more on What the WSIS argument (doesn't) mean

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: jean_camp <jean_camp () harvard edu>
Date: October 14, 2005 11:35:03 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] more on What the WSIS argument (doesn't) mean


Which bunch of evil bullies - those UN High Commission of Refugees,  
those Dutch blue helmets who died trying to stop genocide in Rawanda,  
and those with decades of service of UNICEF?

Certainly there are elements of corruption but we can not hold the  
American corporate, not for profit, or federal government as ideals.  
This kind of comment dismisses the armies of people who work across  
the globe for compassion, the unarmed NGO participants that have  
higher death rates than soldiers.  I might be in my comfy chair but I  
have at least the decency to respect those that have left such  
comforts behind. (I feel the same about condemnations of soldiers for  
leader's failures.)

Supporting ICANN does not require dismissal of UNICEF. To be willing  
to undermine the work of the UN to avoid the work of  firing a brain  
cell is shameless, beyond pandering.

regards,
Jean
who will be doing trick or treat for UNICEF as a pirate. ARRRRRRRR


On Oct 4, 2005, at 8:40 AM, David Farber wrote:


>  actually have no objection to international oversight of the  
> Internet,
> but the notion of handing it over to that collection of thugs,  
> chiselers
> and road agents known as the UN is downright absurd.  Maybe some new
> organization, open only to countries with democratically elected
> governments, might be the way to go.
>
>
>
> Hiawatha Bray



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/