AW: AW: [governance] FYI

Mon Sep 20 09:14:03 EDT 2010

Dear Wolfgang and members of the list

IMHO this iinitiative is arguable in at least two aspects :
- Basically : broadband will need huge investments and its impact in developing countries with poor industrial, commercial and value-adding structures is still to be proven. The WorldBank claim of "+10% in BB deployment results in +1,2 in GDP" is a buzz for those who believe it. For BB to become effective as an economy driver you need a suitable environment (as it is proven in all industrialized countries).
- Timely : The UN-GA is just taking stock of the achievements in MDGs and both informations and discussions show that there is still a lot to be done on the very basics of these goals such as access to clean water and sanitation, to suitable and affordable housing and energy, to health and care. These are real basic needs and therefore necessitate highest priority. Please read the CS perception of these issues, e.g here : http://ipsnews.net/newsTVE.asp?idnews=52888

That's why I find this ITU_SG statement rather out of place. Pushing always more towards new investments is to be stopped (just to give you an example : there are a dozen submarine cables in place or ready for that along the African West coast, each one costing some hundreds millions dollars). Instead, the ITU would be better advised in limiting such over-redundant investments, and to coordinate the very necessary telecom infrastructure such as the national and subbregional bacbbones with, and integrate them in, the other infrastructure and netwok projects to be implemented in the same areas. 
ITU has a great responsibility in the fact that more than 30 years after "The Missing Link" (a fore-runner of the WSIS' "digital divide" !) there isn't any valuable subregional telecoms network in Africa, not to speak about a continental network ! Here are the priorities for the ITU, and only once these networks are in place, there will be the time for building African BB networks, exchanging African content : cultural, economical, educational, gouvernemental, and people to people ! Acting in that way, i.e. applying cross-network synergy rules and methodology to infrastructure and network coordination and implementation, will not only save millions of dollars, but will also contribute effectively to the regional integration which in turn will drive the economies in these countries and subregions, as ascertained by multiple research reports and studies. Regional integration is also priority in pan African policy, as the recent AU Summit has well documented and demonstrated. 

Best
Jean-Louis   

> Message du 19/09/10 17:11
> De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" 
> A : "Jean-Louis FULLSACK" 
> Copie à : governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Objet : AW: AW: [governance] FYI
> 
> 
> Thanks Jean Louis
> 
> you are absolutly right that the worst - may be - is not behind but in front of us. ;-(((
> 
> w
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> Von: Jean-Louis FULLSACK [mailto:jlfullsack at orange.fr]
> Gesendet: Sa 18.09.2010 22:56
> An: Kleinwächter, Wolfgang
> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Betreff: re: AW: [governance] FYI
> 
> 
> 
> Well, Wolfgang
> 
> Then, please read just the following article from TelecomTV Newsletter (17 September 2010), and let's imagine such a legislation with Mr Beck or Mrs Palin in the Whitehouse ....
> 
> Best regards
> Jean-Louis Fullsack
> CSDPTT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New US "mega kill bill" would give President and DHS even more power to control the Internet
> 
> Posted By Martyn Warwick , 17 September 2010 | 0 Comments | (0)
> function postBackHiddenField(hiddenFieldID,hiddenFieldID2,TagId,IndSecName) { var hiddenField = $get(hiddenFieldID); var hiddenField2 = $get(hiddenFieldID2); if (hiddenField) { hiddenField.value = (TagId); hiddenField2.value = (IndSecName); __doPostBack(hiddenFieldID,''); } } Tags: Internet legislation Politics 
> 
> There's more legislative jiggery-pokery underway in the US. Two cyber-security bills containing clauses that would allow President Obama and his successors to shut-down all or parts of the Internet in the event of a nebulous and undefined "national emergency" have been rolled together into one overarching mega-bill. Martyn Warwick reports.
> 
> If passed, the new law would give the Department of Homeland Security power "to determine" what constitutes a cyber-security threat and also to "police" what individual citizens are accessing via the web.
> 
> If this wasn't so serious it would be laughable. That's because the Department of Homeland Security comprehensively failed a recent "cyber-security audit" that (get this!) was carried out by.... wait for it... the department of Homeland Security's very own Inspector General! The inspection found that the DHS to be "plagued" by "at least 600 vulnerabilities" 202 of which have been classified as high-risk.
> 
> So, we know that the DHS can't make it's own internal network safe, and, given that fact, it is entirely valid to ask, "Is this agency anywhere near capable of determining what constitutes a real and serious potential cyber-attack and then "securing" the public Internet if it decides an attack is imminent?
> 
> Make no mistake this is very serious stuff.
> 
> Contained in the draft bill are proposals to give the President personal power to turn-off whole sections of the Internet for AT LEAST FOUR MONTHS at a time and longer if "circumstances" are deemed to warrant it - and those circumstances will be determined either by the President and his immediate advisors or by the unaccountable apparatchiks at the DHS. Things would be done by executive order or departmental fiat and with absolutely no Congressional oversight or debate. 
> 
> An alternative proposal is to hand this power to the DHS and allow it to block all web traffic coming in to the US from "certain specified countries" as well as being enabled to shut down "specific networks and hubs." That way totalitarianism lies.
> 
> Senator Joe Lieberman, a prime-mover behind, and prominent sponsor of, the proposed new laws let the cat out of the bag a while back on live TV. He told CNN reported Candy Crowley, "Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too." 
> 
> The Democrats, (for it is they who are agitating for the new legislation) are acting with unseemly haste and want to get the bill onto the Statute Book before November's mid-term elections, when it is expected that their candidates will take a pasting at the polling stations.
> 
> The Senator also claims that the Internet, in its global entirety and many iterations, is a "strategic national asset of the United States." This man needs to get out beyond the national boundaries of his own country a bit more often and to take cognisance of what's happening elsewhere. The US most certainly does not "own" the Internet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > Message du 18/09/10 22:14
> > De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" 
> > A : "Jean-Louis FULLSACK" 
> > Copie à : 
> > Objet : AW: [governance] FYI
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Jean Louis
> > 
> > I just wanted to raise awaneress that these people are still here and we should not be naive. 
> > 
> > w
> > 
> > 
> > ________________________________
> > 
> > Von: Jean-Louis FULLSACK [mailto:jlfullsack at orange.fr]
> > Gesendet: Sa 18.09.2010 17:45
> > An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; info at hoferichter.eu
> > Betreff: re: [governance] FYI
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > That was the Heritage Foundations view. Very revealing, especially through the comments.
> > 
> > And now, Wolfgang, what about the Tea Party's view ?
> > 
> > Best 
> > Jean-Louis Fullsack
> > CSDPTT
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > Message du 17/09/10 06:02
> > > De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" 
> > > A : governance at lists.cpsr.org, info at hoferichter.eu
> > > Copie à : 
> > > Objet : [governance] FYI
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > http://blog.heritage.org/2010/09/16/warning-sounded-over-upcoming-u-n-general-assembly-deliberations-on-internet-governance/
> > > 
> > > w
> > > 
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > > governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > > To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> > > governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> > > 
> > > For all list information and functions, see:
> > > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> > > 
> > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100920/3913030c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t