Proposed Cybersecurity Bill Would Give the President Unprecedented Control Over the Internet



+ Add a Comment

I Jedi

What I don't understand is why the President needs the power to be able to shutdown the Internet at anytime he feels it's deemed "necessary"... Wouldn't it make more sense if his power to only be able to shutdown government servers instead of private/public?



 The U.S. govt. has been trying to "chip away" at the the Constitution....and folks...if they break even one ammendment, they will have "precedence to break them all.

The quotes above by Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin are probably the most inteligent things EVER said by ANY political players.  I would advise EVERY American to re-read them 100 times until they make sense.

This is a 1st Ammendment issue... and if they break it enought to allow internet censorship, by whatever name they choose to call it....the rest of the 1st Ammendment will fall in a heartbeat.

The ONLY thing protecting our rights is the NOT let the govt. change it one iota....once they start....we might at well just rename the U.S. as.....Bejing, China  :/


P.S.  At least I kew better than to vote for Obama  :)


Take an OS, and edit out all the efficiency, and what you have left is a post-XP Microsoft operating system :)



Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.



st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }

/* Style Definitions */
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}

AND as I am concerned the President and
all of the white house should be thrown out IE impeached under the law that no Government
body can retail control over a CORP. and due the things he has done such as
hire and fire people no matter how stupid they were of are. Further more I can
go all day on why he should be thrown out on his bum!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   



Best two words I can think of to describe the shift of power to the
White House over the last 7 months, this is just another step in that
process. Note it's not even the ability, it's the reporting the bill requires that is scary bad.

If you aren't scared you should be, even if you think Mr. Obama is the
best thing since the 8086 you should be. That is unless you honestly
think that who ever you consider your political opposition to be, will
NEVER gain power again. If you really think there will never again be a
Republican president, for example, then you are a fool.

The problem with granting power to the govenement, in anything other
then a totalitarian state of what ever stripe, is that eventually that
power will be wielded by your political enemies.

I've been over this with my daughter on the subject of national health
care. She's all for it, she's young and a senior at NYU so this is understandable.

The point I've made to her is to imagine, no matter how improbable it
may be, that Ms. Palin gets elected to the Presidency, and that her
first appointment is Dr. Wanda Franz, the current president of the
National Right to Life Committee.

As national health care is currently proposed the President's "health
czar" is NOT a cabinet level post and so is NOT subject to approval by
the Senate. Now, I asked her, do you want Dr. Franz to have that kind
of power? Because just as sure as taxes, which ever side you are on
will lose the Presidency sooner or later.

Point of fact, since 1949 the U.S. has had 16 Presidential terms, we
are in the 16th now, starting with Truman, of those 16, 9 have been
Republican and 7 have been Democratic. If I were in week 16 of the
season and my team was 9 - 7 I wouldn't be betting on a Super Bowl, of
course it can happen, but it ain't likely.



American by Birth, But Southern by the Grace of God.



Anonymous needs to forget scientology for a quick bit and take this thing down!



This only fuels my hate towards the guy. If he were any kind of a man he would reject the proposed bill himself.


I'm sorry, but I really really don't like the SoB.



I dont want to sound like I mean any disrespect to anyone or their opinions. But it is amazing how many people think this will effect their daily routines of being online, and even their freedoms as Americans . I dont claim to be any kind of expert in the here, dont get me wrong, but taking this at face value, I cant see where we are just up and giving up our normal beloved online freedoms with this bill. It sounds to me that for the govenrment to step get involved, the sh!t has had to either already hit the fan, or be already up in the air to it.

Do we have a guarantee that an attack can be stopped by the actions that this bill will allow the government to take? Of course not. But I have trouble believing that government officials will have nothing better to do than to look at any of the average user's internet activity and shut down ISPs at will for no reason (or just ANY reason)at all. I guess being just an ol country boy, I need it better explained to me the basic freedoms I will be giving up with this bill.

