Kill Switch

With summer vacation having finally arrived, the annual family sojourn is in full swing. This year the Feeny clan find themselves at Universal Studios in Orlando, a trip against which yours truly fervently warned my wife – the summer months in Florida are no picnic weather-wise, and as staunch a hot-weather person as I am, even I’m being worn down by what can be aptly described as walking around with a heat lamp attached to your forehead in the middle of a heat wave with high humidity. It’s not for the timid.

I’m also a bit concerned with the Grinch’s  following me around the Dr. Suess portion of the park, which leads me to one of two conclusions: either he senses in me a kindred spirit, or the creature that’s seated at the Cinnabon Cafe across the way is a secret service agent. Maybe I’ll try to buy him off with an iced coffee and a muffin. If this is my last piece at AR, you all know where to begin looking.

All that having been said, I’ve found time to offer some thoughts, thanks largely in part to my Ipad and the wonders of the internet. Ironically enough, the very technology that makes it so much easier for a vacationing political hack to continue in his endeavors is the very subject of this article. As to why I’d even be doing stuff like this during vacation, well – the political Left never rests, so neither will I.

Let’s start by getting out of the way what will most likely be the first of the obvious criticisms by our liberal friends – I’m sure that some of what I have to offer here will be dismissed out-of-hand as the work of a mind entrenched in the world of conspiracy theories. That’s fine. For my part, all I can say is that I intend to do my best here to offer basic facts and to use common sense. As I’ve also intoned along the way during my time here at AR, I’m done apologizing for exercising my right to speak freely, at least while I still can.

One of the more recent legislative attempts of this socialist Congress is one that, should it be passed into law, would give the President a “kill switch” of sorts to shut down the Internet in the event of a cyber-attack that threatens our national security. If one were to look at the issue from the common-sense, conservative perspective, it would, indeed, seem to make sense; if we here on the right claim to have the welfare of the country and a strong national defense as integral parts of our basic platform, then we should have no issue with this. I agree. There are, however, serious, serious problems with such an idea.

First and most importantly, one man – admittedly the most important of our citizens, but a single man nonetheless – would be vested with far and away too much power, a concept that our Founding Fathers deliberately tried to prevent from happening. Not only would this man have singular control over the most complex communications infrastructure to exist in the history of humankind, he would now possess this in addition to his access to the button that could conceivably end all human life on large tracts of planet earth.

I’m not sure I’d want to hang out with a person with that degree of power. I mean, he is very cool, but I’d be somewhat unnerved by the man behind the curtain.

Second, where in the Constitution is the President of the United States given the authority to comprehensively and completely shut down all communications in America? I suppose the first and most obvious answer will be the lines that speak to “providing for the common defense”, but the conflict that I see here is that the Internet is truly the last bastion of free speech in our society.

So, what’s it gonna be? Sweeping protections in the face of a cyber-attack, or the right to freely express ourselves? After all, aren’t liberals all about “expressing themselves”?

Well, as Benjamin Franklin once stated, any person who is willing to sacrifice a degree of liberty for a degree of security will get none and deserve neither. This visionary-type statement certainly seems to go along quite well with the basic fact, at least from all of my experiences, that once you give the government a foot, it will gladly use that foot to take another one and to put you under surveillance.

See, I think there’s more to this, which I’m sure many people with common sense can already see. This is also where the accusations of my being tangled in a web of conspiracy theories will come into play. I’ll get to that in a minute.

I think the most general statement that needs to be made here is that in looking at this from the widest possible angle, the very concept of an Internet “kill switch” is laughable on its very face. Of course, any of our liberal friends who are reading this might be decidedly confused as to which side to take on this issue – on one hand, they’ll want to dismiss me as a conspiracy whacko; on the other, they’ll want to defend the notion that an Internet “kill switch” actually is possible and that President Obama certainly should and will use it. I’m really curious as to which side they’ll take. It should prove amusing.

Anyway, as I was saying, if this Lieberman-Collins brainchild were to make it through both houses of Congress, I’d have to really wonder at whether or not they’d fully thought through all of the other and clearly obvious, ancillary consequences that would come with the possibility and authority for such drastic action. For instance, let’s not forget that that the Internet is also occasionally referred to as the World Wide Web – it is, after all, global. Liberals are all about everything being “global” in nature, so surely this point couldn’t have escaped them. How would such a radical action affect the other nations of the world that are inextricably and electronically tied to us?

