UNInvolved in the Internet

This past week, the UN met to discuss a potential treaty. This treaty would give the governments and the International Telecom Union more control over the internet. However, as explained in this article, the treaty failed to be signed by numerous governments. The  US refused, saying that "The internet has given the world unimaginable economic and social benefit during these past 24 years. All without UN regulation." The US delegates argued that the UN intervention was unnecessary. Governmental control of the Internet would also be harmful. The internet, as it stands now, is free and uncontrolled by any authority. Laws still apply to those who use the internet, but other aspects, such as speech are unabated. Handing over this freedom to the government would  go against the very freedom the US is built upon. 

On top of this, most of these meetings were held "behind closed doors." This means that the meetings were closed off to the public or anyone else who would have anything to say about the treaty. This undemocratic way of going about the treaty seems to  indicate that the UN would try to regulate the Internet in a similar fashion.

What are your thoughts? Do you think that the government should have any control over the Internet? Is there any way for governments to regulate the Internet without overstepping their bounds? Post your thoughts in the comments. 

Ad Infinitum

During a visit to the Internet, I came across a photo album depicting Chinese factory workers and the toys they make. Jakey Witz also made a post about some of the photos. As I was looking through the album, I found one picture that I thought encompassed the conditions in the factories quite well. 

The thing about this particular photo that struck me was the repetition. Almost every worked is dressed the same: they all wear the same hats and shirt. The only difference is the colors of two of the workers. The items they are working on are also mostly the same. I counted eight bins filled with identical toys. It seems like the entire factory looks like this. The line of tables goes far  into the distance, seemingly forever. Or at least to the back wall. On the left and right, you can see other long tables, with more workers in the same uniform, all probably working on similar toys. 
These workers probably sit there almost all day, performing the same action on the same toy for however long it is in production. And that length of production depends on us. As long as we keep buying the toys, they keep making them. This cycle will continue infinitely until we change something. How do you think we can bring that change? Do you have any other thoughts about these factories? Post your comments below. 

Justification

After the class discussions,  I decided to look into the Downing Street Memo. While reading through it, I came across a line that seemed to fit the narrative of the Iraq war quite well. The original text from the memo can be found here.  
The line that caught my attention went as such: "Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran." Hold on, Saddam wasn't threatening people? But this ins't what the government told us. They said that he could use them on us (and other), and they're admitting that this isn't the case? Furthermore, Iraq's weapons capabilities were less than North Korea's? I don't know what North Korea had at the time, but I remember their failed nuclear test back in April. Given their current position, I don't see any way that North Korea could have WMDs years before that. If Iraq had less capability than North Korea, I don't see any problem. 
I don't think that the narrative the government gave us was fair. The whole conflict turned up no WMDs, yet we were told that there were. What do you think about this? And what do you think could be done to stop this in the future? Post your thoughts below.