How much government control in cybercrisis?

more tyranny to come

Shamabala...you havent lost anything. None of those 18 "proposed" bills have been passed.

If you jump the gun, you will always get shot!

Wow! More and more of MSM is sounding like Alex Jones Infowars!

No @!$%#, its not just internet legislation, all our rights are in jeopardy right now, all of them! Well, at least the ones we have left.

Is this the "change" we have in store... More war, no privacy, no freedom of speech/information...

Wake up America!

dbtmellis:

I just read your comment. You are an idiot. Period.

Be sure to take your vaccines and oh step this way to take a shower...

George Orwell..arent you dead?

I ingore people who yell to "wake up".

Name ONE...just ONE right that we DID have that we DO NOT have right now.

oh and please back that up with solid examples, and not just brainwashing propaganda

I know you might be quick to yell "Patriot Act". So...if its impacted YOUR Life...please tell me about it.

its propaganda to scare people into the Goverment is turing into WWII Germany. There are MANY controls in place to ensure that will never happen.

The only thing that "could" allow that to happen is to keep re-electing Liberal Democrat Incumbents.

Why is is that Congress has a 36% aproval raiting but 90% of the Incumbents are re-elected?

If people live their life as if the Government is NOT THERE at all...then they (the government) are doing thier jobs.

The Government has not harassed me or millions of others.

Obey the law and they will leave you alone.

Criminals and Terrorists have no respect for the law!

We need less Government

Yes we need rules

Not 290909099505 rules those on every thing we do

Not how many sheets of toilet paper we use ECT

We are losing more and more freedom every day

My message to all these commies who infilitrated our Congress: GET LOST!

Same old tactic of this administration. Trying to breed fear and then we let the government have more power to control. I'm not stupid enough to buy what their selling. If Obama was so concerned about our safety then why is he undermining American is every way possible? Why is he still apologizing for America to tyrants. He wants to undo our nukes, but yet he's worried about cyberattacks, yea right! I already woke up and smelled the coffee long ago.

dbtmellis

When I respond to comments like yours, people call me a, "liberal." By the dictionary I am. When I respond to comments about income tax or the federal reserve, people call me a, "right wing terrorist." The only part of George Orwell's comment I object to is his use of ad-hominems. Your argument can easily be shredded with cogent commentary.

I will start with the concept of, "civil rights." These are rights provided by the government as oposed to unalienable rights which are provided by our creator, whomever you believe that to be. I will not even touch on current events. The, "Right to travel," is considered an unalienable right adjudicated through several centuries. A right is something that can not be encumbered by anyone. Why do you think you have a, "drivers," licence? Driving is a commercial activity. We have all been fooled into an adhesion contract.

Let's consider the right to free association. While many hale the civil rights acts of the 1960s, the freedom of association was eliminated by statute(code) not law.

Let's consider security in our papers and effects. The FISA acts of the 1970's allows inspection of your bank records without notice.

This is but a sample, but think about it. The government has regulated your freedom to move on this earth, the freedom to associate with the people you wish and the freedom to conduct your financial affairs in privacy.

The current events are too easy to shred through the natural law machine. Unfortunately you do need to, "wake up!"

To everyone here, the biggest problem facing America is that most people believe that any and everything can be voted on. Our founders abhorred democracy for the reasons you see people complaining today. Too many people believe if we just get the right people in office everything will be ok. If we all recognize that the Constitution was a, "LIMITING," document and that certain things are not within the jurisdiction of either state or federal government to decide, we will live the dream our founders layed out before us.

There's enough adware and spyware going around and I don't know of any single system that can stop it all. It seems they can trace what they want to trace. I see no need to "kill" the system. I'm not sure the "framers" had quite all this in mind when they wrote the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, etc. My answer is NO, NO, NO.

The Government has not harassed me or millions of others.

Looking at Baghdad I would like to reserve a benefit of a doubt before we hear a second opinion from an unbiased source.

another step toward socialism. aint big government great

Big Brother in action........and all the while your "Big Brother" sings to you..................... "Don't worry, be Happy"

buffalo bob-937857

another step toward socialism. aint big government great

Those ignorant of the past are doomed to repeat it..........or something like that...and this next generation isn't too bright.....

I wish it was that simple......look around you...and the world..........You are headed for a "GLOBAL GOVERNMENT"...from G-8 to G-20, what? next month the G-50.....With the China & Russia running the show..........I'm glad I'll be really dead by then....have fun in your new world order.........I'll be a worm turd by then..........

