Is the WHO (World Health Organization) planning to take control of the Internet, for the “benefit of humanity”?!
Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!
Claim : WHO Plans To Take Control Of Internet!
People are sharing an article by NewsPunch, which claims that the WHO (World Health Organization) is planning to take control of the Internet, for the “benefit of humanity”!
Here is an excerpt of the very long article, so please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!
WHO Moves Forward With Plans To Take Total Control of the Internet ‘For the Benefit of Humanity’
The World Health Organization (WHO) this week held a meeting to advance the international pandemic treaty — a legally binding instrument that will grant the global health agency total control over the internet to censor anything it deems to be “false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation”.
Specifically, WHO member states are instructed to “tackle false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation, including through promotion of international cooperation” and manage “infodemics…through effective channels, including social media.” Infodemics is a term that the WHO uses to describe “too much information including false or misleading information in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak.”
Additionally, Article 16 (“Whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches at the national level”) recommends that WHO member states collaborate with non-state actors and the private sector when carrying out their obligations under the treaty.
As the treaty has progressed, it has faced increased political pushback from elected officials in member states, with US Republican Senators recently introducing a bill that would require the treaty to be approved by two-thirds of the Senate.
But despite this pushback, the Biden administration committed to the international pandemic treaty on the first day of the recent WHO meeting.
And the WHO is continuing to discuss the treaty and plan for its future. The global health agency has another meeting to discuss the treaty scheduled for April 3 to April 6, plans to present the treaty to its decision-making body, the World Health Assembly (WHA), in May, and hopes to finalize the treaty by May 2024.
The WHO intends to adopt the treaty under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution through an international lawmaking process where a group of mostly unelected diplomats vote on the treaty.
If the treaty passes, WHO member states will be required to “raise financial resources for effective implementation” of the treaty and commit to allocating at least 5% of their annual health expenditure to “pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and health systems recovery.” Additionally, the treaty tells member states to commit an undisclosed amount of their gross domestic product (GDP) to “international cooperation and assistance on pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and health systems recovery.” This equates to billions of dollars in annual expenditure for many WHO member states and hundreds of billions of dollars per annum for some.
This WHO push to crack down on speech via this international pandemic treaty is being made in tandem with another WHO effort that targets “misinformation” and “disinformation” — proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005).
Like the treaty, these proposed amendments will be legally binding under international law if finalized. The amendments include provisions for the WHO to “counter misinformation and disinformation” at “the global level” and to develop member states’ capacities to gain “leverage of communication channels to communicate the risk, countering misinformation and dis-information.”
In a report that was released alongside the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR), the WHO suggested it would use its new misinformation and disinformation targeting powers to go after content that could “undermine public trust in health agencies and impede public confidence in, and compliance with, governmental or WHO guidance.” It also called for “a balance between ensuring more accurate scientific information on one hand and freedom of speech and the press on the other.”
Truth : WHO Is NOT Planning To Take Over Internet!
This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS about the World Health Organization – WHO, and here are the reasons why…
Fact #1 : NewsPunch Is A Fake News Website
Like Real Raw News, NewPunch is a FAKE NEWS website that capitalises on making shocking but fake stories to generate page views and money.
It was founded as Your News Wire in 2014, before being rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news spread on Facebook that year.
Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should NEVER share anything from NewsPunch. Here are some of its fake stories that I personally debunked earlier:
Fact #2 : WHO Member States Want To Better Prepare For Future Pandemics
This claim is based on WHO member state discussions in 2022, to amend existing International Health Regulations to strengthen the world’s preparedness against future global pandemics.
The International Health Regulations (IHR) were first adopted by member states in 1969, empowering the WHO to monitor global diseases. Those regulations have since been revised over the years, including in 2005 – after the SARS outbreak.
On 1 December 2021, world leaders agreed to kickstart the process to draft and negotiate an agreement or convention to “strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response“.
The proposed recommendations came from WHO member states, and not WHO itself. Among the more than 200 recommendations on how to better prepare for the next pandemic were:
sharing of data and genomic sequences on emerging viruses
a plan for equitable vaccine distribution
a ban on wildlife markets
incentives for reporting new viruses or variants
In other words – this agreement is being formulated by WHO member states, and not the WHO itself.
If you read the zero draft of the proposed WHO agreement, you will realise that the WHO is not planning to control the Internet. This is explicitly stated in Article 17, which refers to “Parties” that are the member states.
The Parties commit to increase science, public health and pandemic literacy in the population, as well as access to information on pandemics and their effects, and tackle false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation, including through promotion of international cooperation.
