Folks, you best take this seriously and act soon.

[AllieBaba]

Then there are those people who would wither away and die.
For some, the internet is a bodily function.

 

[Gunny]

I actually don't mind the patriot act..

More proof that the conservative whines about govt power are nothing but hypocritical blather.

Wrong. FDR imposed FAR harsher measures and authorized the wiretapping of ANY and ALL suspected subversives. PRIOR to WWII.

What's the difference?

Oh, and when was it exactly Obama had the Patriot Act done away with? Last I heard, it was business as usual at the NSA ...

 

[Dis]

And most computer geeks are hardcore righties anyway.

This is true.. Out of the 9 hardcore professional geeks I know, 9 are hardcore right.

 

[uscitizen]

They are just keepin us safe from terrorists.
Or to be more exact, keeping businesses safe from terrorism.

I've heard that crap before. Didn't Bush tell us the Patriot Act was "for your own good"?

Immie

Yep funny how the views of some change so quickly.

Govt control of the net was inevitable, I said that at least 15 years ago.

 

[AllieBaba]

I actually don't mind the patriot act.
I don't really mind this one, either. It's just business as usual, and I have faith in techies to figure it out and figure out workarounds.

Obama will not kill the internet. It's bigger than he is.

Most conservatives supported it.

I on the other hand saw... Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office with the power of the Patriot Act under her control and whatever interpretations she came up with and thought... "Oh Shit!!!"

And another thing, If Al Gore had won the Presidency and 9/11 had happened and Al Gore had proposed the Patriot Act, I would not have been the only conservative thinking... "Oh Shit!!!"

Immie

The Patriot Act is renewable, which means it comes up for a vote every so often. That's why I finally supported it. It's not perfect, but it's something we've used before.

 

[HUGGY]

So?

If you werent such a partisan hack, you'd realize this was "dished out" by bush

I repeat: So? Do you expect me to say, "Oh, if Bush wanted it, it must be cool!"?

Not happening. In case you haven't noticed, I don't want an all-powerful government. Such power as this is too open to politically-motivated abuse.

This is eight years after the fact sparky. Did you protest the patriot act?

 

[Immanuel]

I actually don't mind the patriot act.
I don't really mind this one, either. It's just business as usual, and I have faith in techies to figure it out and figure out workarounds.

Obama will not kill the internet. It's bigger than he is.

Anyone who isn't a criminal wouldn't.

I'm not a criminal and I don't. Unless, being unemployed makes me a criminal.

I think it is a conservative principle not to trust government too far. I think the powers of the Patriot Act can turn a law abiding citizen from law abiding to "enemy of the state" in the matter of a single power change in Washington.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

I actually don't mind the patriot act.
I don't really mind this one, either. It's just business as usual, and I have faith in techies to figure it out and figure out workarounds.

Obama will not kill the internet. It's bigger than he is.

Most conservatives supported it.

I on the other hand saw... Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office with the power of the Patriot Act under her control and whatever interpretations she came up with and thought... "Oh Shit!!!"

And another thing, If Al Gore had won the Presidency and 9/11 had happened and Al Gore had proposed the Patriot Act, I would not have been the only conservative thinking... "Oh Shit!!!"

Immie

The Patriot Act is renewable, which means it comes up for a vote every so often. That's why I finally supported it. It's not perfect, but it's something we've used before.

That was not enough to sway my feelings and it seems I have reason to stand by my guns on that, President Obama has not done anything to abort the act and those Republicans who swore to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States don't have the power or the gumption to do so today if it became necessary.

Immie

 

[sangha]

I actually don't mind the patriot act..

More proof that the conservative whines about govt power are nothing but hypocritical blather.

Wrong. FDR imposed FAR harsher measures and authorized the wiretapping of ANY and ALL suspected subversives. PRIOR to WWII.

So you had to reach back 70 years to find an example?

What's the difference?

Liberals don't whine about Fed power. There's nothing hypocritical about a liberal supporting increased Fed powers. It is totally hypocritical for conservatives to whine about nanny state govts, while expanding the Feds powers

Oh, and when was it exactly Obama had the Patriot Act done away with? Last I heard, it was business as usual at the NSA ...

Oh, and since when is it hypocritical for a liberal to support increased Fed power?

 

[sangha]

And most computer geeks are hardcore righties anyway.

This is true.. Out of the 9 hardcore professional geeks I know, 9 are hardcore right.

