you've gotta die, gotta die, gotta die for your government?
die for your country?
that's ****! there's a gulf war vet, dying a slow,
cold death and the government says,
"we don't know the source of his sickness."
but don't believe what they say,
because your government is lying they've done it before
and don't you know they'll do it again a secret test,
government built virus "subject test group: gulf battle field troops"
you've gotta die, gotta die, gotta die for your government?
die for your country? that's ****! first world war veterans slaughtered,
by general eisenhower you give them your life,
they give you a stab in the back radiation, agent orange,
tested on us souls guinea pigs for western corporations i never have,
i never will pledge allegiance to their flag you're getting used,
you'll end up dead! you've gotta die, gotta die, gotta die for your
government?
die for your country?
that's ****! i don't need you to tell me what to do
and i don't need you to tell me what to be... **** you!
i don't need you to tell me what to say
and i don't need you to tell me what to think!
what to think! what to think, what to think,
what to think, think, think, think! you've gotta die,
gotta die, gotta die for your government?
die for your country? that's ****!
Timothy Heald
Information Systems Manager
Overseas Security Advisory Council
U.S. Department of State
571.345.2319
The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S.
Department of State or any affiliated organization(s). Nor have these
opinions been approved or sanctioned by these organizations. This e-mail is
unclassified based on the definitions in E.O. 12958.
-----Original Message-----
From: Heald, Tim
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 2:48 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Threat to the Internet
Funny antiflag has a song with almost the exact same lyrics. I'll look for
it later.
Timothy Heald
Information Systems Manager
Overseas Security Advisory Council
U.S. Department of State
571.345.2319
The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S.
Department of State or any affiliated organization(s). Nor have these
opinions been approved or sanctioned by these organizations. This e-mail is
unclassified based on the definitions in E.O. 12958.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Campbell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 2:42 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Threat to the Internet
SUB
HUM
ANS
Great - I'm off to the CD store after work now. It's been too long.
Hey, as long as I have all you aging punks' attention... does anyone
know where I can get a Judge t-shirt? I'm having a fit of nostalgia to
my old hardcore sXe days back in high school, and I used to have this
green t-shirt with Judge's two-sledgehammer logo on it - wore it all the
time (along with my GBH and Sick Of It All gear)... I'm sure there's
some 80's punk shop out there that has this stuff :)
- Jim
Jerry Johnson wrote:
>Google shows:
>
>Subhumans:Worlds Apart:Businessmen
(http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=CASS80306201527&sql=Adjtvad6kv
8w8)
>
>Here comes the original business man
>He smiles at you as he shakes your hand
>'Listen to me', he's got a lot to say
>But you don't understand
>No you don't understand
>So you say 'O.K.'
>
>They'll do it once, they'll do it again
>The world is run by business men
>They'll do it once, they'll do it again
>The world is run by business men
>
>He takes your money, you take his word
>He tells you things you've never heard
>He says 'Sign here on the dotted line'
>But you don't understand
>No you don't understand
>But you think it's all right
>You think it's all right
>
>He disappears for a month or two
>He ripped you off and you dunno what to do
>You'd take him to court but you don't know his name
>Cos business men
>Yes business men
>Are all the same
>They're all the same
>
>They'll do it once, they'll do it again
>The world is run by business men
>They'll do it once, they'll do it again
>The world is run by business men
>
>Don't forget, it will soon appends to you
>
>
>
>
>
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/24/03 02:12PM >>>
>>>>
>>>>
>Damn, now I'm not sure. I want to say the Vandals.
>
>Shawn
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ben Doom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 7:31 AM
>To: CF-Community
>Subject: Re: Threat to the Internet
>
>
>It sounds like, but isn't from one of my favorite Rancid songs.
>
>--benD
>
>Shawn Regan wrote:
>
>
>
>>It was only a matter of time!
>>
>>
>>"They did it once they can do it again. The world is run by business men"
>>
>>
>>Name that punk band!
>>
>>
>>Shawn Regan
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Sandy Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 2:59 PM
>>To: CF-Community
>>Subject: Threat to the Internet
>>
>>Comments?
>>
>>http://www.msnbc.com/news/104404.asp
>>
>>
><http://www.msnbc.com/news/104404.asp>
><http://www.msnbc.com/news/104404.asp>
>
>
>>Domain names and the threat to the Net
>>
>>A tale of intrigue, double-dealing and global power struggles
>>
>>WASHINGTON - This is a tale that has all the intrigue, double-dealing and
>>global power struggles of a spy novel. But the plot line is real, with
>>nothing less then the fate of the Internet community hanging in the
>>
>>
>balance.