As you can see, under the agreement, each individual country will commit to increase KNOWLEDGE about science and public health, as well as combat “false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation”.
Not only does the article clearly state that it is up to each country (not the WHO) to implement its policies, it does not mention anything about controlling the Internet.
The only people who need to worry about Article 17 of this proposed WHO agreement are those who peddle “false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation”.
Fact #4 : No One Can “Take Over” The Internet
The Internet is not some kind of organisation that the WHO can “take over”, even if it wants to. The Internet is a global system of networks, literally a “network of networks” connecting the networks in each country to each other.
Until today, there is no centralised control of the Internet – no one sets the rules or policies, or even technical implementations. It is up to each country to adopt its own policies, although to ensure interoperability, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) manages the domain name system (DNS), while the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) helps to standardise and improve technical aspects of the Internet.
Due to its autonomous nature, no one can control the Internet, never mind take over control. Individual countries and organisations can control its own networks, limiting or filtering access as they wish, but they cannot do so for other networks.
Fact #4 : Many Countries Do NOT Want A Binding Treaty
The claim that this is a binding treaty is, currently, false.
While the European Union, Britain, Indonesia and Kenya have proposed that the changes be adopted in the form of a binding treaty, the United States, India and Brazil opposed that idea.
The EU proposed the treaty and is its biggest backer, with support from Britain, Indonesia, Kenya and others.
The United States will take part in the talks but has opposed a binding treaty. India and Brazil have also voiced reservations.
With so many member countries involved, securing agreement is likely to be tricky.
If you download and read the zero draft, you will realise that the WHO is still calling it a “convention, agreement, or other international instruments“, clearly showing that member countries have not decided whether they want it to be binding or otherwise.
In the third point noted on the very first page of the draft, it was even pointed out that this is just a draft that is being used for “commencing negotiations“, and that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed“.
The INB (Intergovernmental Negotiating Body) further agreed that the zero draft would be considered at its fourth meeting as a basis for commencing negotiations at that meeting, it being understood that the zero draft will be without prejudice to the position of any delegation and following the principle that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”.
So it is ludicrous for anyone who read the first page of the zero draft to claim that this is a binding treaty.
Fact #7 : WHO Agreement Must Be Ratified By Member Countries
The claim that the proposed WHO agreement will be voted on by “mostly unelected diplomats” is nonsense.
First of all, the agreement was drafted and amended by member countries themselves. The WHO is only facilitating this agreement. It is not the one creating the agreement.
Secondly, even after member countries agree on a final WHO agreement, it must be approved and adopted by each individual country. This is clearly stated in Article 33(1) with my emphasis in bold:
The WHO CA+ shall be subject to ratification, acceptance, approval or accession by States, and to formal confirmation or accession by regional economic integration organizations. It shall be open for accession from the day after the date on which the WHO CA+ is closed for signature. Instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval, formal confirmation or accession shall be deposited with the Depositary.
Fact #8 : All Treaties Require US Senate Ratification
The move by Republican Senators to introduce a bill that would require the WHO treaty to be approved by two-thirds of the Senate is nothing more than political drama, because it is already the law of the land.
The US Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to approve, by a two-thirds vote or more, all international treaties (binding agreements) negotiated by the executive branch.
[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;
In other words, the bill by Republican senators is irrelevant political theatre. If the WHO agreement is a binding treaty, the US Constitution already requires two-thirds of the US Senate to ratify it.
Please help us fight fake news – SHARE this article, and SUPPORT our work!
Please Support My Work!
Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!
Name : Adrian Wong Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.
He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.
People are sharing a post by Li Guangman on what China should worry about the Russia-Ukraine War.
Take a look at the viral post, and find out what the facts really are!
Li Guangman : What China Should Worry About Russia Invading Ukraine!
Chinese and pro-China netizens have been sharing this post by Chinese blogger Li Guangman on what lessons China should learn from the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
It’s a very long post, so feel free to skip to the next section for the facts…
Some worries brought about by the Russia-Ukraine war (says Li Guangman)
After the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war, the robbery behavior in the entire Western world broke many Chinese people’s perceptions, which made me feel a strong and deep worry.
