Bill Allows Obama Power to Shut Down Internet

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by XShooter, Apr 23, 2009.

  1. XShooter

    XShooter New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    151
    Location:
    Colorado
    From Tom's Hardware. Here is the link: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/obama-shut-down-internet-legislation,7478.html

    The President of the United States is said by some to be the most powerful man in the world -- but should he have control of the spread of information.

    ZoomA legislation proposed on April 1 is no joke. The proposed bill would grant President Obama the authority to shut down public and private networks -- including the restriction of internet traffic -- as part of a cybersecurity emergency plan.

    The bill was introduced by West Virginia Democratic Sen. John Rockefeller and Sen. Olympia Snowe, a Republican from Maine. The aim of the bill is to unite both public and private network operators to develop regulations for what to do in case of a cyber attack.

    For obvious reasons, many are concerned about what such power could mean if the wrong actions were taken. Leslie Harris, president and CEO at the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), said in a NetworkWorld story, “This is pretty sweeping legislation. Seems the President could turn off the Internet completely or tell someone like Verizon to limit or block certain traffic. There is a lot to worry about in this bill.”

    While the public sector may be used to more government regulation and involvement, such control will undoubtedly bother corporations. CDT’s Harris added that regulatory rules could force companies to all conform to a similar system, which could hamper security and innovation. For example, if a critical security flaw was found in a mandated system, then the entire network could be susceptible to such a flaw.

    Corporations, particularly internet-centric companies, are keeping close watch on how this will pan out.

    “We are currently studying this legislation,” said Dan Martin, a spokesman for Google. “Security has been a priority at Google from the beginning of the company – we recognize that secure products are instrumental in maintaining the trust our users place in us.”

    The politicians behind the bill do clarify that this is just the first proposal and that there is still room for much revision and evolution.

    “This legislation is the beginning of the process - the objective of this cybersecurity bill is to start the debate and chairman Rockefeller welcomes comments from all parties, he is sitting down with stakeholders already and he welcomes input from all those supportive of the legislation and those with concerns,” said Jena Longo, deputy communications director for the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation.

    Check out the bill here (PDF), hosted by NetworkWorld.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
  2. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    Well of course, Barry can't have us speaking ill of him online, now can he? It's all part of the plan allowing his puppetmasters to take total control of everything:mad::mad::mad::mad:
     

  3. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    NE Ar. W. of Black River
    Obama must think this is a necessary power because when Eastern Europe and the U.S.S.R. attempted to throw off the yoke of Communism, the respective govts. seized the radio/tv stations and press. Then the grassroots using the internet swamped their oppressors by communicating over the internet which was so pervasive their was no way the govt could stop it. This authority would prevent organized opposition if he should attempt to seize power. This has never been tried in this country before. Might be interesting to see how it unfolds. The hackers should have a high time getting around this.
     
  4. XShooter

    XShooter New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    151
    Location:
    Colorado

    BINGO!
     
  5. islenos

    islenos Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,241
    Location:
    West Texas
    Yesteryear it was hoisting the lanterns oneth by land twoeth by sea to alert those opposing tyranny.

    Today we have the internet to alert those opposing tyranny. For Obama to seize total control he must be able to cut off our form of communication.

    Time to brake out the HAM Radios
     
  6. Blackhawk Dave

    Blackhawk Dave Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Messages:
    740
    Location:
    Denton, TX
    If he gets the bill through, all he has to do is SAY there's an attack. No proof, no nothing. Then it's all over.
     
  7. XShooter

    XShooter New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    151
    Location:
    Colorado
    Roger that! And notice it includes "private networks." Your internet connection in your house is considered a private network! Not only that, but it gives him the legal right to access all your private information on your computer "network" without a warrant or even probable cause. We are in some serious trouble if crap like this starts passing through congress!
     
  8. 4EvrLearning

    4EvrLearning New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,449
    Location:
    Left Coast
    All I had to do was see Rock'efeller's name in there, and that was enough to worry me. That family is dangerous...has been for a long time...OWG and control of the "little people."
     
  9. yellerdawg

    yellerdawg Former Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    244
    Im sorry. But this is just more " loser Talk ".


    What I mean by that is of course , same rule of thumb as with your own private prospects of this Nation and your own worth and endeavors.



    = run with fools , well....

    = Indulge only in the Negative ....well

    Dont take it wrong concerning those here or who post such , its just
    IMHO most dont realize how many out there want to keep us on the scared end of things. Remember , there a lot of folks with their own agenda's....

    ;)

    QUICK EDIT - 10:16 - Left out point I was going to add-

    You know , most dont know Homeland recent laws and how they affected out Telco situations , point being , if this same layout bill had been under Bush , and probably was started then , what would the posting be ?

    Regardless , in event of such a national event ( Telco CLosure , ALL COMMS ) why , such a Presidential Directive/Order would be to the Monument Level that we would either be Begging Him to do it , or too busy trying not to die to worry about the phone.......please give another scenario if you have one where this would or could happen...? Short of POTUS barricading himself in Whitehouse Bunker and hoping subordinates would carry this out while the rest of us are busy digging at bunker with a taste of "BBQ" butt in our eyes.....:p
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
  10. XShooter

    XShooter New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    151
    Location:
    Colorado
    Yes it is "loser talk." It's about "losing" our 4th amendment privacy rights. Do you see "positives" about allowing the federal government to shut down private networks and access their data at the whim of the president's order only?