I think I will still have my freedom of choice to get on the internet or not. I will even have the choice of saying I am planning an attack on America. But just as it does even now, that same freedom of choice has consequnces. If I am a rag head that hacks into Fanny May's network and demands half of the days haul or imma blow ya up, I will probably expect a little frack from a country thats leaders would probably rather not have that happen. If that frack involves a major monitoring of major networks for the efforts of keeping us safe until an investigation can be conducted, then I cant say I would be against it.

One line in from one of the articles above struck me as especially irresponsible... "Obama may soon have the power to nuke the real world, and World of Warcraft. Are you comfortable with this? "

Instilling this kind of fear on otherwise unknowing people is just 'FoxNews' calibur misleading. Its how GeeDubya ruled this country after his 9/11 lies and its wrong. No this comment has nothing to do with what side of the isle may come from. By the way, lets hypothetically say that out of WoW's 11million or however many active people it has now, say a handful log on and say their will be an attack on America. I dont think that would send up a red flag to the president to shut it down. But say 3million people get on and report the same attack or are otherwise threatening America, then WoW may want to be looked at pretty close for a day or 2... just sayin..

Unlike the last 8 years, at least some effort is being done to try to protect the American people. ... I should stop here so I dont get into an inappropriately political argument.



First of all, as well displayed by the current and even the previous president, just because presidents excercise authority, does not mean they actually have it. If there is critical infrastructure for military purposes it should not be running over the public internet. The government has no authority in this area.



As much as I support our leader, I believe this is going a bit far. The internet wasnt meant to be used for millitary use and whatnot....(OH WAIT :P)


But seriously, I think too much power is being put in the govts hands. Not saying our next prez, or current prez, will be a dictator, but its just not that safe. 



I've just about had it with Obama.  He destroyed the used car market with the cash for clunkers program, he took over a few car companies, ruining our health care system, raising taxes/minimum wages which will flush the economy down the toilet and now he wants the ability to shut down our internet.  Is there anything he can't do correctly?


I Jedi

Well, actually, there is one thing I happened to agree with that man on... Just one... He picked a good person to run the FCC... A free-loving open-Internet man... :} That's the only thing, though, that I gave him a dumbs up on.



The problem with having a government do anything, of ANY description, is that it by virtue of its design and function can not, and will not, do anything well.


Goverments are good for protecting the common good of the people from outside aggression, and beyond that they should have absolutely no role in the lives of the people, because any role they try to perform they will not do well.

The U.S. Government for instance excells in the destruction of money, more specifically they are by far the most efficient machine for obliterating YOUR money that has ever existed. Not only will they at some point take some 55% of your money even before you're able to spend it (OR MORE), you will -never- be able to see it back within your lifetime. Even if you get a fabulous tax return every year, you're still loosing your behind on the bargain because the government keeps far more than they ever give back, all to squander it on innumerable things they have no right within the constitution to be involved in, nor to put YOUR money into.

So if you want something destroyed, have uncle sam to it... But as the adage goes, if you want something done right DO IT YOURSELF! At the very least you should have the freedom to CHOOSE TO DO IT YOURSELF.

This era of usurpation of rights en masse is deeply disturbing, and should be to everyone regardless of your political affiliation. People need to grow up and get beyond routing for their "team", because regardless of whether or not you have a pin that says "Yes We Can", you're going to find out that "no you can't anymore" because that right has been abridged in favor of the tyrannical efforts of the government. Regardless of whether they have an (R) or (D) by their name, they aren't your friends when they are trying to financially enslave you to Washington D.C.'s whims.


All of the childish name calling and juvenile antics of BOTH SIDES need to be set aside and the reality of the situation must be assesed for what it is. There is no Hitler here, and a fourth reich is not in the works. No class or culture is being systematically rounded up into ghettos for "their protection", so all the Nazi name calling needs to stop as well.


