What do you think the response would be from our ideological counterparts if they found out George W. Bush could use the excuse of some national emergency to take control of the Internet? Whether or not it could really be done is another issue, but the libs would be having collective aneurysms.
Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.
They’re not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft, which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.
But if it’s Obama, they could live with that.
The new version would allow the president to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “non-governmental” computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for “cybersecurity professionals,” and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.
Of course, friends of Obama would have access (either by his good graces or bribes). After all, what do you think would be the criteria for obtaining this “license”?
If this were to become law, the president would be able to shut down any business he wanted (as most are somehow reliant on the Internet to function), hold up payroll checks, halt the free flow of information, and once his administration had such control they could control who succeeds and who doesn’t, period.
Change we still can’t believe.
h/t Sher Z
I guess that depends to the definition of “National Emergency”. Under this administration, would that definition be, “Under 50% in the polls” or “Potential interference to National Healthcare”?
So let me get this straight…
According to “human rights,” it’s wrong to threaten a PROVEN TERRORIST during interrogation in order to deal with an imminent threat; but there’s nothing wrong with taking away the freedoms of law-abiding corporations and individuals to achieve the same basic goal?
Dang – now he is threatening my job.
this legislation has reichstag fire written all over it.
Keep thinking that way, louielouie, you are not alone.
Will the horrors never end?
Tnis is truly frightening.
The problem with this and HR3200, and all the bills Hussein-Obama is attempting to push thru is that, besides their pro-fascist/socialist/communist stance, they are all open to interpretation and re-definition of words and phrases.
So no matter what any of the documents say, no matter what any of the legislators say, there is no way for citizens to be sure of what we will end up living under. All rules can change at any time.
This certainly has me very frightened and unsure as to how to protect myself and my family.
Anyone else?