Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin today posted this Status Update on Facebook:
Evidently relinquishing America’s control of the internet via our Icann control of domain names was what Obama meant when he led his adoring followers in those strange, kind of creepy chants of “Yes-We-Can”. Surrendering our control of the internet is a colossal foreign policy error with long term negative repercussions for freedom. This is nothing more than a gift to authoritarian regimes who seek to stifle the freedom the internet gives to voices around the world fighting for basic human rights. No amount of Obama/liberal media spin can justify this. Here’s more on this terribly frightening Obama decision:
It’s the decision to relinquish control over Internet domain names. As of next year, by Obama administration fiat, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) will no longer be in charge. Instead control will pass to some other international body–most likely, L. Gordon Crovitz points out in today’s Wall Street Journal, the UN’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU), favored by the world’s tyrants.
Like almost everything at the UN, the ITU is controlled by authoritarian regimes such as Russia and China, who marshal voting blocs of unfree countries to drown out free ones. These are countries that want to be able to shut down their citizens’ access to the Internet, and to prevent online activism of various kinds. U.S-controlled Icann is the last defense against the kind of censorship and repression that would entrench their power indefinitely.
Why is the Obama administration giving up control over the Internet’s domain names? For one reason alone: it is embarrassed by the NSA scandal, and wishes to make amends. In a continuing pattern of craven surrender and appeasement–a stark contrast to its bullying approach to domestic opposition–the Obama administration is trying to buy goodwill by giving up a strategic asset that, Crovitz notes, is akin to control of the high seas.