However what is happening is that incredible greed and incompetence are conspiring together in Washington D.C. to make a tempest of leaders purposely and willfully disregarding those they supposedly represent in an effort to further their own ambitions, and to cede more power and control over the people of this nation to themselves.


Over 200 years ago they knew full well how corrupt a goverment can easily become, so they wrote the 10th ammendment very specifically:


"The powers not delegated to
the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."


Note how it specifically says the powers NOT deligated to the United States are solely the domain of the States and the PEOPLE (you know, all those millions of folks that Congress are bribed by lobbyists to ignore), meaning in no uncertain terms, that the ONLY powers that the United States -TRULY- has are those expressly granted to it by the Constitution itself. Now of course the additional 17 ammendments -since- the bill of rights have long since dispensed with the supreme law of the land, so why should anyone in Congress worry about trampling on the people some more at this point.


As the old joke goes...


Politicians are like diapers, they should be changed often and for the same reasons...

Most would say "because they start to stink", I prefer to think it's "because they both become full of crap"


Stop voting for politicians words and start following their ACTIONS, don't pander to one faction or another, and most especially don't believe any of their promises.


How do you know when a politician is lying to you? Their lips are moving... And no, that wasn't a joke...


I Jedi

The problem I see with Americans today is that their fat and lazy. They no longer care about the country and the world, as they once did before. No, now-a-days, as long as they get what they want in life, they're happy with it. This is, of course, the problem that plagues all democracies everytime. In the beginning, every free-loving and democractic society cares for the whole and not just for the individuals. Overtime the people start to release, however, that voting for certain parties, etc, can mean a better life-style that meets "their" needs... And people stop caring about the country and turn to the individual... I think it's intollerable, however, for how much of a lack of effort Americans give to defend their own rights to a government that should of been long overdue for fixing and re-structuring.




There is no Hitler here, and a fourth reich is not in the works. No
class or culture is being systematically rounded up into ghettos for
"their protection", so all the Nazi name calling needs to stop as well.


How the Hell would you know?

You read somewhere that Hitler died at the end of the war so you chose to believe it

I wouldnt put ANYTHING past these creeps! 



Are you simply ignorant or did you purposely say something to make yourself look foolish?


Has anyone been rounded up and systematically been put into specifically deligated ghetto areas based upon cultural, social, or religious grounds under the guise that it was to "protect them" from the public at large?


Then THAT is just how the hell I know, this asinine drivel that any one or either parties are Nazi's is moronic to the point that it is insulting to the people of the Warsaw ghettos, or the larger population of Jewish, Gypsy, among others who were rounded up en masse, herded into sectioned off corners of the city, and eventually sent to death camps!


Quit being a sniveling rabble rouser trying to elicit rage based upon the WRONG thing, and actually look at what these tyrants are actually doing.


They don't want to ethnically cleanse, they clearly want to grab control of as many as they can by any means necessary, so take exception with that, don't make things up based upon false analogies and ingnorant rhteoric you've been TOLD to believe.


You've clearly got a lot of education to catch up on, and until you're brain is at least <---------------> this big, you can't ride this ride...



Untill you get a Freakin Clue, maybee you should shut your ignorant yap

and here is how I would know>

There were thousands of children growing up after WW2 who never quite understood why there was so much secrecy surrounding members of their own families.

Kids who never got answers to personal family questions they had.

Kids who definitely knew something was wrong but diddnt know what it was untill they stumbled into the mess that was their lives and realized they were the children of Nazis

I was told a very limited history of my Grandfather untill I realized that the young pictures of him diddnt look anything like the older pictures

Before he died, I always wondered why he looked exactly like a very old Adolf Hitler

I always wondered why every finger on both hands were cut off at the first joint (including his thumbs)

I wondered why his Raspy voice sounded like he had his vocal chords scraped or surgically altered

I never gave it much thought though as to why he had no teeth as so many people had false teeth

As I got older, I realized that for Hitler to get out of Germany, his Fingerprints on file throughout Europe had to dissapear, OR, his fingers had to dissapear

Same with dental records and ditto for his voice

So, unless you can prove conclusively that my Grandfather is NOT Adolf Hitler, you might want to shut your stupid yap and ask yourself why Adolf Hitler's alledged body was immediatly burned before we could examine it

Ever wonder what happened to Hitlers double's?

