Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: Garry Anderson
Date/Time: Mon, January 21, 2002 at 7:11 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Subject: I Concur


Jason and Richard - you can see behind the veil of lies and spin.

The half truths, that authorities give, satisfy those whose senses have been dulled by years of propaganda.

They do not properly question or scrutinize them.

Nothing to do with intellect - just they have been conditioned with the stories of people 'stealing' Big Business domain names - when all businesses could have protected domain in a protected TLD. People do not realize ICANN are limiting a LIMITLESS resource, or that countries can have millions of domains - so nobody is 'stealing' the country name from them.

For one example (on scrutiny), regarding Jasons comment about our UK government and Richards about Bin Laden:

Simple question, why has nobody asked Blair:

Why does the PM support US attack on Afghanistan, with President Bush accepting no compromise - when the UK itself would not have released Bin Laden to US, without assurances about death sentence?

How could anybody support an invasion against Afghanistan, for not releasing Bin Laden - when they would not have released him either?

When I hear Blair and cronnies being interviewed - I am nearly always amazed at OBVIOUS questions the interviewer does not ask.


The fact that US DoC, ICANN and Afilias do not answer these questions, can only lead those of intelligence to one conclusion:

They are CORRUPT.

No doubt they believe; Better to be thought corrupt, than open your mouth and prove it.

For over two years, not one person has gave me sensible and logically reasoned explaination, why the authorities do not use restricted TLD to replace registered trademark symbol.

Like you both say - INJUSTICE is frustrating - it can only lead to direct action.


Message Thread:

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy