Should Obama Control The Internet?
You’ve heard of Mother Jones, right? It is a far left magazinethat was started by folks well on the left, and, of course, looks at things from the far left viewpoint. But, I have to give them this: they are not stuck on ObamaLuv. They treat him exactly like they would have had Bush been president
Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency?
Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians.
The Cybersecurity Act of 2009(PDF) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.
That the definition would be left to the presidentvery much concerns Mother Jones, and should concern everyone. What if he thinks it is an emergency to shut down everyone on the sidebar of Hot Air or National Review? What, that could never happen? You sure? Perhaps it is not the same thing, but the nation of India, the “worlds largest democracy,” gave an order to restrict 17 websites for BS reasons, but, most of the sites, including mine, were involved with “flush the koran” photoshop fun. The order has never been formally rescinded.
And you would think this would concern the usual liberal/progressive subjects, all those who pitched hissy fits over the Evil Boooosh listening to terrorists talking overseas without a warrant, even with
The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
So, he can pretty much do whatever he wants. Give Jazz Shaw kudos on this one, at least he is concerned. Though I suspect that if this was happening while Bush was president, the article would have had a much more worried tone. And other on the Left, such as Excitable Andy, Keven Drum at Mother Jones, and Liberty Street, who are more concerned with some torture memos from years ago. So is the ACLU, which, last time I checked was supposed to protect American Rights. But, no mention of the cybersecurity issue. Bringing terrorists currently residing in Gitmo to domestic soil is more important than a bill that could lead to massive civil liberties abuses.
Think any of them would ignore the Cybersecurity Act if Bush was president, or had McCain won? Even if it hasn’t passed yet? Hopefully, it will go down in flames, like it should. Rockafeller and Snow should be ashamed of themselves, but, then, they wouldn’t be able to be elected officials if they actual had shame.
Crossed at Pirate’s Cove
Email This
Posted by William Teach on April 4, 2009 9:30 am
» Filed Under ACLU, Barack Obama, Border Control/Homeland Security, Internet, News, Totalitarianism
Trackback URL:
Comments
6 Responses to “Should Obama Control The Internet?”
-
-
-
Affiliations
The Giants
Advertise
-
-
Our Store
- Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
-
- More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
this isn’t the mother jones i thought i knew
I think that President Obama should not have control over the internet, and honestly shouldn’t even be allowed to continue as President being that everything he claimed he would do for our country he has done just the opposite. I honestly think he is the Anti-Christ!
What an ignorant thing to say. No one steps into office and immediately its all sunshine and fruitloops. There is so much time needed to pass any bill for your “change”. Dont be fooled into thinking ghosts and demons run this planet. Do us all a favor and study up on some biology, that way maybe we can actually move foward and focus on the serious probelms at hand from our own doings like global warming and the large hadron collider. We dont need to create anymore… Censorship of knowledge is walking in reverse. And These narrow minded thoughts will be the downfall of us all.
Why would anyone even want to take a chance on the possibility of the worst possible scenario coming true if you didn’t have to? Have we had it too good for too long; so long as not to question and protect what we have had?
To the above poster (poster #2). What reason do you have for Mr. Obama to not be the president? Other than you don’t like him or don’t think he should “rule” over you for your own reasons stemming from hatred. Yes, that is a very ignorant statement. Stop watching Faux (Fox) News! If a president should no longer be in office because he didn’t do what he said he would, then Bush Sr and especially Bush Jr. would have never finished out their terms!! But President Obama has kept his word thus far… Healthcare overhaul (check); credit card regualtions (check); Wall Street Regulations (check)- at least working on it with no help from the Repugnants; Working towards pullling troops out of Iraq (check)…
This bill is being proposed by two Senators: a Republican and a Democrat- not by the President. George Bush Jr. signed an expanded wiretap power into law (Ummm, an expansion of the Govt for you nutty tea-baggers) in 2008. And Does Bush’s Patriot Act mean anythiing to you? Hello, and Bush was pushing to allow allows law enforcement agents direct access to entire ISP networks!!
For the above poster (poster #2), if you never complained about this under Bush than keep your hypocritical mouth closed and get educated!
JusMe, just because Obama kept his “word” and passed ObamaCare and CC reform, Wallstreet reg’s, doesn’t mean it’s for the best interest of this country and its citizens, but for his. How unfair/unjust this Admin is, not to mention hypocritical. They declare a monopoly on a private Corp. while at the same time they themselves are becoming a monopoly. These policies shouldn’t be used as some convoluted(?)set of carrots and sticks to get citizens to behave in a particular manner. What we eat/say/think, how much money we make, how we’ll live, whether or not we can afford a home, shouldn’t be the interest/concern of this Government. This country is becoming a nanny state and that’s not something I want for myself, my children nor for you and your’s.
[edited]