Convention on Cybercrime: Creating a new world order on the Internet?
Remember the good old days, when Bill Clinton was President and you couldn’t get through a political discussion on the internet without someone screaming about the “New World Order?”
Well, President George Bush is trying to create something of a new world order on the Internet, as he has put pressure on Congress to pass the Convention on Cybercrime treaty.
In nutshell form, this treaty could create a situation where the U.S. will be forced to uphold Internet laws from other the other nations involved. This treaty has been on the table for a while now, but Bush is looking to get it through Congress within the next couple days.
While the basis Bush’s eagerness for this seems to be a “Lets get the terrorists mentality” the treaty could seriously infringe on the individual rights of average Americans.
Think it doesn’t affect you? Well, recently, Brandon Tucker’s blog “Mel Gibson’s anti-semitic tirade and golf and sports controversial quotes” created a discussion that worked its way into a debate about the Holocaust.
Now, there are European countries where such discussion is not just frowned upon, but illegal. This treaty could create a situation where the FBI would have to enforce those laws in the U.S., as well.
The terminology of the treaty is broad, and there have been assurances from Bush that many of the powers the treaty creates would never be used. But if you believe that such things are created to never be used, then you just haven’t been paying attention.
Others understand and pontificate on this subject much better than I:
Text of the Convention on Cybercrime
Zdnet: Fuzzy logic behind Bush’s cybercrime treaty
The World’s worst Internet laws sneaking through the senate
Dvorak Uncensored: Bush Wants FBI To Enforce Other Country’s Net Laws Here
ACLU Letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime (from 2004)
Why the cybercrime treaty is privacy-invasive and worrisome, by James Plummer
Cybercrime treaty before U.S. Senate: two critiques
So take a little time and look into this yourself. Should you find that upholding the laws of other nations doesn’t interest you, contact your senator.
–WKW
| « Sophie Sandolo beats Karrie Webb! An update of our favorite Italian calendar girl golfer | Bold predictions from a Wie Waffler while Brian Urlacher lies about his game » |
2 comments
On this we're in total agreement. Powerful forces have long been trying to gain control over the Internet, which, for all its flaws, is a bastion of free expression.
While I have no doubt that Bush has good intentions with respect to this, this has the "law of unintended consequences" written all over it in bold letters. Once the PC powers-that-be have the capacity to control web content and punish those who run afoul of their strictures, these powers will have yet another tool with which they'll be able to squelch politically unfashionable expression.
Ironically, such control will do next to nothing to curtail the things that truly corrupt society, such as the rampant pornography on the Internet. You see, the forces in question don't fear decadence. They fear truth.
The onus should be on American citizens in this case IMHO, not the gambling entities in another nation.
The US at this point has control of the Internet, therefore it behooves them to control the citizens of the USA, not try to penalize foreign businesses.
Comments are closed for this post.


Recent comments