First, in the past, the Chinese generally believed that all public platforms were neutral and would not be interrupted no matter what happened. However, after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war, some so-called public platforms immediately announced their participation in sanctions against Russia. First, a large number of foreign Internet service operators headed by the United States announced sanctions against Russia and launched a “disconnection action” against Russia. The second is the removal of major Russian banks from the U.S.-controlled SWIFT system, making it impossible for major Russian banks to conduct global transactions and settlements. Both the network root directory system and the U.S. dollar settlement system are so-called public platforms controlled by the United States. Once a war breaks out, all of them will become weapons of war, and even become a key factor in determining the victory of the war. The greater the reliance on these systems, the more victims will suffer, the deeper the degree.
Second, some previous propaganda told us that satellites in space are safe and will not be attacked, and space wars will not break out. However, immediately after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war, a mysterious hacker group (obviously the cyber army behavior of some government organizations) attacked the Russian space control center, and claimed to have shut down the Russian space center and successfully made all Russian satellites out of control. The Russian space control center said it was indeed attacked, but the security system automatically obscured the attack and repelled it. Does this suggest that warfare has extended into space? Are space battles going on all the time?
Third, the Chinese generally believe that banks in Western countries are safer than domestic banks, and Western countries attach great importance to the sacrosanctity of private property. However, after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian War, the entire Western countries immediately erupted with ferocity like hungry wolves, killing Russia. All the assets of the government and private individuals overseas were looted, not only the bank assets were frozen, but even the luxury yachts and private residences of the Russians overseas were taken away. According to preliminary statistics, the total amount of Russian overseas assets frozen by Western groups this time is about 8 trillion US dollars. Li Ka-shing, who had previously cashed out hundreds of billions of yuan from China and switched to the UK, has recently started selling grid assets worth more than 100 billion yuan in the UK. What does that mean? These capital tycoons who have no motherland and no conscience are finally starting to feel unsafe to invest overseas. What is China’s total overseas assets? Some people estimate that the total overseas assets of the Chinese government, enterprises and individuals are about 16 trillion US dollars, which is roughly equivalent to China’s annual GDP. To freeze US Treasury bonds purchased by China. Once a conflict breaks out between China and the United States or between China and Western countries, the United States and Western countries will definitely take action against China’s overseas assets, which is certain.
Fourth, in the consciousness of the Chinese, Switzerland is a neutral country, and it is absolutely safe to store money in Switzerland. However, after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war, Switzerland immediately gave up its neutral position, announced its participation in sanctions against Russia, and froze all Russian funds in Swiss banks thus uncovering the hypocrisy that Switzerland is a pure financial land. How much assets do Chinese people deposit in Switzerland? These assets are probably no longer safe now.
Fifth, after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war, almost all high-tech companies in the United States and Western groups announced their participation in sanctions against Russia. They cut off the supply of chips and all high-tech products to Russia. Musk’s Starlink also participated in the sanctions against Russia. Sanctions and support for Ukraine, Apple is also involved in sanctions, the depth and breadth of the technology sanctions imposed on Russia by the entire West are beyond our imagination, sanctions are imposed on anything that can sting or kill Russia, and the methods are used to the extreme. What science without borders is just bullshit. In this regard, the United States has already used China’s Huawei. In the future, once a conflict between China and the United States breaks out, the United States and the West will definitely impose the most severe sanctions and embargoes on all high-tech products, materials and technologies in China. There is no doubt about this.
Sixth, many Chinese believe that Western public opinion is the freest, and Western news is the most authentic. However, after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war, the entire Western public opinion has become a public opinion war machine launched against Russia, and the major Internet platforms in the United States and Europe. They have closed Russia’s external communication channels, they control the entire public opinion dissemination, guide public opinion in a direction that is beneficial to the United States and the West, and they continue to create fake news. Once a conflict between China and the United States breaks out, the United States will definitely launch a war of public opinion against China. On the one hand, it strictly seals the voice of China, preventing China from speaking in the world, and on the other hand, it amplifies the negative news that attacks and smears China.
Seventh, there are many other sanctions. For example, the sports, cultural, artistic, and music industries have imposed sanctions on Russia, and even Russian cats and Russian trees have been sanctioned. It looks funny, but it is not funny. A true manifestation of Western political and cultural hegemony, which allows us to see how deep and wide the influence and control of Western hegemony are. These areas that do not seem to belong to politics have suddenly become weapons of war. It has become a tool of war that kills people without blood. This is probably the first time we have such a deep feeling.
The above points should give us a sense of sudden awakening. Now we will truly realize that the Russian-Ukrainian war is actually a real all-out war waged by the entire Western bloc against Russia. In addition to providing arms and funds to Ukraine, the Western bloc is also waging an all-out war against Russia in all fields. These The means of participating in the war are either open or covert, but they are all aimed at the key points of Russia, and both are fatal. If the United States and the Western bloc were not afraid of Russia’s thousands of nuclear bombs, and not afraid of Putin’s strongman character as he said and did, they must have already rushed to bite them directly.
