I'm always puzzled by these articles looking at the Great Firewall of China as if it is an alien thing. Much of it was designed in the US, by American engineer

I'm always puzzled by these articles looking at the Great Firewall of China as if it is an alien thing. Much of it was designed in the US, by American engineers, working for companies like Cisco ( http://www.wired.com/2008/05/leaked-cisco-do http://www.wired.com/2008/05/leaked-cisco-do ). So just ask them. People have even sued companies like Cisco about this ( http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index.php/suit-over-ciscos-role-in-chinas-great-firewall-must-proceed-advocacy-group-says/ http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index.php/suit-over-ciscos-ro... ), but the US government dismissed those cases ( http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2015/03/china%E2%80%99s-golden-shield-cisco-systems-complicit http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2015/03/china%E2%80%99s-go... ). I read bizarre pieces from New York Times columnists ( http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/opinion/18kristof.html http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/opinion/18kristof.html ) which say "If President Obama wants to support democratic movements on a shoestring, he should support an “Internet freedom initiative” pending in Congress. This would include $50 million in the appropriations bill for these censorship-evasion technologies. The 21st-century equivalent of the Berlin wall is a cyberbarrier, and we can help puncture it." Huh? US corporations built it. The US courts have OK'd it. Why should US taxpayers pay to circumvent the technology that S&P 500 companies like Cisco are building?