Bill Gives Obama ‘Kill Switch’ for Internet

[DixieDestroyer]

The building of a (puppet) dictator continues...

New Bill Gives Obama ‘Kill Switch' To Shut Down The Internet

Government would have "absolute power"Â￾ to seize control of the world wide web under Lieberman legislation

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, June 16, 2010

The federal government would have "absolute power"Â￾ to shut down the Internet under the terms of a new US Senate bill being pushed by Joe Lieberman, legislation which would hand President Obama a figurative "kill switch"Â￾ to seize control of the world wide web in response to a Homeland Security directive.

Lieberman has been pushing for government regulation of the Internet for years under the guise of cybersecurity, but this new bill goes even further in handing emergency powers over to the feds which could be used to silence free speech under the pretext of a national emergency.

"The legislation says that companies such as broadband providers, search engines or software firms that the US Government selects "shall immediately comply with any emergency measure or action developed"Â￾ by the Department of Homeland Security. Anyone failing to comply would be fined,"Â￾ reports ZDNet's Declan McCullagh.

The 197-page bill (PDF) is entitled Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, or PCNAA.

Technology lobbying group TechAmerica warned that the legislation created "the potential for absolute power,"Â￾ while the Center for Democracy and Technology worried that the bill's emergency powers "include authority to shut down or limit internet traffic on private systems."Â￾

The bill has the vehement support of Senator Jay Rockefeller, who last year asked during a congressional hearing, "Would it had been better if we'd have never invented the Internet?"Â￾ while fearmongering about cyber-terrorists preparing attacks.

The largest Internet-based corporations are seemingly happy with the bill, primarily because it contains language that will give them immunity from civil lawsuits and also reimburse them for any costs incurred if the Internet is shut down for a period of time.

"If there's an "incident related to a cyber vulnerability"Â￾ after the President has declared an emergency and the affected company has followed federal standards, plaintiffs' lawyers cannot collect damages for economic harm. And if the harm is caused by an emergency order from the Feds, not only does the possibility of damages virtually disappear, but the US Treasury will even pick up the private company's tab,"Â￾ writes McCullagh.

Tom Gann, McAfee's vice president for government relations, described the bill as a "very important piece of legislation"Â￾.

As we have repeatedly warned for years, the federal government is desperate to seize control of the Internet because the establishment is petrified at the fact that alternative and independent media outlets are now eclipsing corporate media outlets in terms of audience share, trust, and influence.

We witnessed another example of this on Monday when establishment Congressman Bob Etheridge was publicly shamed after he was shown on video assaulting two college students who asked him a question. Two kids with a flip cam and a You Tube account could very well have changed the course of a state election, another startling reminder of the power of the Internet and independent media, and why the establishment is desperate to take that power away.

The government has been searching for any avenue possible through which to regulate free speech on the Internet and strangle alternative media outlets, with the FTC recently proposing a "Drudge Tax"Â￾ that would force independent media organizations to pay fees that would be used to fund mainstream newspapers.

Similar legislation aimed at imposing Chinese-style censorship of the Internet and giving the state the power to shut down networks has already been passed globally, including in the UK, New Zealand and Australia.

We have extensively covered efforts to scrap the internet as we know it and move toward a greatly restricted "internet 2"³ system. Handing government the power to control the Internet would only be the first step towards this system, whereby individual ID's and government permission would be required simply to operate a website.

The Lieberman bill needs to be met with fierce opposition at every level and from across the political spectrum. Regulation of the Internet would not only represent a massive assault on free speech, it would also create new roadblocks for e-commerce and as a consequence further devastate the economy.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-bill-gives-obama-kill-switch-to-shut-down-the-internet.html

Edited by: DixieDestroyer

 

[Bart]

New Bill Gives Obama ‘Kill Switch' To Shut Down The Internet


The federal government would have "absolute power"Â￾ to shut down the Internet under the terms of a new US Senate bill being pushed by Joe Lieberman, legislation which would hand President Obama a figurative "kill switch"Â￾ to seize control of the world wide web in response to a Homeland Security directive.

Lieberman has been pushing for government regulation of the Internet for years under the guise of cybersecurity, but this new bill goes even further in handing emergency powers over to the feds which could be used to silence free speech under the pretext of a national emergency.

So, Zionist Orthodox Jew Lieberman proposed this legislation. Nuff said.

 

[jcolec02]

The beginning of the end of free speech as we know it....

 

[Westside]

This is a reason to get out and vote this November for conservative candidates

 

[jaxvid]

A phone modem and a foreign ISP is all you need. They can slow down the internet but not stop it.

 

[Jimmy Chitwood]

the "moderate" Joe Lieberman goes on theair to explain his internet kill switch legislation. to summarize: China can shut down the internet, so why can't we?
[tube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1caZvxMUWk[/tube]

 

[DixieDestroyer]

The privacy & anti-police state position is one of the VERY few issues I side with the (mostly verminous) ACLU on...

Obama Internet kill switch plan approved by US Senate

President could get power to turn off Internet

By Grant Gross
Published: 11:02 GMT, 25 June 10

A US Senate committee has approved a wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that some critics have suggested would give the US president the authority to shut down parts of the Internet during a cyberattack.

