Cybersecurity Bill Proposes Unprecedented Government Power Over the Internet
A cybersecurity bill introduced today in the Senate would give the federal government extraordinary power over private sector Internet services, applications and software.
The bill would grant the Commerce Department the ability to override all privacy laws to access any information about Internet usage in connection with a new role in tracking cybersecurity threats.
Our federal government is severely overreaching. Guess they have forgotten the role of stolen government laptops in the loss of sensitive data with national security implications.
Yet another federal power grab by increasing government facism.
“Beginning in the 1970s, some historians and political scientists began to develop a broader definition of fascism, and by the 1990s many scholars had embraced this approach. This new approach emphasizes the ways in which fascist movements attempt revolutionary change and their central focus on popularizing myths of national or ethnic renewal. Seen from this perspective, all forms of fascism have three common features: anticonservatism, a myth of ethnic or national renewal, and a conception of a nation in crisis.”
http://www.angelfire.com/tx5/ara/pde/facism.html
Recall this last sentence the next time you hear Obama speak.
Sounds like the last 8 years.
“anticonservatism”
“Sounds like the last 8 years.” ????
You mean ALL that bull you posted here about the conservatives and neocons of the Bush administration you now say is patently false ?
dans please, just because you call yourself conservative or neo-con doesn’t mean you truly are. Why, your own peers do not even recognize Bush as a conservative.
So, you agree that the last 8 years have proposed the myth of ethnic or national renewal, a conception of a nation in crisis, and anti-conservatism?
Bush was not a fiscal conservative, that’s for sure, but he never pretended to be that I can recall. He gave it away at his first Convention acceptance speech which was pretty much a promise to spend lots of money.
As far as crisis goes, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Yes Bush put us in a hole because he never wielded the veto and he did not end the insane policy of forcing banks to give mortgages to people who could not afford them or were not even legally supposed to be here. The deficits Obama wants to produce, however, are stratospheric, fall-of-the-Roman-Empire stuff.
Bush left us fretting over bailouts and companies supposedly too big to fail. Obama is going to leave us with the Chinese Navy stationed at Pearl Harbor, if not Long Beach.
During the campaign AKA/Soretoro hired a firm to comb the internet looking for websites that were reporting his negative side, their job was to have them shut down.
Embarrassing YouTube videos disappeared sometimes within minutes. National TV stations were warned not to print negative stories about him and they threatened litigation.
Basically, he won because no one would report anything but his stolen slogan, “Yes We Can,” Change and Hope, all worthless without substantiation, context or plan of action, empty, empty, empty.
If the media would have acted, inquired or demanded the documents that have been requested for several years from many sources (that is if any documents even exist)he would have saved about $1million dollars instead of spending it on lawyers to fight the release of any documents and bully poor old men.
It is just the beginning, AKA and the DC Syndicate are just getting started, Chicago Style.
Actually, in ref to crisis I meant 9-11, not financial, though he’s helped with that as well. So, in the midst of that crisis and it’s aftermath you had “neocons” and the like bitching about who was American and patriotic enough, tapping the phones, monitoring what you check out from the library, reading your emails, spiriting people out of their homes to other countries to be “interrogated”, etc., etc.
That kind of fascism.
I question your patriotism, Kevin.
fascist
For once, I agree with you Kevin — such bills are fascist, but really, given his “Truth Squads”, is it really any surprise? (http://www.kmov.com/video/index.html?nvid=285793&shu=1)
In fact, be careful using the “f” word — soon, it will be “Hate Speech”, and you’ll find yourself incarcerated for violating the government’s civil rights …
Funny how the left howled in agony over the monitoring of phone calls between known terrorist-connected phone numbers and numbers in the United States — wanted to sue the telecomm companies out of existence for cooperating with the Federal Government, and you’d have thought puppies were being slaughtered hearing the shrieks of pain and betrayal when those companies were given cover by the (Democratically-controlled) Congress.
After years of smirking allusions to the Patriot Act, and how we lost so many civil rights since 9/11, now when it’s the Left that wants to invade our privacy or control our behavior, then it’s okay, and now it’s the *complainers” who are “facist” – what are we, in 2nd grade – “I know you are but what am I?”
You know, a quick change of subject to:
a. George Bush,
b. Haliburton, or
c. America’s Genocidal Wars against the American Indian
just isn’t going to work anymore. Gonna have to deal with the “here and now”, and “from now on” …
Kevin,
“dans please, just because you call yourself conservative or neo-con doesn’t mean you truly are.”
When and where have you seen me call myself a conservative or neocon ? Trust me, those that know me here are having a very hearty laugh at your expense.
If you wish to don a dunce cap, it behooves you to sit quietly in the corner…
Btw sports fans, Bush is not responsible for the actions of the current administration, and the 111th Congress.
Joe, being “anticonservatism” is not a label I would stick on Bush.
However, given the current administrations attacks on Limbaugh and others, it does seem appropriate…
Kiddin’
“those that know me here are having a very hearty laugh at your expense.”
HA, HA, HA! I be laughing at you now. Ha, Ha, Ha!
“I question your patriotism, Kevin.”
Say it isn’t so? Could this be the end of fishing as we know it?
“Internet records to be stored for a year (in the UK)
Details of every email sent and website visited by people in Britain are to be stored for use by the state from tomorrow as part of what campaigners claim is a massive assault on privacy.” (I forgot to get the link to the newspaper, it’s on Atlas Shrugs.)
