Re: [ga] A Monroe Doctrine for the Internet

[RBHauptman@xxxxxxx]

This is so confusing I have no Idea if you are agreeing or disagreeing with  
me.
 
So England and the moron Blair agrees with our moron Bush, who cares?   They 
were both dead wrong.  And arrogant.
 
In your behalf I will change my original thesis, the United States AND  
England are arrogant fools. 
 
And the fact that we give lots of money is irrelevant.  We are still  
arrogant.  And much of the world still hates us.
 
Have a nice day....
 
_hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxxx (mailto:hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx)  said:
<<Perhaps i do not know what arrogance means but, i do not believe  in means;
Giving more aid to other countries than the rest of the world  combined.
Transferring the "control" of the internet from government to a  quasi-public 
entity.
Throwing the full weight of the Pac Fleet into rescue  efforts after a 
Tsunami.
Obtaining the right to vote and go to school for  "gazillions" of women for 
the first time in known history.
WWII comes to mind  as something not arrogant, as my Dierker ancestors, 
gassed or luckily saved  would know. 

But back to the internet Mr. Hauptman, you criticize  but what is your 
alternative plan on behalf of your "bazillion" California  constituents?

As for Countries you should have noticed while  reciting the wars in Iraq and 
Afghan that you were writing in line with an  Englishman, whos country is one 
hundred percent allied with "America" in such  endeavors and who's trade 
treaties together help form the basis for the global  communications networks that 
make this net and ecommerce work globally.
Which  was following a line by a good Frenchman Jefsey who basically has 
always held we  should work within the existing structure while perfecting 
alternatives  internationally. And he sat on the GAC. 

Read some ICANN history  and see just how captured the workings are by US 
interests. Chairman of the  board is a good place to  start.

Chau,
Eric>>