Bill would give Obama the power to seize the internet
In a new bill that is being written by Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe power will be given to the president that would allow him to shut down the internet for private citizen users during a “cyber emergency.”
The president will be able to seize privately run networks once he declares a “cyber emergency.” So what is a “cyber emergency?” I guess that would be whatever the hell Barack Obama claims is a cyber emergency. A new worm or trojan, or a new virus; is that enough of a threat for the president to declare an emergencyand then seize private networks? We already have Government Motors, now we have President Mcaffe?
Is that so outrageous when we have already seen that this president has no problem extending the government’s reach where is doesn’t belong and where it was never intended to go? He has already fabricated a healthcare crisis and used the economy as an excuse to meddle in Wall Street, banking and mortgage institutes, and the automakers industry.
This president is using what he calls crisis management to pass his whole agenda. His whole presidency revolves around one crisis or another and now we are going to give him the power to declare yet another type of crisis so that he can step in and take over yet another private entity?
This president will not be happy until he has his hands in every possible aspect of the people’s lives as he can.
America's Watchtower 
Cyber emergency? That sounds “wicked stupid”, if you know what I mean. Are people going to be getting electricuted through their computers? Will the “virus” infect humans and we’ll instantly drop dead, like captain tripps? I hope more people are posting about this to give it the attention it deserves, I don’t think it will go through, but you never know—- they might say, do it for Teddy!
LikeLike
Actually, someone needs that power. If a foreign government were to unleash a form of cyber-warfare on the U.S. how would we respond? Think about all the things that we use in our daily lives that have to have internet access. How would you get gas for your car? The pump would not take your credit card. The ATM would be offline and you could not get access to your money without going to your local bank. Your local bank would not be able to tell what you account balance was without their computers.
Cyber-warfare is a crazy idea? 2 months ago several of the South Korean governments computer systems went down due to a cyber-attack. They blamed the North Koreans. It is a very real possibility.
Now before you start saying that I am a dumb-ass liberal, please notice that I said SOMEONE needs this power, I did not say Obama needs this power. I think its a good idea that our government leaders are preparing for this problem should it every occur, I just am not sure what the solution is.
LikeLike
Cyber swine flu anybody?
LikeLike
LOL! Yes, now I understand about the electricity, and the banks, etc. But there must be a way to separate those things from say, like me making a comment on a post, shouldn’t there?
LikeLike
Seems to me that consolidating control of many separate networks into one place would be more dangerous that leaving them as is. The way it is now, those private networks aren’t necessarily connected to eachother.
LikeLike
The thought of all that power consolidated just creeps me out. Isn’t that what they do in Iraq and such places. Shut down the internet in cases of emergency like the recent uprising of the people?
LikeLike
The spreading shadow of Obuggerism is creeping across the land and the hand of the tyrannt is reaching out for us all—-not to help, but to control and destroy. Individualism is the enemy of the collectivist state and it must be elimated whatever the method, whatever the cost. Freedom of expression must give way to the overriding welfare of the State. Thats Obugger’s plan, thats his road to his Utopian dream—a nightmare for most Americans.
LikeLike
Seriously, cyber-security should fall within the domain of the military. Being the top level commander of the military, it makes sense for the president to have that power. This is a serious issue; just as serious as the threat of Islamic terrorism. With a well placed attack, it can bring down the economy. Imagine the chaos that would ensue. Wouldn’t it be a better idea to address the issue now and have a plan for when the attack comes? or should we wait until an attack arrives like what happened in 2001?
But I guess since it is a democrat in the White House, partisan politics is more important than national security.
LikeLike
The military is already forming a “Cyber Defense Command” and seems to be doing all the right things to prepare us for future cyber attacks. True, as Terrant says, the President is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. It is also true that when Presidents meddle in actual execution of military action, the military fails. Just ask Presidents Johnson and Nixon and maybe, even, Tsar Nicholas and Der Fuhrer. Questions to be asked are: What would constitute the Crisis, how is it defined, and for what duration would the seizure last? Both need to be clearly specified in the bill.
My gut says that this is not a good thing. It follows too many other government seizures of the private domain. If you look at totalitarian governments around the world, such as China, Iran, and Thailand, internet control seems to very high on the list of ways to control the people.
