Congress to introduce President internet control legislation
The socialist Congress of the United States of America is currently drafting legislation (or “drastic intervention”) that will hand over the internet, a private civilian enterprise (business), to the President of the United States in the event of a “cyber-emergency”.
According to an article on Worldnetdaily.com “Critics, however, have pointed to three actions Rockefeller and Snowe propose that may violate both privacy concerns and even constitutional bounds:
First, the White House, through the national cyber security advisor, shall have the authority to disconnect "critical infrastructure" networks from the Internet – including private citizens' banks and health records, if Rockefeller's examples are accurate – if they are found to be at risk of cyber attack. The working copy of the bill, however, does not define what constitutes a cyber security emergency, and apparently leaves the question to the discretion of the president.
Second, the bill establishes the Department of Commerce as "the clearinghouse of cyber security threat and vulnerability information," including the monitoring of private information networks deemed a part of the "critical infrastructure."
Third, the legislation proposes implementation of a professional licensing program for certifying who can serve as a cyber security professional. And while the critics concede the need for increased security, they object to what is perceived as a dangerous and intrusive expansion of government power.”
A draft copy of the legislation penned by Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D) and Co-sponsored by RINO Sen Olympia Snow (R) here:
http://cdt.org/security/CYBERSEC4.pdf
This author is one who agrees that the United States needs to be “proactive” against cyber attacks from within and globally (as the ones from China have been reported). I think that our “critical infrastructure” (i.e., oil, gas pipelines, nuclear power, banking servers, military servers) should be moved to an “independent” and secure network that the internet cannot attack vs. the relying on internet connectivity for these vital networks on the public domain where they are vulnerable to cyber attacks.
The conspiracy theorist in me paints a more sinister motive:
“control of information”
This author is one who agrees that the United States needs to be “proactive” against cyber attacks from within and globally (as the ones from China have been reported). I think that our “critical infrastructure” (i.e., oil, gas pipelines, nuclear power, banking servers, military servers) should be moved to an “independent” and secure network that the internet cannot attack vs. the relying on internet connectivity for these vital networks on the public domain where they are vulnerable to cyber attacks.
The conspiracy theorist in me paints a more sinister motive:
“control of information”
An article by “Canada Free Press” titled “Controlling the last free voice in the world” described the UN’s relentless pursuit of controlling the internet as:
“The UN argues that the Internet is international in scope and needs much grander over site. Who better to handle the chore, of course than the body that fancies itself an international government? The Internet is fast becoming the biggest international prize as the greatest source of information and human involvement. It offers the UN huge opportunity for creating tax revenues and controlling commerce. It is also the place to control the flow of ideas. What totalitarian can resist a bid to control the Internet?
Democrats plan to “Control the free flow of information while maximizing tax revenues”
It can be best described or compared to the movie “Network” where a news anchor gets up in the middle of a broadcast to announce “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore”. I refer to the recent grassroots opposition to Obama’s stimulus plan that is bankrupting this country and placing this enormous burden onto the taxpayers of America.
It all started February 19, 2009 on the liberal news station CNBC, when Rick Santelli became an instant sensation overnight (MSM called the episode “Santelli’s Rant” to discredit him) but the alternative media hailed his “rant” as a “Watershed moment”.
It was fitting that the newscast of his rant occurred in Obamaland at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange when he called for a “Chicago Tea Party”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEZB4taSEoA
Other than the initial attempt at discrediting Santelli by the MSM as “ranting” they have been absolutely silence to the growing phenomena. Since February 19 (a little more than 6 weeks) more than 993,500 (a little more than 23,600 people per day) have viewed the Youtube episode.
Without the help of any coverage of the tea parties that have occurred, like the one in Cincinnati on March 19, 2009 that drew an estimated 5,000 attendees, the spread of the phenomena has occurred on internet. Though the crowd was large and peaceful the MSM deemed it un-newsworthy, yet 4 days later when a bus of ACORN activists totalling no more than a dozen or so descended on AIG executives homes the MSM was tripping over each other to cover the story. In other words, big business bad and worthy of small protests coverage while anti-tax, anti-Obama large protest deemed invisible.
I wonder if the proposed legislation to control the internet has anything to do with the ability of the internet to rally support in opposition to the President and the socialists in the Senate and Congress on this and many other issues that they are trying to force upon the American public?
There are a few instances where groundswell opposition has occurred on the internet and has stopped legislation and policies from being forced upon the masses.
The first to come to mind was during the Bush Administration and the “illegal Amnesty” bill that was being proposed and was considered to be imminent. People from around the country got onto their computers, en masse, and emailed their elected representative to say NO. It stalled after they got the message loud and clear.
The second that comes to mind was also during the Bush administration that would have sold our port security to a firm out of Dubai. Once again, people powered up their computers to send another resounding NO. Once again our feckless leaders got the message.
The ability for Americans to communicate (especially with the advent of Twitter) with each other in opposition to our elected leaders wishes frightens them. Likewise, the opposition voices that will be silenced through this bill frightens us.
Without the MSM to allow the “Taxed Enough Already” to spread like wildfires through dry and brittle brush, the internet has been the fuel for this fire. Since the time of Santelli’s rant of holding one tea party in Chicago has now grown to just about 2,000 cities across America. The lion share of those gatherings will be held on the symbolic day of April 15 (tax day).
Let’s hope that the internet is still around if we need to defeat this power grabbing control of the internet. If we lose our voice and ability to communicate, we have lost big time……..
Other than the initial attempt at discrediting Santelli by the MSM as “ranting” they have been absolutely silence to the growing phenomena. Since February 19 (a little more than 6 weeks) more than 993,500 (a little more than 23,600 people per day) have viewed the Youtube episode.
Without the help of any coverage of the tea parties that have occurred, like the one in Cincinnati on March 19, 2009 that drew an estimated 5,000 attendees, the spread of the phenomena has occurred on internet. Though the crowd was large and peaceful the MSM deemed it un-newsworthy, yet 4 days later when a bus of ACORN activists totalling no more than a dozen or so descended on AIG executives homes the MSM was tripping over each other to cover the story. In other words, big business bad and worthy of small protests coverage while anti-tax, anti-Obama large protest deemed invisible.
I wonder if the proposed legislation to control the internet has anything to do with the ability of the internet to rally support in opposition to the President and the socialists in the Senate and Congress on this and many other issues that they are trying to force upon the American public?
There are a few instances where groundswell opposition has occurred on the internet and has stopped legislation and policies from being forced upon the masses.
The first to come to mind was during the Bush Administration and the “illegal Amnesty” bill that was being proposed and was considered to be imminent. People from around the country got onto their computers, en masse, and emailed their elected representative to say NO. It stalled after they got the message loud and clear.
The second that comes to mind was also during the Bush administration that would have sold our port security to a firm out of Dubai. Once again, people powered up their computers to send another resounding NO. Once again our feckless leaders got the message.
The ability for Americans to communicate (especially with the advent of Twitter) with each other in opposition to our elected leaders wishes frightens them. Likewise, the opposition voices that will be silenced through this bill frightens us.
Without the MSM to allow the “Taxed Enough Already” to spread like wildfires through dry and brittle brush, the internet has been the fuel for this fire. Since the time of Santelli’s rant of holding one tea party in Chicago has now grown to just about 2,000 cities across America. The lion share of those gatherings will be held on the symbolic day of April 15 (tax day).
Let’s hope that the internet is still around if we need to defeat this power grabbing control of the internet. If we lose our voice and ability to communicate, we have lost big time……..
No comments:
Post a Comment