TXAGGIE,

I like the way you expresssed your ideas on the topic here .

the perspective you are presenting seeems to be over looked by many

If U.S. security is threatened say by a nuclear plant's or military computer network being infiltrated then I'm all for the ability to control cyberspace. Of course I'm pretty sure it already exists in one form or other. As long as guidelines are clear and there are limitations on when and why Govco. can step in I can deal with it. The trouble as with everything else Govco. gets involved with is knowing when to say when.

msong,YOU"RE calling people hateful? Typical over the edge lefty double standard. Take away people's rights because "I" don't agree with them. We are in trouble.

The government should take a " hands off" approach with the Internet. Any meddling would be a first amendment violation of freedom of speech and constitute "book burning" What have we become?????

msong

Government should have 100% control of everything in america

You are welcome to go back to North Korea, Russia, or Venezuela anytime...I'll even chip in for the one way ticket, out of my unemployment check, no less.........

I know you might be quick to yell "Patriot Act". So...if its impacted YOUR Life...please tell me about it.

Well, thanks to provisions in the act, if someone has been impacted, they may not be able to talk about. Also, thanks to the provisions, people don't know if their personal information has been seized without a warrant. You may say that's not important, but allowing the government to root around in one's personal information without transparent safeguards will inevitably chill free speech. Remember the Nixon administration's use of the IRS against its "enemies."

One should have the ability to speak out without fear of investigation by the government.

Same old tactic of this administration. Trying to breed fear and then we let the government have more power to control.

Sadly, this is a bipartisan tactic. The Bush administration used it effectively after 9/11 to get the "Patriot Act" passed by a spineless Congress. Bush started it. Too bad Obama is continuing it.

Obey the law and they will leave you alone.

This has to be one of the more naive things I've seen in recent months. Whatever gave you this idea? Let's say my political beliefs are out there. I am harassed. I obey all federal, state and local laws. Believe me baby, if people want to harass you they will. The PATRIOT Act does not protect anyone.

My message to all these commies who infilitrated our Congress: GET LOST!

Don't tell me, you're a freedom loving conservative, right? Well if you love freedom so much, why do you have an issue with people freely choosing to become Communists, and the constituents of their region electing same?

Go ahead, take control! You've f----d everything else up, you might as well make a day out of it.

True, if there are ANY power plants out there that have their control systems exposed to the internet, THAT is what needs to be corrected. As with all scare campaigns, they are spreading misinformation and putting forth scenarios that are not possible. I fear a disgruntled employee with a USB stick more than any foreign agency, any day.

Hackers can break in because they are light years ahead of US IT. The fundemental flaw is in the OS... the weakness is in connecting various computers throughout government.

Stupid is as stupid does; that they have down in DC.

Creating a crisis or acting on one, is the most effective way to get something pushed through when most wouldn't normally. "Stimulus" This is what Rahm Emmanhuel has said. This is the most effective way of getting what they want. They are betting on the swine flu to push through health care. Betting on some cyber attack to be able to take over the Internet. NO Way! They should never have control of our information. This is absolutely horrible.

Our country dearly lucks a law confronting “a hacker”, the wrong - doer.

As far as defending our government from attack… that would make Watergate a crime.

txaggie, you're right on it. The original thought behind the federal government was to support and defend the States rights, thus the 'United States of America'. Since the early 30's more and more of these rights are being taken over by the Fed's, (and before you knee jerk reactionaries scream for proof, use the internet, before it's taken away, to search this info. It's very easy to find.). This is why the Founding father's did not want a King or a Monarchy style of Government. As Jefferson said, "The more power you bestow, the more they have to take away".

we are leaning in the last 18 years towards a Federal union of states and away from a system of united states. This is a scary time if we let them keep taking, Banks, Auto (private business's), Health, etc. Doesn't matter which 'side' you're on, we need to resist as one. The two party system is working great in the 'united we stand, divided we fall' category.

So yeah, wake up people, we're still ALL Americans!

Absolutly against any government atempt to control the net,seems very iranian.I have unabashed contempt for hackers.same thing as terrorists.I'm amazed that any computer holding sensative information would even be connected to the net.This is the vehicle for free speach in the 21st century and should not be stifled Even if you don't like what is on it.

If wall street banksters and the Obama sweepstakes giveaway doesn't kill the economy then the internet failure wont have much effect.