Putting that aside for the moment and assuming that just portions of the communications infrastructure in the United States could be isolated from the rest of the planet, I’m wondering which portions it might be. For example, one of the original sponsors of the bill, Democratic Senator John Rockefeller of West Virginia, claimed that the bill might not only wield authority over governmental Internet considerations but might also extend to other “private” online services that are of interest to the government.

Hmmm….that sounds rather ominous. But that’s just me.

Let’s even look at a piece of this issue that I feel has gone largely unmentioned to this point, though admittedly, I’m sure that this would all be part and parcel of such an action if such a situation were to arise. I’m curious – would the entire telecommunications network be shut down, including cell phone communications? Of course, I’d have to answer “yes” to that myself, as it seems to be a no-brainer; however, I’m still understandably curious, simply because I’ve heard no mention of its being part of the bill. After all, it was the cell phone network that was probably of far greater interest to the terrorists who engineered the 9/11 attack than it was their work on the Internet. Cell phones would simply have to go.

Here, in the end, is where my “something more” comes into play. It’s a foregone conclusion that when it comes to political speech, conservatives rule the Internet. Why? To me, the answer is fairly simple, though I’m sure there are more elements to this dynamic than what I’m mentioning here. From where I stand, it strikes me that conservatives dominate the ‘net because it more easily plays into their hands; the vast majority of those who consider themselves ‘conservative’ are the producers of society and are, more often than not, too busy working and trying to support their families to involve themselves in political machinations (though during this turbulent time in history, they’re certainly making the time). It’s those on the Left that essentially make ‘paid careers’ of trying to disrupt the lives of otherwise peaceful, law-abiding citizens. Conservatives also dominate talk radio, which arguably remains the driving force behind the conservative movement. In both cases, whether listening to talk radio or taking a few minutes to read something of interest on his office computer, a typical conservative no longer need venture out of his or her house after working a long day in order to ‘protest’ some thing or another (in many cases, however, they’re even doing that nowadays, as we have seen in the Tea Parties and the health care debates of last summer). Conceivably, from the comfort of their office desk (or at home) they can listen to talk radio and/or add their voices to the political debate via the blogosphere, sharing links to crucial articles via social networking devices such as Twitter and Facebook. It’s certainly ironic that arguably the very cyber-engine that drove the Obama campaign bus to victory in ’08 is, in many ways, helping to push that bus into the breakdown lane.

Excuse me while I slow down as I’m passing to look at the wreck on the side of the road. Sure hope no one’s hurt.

See, the Internet is a major, major problem for this administration specifically and the political Left more generally. They can’t shut us up. But then again, they don’t want to, do they? – they’re the biggest advocates of free speech in the country!

Of course, it’s only freedom of informed, enlightened speech that is still free – we ignorant conservatives need to be shut down, because, naturally, we’re polluting the national discourse. As a matter of fact, I think that’s in the first amendment somewhere – ignoramuses need not apply.

Wasn’t it President Obama who recently stated during a college graduation speech that there’s just too much information out there nowadays? That maybe, if you’re inclined to watching Glenn Beck, that perhaps you should take a look at the Huffington Post, just so that you get a sense of what both sides of the debate are putting out there?

Perhaps we should consider Mark Lloyd, a hard-leftist who is trying to establish the ‘Net Neutrailty Act, which would ostensibly put such incredibly heavy burdens on private communications that they would virtually cease to exist (which, translated, basically means that he intends to “neutralize” the conservative voice – but it sure sounds “fair”, doesn’t it?). Or, how about the George Soros-funded Media Matters, a group that was recently shot down by the Supreme Court in their attempts to have the FCC impose draconian rules over Internet availability? No matter, though – if they couldn’t get that, they simply now intend to go around it by trying to make the Internet a public utility.

Geez – that is an awful lot of focus on Internet communication. Why, do you suppose?

Let’s consider the mainstream media for a moment. Why is it that they’ve been, for the vast majority of the time since Obama began campaigning in earnest, so far into the tank for this administration? Because they’re patently against the notion of individual freedom? No, I don’t think it’s that; it strikes me that they see that the world of communications is changing, people are more and more frequently getting their news from mobile, quick-bite sources, and that the days of sitting down on the couch to watch the evening news are all but over. TV news is now driven by opinion, during prime-time.