In my opinion, the contradictions between China and the United States and the group of Western countries are irreconcilable and inevitable. All the means and weapons used by the United States and Western groups on Russia today will be used on China, and they will only be more vicious and barbaric, with no exceptions.
There will definitely be conflicts between China and the United States. The United States and Western blocs will definitely cut off China’s Internet connection with the world. They will definitely launch attacks on China’s space satellites and satellite navigation systems. They will definitely drive China out of SWIFT and make China like Russia and Iran. Launching an unprecedented financial war against China will definitely impose stricter and more comprehensive sanctions and blockades on China’s high-tech and high-end manufacturing industries, it will definitely cut off China’s energy transportation channels, and it will definitely launch a war of public opinion against China. To launch a color revolution, it will definitely try to isolate China from the so-called “mainstream” of world politics in all fields. The war will be carried out with unimaginable cruelty and brutality, there will be no so-called morality, and there will be no so-called rules, in addition to life and death, there is no way out.
This comprehensive war launched by the United States and the Western bloc against Russia is a realistic version of the sand table exercise for us, and it is a bloody teaching. We must start to act now, start the layout, and be fully prepared to deal with a comprehensive war that is bound to happen in the future, which is related to the fate of the country and to life and death.
The situation is getting more and more serious, not the storm is coming, but the storm is coming, we must act now, act now, act now, because the hatred of the United States and the entire Western bloc against China is deeper than that of Russia, destroying and the will and impulse to loot China is stronger.
Therefore, the coming war will be more tragic and bloody, there will be no mercy, there will be no reinforcements, everything can only depend on ourselves, on our own strength, on our own preparations, on our own will.”
PS. I have no idea who Li Guangman is, but apparently, some Community Party folks think he’s important, and have been sharing his posts.
Li Guangman Is Wrong About Why China Should Worry About Russia Invading Ukraine
I have no idea if Li Guangman actually wrote that post, but one thing is for sure – it is full of misinformation.
I’m not going to focus on what lessons China should learn from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but I will show you what can be easily and factually proven false in that viral post.
Fact #1 : Corporations Do Not Sanction Countries
Li Guangman falsely claimed (intentionally?) that Internet service providers and social media platforms announced sanctions against Russia after they invaded Ukraine.
That never happened, because corporations don’t issue sanctions. Those corporations only decided to stop working with Russia, after Western countries announced sanctions against Russia.
Cogent Communications, which is the second-largest Internet connectivity provider in Russia, terminated their contracts there on 4 March 2022 to comply with EU Regulation 2022/350.
Fact #2 : Corporations Chose To Stop Doing Business In Russia
Many corporations decided to stop doing business in Russia, mainly because they are public-listed companies that are answerable to their shareholders, and their customers worldwide.
For many, the limited Russian business they conduct is not worth risking their worldwide business, especially when the rest of the world is stridently against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Automotive : Ford, General Motors, Toyota, Volkswagen and Nissan
Aviation : Boeing and Airbus
Finance : Visa, Mastercard, American Express, PayPal, Western Union, Moody’s, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup
Big Tech : Airbnb, Amazon Web Services, Apple, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Netflix, Nintendo, Sony, Spotify, TikTok
Hotels : Hyatt, Hilton, Marriott
There is also the issue of sanctions – Western sanctions may also prohibit them from selling their products and services to Russia and/or Belarus.
Fact #3 : US Did Not Launch “Disconnection Action” Against Russia
Li Guangman also falsely claimed (intentionally?) that the US launched disconnection action against Russia. That never happened.
The easiest way to do that would be to get ICANN to remove Russian domains from the Internet, which would prevent anyone from accessing any server in Russia.
However, the United States never made such a request. Only Ukraine asked ICANN to do this, but ICANN refused their request.
It is also a very silly claim to make, because it actually benefits the US and Western nations to maintain Internet connectivity to Russia, which allows them to reach out to Russian citizens with the truth.
Fact #4 : Russia Blocked Western Social Media
In fact, Li Guangman (intentionally?) left out the fact that the Russian government itself blocked or restricted access to Western social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.
The truth is – it does not benefit Russia to let their citizens access uncensored information about their invasion of Ukraine. That’s why they blocked access to Western social media platforms.
