<html>
<body>
At 12:08 15/03/2014, McTim wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">For a very long time indeed,
many have asked for the US to relinquish their role. Now they have
signaled their willingness/readiness to do so. <br>
In practical terms, I see ICANN "floating free" from its USG
ties. That is what i got out of the Press Conference last night
anyway (although I dialed in late) so may be mistaken.</blockquote><br>
I am puzzled by nothing anymore when I see that the IG leaders can
discuss seriously a thread where ICANN is labeled as the "Web
Policymaking Body". Blah, Blah, Blah.... the same smoke screen over,
and over, and over again. <br><br>
The important issue IMHO is the March 14, 2014, alliance of the 14
I*leaders (some say "USurpers" of the Multitude's power). The
move is well planned: OpenStand: 29 August 2012, raises the issue of the
protection of the Internet Globalization "Huge Bounty" after
several ISOC gathering of key I*leaders. RFC 6852 permits to officialize
it. Snowden catalyzes the process. Brazil is upset: it was the main
target, but China or Russia or France/Germany were next in line. GS1's
Fadi Chehade was ready to propose a settlement meeting. The NTIA has just
prevented any risk that Sao Paulo might proposes any other kind of World
Digisphere Organization than ICANN, in anoucing just before the meeting
that it intends to transfer all its rights to ICANN, while in between
ICANN will have adopted the idea during its Singapore meeting.<br><br>
Brillant!<br><br>
There is definitly no one in the /1NET cockpit: they are at the NTIA.
<br>
Congratulation, Folks, for a military rather than a diplomatic work well
timed and done! <br>
Montevideo/Fadi Chehade plan B was well executed when Brazil did not
welcome Snowden.<br><br>
Bottom question: do you really think it is in the best US
interest?<br><br>
<br>
</body>
</html>