I make my living by programming computers for use on the Internet, and the one thing that all this noise about having a kill switch tells me is that the U.S. economy and the economies of many other nations rides on a very fragile and very fallible framework. The disruption of the Internet can wipe out businesses that rely on small margins of profit to stay in business. Finding alternative methods of communicating with customers in the event of a failure of the Internet is something that most such businesses don't even consider because in the minds of their owners, the Internet is rock solid.

Let's say that an enemy were to launch a rocket with a small nuclear warhead in the direction of the East Coast. Exploding that small weapon at a high altitude would cause no physical damage or death, but it would create a magnetic pulse that would destroy most electronic communication equipment. The only thing that would survive would be old fashioned rotary telephones. Those phones would be useless, however, because they connect to electronic communications networks.

The more we rely on electronic networks, the less it takes to wipe out our communication infrastructure. Businesses want to have less reliance on face-to-face communication and written correspondence delivered via first class mail because those methods are time and money consumers. Instead they want to use electronic methods. They want paperless transactions, payment for bills done over the Internet, electronic banking, and so forth.

One of the great curiosities of the banking industry for instance, is that while it still has all the vestiges of security when it comes to the collection and payment of money, the storage of money is another issue. Much of the money that is stored becomes so-called "book entries," electronic records that indicate how much money has been received and how much has been paid out. Actual paper currency is quickly shed in order to "store" wealth in electronic ledgers that keep track of where it went. Yet, the computer systems that keep track of the money, while protected in the sense that people have to log in and out of the buildings where those computers are located and while the people that use them have to log in and out of their workstations, are not protected from physical forces outside the buildings in which they are housed any more than an art gallery is protected from the heat of the day. Computer security experts regard having mirror copies of databases located at various sites throughout the country as diversifying the risk with respect to any local disaster. They don't even consider the possibility that a nuclear attack as described above would destroy most if not all electronic records throughout the entire country.

Recently, in Niagara Falls, NY, a conference discussing this issue was held. It attracted many national international government and business leaders. Like many such conferences, it resulted in little specific action, but it raised the consciousness of how little it would take to destroy virtually everything upon which cooperative societies rely.

So, should the government have some say with respect to the shutting down of the Internet in the event of an emergency? You tell me. As far as I know, the government is the only organization that can issue a unilateral order to stop. Anything short of that would entail lots of discussion and bargaining, similar to Nero fiddling while Rome burned.

Granting that option to the federal government carries with it great risks because the penchant of elected officials is to garner power to themselves. It makes them feel important, and they chronically abuse their powers. Moreover, most legislators couldn't tell a byte from a bite if their lives depended on it. They would likely hand over the implementation for such actions to FBI data personnel, who like most every other database employee I have ever known are controlling and somewhat anal-retentive. Worst, implementation would only follow a decision process that would involve Congress. If the health care debate and the operation of Medicare and the Post Office are any signs of their suitability for such a task and their preparedness to act quickly, then the government's medicine is likely worse than the calamity it would intend to prevent.

Seriously, you think the only consequence of the government taking control of or shutting down access to parts of the Internet is the lack of shopping??

How about the idea that once the government has that power, they could then decide that Al Quaida is using the Internet to recruit new people, so they're going to block all websites that mention any of those buzzwords. Or that the foreign news is skewing Americans perceptions of what's happening in the world, so that needs to be filtered too. Oh yeah, and they no longer like the police being mocked or caught doing the wrong thing, so any videos posted of police acting incorrectly will be immediately removed. But hey... it would all be in the name of "safety" so it would be okay, right??

Ok, some of those scenarios sound extreme, I know. I'm not usually a conspiracy theorist. But the Executive Branch has waaay to much power as it is. Remember the phrase "checks and balances"??

I was refering to the possible crisis itself, which the government is using to try and sell the proposition that they need more control.

You seem to regard the Internet as little more than a toy. But, shutting it down would be as devastating, perhaps more so, than shutting down the phone system.

People use it to telecommute to jobs that may be thousands of miles away. Self-employed individuals use it to service clients throughout the country. Companies use it not just for external communications, but for data flows within the organization. Medical personnel use it to retrieve important reference information. And, there are many more critical uses.

People who are upset with this idea of a "kill" switch are not spoiled whiners.

How about the idea that once the government has that power, they could then decide that Al Quaida is using the Internet to recruit new people, so they're going to block all websites that mention any of those buzzwords.

Thank you for this. People seem to fail to understand that the totalitarianism they condemn in other countries is no different than the same thing here.