Many websites in this country have already been blocked from view. I have seen numerous emails from people who work for the govenment that have written and told the site owner that the government had blocked their site, for example Atlas Shrugs was recently notified of the same with her blog:
“An officer over at the Dept. Homeland Security – Customs and Border Protection sent me this screenshot when he tried to access Atlas. He is the third reader (who shall remain anonymous) who works at Homeland Security who cannot log onto Atlas. They had been able to access my site continually up until this week. “It went from to access to no access overnight”.
Google censors for China, that’s when I lost it for Google. They are a US company, not Chinese.
H E,
I would suggest you put it out there on the blog as fast as you can. I predict that this site will get noticed in another couple of years! Then all our asses will be in the fire!
dans, no Bush is not responsible for the current admin or 111th Congress. It does not mean that this bill doesn’t mirror what’s been going on for the last 8 years. Fear is well exploited. Besides, it’s introduced by an (R) AND a (D) so you can cool your partisan jets.
Government control of information (under the guise of cybersecurity), government control of pay (Pay for Performance), government control of health care, government control of banking: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html
Fascism Light.
Rachelfirend, the government has been taking control over banks for a long time:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/06/60minutes/main4848047.shtml
Oh, and they built the internet, not Al Gore.
“It does not mean that this bill doesn’t mirror what’s been going on for the last 8 years.”
Kevin, if this is true, so is one of the following two points :
1 -As you defend this invasion of Internet privacy, you were also in agreement with what Bush had done.
2- As you are against what Bush did over these 8 years, you are also opposed to this invasion of Internet privacy.
Which is it ? You can’t have it both ways.
Ummm…nobody has a reasonable expectation to privacy over the internet. And to compare this bill to Bush’s warrantless wiretapes and their constitutional implications is absurd.
dans, “As you defend this invasion of Internet privacy”
Show me where I defend it? It’s your assumptions that are problematic. I know it’s hard to think outside the box and, well, you and I haven’t spent much time together in person, so I understand you’re a bit confused.
You, however, appear to be in agreement with me that this is nothing more than a continuation of what’s been going on for the last 8 yrs. I’ll give you 7 and 1/2, actually.
Kevin, the fact that you are insistent upon alluding back to Bush when discussing this is and of itself a lame defense for the issue at hand.
Man up and answer my question of #20…
Troll, Privacy is a penumbra right.. Unauthorized entry into a computer system is illegal, whether the target machine is connected to the Internet or not.
btw :
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/lis/privacy/eprivacylaws.htm
Troll,
“Ummm…nobody has a reasonable expectation to privacy over the internet.”
Not even the government. Todays technology makes it unobtainable. Ever look up your name on the net? And you are worried about wiretaps? Should I tell you about radio waves and sonic ears? I bet I could scare you mute if you only had a clue about things. C’mon, Troll. Let’s talk about kids and guns.
dans, you man up. What’s you’re problem? Is it possible that I can be unhappy with the government’s invasion of privacy (ill-assumed privacy or actual) regardless of which administration is in charge? What’s ridiculous, or a lame defense as you put it, is your insistence that this bill has anything to do with one party over the other when it’s got bipartisan sponsorship. You blatantly remind everyone, in your words, to “Recall this last sentence the next time you hear Obama speak” as though it has anything to do with the current president.
Get a clue. You’ve been pwned on this one.
Oh, and it would be dishonest of me to answer #20.1 or #20.2 as 1. I have never spoken in defense of this bill and 2. While I have spoken out against Bush’s last 8 years, I have never supported this bill.
Buddump csshhhh!
Thank you ladies and gentlemen, I’ll be here all week!
So in a round about way, you chose door #2.
“anticonservatism, a myth of ethnic or national renewal, and a conception of a nation in crisis”
These three elements are present in one form or another in most if not all of Obama’s speeches. Face the music comrade Kevin, you and your party have given us a fascist…
dans, just stop. You’re not making a lick of sense at this point and I’m a little embarrassed for you.
Whatever you say Peter Pan…
Shhhh. Don’t tell anyone. I’ll be back in your room tonight to pick up you and Wendy and your brother again.
ZS3F4 DH5IU KGF79 WFQ4T LPTE4 QK88M 3DKPE GFJSK TL8RT XM66Y DTYLM 2UFQI …. Oh, don’t mind me. I’m just devising a secure e-mail code for when the new cybersecurity bill goes into effect.
Kevin — From what I’ve seen on this blog from Dans re the 2nd Amendment, the last thing I would consider doing is trying to sneak into his room at night!!
Wolv, fyi, there used to be, and still may be, a free version :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
I generally don’t consider someone wearing tights to be a threat
Wolve,
“ZS3F4 DH5IU KGF79 WFQ4T LPTE4 QK88M 3DKPE GFJSK TL8RT XM66Y DTYLM 2UFQI”
I can’t belive you said that and, yes, I DO resemble that remark (I broke your code in 2 minutes and 37 seconds)! HA!!!!
ACT — You Rebs never learn anything! There are three sub-codes within that coded text, and you have to speak a rare foreign language to break out the last one. How do you think I stayed alive all those years?!!! Oh, well, to be expected. None of you Rebs ever caught on to the fact that the smoke rings being emitted from Grant’s cigars were actually troop movement signals. No wonder Grant took Richmond.
Wolve,
While you were typing your response to me and I had you distracted, I cyphered myself into your savings account and sent all that hard earned money to my Cayman account. That’s right, under Mr. Smith. Thing about you Yanks is you get so focused you lose track of the obvious. And Grant was just a pot-bellied drunk. Speaking of which, how about you and me and that drink? We can discuss terms of your surrender!
Grant was not pot bellied..