Cruz is unhappy with ICANN CEO’s answers.
Cruz previously criticized Chehadé for his participation with World Internet Conference, a conference organized by the Chinese government. He asked Chehadé some pointed questions about his role and when it began.
Chehadé responded, but Cruz isn’t happy with his answers.
Cruz’s statement today reads:
Either the World Internet Conference and the People’s Republic of China have misreported the events that took place during their own conference or Fadi Chehade isn’t being completely honest with the United States Senate. While Chehade continues to state that his first meeting won’t take place until later this year, the Xinhua News Agency, the official press agency of the People’s Republic of China, reported on December 17, 2015 that, ‘The advisory committee held its first meeting on the sidelines of the second World Internet Conference in Wuzhen of east China’s Zhejiang Province. Jack Ma, founder of China’s Internet giant Alibaba, and Fadi Chehade, president and CEO of ICANN, act as co-chairman of the advisory committee.’ It should also be noted that Chehade has admitted that he has entered into an arrangement while still serving as the CEO of ICANN and performing under a contract with the United States government, through which his future travel costs to the Chinese government’s state-sponsored World Internet Conference will be compensated. Travel compensation from the Chinese government can be a form of personal conflict of interest, which could impair Chehade’s ability to act impartially and in the best interest of the government when performing under the contract. As such, Chehade should recuse himself from all ICANN decisions that could impact the Chinese government, which include all negotiations and discussions pertaining to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) transition.
Canadians, crazy… am I right or what.
Greed really got to Chehade. Resign already
Future travel costs and I believe he is stepping down officially in March. I am not sure how far you can impute conflict of interest here. Government officials jump from civil service to corporate roles all the time. I am certain that some of those conversation start before their tenures are finished. I do not see much substance in the Senator’s statement without additional facts.
Well, this is Ted Cruz we’re talking about here.
http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality
With all due respect, that was a stupid article you linked to.
Normally I really like you and your website, Andrew Allemann, but this time I’m not happy with you and you’re going to hear it now. 🙂
I’m sure you’re a very brilliant guy, but this issue transcends party politics and ideology. Cruz is the only one in a position to do something now whom I have seen who hasn’t yet sold his soul and sold out the entire country and the entire world with this “transition.” Even Bill Clinton hadn’t done that as of not long ago, also opposing the transition, though I wonder what he might say now.
It doesn’t matter how many people believe or want this to be a partisan issue. This issue transcends all of that. It is no less important and consequential than Net neutrality was, with no less at stake, and maybe even more this time in the long haul.
The left cared about Net neutrality, they were right about it, and the whole country heard about it because of that. They did a good job and I’m glad they did. But now they are dead wrong about this, and no surprise the country is practically clueless that if even exists, or what it is, or that it is not the previous Net neutrality issue to begin with.
The right were dead wrong about Net neutrality, but now it’s almost only one or a few from the right who are dead right about this. But since the left are all too happy with the party line on this one, the “media” has predominately towed the party line. and the ideological line. Is that what you are? If so I recommend trying independence, it’s rather liberating and you get to honestly choose the best from both sides and reject the worst.
Okay while I can think of one of your blogging peers whom I could happily bet big bucks he wouldn’t even allow this post to appear, I’m sure you’ll bear with me in this little rant. 🙂
I’m confused as to what you think my political views are. Is this in reference to the original article or to my comment about Cruz and net neutrality?
Your comment about Cruz and Net neutrality, in light of the article above and the larger issue it relates to. I would think since I obviously support Cruz’s efforts against the “transition” and in light of how I replied to Ivan I don’t have a problem with the posting of the article. From what and how you posted, my impression is that you are probably a Democrat or hold to that leaning or view more or less if you are a US citizen, which frankly since I don’t know much about you I have no idea if you are the latter. I know M. Berkens and E. Silver are US based, whom I consider the other two of what I call the “big three” of the blogs, but regarding you I haven’t seen much info and haven’t bothered looking. So for all I know you could be Canadian like A. Dicker. Given how Raider fared over at the now former DNF, my impression was that as a Canadian Dicker probably held the equivalent views of a Democrat, while his American partner in crime seemed to probably be a Democrat as well.
So I hope that answered your question. The issue of the “transition” is so important that nothing less than life, the world, freedom and free speech, and commerce as you know and take for granted are at stake long term, no less than and perhaps even more than with Net neutrality, the issue the “left” and the Democrats by and large were right about while the “right” was wrong then.
