Should Obama Control the Internet? (New Bill Calls For It)

[TruthBringer]

I can't even believe they are asking this question. The Rockefellers? Give me a ****** break. The day I let bankers tell me what to do with my rights is the day that I take a flying leap off a cliff into a giant bowl of acid!



Should Obama Control the Internet?



A new bill would give the President emergency authority to halt web traffic and access private data.

—By Steve Aquino



Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency?

Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians.

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.

Rockefeller made cybersecurity one of his key issues as a member of the Senate intelligence committee, which he chaired until last year. He now heads the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, which will take up this bill.

"We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs—from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records—the list goes on," Rockefeller said in a statement. Snowe echoed her colleague, saying, "if we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a cyber-Katrina."

But the wide powers outlined in the Rockefeller-Snowe legislation has at least one Internet advocacy group worried. "The cybersecurity threat is real," says Leslie Harris, head of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), "but such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy."

The bill could undermine the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), says CDT senior counsel Greg Nojeim. That law, enacted in the mid '80s, requires law enforcement seek a warrant before tapping in to data transmissions between computers.

"It's an incredibly broad authority," Nojeim says, pointing out that existing privacy laws "could fall to this authority."

Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that granting such power to the Commerce secretary could actually cause networks to be less safe. When one person can access all information on a network, "it makes it more vulnerable to intruders," Granick says. "You've basically established a path for the bad guys to skip down."

The bill's scope, she says, is "contrary to what the Constitution promises us." That's because of the impact it could have on Internet users' privacy rights: If the Commerce Department uncovers evidence of illegal activity when accessing "critical" networks, that information could be used against a potential defendant, even if the department never had the intent to find incriminating evidence. And this might violate the Constitutional protection against searches without cause.

"Once information is accessed, it can be used for whatever purpose, no matter the original reason for accessing something," Granick says. "Who's interested in this [bill]? Law enforcement and people in the security industry who want to ensure more government dollars go to them."

Nojeim, though, thinks it's possible the bill's powers could be trimmed as it moves through Congress. "We will be working with them to clarify just what is needed and how to accomplish that," he says. "We're hopeful that some of the very broad powers that the bill would confer won't be included."

Should Obama Control the Internet? | Mother Jones

[TruthBringer]

Am I dreaming or is this for real?

Jay Rockefeller, who declared last month that we would all be better off if the internet was never invented, is spouting his mouth off that the internet needs to be controlled for "security purposes".

And not only that, but two bills have already been created to do just that.

Indeed, there are political forces are behind Senate bills No. 773 and 778.

Rockefeller meant the government would be better off if the internet was never invented. If the internet was never invented, the corporate media would dominate news and information and alternative media restricted to print would have a far more difficult time counter balancing government propaganda. Government and the elite behind it are sincerely worried about the fact increasing numbers of people get their news from alternative media sources on the internet and corporate media newspapers are falling like dominoes.

Rockefeller’s bills introduced in the Senate — known as the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 — would create yet another government bureaucracy, the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor. It would report directly to Obama. Rockefeller’s legislation would grant “the Secretary of Commerce access to all privately owned information networks deemed to be critical to the nation’s infrastructure “without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule or policy restricting such access”.

In other words, Obama would have a Cyber Czar in the Commerce Department and the power to shut down the internet.

Here is a video of Jay Rockefeller peddling this BS:

YouTube - Jay Rockefeller: Internet should have never existed

[TruthBringer]

The cybersecurity fraud now in motion will grant the Department of Commerce oversight of “critical networks, such as banking records, would grant the government access to potentially incriminating information obtained without cause or warrant, a violation of the Constitution’s prohibition against unlawful search and seizure.

Obama’s internet agenda is an extension of his effort to impose government control over the private sector. It should be obvious what is going on here. Not if but when the next false flag attack occurs here in America, the elite will turn off the internet in order to control the flow of information. They will tell us they were forced to do this in order to deny terrorists in caves or driving around with Ron Paul bumper stickers on their cars the ability to sabotage the power grid and banks.

Senate bills No. 773 and 778 are about controlling information. The bills have nothing to do with mischievous kids with laptops in Latvia.

[TruthBringer]

Senate Proposal Could Put Heavy Restrictions on Internet Freedoms



James Osborne

Fox News

April 21, 2009

The days of an open, largely unregulated Internet may soon come to an end.

A bill making its way through Congress proposes to give the U.S. government authority over all networks considered part of the nation’s critical infrastructure. Under the proposed Cybersecurity Act of 2009, the president would have the authority to shut down Internet traffic to protect national security.

The government also would have access to digital data from a vast array of industries including banking, telecommunications and energy. A second bill, meanwhile, would create a national cybersecurity adviser — commonly referred to as the cybersecurity czar — within the White House to coordinate strategy with a wide range of federal agencies involved.

Senate Proposal Could Put Heavy Restrictions on Internet Freedoms - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com

[TruthBringer]

Here's one question I do have. If the government is successful with passing this bill into a law, and creating this "cyber-security unit" or whatever it is, and gaining control when it wants to of internet traffic-flow, etc., is it one day going to end up effecting message boards like this one? Forum Garden? Possibly even shutting it down for however amount of time? And will it also interfere with their revenue, etc. during the next "terrorist" attack or whenever they just plain choose to abuse their power?

In other words, will the old saying "absolute power corrupts, and it corrupts absolutely" apply here?

Anyone have any thoughts?

[TruthBringer]

Rep. Weiner: Do We Give Obama an Internet On-Off Switch?



C-Span

May 3, 2009

[TruthBringer]

Globalizing the Internet



LEIGH PHILLIPS

EUobserver

May 6, 2009



The European Commission wants the US to dissolve all government links with the body that ‘governs’ the internet, replacing it with an international forum for discussing internet governance and online security.

The rules and decisions on key internet governance issues, such as the creation of top level domains (such as .com and .eu) and managing the internet address system that ensures computers can connect to each other, are currently made by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a private, not-for profit corporation based in California which operates under an agreement with the US Department of Commerce.

The decisions made by ICANN affect the way the internet works all around the world.

EU information society commissioner Viviane Reding on Monday (4 May) suggested a new model for overseeing the internet from October this year, when the Commerce Department agreement runs out.

She called on US President Barack Obama to fully privatise ICANN and set up an independent judicial body, described as a “G12 for internet governance, which she described as a “multilateral forum for governments to discuss general internet governance policy and security issues.

EUobserver / EU wants 'Internet G12' to govern cyberspace

[nurvepc]

The goverment in general, has always tried to find ways of control oven the internet.

The largest threat in the past 3 or 4 years, is prosecutors, law enforcement, etc. using pre-exsisting laws, written in such a manner, as to apply to the internet.. Getting sites shut down, blocking trafic, etc.

Wikileaks.org has some amazing classified documents (which they get in trouble for on there own) of the united states blacklisting sites based on politics, or opinion, or actions. A law written to be Anti-childpornographic, is now used for a wide variety of websites that have nothing to do with it.

Another is watching. Google knows everything you do. then stores the information, and freely provides it to the goverment. no outcry... the media is more concerned over adopting puppies and swine flu then anything else in my opinion