The Brian Williamses and Katie Courics of the world can see that their elitist, lavish sinecures are on borrowed time. As with so many other things relative to this administration, it all comes back to one, very simple consideration, the infamous three-letter word:

J-O-B-S. Specifically, jobs with government funding.

Geez, think this might have anything to do with General Electric’s owning NBC, and its owner, Geoff Immelt, working as one of President Obama’s economic advisors? Or, even possibly, this administration’s admission that it may possibly consider bailing out the other dinosaur of yesteryear communications, the newspaper industry?

That sure sounds like fascism.
Nah – mere coincidence. Conspiracy theorist.

Since President Obama’s coming into office, this administration has seemingly been working amidst perpetual crisis. In all honesty, I can’t remember a period of my life when there seemed to be so many near-national emergencies. Seems like we’re always at “code red”, so to speak. Let’s see if I can conjure up at least a working list:

> an economic meltdown (of course, inherited from evil Republicans, to say nothing of the Democrats’ role in forcing banks to make unstable loans)

>Global Warming, which, based on what I’m experiencing in Florida – oh, wait…this is Florida…it’s supposed to be hot here…my bad, as they say

>Conflict over the Arizona law and illegal immigration in general, which, of course, might have one more astutely consider the revelation of Senator Kyl last week

>The oil spill in the Gulf and the negligence of BP, which, mysteriously enough, happened about two weeks following President Obama’s announcement that he’d be more willing to consider offshore drilling

>The ongoing war in Afghanistan

>The more recent McChrystal issue (which, laughably, resolved itself in the appointment of the ‘evil’ General “Betrayus”)I’m sure that I’m missing a few, but I’m also confident that my point has been made. Can’t let any of those crises go to waste.

Consequently, should we be prepared for a national “cyber-crisis”? Is the groundwork being prepared for us? I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s a foregone conclusion, but there isn’t anything that this administration attempts that is in any way surprising any longer. My guard is perpetually up.

Wouldn’t it be a beneficial by-product if the conservative voice just happened to be “shut down” in the process of guarding against an “attack” on the Internet? Wouldn’t shutting down the Internet be practically tantamount to the Patriot Act, against which liberals went out of their minds?

Of course, our President will claim that “he didn’t want to do it,” that “robust political debate is a necessary part of what it means to be an American.”

Unless, of course, you don’t read the Huffington Post.

Sorry – had to do it. Had to protect you.

If and when such a situation occurs, I’ll be very curious as to whether I can still get a cell phone signal.

__________________________________________________________

Additional Notes

As per usual with this administration, there’s a lot more going on about which I’d love to write but simply don’t have the time. Here are several issues that have recently arisen that bear watching:

Complete Disregard for the Rule of Law - http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-35976-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m6d24-Obamas-plans-to-grant-amnesty-without-Congress

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/06/federal-judge-rules-against-obamas-job-killing-moratorium/

Assault on Freedom of Speech and the 2nd Amendment – vote was scheduled for yesterday – NRA cuts special back room deal - http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/06/house-passes-campaign-finance-refor.html

Share

Comments

  1. Michelle Zhang says:

    Did you visit the Wizarding World of Harry Potter??????????????

  2. John Feeny says:

    You know, Michelle, I honestly just don’t get it. It’s kinda like what I say the Beatles- I’m the first to admit that they and Elvis were the two musical phenomenons to have the greatest impact on modern music, but I hate the Beatles. I just can’t listen to their music.

    That said, WHY would thousands of adults stand in two to four hour lines to pick up a plastic stick? In unbearable heat, to boot? I don’t understand. I’m sure it’s a wonderful series of movies, but I just don’t get it.

    I don’t know – maybe I am the Grinch, after all.

  3. Boston Blackie says:

    John,
    You opened yourself up to the libs to imply that your brain is frying in FLA. Funny how most of these “conspiracy theories” are actually coming true. What would be considered a cyber attack – pictures of Mohammed, speaking out against the Messiah, or maybe right-wing hate speech during an election cycle? I am sure Obeyme can take tips from China when to hit the switch. Will it affect his infamous blackberry that he can’t live without.