This is where Russia is attempting to mimic China in its control of what information citizens can access. China is the undisputed leader in Internet censorship.
Fact #5 : Russia Prepared To Cut Itself Off The Internet
Li Guangman also (intentionally?) left out the fact that Russia was more than prepared to cut itself from the Internet.
The Russians started working on the ability to cut themselves from the Internet in the early 2010s, testing that ability in 2019 and in subsequent years.
Russian President Vladimir Putin also signed into law, a set of 2019 amendments called the Sovereign Internet Law (Закон о «суверенном интернете»), that lets the government cut Russia off the rest of the Internet.
Fact #6 : SWIFT Is Controlled By EU, Not US
SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications) messaging network is not American, but Belgian, based in La Hulpe, Belgium.
As a cooperative society under Belgian law, SWIFT is owned by its members – financial institutions, not countries. In fact, its current chairman is Yawar Shah of Pakistan, while its CEO is Javier Pérez-Tasso of Spain.
Li Guangman (intentionally?) forgot to point out that the United States and Britain had been pushing for Russia to be banned from SWIFT, but EU nations refused earlier.
In the end, the European Union agreed to remove seven Russian banks from SWIFT, instead of the entire country.
The EU also excluded Sberbank (largest bank in Russia) and Gazprombank from the SWIFT removal, so they could still buy oil from Russia.
All proof that SWIFT is controlled by the EU, not the US.
Fact #7 : SWIFT Is Just A Messaging Service
SWIFT is a messaging system that securely transfers “messages containing the payment instructions between financial institutions involved in a transaction“.
It is not a payment system, and therefore, does not hold any funds. Neither does it perform cleaning or settlement services.
After a payment instruction has been initiated through SWIFT, the corresponding financial institutions must then “settle” the transaction through a payment system, like TARGET2 in Europe.
Fact #8 : SWIFT Removal Is Only An Inconvenience
While removal from SWIFT is a big deal, it is not the end of the world for those seven Russian banks, because it is merely a messaging system.
Banks can use alternative methods like faxes (yes, they still exist!) or alternative messaging systems like Russia’s own SPFS, China’s CIPS and India’s SFMS.
VEB is largely focused on domestic projects, and uses SPFS for overseas transactions
Sovcombank says that other sanctions already block it from making overseas payments, so the SWIFT removal has no impact
Promsvyazbank said that it had prepared for SWIFT removal, so it will not have a significant impact
VTB and Otkritie said that they would not be impacted
So Li Guangman’s claim that SWIFT removal is a weapon of war is… absurd and melodramatic.
Fact #9 : No One Ever Said Satellites Are Safe From Attacks
Li Guangman also falsely claimed (intentionally?) that Western nations had earlier claimed that “satellites are safe and will not be attacked“.
No country ever said that. In fact, the United States Space Force was formed, in part, to protect US satellite communications.
The US Space Force Vice Chief of Space Operations, General David Thompson even shared in November 2021 that :
“Both China and Russia are regularly attacking US satellites with non-kinetic means, including lasers, radio frequency jammers, and cyber attacks… every single day“
Li Guangman seems incredibly naive and ignorant about daily attacks on satellites, because the alternative explanation would be that he knew but intentionally chose to mislead you.
Fact #10 : Anonymous Is Not A Government Organisation
Li Guangman falsely claimed (intentionally?) that Anonymous is “some government organisations”.
Anonymous is a decentralised collective of anonymous hactivists… hence, its name.
It is not a government organisation.
It has previously attacked several Western governments, including the United States
Dozens of people associated with Anonymous cyberattacks have been arrested in the US, UK, Australia, the Netherlands, Spain, India and Turkey.
This is common knowledge, so it is peculiar that Li Guangman is so ignorant about Anonymous… or believes that people are stupid enough to believe him.
Fact #11 : Anonymous Did Not Hack Russian Space Agency
They never shut down the Russian space control centre, or took any Russian satellite out of control. All those are lies that Li Guangman apparently concocted.
Roscosmos Chief Executive, Dmitry Rogozin also denied the claim, saying that “The information of these scammers and petty swindlers is not true. All our space activity control centers are operating normally.‘
So you have to ask yourself – why would Li Guangman lie about this? These are all on public record. Does he believe that you are so gullible that you would believe everything he says?
Fact #12 : Sanctioned Assets Were Frozen, Not Seized
Li Guangman falsely claimed (intentionally?) that the assets of Russian government and private individuals were looted (stolen) by Western banks / governments.
As part of sanctions against the Russian government, Western countries also sanctioned certain Russian individuals, including the super-rich Russian oligarchs.
