data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9178a/9178a8080e440b5b3c2780b00fc44bc146d81143" alt="Subscribe to Syndicate"
New Internet law provision in VAWA can crush individual freedoms
Article here. Excerpt:
'CUMBERLAND — The war to control the Internet began after Congress quietly passes a law allowing U.S. authorities to access foreign birth certificate repositories to identify worldwide Internet users.
...
All the details, that few Congressmen read, are in an unnoticed attachment in the recently passed Violence Against Women Act (S-47).
Section 808 regulates “marriage brokers” (similar to social referral or dating sites) that are prohibited from providing services to foreigners under 18. Foreign clients must submit their birth certificate information or government ID before communication with Americans can begin, and allows U.S. authorities access to this sensitive information, effectively creating an Snternet police force.
At first glance the stated purpose “to prevent marketing of underage children” by international marriage brokers seems reasonable. However, logic reveals that Section 808, an immigration provision, is pointless — an underage child cannot legally immigrate for the purpose of marriage. And why is it illegal for an 18-year-old American to say “Hello” to a 17-year-old Canadian?
The sinister term “marriage broker” is a spoof coined by special interests while crusading for the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act, the parent law of section 808. The legal definition of “marriage broker” is so broadly tailored that any online communication for social referral, friendship or dating could nefariously be regulated now, or in the future.
...
What would prevent other countries from retaliating by enacting laws requiring Americans to submit their birth certificates or other requirements prior to saying “hello” to their citizens?
...
Part of the blame falls on VAWA author and Senate Judiciary Chairman, Pat Leahy (D-VT) who approved the legislation as a pet project for the ideological gains of special interests.
...
Regardless, Congress has no right to place arbitrary restrictions on legitimate communication across the Web, a gross affront to human rights.'
- Log in to post comments