    You are right about some people and organizations having agendas and wanting to profit from the fears of others - however, I would worry about anyone who isn't concerned right now - especially in light of all the new legislation and excutive orders coming out of Washington in past 3 months. It's very scary when nearly all of this new stuff either restricts more of our civil liberties, creates "extreme" government control over private industry, and invades personal privacy - not failing to mention that most of it appears unconstitutional as well. I would have to ask ANY informed person, if none of these things concern you - then what the heck does?
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
  11. alhefner

    alhefner New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    The founders knew that whoever controls the flow of information and OPINION also has control of the population.

    The last few presidents and Barry have all been working toward the day when they can configure the flow of information in such a way that the press SEEMS to be free and independent but is actually under full government control.

    When, not if, they take full power over the internet, our most efficient means of spreading truth will be disabled.

    +10 on the radio idea mentioned above.
     
  12. 4EvrLearning

    4EvrLearning New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,449
    Location:
    Left Coast
    Just found the actual bill text:

    http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s773/text

    I wish I was smart enough to weed through the legalese and cipher out the ramifications. But just on general principle alone, to have the government involved in and/or controlling a form of commerce and communication is frightening, indeed!

    The internet is a Catch-22 situation...due to the wonderful things it gives us, we have become extraordinarily reliant upon it for SO much in our lives. Personally, I receive my work via e-mail. If I lost the internet, it would put a huge cramp in my business, if not shut me down completely. That's just 1 person, and 1 application. Multiply that out, and it's not hard to see the impact of losing this tool....either losing it altogether, or losing it to people we can't trust.
     
  13. yellerdawg

    yellerdawg Former Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    244
    We allowed it under Bush ,for Security Reasons...and I can bring proof of tie in with Telco concerning Data supervision. Were going to have to start realizing , as many Conservative Hosts say , this or these things are a matter of payback people , the " pound of flesh " if you will. We are simply at the mercy to SOME extents until ellection(s) times , the way Dems were last eight years. Our main problem now though is , and again my IMHO , our minority so called reps , have a case of at least strhepp throat , if not couple with amnesia. Im just stating my own opinion , that I would rather think first instead of being frightened.

    OK , tell me what newspapers you read that headlines accurately report the stock mrkt up over 27% since last 6 weeks or less. They are not. Yes we are in a media controlled problem fight as well. But heck , im sorry , I guess here we go again , what good media favor(s) can I or we fall back on from both Bush years , Reagans...? So , nect time GOP in power , we burn the press...!

    No , we keep up good work like tea parties. We constantly contact LOCAL reps and county gov's and remind them ( as so many have , even in North )
    we dont need stimulus funds and the web of strings tied to them. This is simply a political upheaval time , followed woth or by some low economic times. AR's were banned before ..hey ...they were unbanned too.

    Sorry , getting pulled into same neg junk I simply am tired of hearing.

    OK , no more honest opinions. All win. We are so boned. What will we do.
    AM passing all my ammo to neighbor in morning and saving one for me.
    When they come to my door...next Tuesday is it ? ...to get my gun(s) ..ha ha ..joke will be on them , will only find the one spent shell. Thatll show em.

    He's "turning Off " the internet , I suppose , the week after he burns all the books. Thank god at least , I was warned of it first.

    Man . I just dont know. Some things in this world still fool an old man. The corruption of people in government using our money , is not one of them.

    The proof is there. Our individual states are not wanting , nor will tolerate

    ( at this current or near future time ) a nazi style socialist style of government in these united states. I am sorry if a simple opinion of wanting to stay positive about what leaders or reps we do have coupled with the people of this Nation , makes one seem naive or "blindly walking into the boxcar " and not hearing the warnings...but I for one do hear the warnings and I do know people. And I know positive from negative. I openly speak of my dislike not only for the POTUS and especially his party/subs , but I for one would never place him in a "Nazi" uniform or label a devoted father an
    "anti-christ" despite his political and known convictions.

    Theres losers ..and then theres sore losers. I would simply rather keep a dedicated eye on the constitution and those who hide behind it or choose to whittle at it. IF our / mine / yours Reps dont know our/ mine / your respects and opinions by now , then yes god help us all. But they do. But it is also politics as usual. I for one , prefer to sit tight with older republicans and remember that you can ignore certain skirmishes , if you see the end of the war in sight or the chance to win the main battles.

    If indeed we now live in a place as to where the number of people choosing to live as nazi socialist so outnumber those who dont. We have much more serious living arrangements and problems than chatting on a post...;)
     
  14. alhefner

    alhefner New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    Something lots of folks don't know and that the feds will NOT disclose is that the internet is EASILY configurable and that any systems and networks experiencing attack can be ISOLATED without shutting down access and use of other networks in the internet system.
     
  15. XShooter

    XShooter New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    151
    Location:
    Colorado
    Thank you for the link! I have no problem with the concept of protecting our computer networks from sabatoge and invasion, but I have a huge problem with el presidente being able to just order a "shut down." There are many ways to secure computer networks without shutting them down, but IF a shut down did become necessary - would it not be better to have a process in place that would assure us that the president didn't just decide to shut it down simply because he can? This thing seems to be missing enough "checks and balances" to preclude the excessive use of power by the whitehouse and that is what bothers me about it.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum A second bill filed in Congress to reclassify silencers Jul 7, 2017
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Iowa gun bill will soon be signed! Apr 7, 2017
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum TN Constitutional Carry bill killed Apr 5, 2017
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum House Passes Bill to Protect Second Amendment Rights of America’s Veterans Mar 18, 2017
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Do we have enough Senate votes to pass the carry reciprocity bill? Feb 27, 2017