    “Of course, it’s only freedom of informed, enlightened speech that is still free – we ignorant conservatives need to be shut down, because, naturally, we’re polluting the national discourse. As a matter of fact, I think that’s in the first amendment somewhere – ignoramuses need not apply.”

    John Boy from Canada would be so proud of those comments. You are finally seeing things his way, he only wishes it was true and not a pipe dream.

    As for the Beatles, FINALLY, someone who agrees with me. I do not have the stomach for them. Must be because I am also a right-wing conspiracy whacko.
    And damn proud of it.
    Enjoy your vacation. Just think if you were a public school teacher, you could afford to be vacationing in socialist Greece instead of Disney.

  4. John Buyon says:

    well as the resident liberal bogeyman I feel compelled to comment on this.

    first of all I seriously doubt that the government let alone one member of it could shut down the web, that just seems factually untrue. you know being there Billions of people, hundreds of thousands of servers, hundreds of satellites, all countries, I-pod,pads,touches,phones etc…

    once again phantom enemies of the right wing are coming out to pasture.
    you say conservatives dominate the web? nonsense…
    it is the *energized* political minority/marginalized elements that dominate the chaos and anarchy of the internet.
    after 9/11 it was the truthers and their ilk
    before election 08 it was the Obama drones/Ron Paul-ers
    after the election it was the TEA’ers and various right-wing idiots.
    I have been reading up on conservative/conspiracy (including alex jones) websites and you guys are not conspiracy theorists you are just stupid.
    the *elites* would do this and that with black helicopters/Y2Kers, ban the internet, ban guns, ban speech, fema camps, ban religion, cannibalism after economic crash, oil going to 250$ etc… it never ends
    and these *elites* never act on their so called intentions, infact they always do the opposite.
    maybe because you guys have a faulty definition of *elites*
    ie liberal,media,political.
    my definition of elites?
    the top .5% economically of the world (because nation-states don’t mean squat) and their institutions of power. if you think of these people as the elites you get a much more coherent and sensible narrative.

  5. John Feeny says:

    Yes, Mr. Bogeyman….but explain WHY this is actual legislation…..you seem to have a grasp on all things.

  6. Gail B. says:

    John Feeny says:
    June 25, 2010 at 4:22 pm

    “Yes, Mr. Bogeyman….but explain WHY this is actual legislation…..you seem to have a grasp on all things.”

    Somebody call the fire department–I smell SMOKE!

  7. Gail B. says:

    Mr. Bogeyman, you may as well face it: Every time you liberals are busted for your textbook strategy, you start calling names, making insults, twisting truth, and/or cry racist–all without an element of cold facts.

    Forget it! We understand you! And, we really do not appreciate your coming here to vent your indignation that conservatives are not persuaded to cross to the liberal/Progressive side.

    For example, Obama just had to get the Stimulus passed “to boost the economy.” Well, when people began to see the debt numbers, he then said he had to “cut spending” to boost the economy.

    Mr. Bogeyman, WHY does Obama have so many Communists, Marxists, and Progressives surrounding him and advising him? Why the network of organized special interest groups and unions? Do you not realize that for every benefit the government provides, it can also regulate and/or take away? Is that what you call liberty? If the government had allowed the Stimulus money to remain in the paychecks of Americans for only six months, unemployment would not have increased; consumer spending would have increased; jobs would have been kept and more created; and there would not now be an economic “CRISIS.” As it is, conservative Americans are waiting for the other shoe to drop because of this incompetent regimeand its even more incompetent leader–what’s going to happen to us next?!

    Obama wants control of the Internet because people are not reading the liberal newspapers or watching the liberal television networks. Everyone knows that they are in Obama’s pocket! But the Internet isn’t–YET, anyway. It’s all about control, Mr. Bogeyman. Wake up! Why would you want to live under a dictatorship?

    Because of the economic situation that Obama’s brilliance has caused to worsen, many of the unemployed have started their own businesses. See, it’s capitalism that fuels the economy, not government. The government cannot fuel the economy because the government produces no product.

    I don’t know where you went to school, but you have a lot more to learn.

