump is actually making efforts. Already he talked in Mexico and is making good relations.

What has Hillary done (and I mean that's positive)? Apparently in her entire time in office she's done so little, one of the few things she did do was name a post office.