Rajjpuut's Folly: Latest Betrayal by Obama, Turning Internet over to Foreigners

Some of the technical background for this blog can be found here:
Of all the many betrayals of Barak Obama, some day the one we may all regret the most under a Brave New One-World government may be his “giving away” of the internet. The information superhighway, internet, worldwide web or just the WEB as we know it may soon become a thing of the past thanks to Barak Obama’s need to prove his compliance with the rest of the world’s power structure and just how cooperative, sharing, inclusive and multi-national in thought he can be.
Understanding the nature of this betrayal comes from first understanding that the internet was from day one an American Department of Defense creation so that computers of the American military could talk to one another, easily, accurately and quickly and so that important American military information could be shared among all American military computers. The system has remained in American hands since the beginning so that no foreign power would ever have the power to disrupt it or interdict our communications. The system as it now stands canNOT be given away without giving away immense amounts of knowledge and potential control over America’s cyber-infrastructure.
Within a year, control and key management of the internet by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce may be non-existent. Could this help tyrants control all communications in their country? Could this allow Barak Obama to control all communications in this country? Remember the internet crackdown in China last year? Remember the role the web played in Iran in allowing dissidents to communicate the activities of their illegally elected president, Iran’s police and just to keep them in touch with each other? Today 90% of the most serious internet information thefts in science, industry and even the military are begun in one country: China . . . how much easier might things be for the Chinese communists if we just give away control of the system we created?
It’s a somewhat long and fascinating story, but let’s leave out 99% of the details and look at it in a nutshell . . . (First of all, Al Gore did NOT invent the internet, in reality he had little to do with it so that statement’s just as inaccurate as anything he’s said about global warming.) The information superhighway as we know it began small with a lot of scientists sharing information over the prototypical equivalents of what today we call a local area network (LAN). A few businesses were doing the same thing, but not many because the process of setting things up was labor extensive and very expensive and worked best in small areas, not for widespread large companies. The connections were hardwired and slow and they might serve a dozen or up to a couple hundred individuals in a relatively small area. The whole thing was limited by its relation to old fashioned telephone-switching techniques which were extraordinarily slow, expensive and unreliable.
The first big breakthrough was a method of switching called “packet- switching” which, once invented, made the server as we know it today possible and changed the whole ballgame. Today’s internet grown immensely complicated and widespread since the invention of packet-switching is just the realization of predictions that go back nearly fifty years. In a series of memos beginning in August 1962, J.C.R. Lichlider of MIT discussed the potential of a "Galactic Network" and how social interactions and educational information sharing might be enabled through networking. The Internet today certainly provides such a nationwide and global infrastructure and already interplanetary Internet communication has been seriously discussed.
Just about the time that scientists from multiple universities were seeing the tremendous potential of sharing information on more extended networks, the American military saw the immense value such systems (if expanded to a dramatically greater extent) would have for offering them strategic and tactical advantages in information gathering and sharing, not to mention virtually instantaneous speed of distribution. Beyond anything else, the American military was the driving force for creating the internet.
About that same time a huge bunch of additional technical breakthroughs were happening. More importantly, two more Americans, Dr.Robert E. Kahn and Dr. Vinton G. Cerf, working for the DOD (Department of Defense) in DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) up to and after 1972 conceived of, designed and oversaw the development and execution of a something called “open-arching” (pronounced “arking”) or open-architecture networking, an immense breakthrough in networking and connectivity which gave birth to the internet as we know it today and gave the whole process its “weblike” quality. Instead of the need to hardwire every single connection, the process relied on a combined 1) receiver-transmitter 2) identity recognition device 3) data storage and 4) switchboard-executing machine called a“server” which in concert with virtually unlimited other servers brought together as first a few individual networks and then a whole series of interconnected networks which thus made the information superhighway virtually unlimited in size and scope.
What made the whole thing possible was the server and . . . thanks to Kahn and Cerf’s conceptions each person or (more accurately) each computer connection onto each server was provided with a unique “identifier,” now known as its tcp/ip that could be instantaneously recognized and instantaneously communicate with others and otherwise interact through the server network. When the process went beyond the DOD and became national, the U.S. Department of Commerce was put in charge.
It wasn’t too long till the whole thing went international and soon other individual businesses, universities, groups, and countries created their own webs within the greater worldwide web. Here is the key thing to understand: ALL vital communication is based upon the abilities to send, receive, identify any and all the other parties to the communication and to make your own identity known. IP means “internet protocol”; TCP means “transmission control protocol.” A protocol in computing is a set of electronic instructions that permit these processes to occur. Not to belabor things with the overly technical, but the magic of the tcp/ip identifier is that the system’s entire “integrity” is based upon it. Ceding control over such processes here in America to foreign powers could lead to sabotage of such a nature and scope as to become cataclysmic.