  8. Gail B. says:

    Someone who knows I watch the Texas/Mexico border cams asked me if Obama was at the border passing out amnesty cards!

  9. Budge it says:

    I see they flipped the ‘kill’ switch on this years congressional budget for the nation. How many corporations could get away with that???

  10. Address canceled says:

    11:24 That means we can just skip the next State Of The Union as well.

  11. John Buyon says:

    as I already said I doubt this bill would become law and even if it does I severely doubt it would even work seeing it being almost impossible to regulate the internet.
    but if this is law actually becomes serious I would obviously be against it because the internet is basically the only advance of freedom in the past 20 years.

    I don’t understand why you people want to brand yourself as conservatives in my way of thinking the word and the philosophy of conservatism is a regression and backwards looking.

    Obama has never said that he wants to “cut spending to boost the economy” he is telling the G20 to NOT CUT SPENDING so that there will still be money injected into the economy.

    Communists, Marxists, Progressives.
    Warning Glenn Beck alert!
    do you know what Marxism is? can you explain 3 of Marx’s critical ideas? I seriously want to know what conservatives think Marx said.
    Communists: Last time I checked the red scare died 50 years ago.
    Progressives: Is that a bad thing? that we have people in the executive branch that believe in protecting workers rights, protecting the rights of minorities and conserving the environment?
    In my view It is progressives who should be always in charge and conservatives should serve to criticism them only.
    because conservative philosophy defends Big business, authoritarian politics, and environmental destruction in the name of profits and “free markets”
    do you know who the american progressives were? many presidents many Republicans and lots of democrats, academia, church’s and Labor Unions, schools and families all identified as progressives or believed in the relatively straightforward truths embedded in progressive philosophy.

    a note about special interests: There are so many special interest groups that they cooperating with each other to lobby the government is actually quite representative of the public at large. big oil/greenpeace, prolife/pro choice groups etc… the only problem is which special interests are you scared of most? this my friend is the critically important reason I am a democrat because the special interests of the democratic party are less “evil”
    who would you trust more Andy stern or jack Abramoff?
    BP or Greenpeace?
    trial lawyers or corporate lawyers who help big business evade their taxes?
    NRA or code pink?
    Religious right or secular coalition for America?
    you get the line of reasoning I hope.

    the right wing has a a lot more shit in their ranks
    you have outright fascists ( Cheney)
    Theocrats (ashcroft)
    and imperialists ( Rumsfeld)

    do I really have to explain stimulus economics to you it is relatively simple.
    1. Recession means less production meaning falling wages less consumption less production less wages and on…. this cycle can be solved by waiting it out until the free market re-balances the capital structure. which works but could take many years.
    or by big government spending which acts as a sort of jolt of “red bull” which gives the private sector a small increase in demand and therefore lifts the economy again.
    2. the private sector spending in a recession is not increasing it decreases as workers cut back consumption to set up rainy day funds, enterprises stop production to sell inventory. if the government didn’t step in the same vicious circle described above would continue.

    this bill is introduced by the right-wing democrat Lieberman not by a Liberal like Obama. If Gingrich introduced such a bill Im sure you idiots would have eaten it up to protect us against AQ.

    OMG I’m so tired of this BS ” the government doesn’t produce anything ”
    this is so self evidently untrue it is ridiculous what about roads, bridges, vaccinations, defense, etc… these are goods and services the government produces in which the benefits are widely dispersed and free.

  12. Anonymous says:

    12;59 yawn

  13. John Feeny says:

    Yawn.

  14. Dee says:

    John, I have to agree with you on this issue. I also wondered what would constitute a “cyber-attack”. Would there be a warning? Most of the internet crashes and hackings I have read about occurred without warning. How would BO know when to shut it all down and like you said, what about the rest of the world (that’s right, he is the world). As Boston Blackie said, what about the infamous blackberry of BO’s? That’s the one that needs to be shut down. The left had a chance with talk radio when Air America was on and apparently failed due to lack of listeners. I personally started reading conservative websites when the mainstream media could not write or discuss political issues without being biased. As with Mr. Buyon, they continued to call names and play the blame game. They did not research BO’s background and ask for info as they have done with McCain and George W Bush. They called Bush stupid but never mentioned that his grades in college were better than Kerry’s!
    “OMG I’m so tired of this BS ” the government doesn’t produce anything ”
    this is so self evidently untrue it is ridiculous what about roads, bridges, vaccinations, defense, etc… these are goods and services the government produces in which the benefits are widely dispersed and free.”
    Nothing the government does is “free”. The taxpayers have paid for it. They want to cut the defense budget and healthcare costs. Hospitals have already laid people off and have closed facilities. Many professional people have lost their jobs and would not be qualified to build “roads and bridges” other than hold the flag or as our local department of transportation does, they could possibly set up the orange cones or lean on the shovel while someone else digs the hole.
    Each and everyday brings a new “crisis” and I hope our country survives. Thank you for an enlightening article.

