more news on ICANN Ombudsman Frank Fowlie's air rage incident & cover-up attempt

[Nuno Garcia]

Dear all, I do not feel very comfortable with this line of emails - it is
true that one reveals itself in small details. However, we must not judge a
man on a single incident.

Please allow for the dust to settle, and then, judge the professional, not
the air-passenger that may have been disturbed for some reason.

Anyway, I do not know enough of this issue to make an educated comment.

BR,

Nuno Garcia


2010/7/29 Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca>

> Hey, dear Brian, relax! Do you really think Amodio and I are treating this
> as a laughing matter??
>
> I do not think it is humor, actually -- I think it is ironic, heavily
> ironic. And is a way to stress the increasing dominance of the so-called
> "intelligence" apparatus (offense to the really intelligent) in the Icann
> system.
>
> I mean, Icann organizes an "open" discussion on the unacceptable MAPO rules
> embedded in the DAG, and invites the dogs instead of their masters to the
> discussion -- FBI, Interpol etc instead of the policy makers and regulators
> who command these guys. This is obviously to the benefit of that part of the
> business community which wants everything to be easily traceable without
> recourse to Court. A police officer wants his job easier, and so do the IPR
> constituency. It is actually sad and infuriating, so we are not laughing at
> all despite the little icons.
>
> --c.a.
>
>
> On 07/29/2010 02:13 PM, Brian Drolet wrote:
>
>> While there is some humor in the Fowlie fiasco, stocking ICANN with police
>> agents is a) not a laughing matter and b) part of the larger context of the
>> militarization of governments and agencies throughout the world,
>> particularly in the arenas of "unregulated" citizen communication and
>> behavior. The debate on privacy vs security in the age of intensified
>> government secrecy and "Total Information Awareness" is part of a much
>> larger battle. For example, the Washington Post reported on July 29th: "The
>> [Obama] administration wants to add just four words -- "electronic
>> communication transactional records" -- to a list of items that the law says
>> the FBI may demand without a judge's approval. Government lawyers say this
>> category of information includes the addresses to which an Internet user
>> sends e-mail; the times and dates e-mail was sent and received; and possibly
>> a user's browser history." Of course Jane Lute, the Department of Homeland
>> Security deputy secretary assured an audi
>>
>
> ence at the Black Hat conference this week that "she wants "to create a
> safe, secure, resilient place where we can thrive...The goal here is not
> control. It's confidence."
>
>>
>> Brian Drolet
>> Deep Dish TV
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>>> From: "Carlos A. Afonso"<ca at CAFONSO.CA>
>>> Sent: Jul 29, 2010 11:03 AM
>>> To: NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>> Subject: Re: more news on ICANN Ombudsman Frank Fowlie's air rage
>>> incident&  cover-up attempt
>>>
>>> :)
>>>
>>> Well, re "liking" as a motivation, humans use to behave like this,
>>> especially in positions of power.
>>>
>>> :)
>>>
>>> --c.a.
>>>
>>> On 07/28/2010 09:23 PM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
>>>
>>>> What is it becoming? A new international law enforcement body overseen
>>>>> by
>>>>> the US gov?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We are watching the transformation of ICANN into KHAOS, somebody needs
>>>> to call Maxwell Smart.
>>>>
>>>> :)
>>>>
>>>> BTW since when "like" is a measure of performance ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Jorge
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Carlos A. Afonso
>>> CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
>>> Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
>>> ====================================
>>> new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
>>> ====================================
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
>
> Carlos A. Afonso
> CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
> Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
> ====================================
> new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
> ====================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100729/16c3d4f4/attachment.html>