However, their assets were frozen, not seized. At least, not yet.
All individuals sanctioned by the US Treasury Department, for example, will have their assets frozen. Those assets would be locked up, and cannot be sold or accessed in any way.
The owner has to get a licence from the department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control to do anything – even to just pay property taxes, or fix a leaking roof.
That’s different from the government actually seizing the frozen assets – this requires the government to first prove that they are linked to a crime. Until that happens, the assets have not been “looted”.
According to Michael Parker, head of the anti-money laundering and sanctions practice at Ferrari & Associates :
These cases need to be built, there has to be a showing of some sort of underlying theory of forfeiture, there has to be a reason that they are forfeited. The mere fact that somebody the United States has said is a target owns this asset isn’t enough to form a basis of seizure under U.S. law.
Fact #13 : Only Assets Of Sanctioned Individuals Were Frozen
Li Guangman also falsely claimed (intentionally?) that ALL assets belonging to the Russian government and private individuals were stolen by Western banks / government.
Not only were they not stolen, only assets belonging to sanctioned individuals and the Russian government were frozen. The assets of other Russian individuals were not affected.
Chinese netizens need not be overly concerned about their money stashed in Western banks.
Even if China decides to do something similarly evil like Russia, and invade another country, Western banks will only be forced to freeze the assets of those in power, like Chinese President Xi Jinping, for example.
Fact #14 : Less Than US$1 Trillion Frozen So Far
Li Guangman also falsely claimed (intentionally?) that Western countries froze US$8 trillion worth of assets.
On 5 March, UK Minister Jacob Rees-Mogg tweeted a chart that showed the value of Russian bank assets that were being sanctioned. That was actually criticised as being overly optimistic, but let’s assume it’s true.
That’s a total of £537.6 billion pounds, or US$703.7 billion. Even if you add US$15 billion of assets targeted by sanctioning seven Russian oligarchs, the total is still under US$719 billion.
So Li Guangman overstated the amount of sanctioned Russian assets by some 11X… if not more.
The City of London leads the way in the effects of sanctioning Russian banks. pic.twitter.com/WAgFV64ghy
Fact #15 : Switzerland Only Adopts Military Neutrality
Li Guangman appears to be confused by the concept of “Swiss neutrality”, which refers to military neutrality – Switzerland will not be involved in armed or political conflicts between other states.
Switzerland, however, pursues an active foreign policy, and is frequently involved in peace-building processes globally.
Fact #16 : Switzerland Has Adopted EU Sanctions Since 1998
Li Guangman appears to be living in the past, claiming that Switzerland abandoned its neutrality to sanction Russia.
While Switzerland declined to be part of EU, it has been adopting EU-only sanctions for the past 24 years!
1998 : EU sanctions against Yugoslavia
2000 : EU sanctions against Myanmar
2002 : EU sanctions against Zimbabwe
2006 : EU sanctions against Uzbekistan and Belarus
2022 : EU sanctions against Russia and Belarus
Fact #17 : Tech Companies Have To Comply With Sanctions
Li Guangman appears to be surprised that tech companies are complying with sanctions.
Of course, tech companies have to comply with sanctions. If they don’t, they would be legally liable and punished with fines and other legal actions.
In fact, Russia just announced sanctions against a wide range of American officials, including US President Joe Biden. They are expecting companies to comply with those sanctions as well.
We should also remember that China imposed sanctions of her own on US individuals and organisations, and expected companies to comply with their sanctions.
Did he expect companies to only comply with Russian and Chinese sanctions, but not those from Western countries?
Fact #18 : Russia Started The Conflict
Li Guangman claimed that Russia invading of Ukraine is “a real all-out war waged by the entire Western bloc against Russia“. What utter nonsense.
Western nations have repeatedly warned the world that Russia was planning to invade Ukraine since November 2021, even as Russia and pro-Russia forces derided them.
As early as December 2021, US President Joe Biden even threatened Russia with sweeping Western economic sanctions if it invaded Ukraine.
Russia repeatedly denied it was going to invade Ukraine, dismissing those warnings as “hysteria”. But they were lying, and ultimately invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022.
So let me be clear to Li Guangman and his supporters – the invasion of Ukraine was a war that Russia actively chose to initiate.
This was not a war “waged by the entire Western bloc against Russia“. This was a war that Russia waged against Ukraine.
Until today, the United States and NATO have repeatedly refused to directly defend Ukraine against attacks by Russia. So to call it an “all-out war” is also ludicrous.