  15. Boston Blackie says:

    Gail,

    “Mr. Bogeyman, you may as well face it: Every time you liberals are busted for your textbook strategy, you start calling names, making insults, twisting truth, and/or cry racist–all without an element of cold facts.

    What do you expect from someone who gets all his info from wikipedia !!!!
    John Boy must have missed his morning meds today, his 12:59 comments are his same ol’ recycled ranting. Why he gives a hoot about America when he is up in Canada is beyond me.
    Hey John Boy, do you even contribute in anyway to the USA economy?
    Dee,
    The bigger issue is not whether the kill switch law will actually pass or not. It is the nerve of the idea even being floated, which is what I think they are actually doing. They just keep trying to push the envelope with us – no surprise Lieberman and Collins introduced it. Between Snowe and Collins, I feel more sorry for people from Maine than myself in mASSachusetts. At least here, I know what to expect from my elected reps.

  16. Gail B. says:

    Mr. Bogeyman said:

    Obama has never said that he wants to “cut spending to boost the economy”

    Uh, didn’t he order something about trimming the budget spending last year because of the economy and the debt–the cuts being only a minute percent of what was needed? And, this was due to the absolute outrage for the Stimulus Bill.

    Do you not understand about overthrowing a government by bankrupting it?

  17. Gail B. says:

    Mr. Bogeyman also said:

    “Progressives: Is that a bad thing? that we have people in the executive branch that believe in protecting workers rights, protecting the rights of minorities and conserving the environment?”

    Yes, it’s a bad thing. The people in the executive branch believe in protecting UNION workers’ “rights.” The ethnic white sector of America is becoming the minority, yet I don’t see anything to protect us–not even at the Mexico border. As for conserving the environment, are you nuts? That’s all about control, making the elitists rich, and creating a nation of serfs who stand in line for government handouts. Wow–such freedom advocates you liberal Progressives are!!!

  18. Gail B. says:

    Mr. Bogeyman showed his ignorance again:

    —OMG I’m so tired of this BS ” the government doesn’t produce anything ”
    this is so self evidently untrue it is ridiculous what about roads, bridges, vaccinations, defense, etc… these are goods and services the government produces in which the benefits are widely dispersed and free.—

    Mr. Bogeyman, how much does a road sell for today? Have you bought a bridge lately? Or, if you did and then sold it, how much profit did you realize? Vaccinations? How do you buy and sell a vaccination? Defense? When did you buy and sell a Marine?

    We never said the government doesn’t produce ANYTHING; we’re telling you that the government does not produce a PRODUCT–that can be sold for a profit. If it has no way to make a profit, it can’t boost the economy. It can only stuff its pockets with our tax dollars.

    This is the reason that people are absolutely OUTRAGED by the Stimulus Bill. Instead of allowing the American people to hold on to their own money, Obama & Co. had to pay back political debts using taxpayer dollars.

    How about doing some searches on capitalism and economics to find out how they work. Then look at the Democratic Party’s website and find their own statement that acknowledges that capitalism is what fuels the economy! So, ask with boldness: Why are Democrats/Liberals/Progressives working so hard to take what we do have? (Answer will be provided if you need to be told.)