And Berkens has been the Old El Paso taco shell girl who saved the day with a dose of basic common sense in terms of debunking the bull-spit sales pitch used to sell the “transition” regarding the threat to “Balkanize” the Internet (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqgSO8_cRio), which he did previously in one of the panel shows at the Sherpa site.
Now I suppose Berryhill may come in to try to pistol whip me over this issue, but time will tell.
And I’d still love to see what former President Clinton says about it now. Would be interesting to see if there has been any flip in his current stance.
Last I saw, essentially every Republican except Cruz was ready to capitulate on this.
I don’t associate with either party. I can hardly see how the transition could be a partisan issue. Alas, making it political is the world we live in.
My personal view on the transition is that it will be good long term for the internet and freedom of speech worldwide.
My comment about Cruz was in relation to his views on another important internet matter. I think that’s relevant.
(Reply in moderation now…)
>”I don’t associate with either party.”
Good to know, at least that would mean you’re not a partisan-ideologue basher on the left (or the right).
>”I can hardly see how the transition could be a partisan issue. Alas, making it political is the world we live in.”
Unfortunately it seems too few people think that way.
>”My personal view on the transition is that it will be good long term for the internet and freedom of speech worldwide.”
Okay, that is the heart of the matter and where we disagree, and I suppose we can “agree to disagree.” I’m surprised anyone could honestly feel that way.
>”My comment about Cruz was in relation to his views on another important internet matter. I think that’s relevant.”
Yes, obviously, but your comment was also obviously meant to demonstrate that Cruz is a boob. Since you support the transition that also explains why of course.
P.S. And accordingly please also note that this does not mean I endorse and party or candidate now either. It simply is what it is with how things are now.
>”Government officials jump from civil service to corporate roles all the time. I am certain that some of those conversation start before their tenures are finished.”
Yes, Ivan, that is what is otherwise known as corruption, and that’s the problem. It definitely happens here, the US, too much, but people are still not completely jaded by it here. That you can even write that way, however, suggests to me that you may be from a country where people are so jaded by that phenomenon that they don’t even consider questioning it anymore and just accept it.
If you want to see an organization making great use of the little known and extremely obscure official country code domain of the US to combat that very phenomenon, the .US ccTLD which hardly anyone in the US actually even knows exists, then definitely check out this website: http://www.Represent.us.
Very recently I even saw some of their great video addressing the very topic you just mentioned.
Agree with Ted, “Chehade should recuse himself from all ICANN decisions that could impact the Chinese government”
Clearly theirs a conflict of interest 2 proven points alone.. Sad that we have some idiot domainers digging up trash on the messenger, like it will somehow change the facts.
Aha – Raider. Now you’ve got a lot of nerve showing up like this after being absent so long. I’m being facetious of course.
You have deprived the domain domain and the domaining world of your presence, and your help when ideological alternatives are needed. (“Domain domain” – not bad.) I can also forgive you for having chosen sides at the great ideological dinner table of the world, too, especially since I know you’re sometimes right, especially much more often than some have been willing to admit before, but I won’t go into that now (though I did a while back, and I guess you missed it and it was deleted).
I suppose perhaps you were against Net neutrality given your affiliation, though you can surprise nonetheless if not. But to the extent that you also oppose this so-called “transition” and whatever Cruz has been up to (whom you call “Ted,” most telling of course), you once again are absolutely right. And I hope you’ve seen what http://www.Represent.us has been up to too.
Nice to see you. I suppose it’ll be another few years before you post again, unless the implosion of one of your detractors has encouraged you to rejoin the world, but take care all the same. If I ever get a chance and if you’re interested, I’d also like to show you what I posted re your sage some time ago too, but I would have to show you a copy because it had to be removed as part of a bigger unrelated debacle on another site. Cheers, Raider. 🙂
And my statement that my reply to you is awaiting moderation is now also awaiting moderation, lol. Only this blog among the big three does all this.
It’s WordPress’ Akismet spam filter that’s catching your comments as spam. I’m not sure why that wouldn’t happen on other sites, too. Unfortunately, there’s no whitelisting feature to get around Akismet that I’m aware of.
It never happens at DomainInvesting, and at TheDomains it has only very rarely ever happened, and when it has it seems to relate only to the presence of links. Here it happens a lot with no apparent reason, and my post to Ivan which contained a link to Represent.US didn’t even get held up in moderation.
Oops, that should be:
* to the extent that you also oppose this so-called “transition” and [SUPPORT] whatever Cruz has been up to…