This fake news appears to be part of the disinformation campaign conducted by the Chinese 50 Cent Army (wumao, 五毛) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check out!
Please Support My Work!
Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!
Name : Adrian Wong Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.
He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.
Los Angeles, California – For the first time ever, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is about to change the cryptographic keys that help secure the Internet’s Domain Name System (DNS).
“It is critical that Internet Service Providers and network operators around the world make certain they are ready for this change as failure to do so can result in their users being unable to look up domain names and thus be unable to reach any site on the Internet” said David Conrad, ICANN’s Chief Technology Officer. Conrad added, “Network operators should ensure they have up-to-date software, have enabled DNSSEC, and verified that their systems can update their keys automatically or they have processes in place to manually update to the new key by 1600 UTC on 11 October 2017.”
The ICANN DNS Key Change
The changing, or “rolling” of the DNS key, is an important step in keeping the global DNS safe and secure. It is very much in line with commonly accepted operational practices that ensure that important security infrastructure can support changing password if the need were to ever arise.
[adrotate group=”2″]
“We’ve launched a testing platform so network operators can make certain that they are ready for the key roll well ahead of October 11,” said Conrad. That testing platform can be accessed at https://go.icann.org/KSKtest. Internet users should contact their ISP or network operators to make certain they are ready for the key change.
ICANN has been working with technical partners such as the Regional Internet Registries, Network Operations Groups, and domain name registries and registrars as well as others in the Internet ecosystem, such as the Internet Society and Internet trade associations, to make certain that those around the world who may be impacted by the key roll are aware of the pending change.
ICANN Chief Executive Officer Göran Marby has sent correspondence to more than 170 government officials including regulators and participants in ICANN’s Government Advisory Committee, asking that they make certain the network operators in their respective countries are aware and ready for the DNS key change.
Support Tech ARP!
If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!
Seoul, South Korea – 62 youths from 14 Asia Pacific (APAC) economies are being groomed as future leaders as they attend the inaugural Asia Pacific Internet Governance Academy. Held at Yonsei University in Seoul, the five-day workshop on Internet governance and Internet-related topics was officially launched by the Korea Internet & Security Agency (KISA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) today.
The Academy aims to improve participants’ understanding of how the Internet works, the “bottom-up consensus building” model of Internet governance, which has helped shape the Internet as we know it today, and how they can take part in shaping the evolution of the Internet for the next generation.
“The Internet is not controlled by any single person, organization, or government. For the Internet to develop and cater to the needs of our region – of which half of the world’s Internet users reside – we need to get involved in the various platforms that discuss, develop and evolve the Internet,” said Jia-Rong Low, Vice President and Managing Director of ICANN’s Asia Pacific Hub.
“I would like to thank KISA and Korea for their partnership and leadership during the development and launch of this program. The next billion Internet users will likely come from our region, and today’s students are the leaders of tomorrow. We hope that after this academy, they can participate in ICANN, and other relevant platforms, to shape the future of the Internet,” Low added.
APAC Internet Governance Academy
The Academy will introduce participants to various Internet governance platforms, such as the Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum (APrIGF), as well as organizations involved in Internet governance work. Speakers from these organizations, such as the Korea Internet Governance Alliance (KIGA), Asia Pacific Network Information Center (APNIC) and Internet Society (ISOC), will share their experiences and work.
[adrotate banner=”4″]
Yoonhong Cho, Vice President of KISA added, “I am very delighted to see the KISA-ICANN joint project on capacity building for the Asia Pacific region bear such fruitful results, in the form of APIGA. In partnering with ICANN and with the strong support and significant contribution from our 11 sponsor organizations, I believe that the inaugural Asia Pacific event will be fully utilized as an incubating platform for the next generation of global leaders for the future Internet.”
ICANN and KISA received more than 120 applications from all over the APAC region. Successful applicants are required to attend 25 hours of online learning prior to the five-day workshop in Seoul. After the Academy, they will be invited to participate in regional and global Internet governance events, such as the 57th ICANN public meeting, which is being held in Hyderabad, India, from 3-9 November 2016.
The academy is also an extension of ICANN’s youth engagement program, which aims to reach out to the next generation and groom future leaders. Another program is NextGen@ICANN, which is held on the sidelines of ICANN Public Meetings.
Support Tech ARP!
If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participate in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donate to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!
Marrakech, Morocco – Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Board Chair Dr. Stephen D. Crocker today submitted to the U.S. Government a plan developed by the international Internet community that, if approved, will lead to global stewardship of some key technical Internet functions.