>
>
>>Call it the "Domain Name" factor.
>>It starts with a group of self-appointed technocrats, a kind of Internet
>>cabal, which operates with no authority of law or formal governance, which
>>has simply rushed in to fill the power vacuum on the Internet, which has,
>>since inception, operated in a spirit of consensus and community.
>> Not since the OPEC oil cartel of 1970s have so few held so many in
>>economic bondage. The Internet cabal holds no less power over the global
>>economic infrastructure we call cyberspace.
>> This cabal intends to control how and when new domain names will
>>
>>
>be
>
>
>>added to the current list of .com, .org, .edu, .gov and .mil, and who gets
>>the rights to act as a registry of those domain names.
>>
>> THE MEMO
>> The group operates from a document, known as the Generic Top Level
>>Domain Memorandum of Understanding, produced by 11 self-appointed
>>participants in closed-door meetings in Geneva.
>> The group set up a U.N.-style international tribunal that operates
>>under the auspices of the International Telecommunications Union, which
>>
>>
>has
>
>
>>headquarters in Geneva. The group steadfastly contends that the process
>>
>>
>has
>
>
>>been "open" from the beginning and that such a document is needed to
>>
>>
>ensure
>
>
>>fair competition and stability for the registration of domain names and
>>
>>
>the
>
>
>>Internet.
>> But the group has garnered no consensus in the Internet community.
>>During a two-day meeting on the issue of domain name registry held in
>>Washington last week, the veneer of openness and cooperation being spun by
>>the cabal began to be stripped away.
>> "Make no mistake, this process is not about technology, it is all
>>about power," said Jay Fenello, president of Iperdome, a small company
>>
>>
>that
>
>
>>is vying to compete in the domain name registry business.
>>
>> THE INTRIGUE
>> This whole mess started as a result of the troubles Network
>>
>>
>Solutions
>
>
>>Inc. had in its role as the sole administer of so-called "Top Level
>>
>>
>Domain"
>
>
>>names, those ending in .com, .edu, .org, etc. NSI operates as a
>>government-subsidized monopoly under a contract set to expire next year.
>> Anticipating the end of that monopoly, two influential groups
>>decided that some plan had to be put in motion to guide the Internet going
>>forward. Those two groups are the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, or
>>IANA, and the Internet Society, known as ISOC.
>> The IANA operates under a loose charter from the U.S. government
>>
>>
>to
>
>
>>act as kind of administrator for handing out the blocs of numbers that are
>>tied to each formal domain name, such as MSNBC.COM, which are used by
>>
>>
>"root
>
>
>>servers" to determine what message goes where. The ISOC is a non-profit,
>>scientific, educational and charitable entity, incorporated in 1992 in
>>Washington.
>>
>> FUTURE OF THE INTERNET
>> These two groups put together the Internet International Ad Hoc
>>Committee, which hunkered down for eight weeks with members of the ITU and
>>World Intellectual Property Organization and hammered out the memo of
>>understanding, a document that essentially sets up a global governance
>>scheme for the future of the Internet.
>> That document spawned other organizations, such as the Policy
>>Oversight Committee, which is intended to oversee policies outlined in the
>>memo. Members of the oversight committee were chosen from those who
>>
>>
>drafted
>
>
>>the document. It then fell to the ITU to circulate the memo for signatures
>>from its members, which are comprised of sovereign states.
>> To date, the memo has garnered more than more than 150
>>
>>
>signatories.
>
>
>>However, those signatories come with a huge caveat: not a single
>>
>>
>government,
>
>
>>save Albania, has signed on.
>> This process has drawn the ire of virtually everyone outside the
>>small cabal of organizations that had a hand in drafting the document. The
>>memo, "although without the stature of a treaty because it can be signed
>>
>>
>by
>
>
>>parties other than sovereign states, is clearly an intergovernmental
>>agreement that possesses significant binding force and effect . as public
>>international law," writes Tony Rutkowski, former executive director of
>>ISOC.
>> Remember, IANA and ISOC have absolutely no formal authority to
>>proceed with this process - they just decided to "do it." Indeed, when ITU
>>called a meeting of signatories and potential signatories of the memo in
>>Geneva earlier this year, Secretary of State Madeline Albright sent a
>>
>>
>secret
>
>
>>cable, which was leaked to the Internet, to the U.S. mission in Geneva,
>>upbraiding the ITU secretary general for calling such a meeting "without
>>authorization of the member governments." She instructed U.S. diplomats to
>>"cover" the meeting, but with lower-level staff, so as to not give the
>>appearance of U.S. support of the memo.