No, I diddnt think so





The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants - Thomas Jefferson.



While this doesn't scare me nearly as much as the healthcare bill or Cap and Trade, but this just isn't right for the country.  Aren't we supposed to have some modicum of freedom? I'd like to see a quote from the Constitution that allows them to do this (if there's an attack on the USA via the Internet, I can see why this might be necessary, although it's sort of a grey area; but it seems as though they determine When and Why they take over your site).


While I don't think that Obama is some sort of Evil Genuis attempting to oppress the American people, but with the "Special Advisors" (read: "Czars") he's proposed, a majority of whom are radical members of radical groups, communist, nationalist or otherwise, not to mention the legislation he's proposed thus far (almost all of which has some sort of Marxist/Socialist spin, however large or small), Obama is essentially chipping away at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  This is just another chip.  


I Jedi

There is no such thing in the Constitition that states that if the Internets were to be attacked, that the President would have the full authority to do whatever he felt necessary to protect the People. However, according to this article, the President does have the power to protect the People in times of national emergency... A.K.A. Marshal law, armed forces, etc. There may even be extended clauses that can be added onto his power in order to better protect the Americans of this country. A.K.A. The Internets.



The thing is, the president does not have the authority to impose Marshal Law. The Congress has to. Also, there is the matter of Posse Commitatus(sic). If this authority was used for a military defense, wouldn't it be akin to sending the Army into these businesses and shutting them down which is illegal under federal law?


I Jedi

I don't understand why we have to give control of the Internets to the President of the U.S. at anytime of the day? Because we could be under the threat of cyber-attacks? Anyone else being reminded of a quote by a certain founding farther?

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

 Don't get me wrong about this, now... No one would want this in the general public. Save for the really scared loonies out there... However, if such a bill got passed through Congress, then it is the same as the public doing what the quote says above. By not saying, doing, or anything to help STOP this particular bill, you are giving up your liberty for safety.



I'm sorry, but that quote is absolute nonsense. It's one of those things that sounds like a brilliant and profound comment on the world we live in, but it's actually total BS if you stop and analyze it.


First of all, Benjamin Franklin never said it. He's just the most popular person to attribute the quote to mistakenly.


Second, just think about the quote. You give up liberty for safety every day. You can't drive your car faster than 65 mph, you can't carry certain weapons, you can't yell fire in a movie theater. You can't share government secrets with your friend from Russia, you can't attack or kill people who make you upset, you can't steal things from your neighbor's house, you can't use bait and switch tactics at your store.


There's an endless list of freedoms that we have given up in exchange for the ability to live in a nation of enforced laws.


And even if the quote was a good one, how does it make sense to apply it to newly-proposed laws only? No one ever uses that quote when they want to change a law that's already on the books. I guess it's because the quote makes them look like they already don't deserve liberty or safety. 



"...You can't drive your car faster than 65 mph, you can't carry certain weapons, you can't yell fire in a movie theater. You can't share government secrets with your friend from Russia, you can't attack or kill people who make you upset, you can't steal things from your neighbor's house, you can't use bait and switch tactics at your store."

Certainly you can drive faster than 65mph.  No law prevents you from driving faster than 65mph.  The law on the books (relative to location) simply imposes a fine and or revocation of driving privilege provided you get caught.  You certainly may carry any weapon you can physically carry.  Again the law on the books provides that IF you do not have a certain type of permit available for viewing you can be fined or incarcerated, provided you get caught.  You can yell fire in a movie theatre all you like.  If there is actually a fire no problem.  If there isnt and someone dies as a result you STILL get away with it as long as you are not identified as the one yelling FIRE!  You can do every one of the things you mentioned as long as you dont get caught tried and convicted of those things. 