Chuckee,I wonder which politicians would be interested in doing this.Lets see,I'm leaning toward the republicans.The same ones that have tapped phone lines in the name of homeland security.

The article refers to 18 different bills with various kill provisions. Before you accuse either liberals or conservatives of tyranny, please confirm that all 18 bills were originated by the same party. I have a feeling that both parties are behind this madness.

bore. . . they have had access to tapping phone line and have done it for YEARS . . . many years . . not sure when it exactly started. . . but its been DECADES that they have been able to tap into anything they want to. . . LONNNG before homeland security was a twinkle in some thugs eye. . .

hope all you liberal idiots are happy for the tyrant you have put in office.

Yep. Way happier than we are about the douchebag who put the PATRIOT Act into place. Actually, one would think you'd be happy. As time goes by there is less difference.

Oh, except for that whole skin color thing...

These bills aren't new as some here have said. It has not just been one party either by any means.

Both parties are guilty of it. Those arguing that this is an Obama initiative are laughably late to the party.

As for current positive plans. Right now the FCC is discussing the passage of a net neutrality standard (i.e. no discrimination of data).

MMM MMM MMM

Obama wants to rule the net

MMM MMM MMM

Get rid of Sean Get rid of Beck

MMM MMM MMM

Take the wealth and for all health care

MMM MMM MMM

Look at all us kiddies with the empty stare

Do you really believe that these presidents; whom we think that we vote to employ, are IN CONTROL of the federation? They are a glorified babysitter and the baby runs the show.

Ask all those dead soilders; who voted for George the younger, how their vote worked out for them.

See how that works....sounds ignorant either way you say it.

The hackers are already in control. It's called the Federal Reserve Banking system. And they are already adding decimals. Inflation or debt monitization.

Right on target Solomonpal!

The only weakness to the web of catastrophic consequence is the domain naming system (DNS).

That's why our lord Microsoft created hosts files!

Desire the Results... Create the problems...

Cause the reations... Provide the solutions...

you can't trust the gov'ment. just ask a Native-Tribal American.

All I am saying is that we should keep one eye on what congress is doing while the other is on what is being debated in the public form, that is all.

Who gets to provide the definition of the word *crisis*?

A gov'ment which hires people to ride in automated elevators all day pushing the floor destination buttons for the passengers?

A gov'ment which hires contractors and pays them with a blank check?

NO THANK YOU. I don't need any protection from an organization which is THAT stupid.

The first thing we need to do is kill all the lawyers.

That will solve the majority of Earth's problems.

freempg stated:

"Should our next generation not experience the risk and rewards of freedom? What then will they experience, tyranny?"

Obama on the Constitution:

“I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot."

“But I think it is an imperfect document, and I think it is a document that reflects some deep flaws in American culture..,"

He went on to be sworn in and stated: ‘I do solemly swear, or affirm, that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and I will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

What part of the above do you believe?

What freedoms have we lost? Last time I checked I was a free now as I've ever been. This unbridled hate for the government is ridiculous. You want anarchy? You want to be "free"? Why don't you go to Somalia or something. A place where the government barely exists at all.

You have no idea how lucky you are to live in the U.S. The U.S will never become communist. And no amount of crazy far right fear-mongering is going to make it so.

I think Boyer and Adrastia, in combination, make the perfect statement. Boyer expresses concern that we are losing more and more of our freedom everyday and Adrastia apparently believes that we have lost none and never will. A big difference, perhaps unintentional, between the two is that Boyer uses the word "freedom" while Adrastia uses the word "freedoms". These words are not grammatically the same and are not interchangable

"Freedom" refers to a general sense of liberty from intrusion by government into our daily lives. We are free to go about our personal and interpersonal business without the government monitoring our behavior, transactions, interactions and so forth. "Freedoms" refers to a listing of Constitutionally or legislatively guaranteed rights that the government has an obligation to protect.

To this extent both Boyer and Adrastia are correct. While I don't think we have lost any of our "freedoms" we have certainly lost some of our "freedom". Two things scare me about this. First, that so many of us seem willing to compromise our freedom for a sense of safety. That we are willing to accept increasing government monitoring of our behavior in the name of protecting us from external threats. Secondly, Adrastia scares me to death. It is exactly when we are so convinced that the government will "never become communist" or so convinced that the government has our best interest at heart that we will stop watching and monitoring what government does. It is exactly at that time that government will do the things that Boyer fears and that Adrastia is sure will never happen.

JoeMike interesting