  19. John Feeny says:

    Hey, John Boy – read it and weep – but in your heart of hearts, you know you’re happy about this –

    This has far reaching repercussions. Turn off the Internet and you will cripple the financial system of the United States. Bills cannot be paid. Companies whose business is conducted over the Internet will be put out of business. Money cannot be easily transferred between banks. No more email (Post Office will like that). But more than that your Freedom of Speech will be stifled. No more Blogs. No more speaking out against the excesses of government. Obama must be stopped before we see Jackboots in the streets. ~Richard

    FROM POLITICO NEWS
    June 28, 2010 Obama has power over the Internet as of today a US senate committee just approved granting the President power to kill the Internet in a cyber attack with a switch of a button. These sweeping powers were initiated by Senator Joe Lieberman who in 2008 supported John McCain’s Presidential nomination and worked for Republicans. You can read more on the Senate Committee on Homeland Security called the S. 3480 bill here .

    Joe Lie Lieberman-Republican Party’s Best Friend to Infiltrate the Democrats
    Lieberman and other supporters of this legislation called The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act a necessity however the government can close off their internet accesses independently and do not need the power to shut down the whole internet communication system. Basically the bet is that republicans wanted this bill passed more than a democracy want their freedoms taken away.

    This will bring us one step closer to complete censorship rights for the next phase of those who wish to shut down the internet because it has immense power to relay information and news. Some politicians are driven by corporate interests in fact 99 percent of politicians do what corporate lobbyists request of them and this smells to the high hills of corruption for corporations controlling the media.
    This gives the government the power to shut down Google for instance any time they wish or the communications of Americans which is very disturbing to those who believe in the Freedom of the Press which includes the Internet.
    Such draconian measures are not necessary but does address the further erosion of the freedom of Americans and how much power the government now has to shut down protests, dissenters and those who just plain do not like the government’s policies no matter who is in power.

    Collins wants Control over the Internet-for the next Republican President
    The Protecting Cyberspace National Asset Act includes a Presidential kill switch rather we would much prefer if Obama had a kill switch on his own blackberry not the whole nation’s internet communications system.

    In fact the President did not need this new act since it is covered in a previous act dating back to 1934 called the Communications Act. Under the Homeland Security and Government Affairs act Obama previous said he would do away with this invasive disregard for the privacy of Americans but refuse to make the change when he became President.

    The bill gives Homeland Security even more special powers to shut down the internet in a response to a cyber attack which have been taking place for decades now. Instead of the government installing their own security system, they would prefer you didn’t have access to communications while they get attacked. It simply is not necessary and the public sector is being taken for another tall tale of fear about terrorists.

    The other sponsor of the bill is Republican Susan Collins along with Lieberman who represent corporate interests not security. Critics say that this will not make the internet any safer and cyber attacks will continue as quick as security measures are in place they will be hacked it is a part of life today.

    Over 24 private business firms and civil liberty groups have opposed this new control of the internet under any circumstances no one has the right to shut down the internet, not even the President of the United States.

    All this is more control of communications, comments and the liberty of the individual to speak their mind. If this legislation is not stopped now, the government will be able to shut your computer down if they do not agree with your views. In essence a totalitarian state and a police state reminiscent of Nazi Germany where books were burned. Politics and the internet should not be joined at the hip and one should not control the other however this is a whole new world of censorship. No matter what party you belong to you should be afraid, very afraid if Joe Lieberman has anything to do with this legislation because it is simply a ploy of disguised censoring your freedom of speech.

    This gives Obama power over the internet and effectively will shut down commercial business, money transactions, and daily business done on the internet is into the trillions of dollars that will be stopped by one stupid guy with a kill switch. The true purpose of this law is to shut down critical comments by the individual not a terrorist act. Is it really necessary to shut down the whole internet and how would Google feel about that and would newspapers, radio, television be next?

  20. Dee says:

    John Feeny, great comment. I totally agree. Mr. Buyon’s computer won’t be shut down because he agrees with BO. So he and the other BO worshippers will be able to talk to each other and express their brilliant ideas for the world. The rest of us can always go back to ham radios or smoke signals (oops, that would cause global warming, my bad).