>>
>> DOUBLE-DEALING?
>> At the domain-name meeting in Washington, participants generally
>>acknowledged that there are no technical obstacles keeping an unlimited
>>number of top-level domain names from being created. This would allow the
>>creation of domain names like .sex, .web, .biz, .XYZ and so on. Indeed, an
>>additional seven domain names have been proposed by the Internet cabal,
>>
>>
>but
>
>
>>no more. The reason for limiting the number of top domains is simply to
>>appease the legal divisions of major international corporations; these
>>companies don't want to have to register their trademarks across
>>
>>
>potentially
>
>
>>hundreds of domain names.
>> Well, screw the suits. There are courts established for protecting
>>trademarks. Policing trademarks is a cost of doing business in the analog
>>world; it should be no different in cyberspace. Artificially limiting the
>>number of domain names, when there is no technological reason to do so, is
>>yet another attempt by the Internet cabal to enforce its control over the
>>Net.
>> As part of that control, the cabal has set up what it calls the
>>Council of Registrars, which will operate under Swiss law. Companies are
>>encouraged to submit applications to become an official registrar of
>>
>>
>domain
>
>
>>names under the council. Only companies accepted by the council will be
>>allowed to compete in the open market to register new domain names, as
>>approved by the memo. Small catch: In order to be "approved" companies
>>
>>
>must
>
>
>>first sign onto the memo and pony up $10,000.
>> To take care of trademark disputes, the council will have an
>>
>>
>appeals
>
>
>>tribunal known as the "administrative domain name challenge panel."
>> This is seen as a threat to intellectual property and trademarks
>>
>>
>by
>
>
>>Andrew L. Sernovitz, president of the Interactive Media Association and
>>founder of the Open Internet Congress, a group dedicated to thwarting the
>>efforts of the Internet cabal.
>> The panels "conduct their work in Geneva or via online
>>
>>
>discussions,"
>
>
>>Sernovitz says in a document on his group's web site. "You will have no
>>right to a face-to-face defense against your challenger, he says.
>> Further, "During the challenge period, your Internet address can
>>
>>
>be
>
>
>>suspended," Sernovitz says. "If you lose a case . you will have lost your
>>rights forever. There is no appeals process and there is no one to sue."
>>
>> THE POWER GRAB
>> The cabal is moving this process forward on a fast track, claiming
>>that action must be taken quickly to keep the Internet from folding in on
>>itself. This hurry-up stance goes against the entire culture of the
>>
>>
>Internet
>
>
>>and is yet another reason why critics claim the memo is simply a power
>>
>>
>grab.
>
>
>> The moves by this cabal are set on a train wreck course with the
>>U.S. government. Currently a government interagency working group is
>>
>>
>asking
>
>
>>the Internet community for suggestions on how to handle the domain name
>>issue. On July 2, the Commerce Department put a notice in the Federal
>>Register seeking comments on how to proceed with the issue. "The
>>
>>
>Government
>
>
>>has not endorsed any plan at this time but believes that it is very
>>important to reach consensus on these policy issues as soon as possible,"
>>the notice says.
>>
>> HANGING IN THE BALANCE
>> In discussions with dozens of people ranging from industry to
>>government officials, a theme I keep hearing is that this structure of
>>global governance for the Internet won't stop at domain names. "The
>>governance models that we choose today for the Internet will be the ones
>>that are placed on society in the next century," a U.S. government
>>
>>
>official
>
>
>>told me, in what he admittedly called a "messianic" remark. "Sometimes
>>
>>
>this
>
>
>>thought keeps me up at night."
>> I won't go that far, but I do know that setting up a global body
>>that operates on the U.N. model will sound the death knell for an open and
>>thriving spirit of innovation and cooperation that has driven the Internet
>>to date. Such a governing body, emboldened by a successful domain name
>>
>>
>coup,
>
>
>>isn't likely to stop there. They will take on other issues, such as
>>
>>
>content
>
>
>>and marketing, in a kind of cyberspace governing mission creep.
>> Let's hope that enough people respond to the Commerce Department's
>>notice in time for the government to step up and stop the Internet cabal
>>before it puts its plan into action.
>>
>> Meeks out ...
>>
>> _____
>>
>>
>>
>>
> _____
>
>
>
>
_____
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
