As we noted yesterday, there has been a lot of political hot air and scare mongering about a supposed "UN takeover of the Internet" that appears to not even actually exist. What does exist is an incredibly vague mish mash of ideas ahead of a World Conference on International Telecommunications meeting that hasn't even occurred yet. That meeting will be focused on possibly modernizing an international treaty on communications overseen by the ITU.

There will of course be in attendance countries who think ICANN's governance of the Internet is too U.S. centric (something that of course terrifies U.S. business interests who like things that way), but that doesn't necessarily mean anything will seriously change. Meanwhile, the ITU has repeatedly stated they have no interest in handling Internet governance. Calling a flood of ideas in a room an attempt to "take over the Internet" -- is more than a little inane and simplistic.

So not too surprisingly, the U.S. press this week has been packed with news stories about how the United Nations is planning to take over the Internet.

That doesn't mean there aren't some bad ideas afoot given the vast number of countries involves in the conversation, though the majority will go nowhere. One of the largest proposals is being spearheaded by the European Telecommunications Network Operators (ETNO) association, and involves playing to the inane pipe dreams of international phone companies and imposing a troll toll on content companies to help subsidize phone monopolies. While there's no real debate that's a stupid plan, just as stupid has been some of the hypocrisy from the United States during this week's hand wringing over the "takeover."

It's hypocritical on several levels. One is that the ETNO is proposing the exact same ridiculous troll tolls companies like AT&T have been dreaming about for years -- the kind of "pricing creativity" half the people lambasting the UN (like FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell) would be in support of if it was an American company doing it. Second, in protesting the phantom "UN takeover" Congress (and many others) are claiming that the U.S. supports a "free and open Internet," which of course, at least to the six of us in this country not drunk on partisan patriotism and actually paying attention, couldn't be further from the truth.

The Atlantic (via Techdirt) notes the House of Representatives this week voted on an adorable and punchy little resolution taking aim at the UN, declaring that "it is essential that the Internet remain stable, secure, and free from government control." It immediately saw cozy, feel good bipartisan support (apparently here in the States hating the UN is the height of fashion) and even saw breathless support by FCC boss Julius Genachowski. But as the Atlantic points out, the United States might want to get off their high horse on that subject, since it often pushes for none of those things:And SOPA/PIPA/CISPA is only a fraction of the great ideas the United States have had in trying to throttle, filter, cap, cripple, or otherwise derail the Internet -- usually with a focus on coddling adaptation-challenged legacy industries (phone companies, entertainment industry). If the government isn't imposing bad ideas to protect these companies, they're busily expanding surveillance powers with a palpable disdain for the rule of law. The United States might want to clean up their own back yard before lecturing the UN -- or anybody else -- on keeping the Internet free of stupid policies.

Also, before crying all week about how the UN is taking over the Internet, you might first want to confirm they're actually trying to take over the Internet.