  21. John Buyon says:

    You guys are such caricatures of the crazy right wing. it’s hilarious but also a little sad that the same government that funded your education, cleans your streets, guards you against criminals and foreign states, sets laws conducive to domestic tranquility, is the object of your most intensive hatred.
    you aren’t against big government you are against government in general. why are democrats working so hard to take what you have? I am personally what you might call a “limousine liberal” but I still think that doesn’t mean that makes me ineligible to improve the position of the poor and working class who do the grunt work that
    runs the economy. the only taxes on the poor I support are sin taxes and environmental taxes, wish to abolish income taxes for all
    making less than $60 k, as well as abolish payroll taxes in favor of a
    steep tax on the big banks and perhaps a nationalization of certain
    business’s that “are too big to fail”

    @Feeny
    I am so sick and tired of this BS “terrorist threat” they are nothing nobodies they cant destroy a free society unless we destroy it ourselves. this shit started under Bush and the republicans. I thought Obama would be a liberal about this and shut down these unconstitutional terrorist security acts. where are the TEA’ers about this? they have unprecedented access to the media and they use it to complain against care for the sick not the loss of privacy.

  22. John Feeny says:

    Watch the language, John boy…unlike liberals, we try to keep the discourse above board. Matter of fact, I think I’ll go and edit your 5th-grade vocabulary.

    Careful, buddy….you’re exposing your leftist mean side.

  23. Gail B. says:

    John Buyon says:
    June 29, 2010 at 12:59 am

    “as I already said I doubt this bill would become law and even if it does I severely doubt it would even work seeing it being almost impossible to regulate the internet.”

    John Buyon: This is for YOU!!!

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19934

  24. Anonymous says:

    Since John Buyon’s favorite word is s___, let’s all chip in and buy him a piece of the same and then set him about on I40 in it.

    http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1467/gordon-murray-design-releases-more-info-on-t25-city-car/

  25. Gail B. says:

    John Buyon said, “you aren’t against big government you are against government in general.”

    No, John, we aren’t against government in general; we are against the people in government today.

    That’s okay, though. On November 2, we will take out the trash.

    And, if you are Canadian, why do you give a flip what we are for or against?

  26. Gail B. says:

    John Buyon said, “this s(***) started under Bush and the republicans.”

    Um, excuse me–Bush had a Democratic Congress. It’s the Democrats that have put us in this economic cesspool, and it’s Obama & Co. that have deepened it.

    The only way we will be able to survive this regime is to get the conservatives back in and REPEAL the damage he’s done already.

  27. John Buyon says:

    @ Gail I HAVE DUAL CITIZENSHIP and have family and own property in the US. some Americans unlike you get to experience the rest of the world
    and what I meant in the previous post is that something very fishy is going on with this terrorism threat, with it’s color coded-ness and the authoritarian practices developing to combat it. And how when you vote in Repub’s they are supposed to keep you safe, and not waste money and not engage in foreign adventures. when you elect democrats you want civil liberties protection. and both parties are failing their base and violating their ideologies. I still side with the democrats however because they fail to a far less degree, and they are much more mature and serious compared to the opposition ie. Limbaugh Beck and FOX news.
    and if you must know more since I have explained my background several times and you still can not comprehend it, I also voted for the conservative party of Canada in the last election, so I’m not a complete ideologue.

  28. Anonymous says:

    John Buyon said “and they are much more mature and serious compared to the opposition ie. Limbaugh Beck and FOX news.”

    That is a hoot coming from the ‘language-man’ himself.

  29. John Feeny says:

    Anonymous -
    I’ll say the same thing to you as I said to John – let’s watch the language an maintain a certain level of discourse. We don’t want to turn into the Huffington Post or anything like that.

  30. Gail B. says:

    So, having dual citizenship makes you a man of the world? Good for you, John Buyon!

    You said, “when (sic) you elect democrats you want civil liberties protection.”

    Where do you get that idea from? I want the Constitution upheld to the letter, including every “i” being dotted and every “t” crossed. The Democrats are doing everything in their power to “translate” the Constitution for their own gain and control. Where were you educated? Or were you? Where is your common sense? Don’t you know that the government cannot spread wealth without infringing upon our civil liberties? Another example is Chicago’s gun ban. When the government takes away the only means we have to protect ourselves, those WITH guns take over.

  31. Gail B. says:

    What I want right now is for CONSERVATIVE Republicans (not PROGRESSIVE Republicans) to take the Congress over again so that I can have some protection against the PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS AND THE PROGRESSIVE REGIME in power now.

  32. Anonymous says:

    Gail, I was an Army brat, seeing Germany, Taiwan, MD, MO, VA, so therefore I too am smarter than you. (insert Buyon smiley face here)

Speak Your Mind

*