I would have to vote no on this one. Let the military do it, it would take the collective wisdom of many to take such a drastic step, not the knee-jerk reaction of a neophyte leader.
LikeLike
My stock answer to this issue:
Don’t worry, he can’t shut the internet down. Only the inventor, Al Gore has that authority. (Had to put forward my joke of the day.)
I swear to God, here and now, if I have to resort to using f***ing SMOKE SIGNALS, I WILL keep fighting what he and his nefarious minions are trying to visit onto this country I love so much. You can take THAT to the bank! My guess is that I will NOT be alone!
Mustang, howdy buddy!! Best comment so far goes to you.
LikeLike
Joe – You crack me up! Good joke!
LikeLike
Mustang, you still get my vote for best comment, but I thought you were someone else whenI was rather forward with the “buddy” remark.
LikeLike
Smoke signals and Morse Code… We CAN do it!!
LikeLike
Well, I have NO idea how THAT login hit, buy it did… Hmmm
LikeLike
Using more than one alias now huh? Seems like Texas Fred is keeping one up on the government on this one. 🙂
LikeLike
Hey Fred,
Nice avitar!
Long live the Republic!
Simper Fi!
LikeLike
Mustang sums up my feeling on this one. I guess I just don’t see a threat that would justify shutting down the internet for private citiznes. Users are subjected to malware everday that would steal your user name and password to your bank accounts but Americans fight this all the time by keeping up to date on viris DATs and through scanning. There is no need for government intervention. As for the banks themselves they have more incription tools at their disposal thatn does the average American. Is the system flaw proof? No, but I just don’t see why the government needs to get involved.
LikeLike
That’s my WordPress.com user name, I use TexasFred on WP.com blogs but I have to just set the manual log in… Why aren’t you on WP.org anyway?? You have tons more freedom and control…
And WE have some server space available too… 😛
LikeLike
One of these days I will make the switch.
LikeLike
Actually, in a cyber attack, there will be a need to shut down the Internet for private citizens. While the attack may originate from Russia, China, or one of the Koreas, most of the computers doing the attack will be in this country. I suggest that you read up on botnets if you are not already familiar.
There are millions of computers belonging to private citizens that are infected and the owners of such computers are unaware of it. The bugs are also starting to get real sophisticated which will make detection more difficult. These will be the computers used an attack. In a massive attack, they will need to be cut off and in some cases a whole subnet will need to be removed.
I think it is a legitimate concern that the bill is overly broad. I would speculate that the reason is that technology is constantly changing and a bill that is too narrow may make it difficult to legally address an attack at a later date.
I find it fascinating that the Patriot act is defended as being a necessary tool to fight terrorism. There are aspects of that bill that are overly broad and granted new powers to the president that could be (some would argue “were”) abused. Criticisms of that bill fell upon deaf ears or were dismissed as not being tough on terrorism. This seems to be a rather similar bill in that it grants power to the president to fight terrorism.
I can’t help but to think that if it was a republican president, there would not be any objections.
LikeLike
Terrant, it’s more like closing the barn door AFTER the horse is gone… In case you haven’t noticed, the ‘net runs REALLY fast, shocking huh?? If there’s a threat embedded in the ‘net, it needs to be shut down NOW, the only way some numb cods idiot in the White House will realize the ‘net is under attack will be when he can’t get on his favorite porn site…
LikeLike
Indeed it is. Personally, I would like to have seen a more proactive approach because private industry does not seem to want to bother with it. But think of what would transpire if Washington attempted to be proactive. I don’t know about you, but I can hear the pundits screaming.
There is two ways to go about this: ignore it or have a something in place. If they ignore it, when the attack comes, people will be going, “why wasn’t something done…” and “it is X’s fault for not doing something earlier…”. For trying to get something in place before the attack, well… read the article.
FYI… it is the backbone that is very fast and robust. At this point in time, I don’t think it would be possible to take it down. The terrorists would not be targeting the backbone. They would be targeting a handful of critical networks. If I was a betting man, I would say they would target the major banks. While Google can handle millions of requests a second, the major banks do not have that kind of infrastructure.
LikeLike
Smells like Tyranny to me.
LikeLike