With all news about the Miers nomination to the Supreme Court, we fear there are many who are asleep at the switch about the United Nations Internet.

For those interested, there was an article written in August 2005 in Gulfnews.com asking, Who should control the internet?.

Their article was a preliminary for the bombshell in the Opinion Journal Online on Sunday, The World Wide Web (of Bureaucrats?). Here is a taste:

“Kofi Annan, Coming to a Computer Near You! The Internet’s long run as a global cyberzone of freedom–where governments take a “hands off” approach–is in jeopardy. Preparing for next month’s U.N.-sponsored World Summit on the Information Society (or WSIS) in Tunisia, the European Union and others are moving aggressively to set the stage for an as-yet unspecified U.N. body to assert control over Internet operations and policies now largely under the purview of the U.S. In recent meetings, for an example, an EU spokesman asserted that no single country should have final authority over this “global resource.”

To his credit, the U.S. State Department’s David Gross bristled back: “We will not agree to the U.N. taking over management of the Internet.” That stands to reason. The Internet was developed in the U.S. (as are upgrades like Internet 2) and is not a collective “global resource.” It is an evolving technology, largely privately owned and operated, and it should stay that way.”

You have got to read it, or you wouldn’t believe it!

It may be time to pay a little more attention to the rest of the world, while watching the Supreme Court nomination battles.

As we have posted before, both here and here, John Bolton it the right man at the right time to bring some much needed shakeup at the United Nations. With so much corruption and scandal at the UN, we need a man with the character, strength, and stamina to represent the United States as our Ambassador.

The Senate failed in their Constitutional duty to confirm this great nominee by the unconstitutional use of the filibuster, President Bush had no alternative but to appoint John Bolton via his Constitutional use of the recess appointment. (HT to Red State.)

Here are the President’s remarks today in making the appointment:

“This post is too important to leave vacant any longer, especially during a war and a vital debate about U.N. reform. So today I’ve used my constitutional authority to appoint John Bolton to serve as America’s ambassador to the United Nations,

I am sending John to the U.N. with my complete confidence … His mission now is to speak for me on critical issues facing the international community. And he’ll make it clear that America values the potential of the United Nations to be a source of hope and dignity and peace,…”

We congratulate Mr. Bolton, and we support President Bush in the use of his Constitutional authority to make the appointment.

The Wall Street Opinion Journal has an excellent editorial today entitled, The U.N.’s Tipping Point, The real reformer is John Bolton, not Kofi Annan.. The writer makes an excellent point about the timing of Bolton’s confirmation by writing the following:

“Today–maybe, possibly, fingers crossed, and if Jupiter is in the Seventh House–the Senate will vote for cloture in the debate over John Bolton’s nomination to be U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, meaning he will at last get the up-or-down vote he has been denied for months. And barring further surprises–no ruling those out, either–Mr. Bolton will be confirmed, meaning he may finally get down to the serious work that confronts the United States at the U.N, particularly in the matter of organizational reform.

For those who are genuine friends of the U.N.’s better ambitions–and we count ourselves among them–the pity is this didn’t happen a (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)