Senator Joe Lieberman and other bill sponsors have refuted the charges that the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act gives the president an Internet "kill switch." Instead, the bill puts limits on the powers the president already has to cause "the closing of any facility or stations for wire communication" in a time of war, as described in the Communications Act of 1934, they said in a breakdown of the bill published on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee website.

The committee unanimously approved an amended version of the legislation by voice vote Thursday, a committee spokeswoman said. The bill next moves to the Senate floor for a vote, which has not yet been scheduled.

Obama security review gets mixed reception

The bill, introduced earlier this month, would establish a White House Office for Cyberspace Policy and a National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications, which would work with private US companies to create cybersecurity requirements for the electrical grid, telecommunications networks and other critical infrastructure.

The bill also would allow the US president to take emergency actions to protect critical parts of the Internet, including ordering owners of critical infrastructure to implement emergency response plans, during a cyber-emergency. The president would need congressional approval to extend a national cyber-emergency beyond 120 days under an amendment to the legislation approved by the committee.

The legislation would give the US Department of Homeland Security authority that it does not now have to respond to cyber-attacks, Lieberman, a Connecticut independent, said earlier this month.

"Our responsibility for cyber defence goes well beyond the public sector because so much of cyberspace is owned and operated by the private sector," he said. "The Department of Homeland Security has actually shown that vulnerabilities in key private sector networks like utilities and communications could bring our economy down for a period of time if attacked or commandeered by a foreign power or cyber terrorists."

Other sponsors of the bill are Senators Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, and Tom Carper, a Delaware Democrat.

One critic said Thursday that the bill will hurt the nation's security, not help it. Security products operate in a competitive market that works best without heavy government intervention, said Wayne Crews, vice president for policy and director of technology studies at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, an anti-regulation think tank.

"Policymakers should reject such proposals to centralize cyber security risk management," Crews said in an e-mail. "The Internet that will evolve if government can resort to a 'kill switch' will be vastly different from, and inferior to, the safer one that will emerge otherwise."

Cybersecurity technologies and services thrive on competition, he added. "The unmistakable tenor of the cybersecurity discussion today is that of government steering while the market rows," he said. "To be sure, law enforcement has a crucial role in punishing intrusions on private networks and infrastructure. But government must coexist with, rather than crowd out, private sector security technologies."

On Wednesday, 24 privacy and civil liberties groups sent a letter raising concerns about the legislation to the sponsors. The bill gives the new National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications "significant authority" over critical infrastructure, but doesn't define what critical infrastructure is covered, the letter said.

Without a definition of critical infrastructure there are concerns that "it includes elements of the Internet that Americans rely on every day to engage in free speech and to access information," said the letter, signed by the Center for Democracy and Technology, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and other groups.

"Changes are needed to ensure that cybersecurity measures do not unnecessarily infringe on free speech, privacy, and other civil liberties interests," the letter added.


http://news.techworld.com/security/3228198/obama-internet-kill-switch-plan-approved-by-us-senate/?olo=rss

Edited by: DixieDestroyer

 

[Jimmy Chitwood]

White House outlines online "security" strategy.the new measureswould require internet users to use identity tokens ... for "our protection" of course.

The White House set out a sweeping strategy to make online transactions more secure on Friday. The move is the most ambitious initiative to emerge from a cybersecurity policy intended to blunt the growing menace of online crime.


Howard Schmidt, president Barack Obama's cybersecurity co-ordinator, who took up his duties in early 2010, released the strategy paper after 12 months of discussions led by the National Security Council and involving scores of private sector groups, critical infrastructure owners and privacy advocates.


The strategy seeks the creation of a system for identity management that would allow citizens to use additional authentication techniques, such as physical tokens or modules on mobile phones, to verify who they are before buying things online or accessing such sensitive information as health or banking records.


A set of standards would let multiple vendors offer authentication services, while people whose identities have been verified would be able to move from website to website without resubmitting information.


Privacy protections would require companies involved to limit their collection and dissemination of personal data, for example confirming that a consumer is over 21 without passing along the person's birth date.


The government would take the lead by establishing the standards and subscribing to authentication services.


Internet companies and government agencies have long supported the idea of multipurpose identification systems, but adoption has foundered in part because of limited incentives for participation. As a result, a bank will have one set of protocols for establishing a client's identity, while a state agency and hospital have others.


The matter has taken on increased urgency as more valuable data pours online and malicious software grows more sophisticated. Industry estimates for the theft of intellectual property and online fraud run as high as $1,000bn annually.


Congressional and private sector support will be critical for the new effort.


"This is a vision and you need that, but they're going to need to work with Congress and get government agencies to test out different pieces of this,"Â￾ said Aris Schwartz, vice-president of the Center for Democracy and Technology. Congress would need to fund test programmes and, perhaps, approve tax incentives.


It has been hard to formulate legislation because internet security issues intrude into so many political areas. But Harry Reid, Senate majority leader, recently urged committee chairmen to harmonise pending bills for cybersecurity overhauls, making it likely new laws will emerge from Congress this year.