Nevertheless, the Obama administration is without fanfare, surrendering control over the web to foreign powers. Without American ingenuity and investment of the American taxpayer, no internet as we know it today would exist. Our control “imperative” is via management and control over the Domain Name System (DNS) and the humongous servers that service the present internet. Global coordination of the entire internet on behalf of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce is locked into a system of internet protocol resources. Without an IP address and all these other internet protocols, a person or nation would have no access to the internet itself. Allowing foreign powers that control is definitely NOT in the best interest of the United States. For example, let’s say that China or its buddy Iran wishes to black out information on internal squabbling or the quashing of dissent within its borders, what could be simpler than to simply put the whole system on the fritz until such a time as they felt open communications offered no threat to their perceived interests? The Chinese have already demonstrated the most sophisticated national hacking capabilities of any entity in the world. Obama’s actions will certainly make it much easier for the Sino-fox to dominate the world's and America's henhouses.

Within months of Obama's taking office, his administration, through the Department of Commerce, agreed to give “greater representation to foreign telecommunication companies” and countries. Control and management of this American invention is not only the right of America but also our responsibility. That responsibility is twofold: 1) for American’s economic and national security and 2) for the functionality of the web for the entire international community. No better nation than the United States exists to protect these twin interests. Americans developed and invented it; paid for it and the research for implementing it; we are, despite Mr. Obama’s desire for media control, the freest and most tolerant nation on earth; we gain nothing from the user fees paid to ISPs (internet service providers) which are operated by individual companies and countries all over the world; and we have no policy of censorship unlike an awful lot of other foreign powers. Additionally, the ability of U.S. intelligence to monitor financial movements as well as other communications by terrorists and terrorist organizations will become remarkably compromised if the give away is allowed to happen. As usual, the Obama agenda is not just NOT pro-American, but only pro-Obama and mysterious and virtually unfathomable (unless you, like Rajjpuut, understand his underlying Marxism) to those interested in freedom and prosperity as well as open and honest government dedicated to the best interests of the American people.
Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut

Views: 12

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Chip BokPolitical Cartoons by Steve Kelley

ALERT ALERT

The Fall Of Fake News!! Quiet Shake-Up At MSNBC After Station Hemorrhages Viewers Following Mueller Debacle 

Reports are surfacing about a quiet shake-up of personnel at MSNBC after the cable news station lost more than 30% of their audience after the Mueller debacle.

Apparently MNSBC doesn’t think their financial woes are newsworthy given that they didn’t run any breathless stories about their own failings.

News of MSNBC’s collapse can’t come as a surprise to insiders who undoubtedly are fully aware that their audience no longer trusts them.

One source familiar told Mediaite the changes came amidst mounting complaints from NBC News chief Andy Lack about a dip in MSNBC’s ratings following the end of the Mueller investigation. In May, ratings for the network in the advertiser coveted 25-54 demo were down 32% year over year.

MSNBC viewers were asked: How much do you agree that MSNBC regularly reports made up or fake news about Donald Trump and his administration?

The responses were devastating! While 35% or respondents agree that MSNBC pushes Fake News, only 24% disagreed. That’s a ratings death sentence!

What do you expect from a channel that boasts disgraced liar, Brian Williams, and race pimp, Al Sharpton?

Bright Start News@BRIGHTstrt
 

MAJOR SHAKEUP AT MSNBC - Ratings crater after Mueller Report Debacle! 

MSNBC Shakeup: Jonathan Wald and Dan Arnall Take Dayside

MSNBC quietly implemented a sweeping shakeup in programming this week, Mediaite has learned, appointing SVP of programming and development Jonathan Wald and MSNBC executive editor Dan Arnall to lead...

Flashback: MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow’s Ratings Plummet To Yearly Low

MSNBC primetime host Rachel Maddow brought in her worst weekly ratings of the year last week.

Her show last week averaged 2,324,000 viewers, with an average audience of 337,000 in the 25-54 age demographic, both of which mark yearly lows for the liberal television host, according to Nielsen Media Research.

Maddow first saw a dramatic drop in ratings following the conclusion of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. Her previous low for a week in 2019 was the last week in March, the first full week after Mueller submitted his conclusion to Attorney General William Barr, where she averaged 2,458,000 viewers with 392,000 in the demo.

She spent two years dissecting every aspect of the special counsel’s investigation into whether President Donald Trump conspired with the Russians to win the 2016 presidential election. The night Mueller submitted his findings to Barr, Maddow appeared to hold back tears over the fact that neither the president nor any family members were indicted.

Compared to Maddow’s low ratings last week, Fox News’ Sean Hannity, whose program is often the most-watched among all cable news shows, averaged 3,108,000 viewers with just under half-a-million viewers in the key demographic.

She also nearly tripled CNN’s Chris Cuomo’s weekly ratings. His program only had 880,000 viewers with 225,000 in the key demo.

SPECIAL VIDEOS

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service