On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 02:33:18PM -0800, Michael O'Keefe wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>- The internet has become an internationally important resource, and > >>having a nationalistic country control it is probably not a good plan > >>for the long run > > > >That would make sense if all countries agreed to respect human rights > >and freedom. No other country has as strong a history in this area > >as US. > > Why do all countries have to give those respects to be on the Internet ? > China, North Korea, Iran don't now and they're connected. > If you want it to be majority rules, then you shouldn't worry about the > UN takin control so long as it follows the majority rules discipline. If > on the other hand you want to follow the "The United States knows what's > best" policy, then leave it as it is, becoz God knows, the United States > would never try to stop people communicating, unless is violated some > corporations copyrights or patents.... >
Actually, Michael's got it right. I want the citizens of those very countries to be able to get information off the internet. I want to, too, just in case CNN and <cough> Fox try to ... how to say? ... shade the news I get. -- Lan Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Guy, SCM Specialist 858-354-0616 -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