Oh and btw those things you identified are not LIBERTIES of FREEDOMS.  You cited generally accepted criminal behaviour and equated it with freedom in a snide attempt to show accepted loss of freedom.  A liberty would be the protected right to be free from illegal searches and seizures of property without warrant or probable cause.  Or the right to counsel and a trial by a jury in suits at common law where the value of same is greater than $20.00 usd.  Those are enumerated liberties or rights.  Those are the things we arent willing to give up for any amount of security.  Those are the ideals that we find ourselves willing to die for.



I've actually looked that quote up and it turns out that the quote has never been confirmed...(wiki for example said that). I do like hte quote either way. :)

That being said I'm not really sure how I feel about this issue. I mean, on one sense i've never been a fan of any government having that amount of control but on the other hand suppossedly quite a lot of damage can be done to another country through a cyber attack.

Wired had an article on an attack on Astonia (there was some accussing of the russians in there for that attack) and it pretty much crippled the country. There have been many many articles about how much of our important infrastructure is accessible through the internet (because the cost of having a physically separate network on a national scale is enormous).

That being said, is giving the president a internet kill-switch the answer? should we be looking to force the telcos to NOT monopolise the lines? I mean, it really comes down to the business of how to manage the lines and the Telco's have a huge interest in that. imagine the money they'd loose if the government jumped in and forced them to actually make good on keeping the infrastructure up to date and decently managed, instead of what we have now... compare to other countries around the world... The US is loosing it's grip on 'super power' national status. This issue is one of the more obvious symptoms of that and could be a show of the over all cause of it as well.


I Jedi

You know what, bro? I agree with you that it is important to keep our data safe... I agree that maybe this bill is only for the good intentions of America, and not just some power hungry politicans trying to gain more of a foothold on American life.

However, like you, I believe that we should find other alternative means to stopping a cyber-attack, rather than just shut the door everytime someone comes knocking... America was great at one point because of innovation and our way of life. Admitably, they didn't have the Internet, like we do. They had their own challenges, though, during their time period, which they confronted and overcame...



I agree, that quote nails it right on the head.



Anyone else sick to freaking death of the term "cyber"?

Regarding the issue at hand though, politicians are addicted to power.  They will do anything, under any pretense to extend the scope of their power.  I see this as just another example of it.  I doubt the need for this sort of legislation for any reason other than that.



It's not just the politicians.

I think it really comes down to rewarding greed as our society does. It's really puzziling that we give people rewards to do the stuff we abour them doing. And really, what kind of power is money anyway? Why does a small amount of paper, or even a number, hold sooooo much power over peoples lives. If you have money you can buy political power. Hell, you need how much money to even run for a political office? way too much, really... 

Even power/money being based on gold for economic reasons... although pretty, its one of the most industrially usless elements around. Too soft to build anything with, not very chemically reactive... good for heat transfers and moving electrons but too soft to make that useful... crazy world we live in.



Umm who let the Marxist in this conversation?

As to usefulness of (Gold) Aurum Atomic element number 79 is the most malleable and most ductile element.  As such it is a premium conductor.  It is about 65% more effecient at shielding from various forms of electromagnetic (Ionizing and non) Radiation so it is used for plating the surfaces of artificial satellite components exposed to radiation outside of our atmosphere.  Gold is an alpha blocker and a neutron blocker and will reflect fast and slow neutrons making it ideal for the inner reflective material in a Tellar device.  Highly polished gold surfaces can be used for mirrors of astounding accuracy and even some high end CD/DVD's use gold as its reflective surface.  Because it is NOT chemically reactive it makes an excellent neutral surface for an amazing array of chemical reactions.  It can make alloys with other base metals to strengthen it and harden it so that it can be used as the inner core of a dental crown a writing instrument, a pair of wire framed glasses, and many many more uses. 

Take your Stalinist ideals elsewhere please  The US does just fine without them.



Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.