“Kill Switch” Bill Quietly Makes Its Way to Senate floor

[darrels joy]

“Kill Switch” Bill Quietly Makes Its Way to Senate floor

posted at 2:26 pm on June 29, 2010 by Howard Portnoy
printer-friendly



He may not have succeeded in slowing the rise of the oceans or providing jobs for the jobless. But if Congress passes the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which quietly arrived on the floor of the Senate late last week, Barack Obama will have the power to shut down the Internet for at least four months without Congressional oversight.



Nicknamed the “kill switch” bill, the legislation would give the federal government the power to close down networks and block incoming Internet traffic from certain countries under a declared national emergency. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), the bill’s primary sponsor, told CNN that the bill is modeled on a law already on the books in China, which gives the government authority to “disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war.” Lieberman added, “[W]e need to have that here too.”

In an earlier incarnation, the bill gave the president unlimited control over the Internet “kill switch,” but the legislation was amended in the face of criticism and now requires that the president seek congressional approval to extend emergency measures beyond 120 days. Even so, the bill imbues the with president absolute authority to shut down the Internet without oversight for a period of no less than four months.

The Center for Democracy and Technology, a citizen watchdog group, has raised concerns that the legislation could be used to stifle free speech.

The concern is not as large a leap as some on the left have contended.

This is an administration that has already used the Internet as personal propaganda tool and had the effrontery to ask private citizens during the year-long health care reform debate to “report phony claims” about the legislation back to the government.

Obama has also tipped his hand in his hirings, which include Mark Lloyd, a self-professed admirer of dictator Hugo Chavez, to the newly formed position of Chief Diversity Officer at the Federal Communications Commission. In addition, the FTC under Obama recently proposed a “Drudge Tax,” which would require that independent media organizations to pay fees that would be used to fund mainstream newspapers, thereby “leveling the opinion playing field.” Obvious power grabs like these have been proposed in the name of cybersecurity, when in reality they are little more than thinly veiled efforts to control thought. Is Obama the sort of person you want at your computer’s power switch?

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives...-senate-floor/

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), the bill’s primary sponsor, told CNN that the bill is modeled on a law already on the books in China

Oh yea, that's what we need, more laws copied from the People's Republic of China.

[darrels joy]

Egypt’s Internet crackdown makes “kill switch” bill a wee bit less popular

posted at 9:30 am on February 1, 2011 by Ed Morrissey


Imagine if the government had the power to disconnect an entire country from its Internet service. Actually, we don’t have to imagine it; we have seen it happen in the past week, as the Mubarak regime in Egypt tried in vain to keep protesters from organizing on Twitter, Facebook, and other social networking platforms. In a display of exquisitely bad timing, two US Senators will reintroduce a bill that would put the same power in the hands of the executive branch after the practical demonstration of how useful — and ultimately useless — it is for squelching dissent:

The news of Egypt’s crackdown on Web access is raising new concerns over a comprehensive cybersecurity bill that critics claim gives the president a “kill switch” for the Internet.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) has recently indicated she plan to re-introduce the bipartisan legislation she crafted last year with Senate Homeland Security Committee chairman Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), which passed the Senate Homeland Security Committee last year only to get mired in a standoff with Senate Commerce Committee members over which panel should have oversight of civilian cybersecurity.

The bill first got introduced in the spring of 2009, when Democrats had overwhelming majorities in Congress. Needless to say, it didn’t fare well, mainly because people understood it to be operationally the same as what Mubarak tried last week. It’s not quite the same thing, or at least it wasn’t when Jay Rockefeller introduced it. The bill authorized the government to take federal servers off-line in case of cyberattack, which would make government data inaccessible, which should raise eyebrows.

The earlier bill also had this disturbing provision:

SEC. 14. PUBLIC–PRIVATE CLEARINGHOUSE.

(a) DESIGNATION.—The Department of Commerce shall serve as the clearinghouse of cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information to Federal government and private sector owned critical infrastructure information systems and networks.

(b) FUNCTIONS.—The Secretary of Commerce—

(1) shall have access to all relevant data concerning such networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access; …

Without regard to any provision of law? This strips the owners of private networks of their Fourth Amendment rights, simply by declaring such systems and networks “critical infrastructure.” If this survives in the Collins-Lieberman bill, that’s a larger practical concern than a total Internet shutdown. But that also could mean that the private networks fall under the authority for shutdown, as Berin Szoka of TechFreedom argues:

“This incident also demonstrates a more subtle point: Maintaining the rule of law in times of crisis demands judicial review for the president’s decision to designate something a ‘critical asset’ subject to government diktat in the name of protecting ‘cybersecurity.’ ”

Collins has bristled at that characterization, pointing out that the White House has indicated they already have the authority to shut down portions of the private-sector Web in the event of a national security emergency under a little-used provision of the Communications Act passed one month after the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor.

At any rate, the reintroduction of the bill at this point almost ensures its demise. If it couldn’t pass during a Congress with Democratic supermajorities, it won’t pass in a split Congress, especially not after Mubarak’s pointed demonstration of the technique. (via Instapundit)

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/0...-less-popular/

[reconeil]

Before stupidly giving President Barack Hussein Obama II or Jr. a: "Kill Switch" or SOLE; "Power to disconnect an entire country from its Internet Service",...FORGET about this latest Mubarak; "Kill Switch" nonsense.

Internet aside, Egyptians have been handling Egyptian Problems for Thousands of Years and way-way-back long before We The Sucker$ and/or U.S. Taxpayers were dictated paying 1.5 to 3 BILLION$ a year (depends on whom counting yearly standard Taxpayer Rip-offs), for much of Egyptian Government & Military needs. Maybe a few bucks even sneaks through to The Egyptian People?

Whatever,...just remember Barry H.S. or Barack H.O's very own words from his very own book: "The Audacity of Hope", revealing where his TRUE Intents & Allegiances actually lay. Makes lordly decrees to old Hosni or from one dictator to another ring rather hollow.

Besides, why would ANYONE even book write: "I will stand with Muslims should the winds shift in an ugly direction" IF NOT actually pro-Islam or some Muslim Brotherhood type, anyway? Even just a memo like that would be VERY DAMNING & REVEALING of how & where Obama TRULY stands.

While at it, ever wonder why BHO's over & over adnauseam repeated for political expediency campaign rhetoric like: "I pray to Jesus every night",...never shows up in any of Obama's books?

Well, the answer to that is also quite obvious...any you Duped BHO believing fools.

That too similarly IS NOT TRUE! Dems/Leftists/Marxists/Progressives will pretty-much say anything & even welcome dangerous: "Criminally Illegal Aliens" (terrorist enemies & dopers inclusive) to USA, merely to get votes & attain high office.

Just watch the news & listen to whom Lords & Ladies SOLELY pander to. The U.S. Citizen/Taxpayer WILL NEVER BE PANDERED TO! Quite the opposite or just cavalierly dismissed.

Neil