“This plan is a testament to the hard work of the global Internet community and the strength of the multistakeholder model,” said Crocker, who transmitted the plan on behalf of the global community. “The plan has now been sent to the U.S. Government for its review, and assuming it meets the necessary criteria, we will have reached an historic moment in the history of the Internet.”
The plan provides a comprehensive package to transition the U.S. Government’s stewardship of these technical functions, called the IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority), which are critical to the Internet’s smooth operation. It also proposes ways to enhance ICANN’s accountability as a fully independent organization. The transition is the final step in the long-anticipated privatization of the Internet’s Domain Name System (DNS), first outlined when ICANN was incorporated in 1998.
The ICANN Board received the package from the community during its 55th public meeting in Morocco, and today transmitted it to the U.S. National Telecommunication and Information Administration (NTIA).
On 14 March 2014, NTIA announced its desire to transition its stewardship of the IANA functions to the global multistakeholder community. The package is the result of an inclusive, global discussion amongst representatives from government, large and small business, technical experts, civil society, researchers, academics and end users.
“The Internet community has exhibited remarkable dedication to the IANA stewardship transition because we know just how important it is to complete,” said Alissa Cooper, Chair of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) that coordinated the development of the transition proposal. “Internet users the world over stand to benefit from its stability, security, and accountability enhancements to Internet governance once the proposal takes effect.”
[adrotate banner=”4″]The global Internet community has worked tirelessly to develop a plan that meets NTIA’s criteria, logging more than 600 meetings and calls, more than 32,000 mailing list exchanges and more than 800 working hours.
The package combines the technical requirements of a transition coordinated by the IANA Stewardship Transition Group (ICG) and enhancements to ICANN’s accountability identified by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability). The two groups were composed of volunteers representing a broad range of interests from the wider multistakeholder Internet community.
“This plan enjoys the broadest possible support from this very diverse community and I’m confident it will meet NTIA’s criteria,” said Thomas Rickert, one of the CCWG-Accountability co-Chairs. “The work of this group shows just how well the inclusive multistakeholder approach is working.”
The U.S. Government will now review the package to ensure that it meets NTIA’s criteria. If approved, implementation of the plan is expected to be completed prior to the expiration of the contract between NTIA and ICANN in September 2016.
Support Tech ARP!
If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participate in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donate to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!
Marrakech, Morocco – Moroccan Minister of Industry, Trade, Investment and the Digital Economy, Moulay Hafid Elalamy, expressed Morocco’s support of the IANA Stewardship Transition today, during the Opening Ceremony of ICANN’s 55th Public Meeting, taking place in Marrakech, Morocco from 5-10 March. The meeting is being held under the high patronage of His Majesty King Mohammed VI.
“This great meeting in Marrakech coincides with the last leg, the final leg, of the process in order to get to a transition plan of the governance model of the world system of Internet resources, in order to increase transparency as well as accountability,” said Elalamy. “This initiative is, without any doubt, the illustration of opening up the Internet.”
ICANN55
ICANN55 is taking place during a critical moment in the history of the Internet governance, as members of the global Internet community have come together in Marrakech to finalize a set of proposals which will transfer stewardship of key elements of the Internet’s system of unique identifiers – the IANA functions – from the United States Government over to the multistakeholder community.
[adrotate banner=”4″]Director General of Morocco’s National Telecommunications Regulatory Agency, Azdine El Mountassir Billah, spoke to the importance of the multistakeholder model of Internet governance, stating, “The great challenge – we know it all and we are working on it – consists of inventing a governance model for the Internet: a multistakeholder, inclusive, fair and balanced one, involving all stakeholders: governments, civil society, and businesses, in order to increase the exchange of opportunities, to reconcile points of view and to create the necessary synergies.”
ICANN Board Chair Dr. Stephen Crocker remarked on the historic nature of ICANN55, but also to the work that still lies ahead, stating, “These proposals will usher in a new era of independence and global accountability of ICANN. Let me emphasize that we’re not done yet. This will be an extremely important juncture at this meeting, and then we still have quite a lot of time and work that will go on in multiple quarters, including, of course, within the U.S. Government.”
“I wish to pay tribute to Mr. Fadi Chehadé, President of ICANN, and his team for the work done to make this organization what it is today,” added Billah. “And for supporting, with enthusiasm and confidence, the holding of the 55th meeting in my country, Morocco.”
Support Tech ARP!
If you like our work, you can help support out work by visiting our sponsors, participate in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donate to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!