Of the 300 I know, only a handful are conservative and only one is a wingnut

 

[sangha]

I actually don't mind the patriot act.
I don't really mind this one, either. It's just business as usual, and I have faith in techies to figure it out and figure out workarounds.

Obama will not kill the internet. It's bigger than he is.

Anyone who isn't a criminal wouldn't.

I'm not a criminal and I don't. Unless, being unemployed makes me a criminal.

I think it is a conservative principle not to trust government too far. I think the powers of the Patriot Act can turn a law abiding citizen from law abiding to "enemy of the state" in the matter of a single power change in Washington.

Immie

The law referred to in the OP reduces the power of the Feds to shutdown the internet. If you really don't trust the govt too far, you should support this proposed legislation

 

[rightwinger]

Internet Kill Switch Approved by Senate Committee - cbs4.com

quote:

"Initially, the bill would have given the president unlimited authority on how long he could control the Internet, but an amendment passed Friday says he would have to get the approval of Congress to shut down the Internet for more than 120 days."


Please contact your congressman today and voice your opinion on this. We simply can not allow DC to take the internet. Think China, Iran, Venezuela.......

Oh my goodness...what will we do?

This is the biggest threat since th Y2K virus

 

[Foxfyre]

I can understand how anything might be considered. When it comes to carrying out the constitutional functions of government, and that would include the common defense, I can see how there will be many good ideas, bad ideas, and everything in between. The Patriot Act was that way. Some bad ideas got stuck in there--most of which have subsequently been removed--but there was also some stuff in there that was absolutely mandatory to intercept and foil the plots of those who want to scare, kill, hurt, maim, murder as many of us as they possibly can. And many MANY such attacks have been intercepted and foiled as a result of the Patriot Act.

Perhaps that is why it continues to be supported on a bipartisan basis in Congress and supported by the current administration. I've been reading how an unprecedented number of plots and plans of terrorist activity has been intercepted and derailed just in the last several months. Most of that stuff never makes the papers. But our government so far is doing a good job of protecting us.

So......back to the internet.

Should the government have ability to intercept and utilize internet traffic initiated by those who intend to scare, kill, maim, or murder as many of us as they possibly can or do what is otherwise necessary to provide for the common defense?

Is anybody here going to say no?

Should the government have ability to otherwise control the message of a free people on the radio, television, in the print media, or on the internet?

Is anybody here going to say yes?

We should support the government in providing the common defense while resisting with all our might any attempt to infringe on our constitutional rights.

And we all should know the difference between these two things.

 

[Immanuel]

Anyone who isn't a criminal wouldn't.

I'm not a criminal and I don't. Unless, being unemployed makes me a criminal.

I think it is a conservative principle not to trust government too far. I think the powers of the Patriot Act can turn a law abiding citizen from law abiding to "enemy of the state" in the matter of a single power change in Washington.

Immie

The law referred to in the OP reduces the power of the Feds to shutdown the internet. If you really don't trust the govt too far, you should support this proposed legislation

Really?

Here's what I am reading:

WASHINGTON (CBS4) ―

The White House is one step closer to having the authority to flip the Internet "kill switch" in case of emergency.

The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs approved a cybersecurity bill called PCNAA, or Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act on Friday. The bill would give the president the power to call it lights out for the Internet if there is "a cyber attack capable of causing massive damage or loss of life."

The legislation would force companies such as broadband providers, search engines, or software firms that the government selects to "immediately comply with any emergency measure or action developed" by the Department of Homeland Security. Anyone failing to comply would be fined

PCNAA Bill Would Give President an "Internet... | Gather

Lieberman defended the PCNAA bill by saying that it was important to give the president the right to "say to an electric company or to say to Verizon, in the national
interest, 'There's an attack about to come, and I hereby order you to put a patch on this, or put your network down on this part, or stop accepting any incoming from country A.'"

Now, what I see there is the potential of DHS to decide that they don't like the information that is being disseminated through the net and shut it down. For instance, they don't like the criticism they are receiving in regards to Heathcare Reform... flip the switch and shut down the criticism.

So where are you seeing this reduction in powers?

Immie

 

[sangha]

I'm not a criminal and I don't. Unless, being unemployed makes me a criminal.

I think it is a conservative principle not to trust government too far. I think the powers of the Patriot Act can turn a law abiding citizen from law abiding to "enemy of the state" in the matter of a single power change in Washington.

Immie

The law referred to in the OP reduces the power of the Feds to shutdown the internet. If you really don't trust the govt too far, you should support this proposed legislation

Really?

Here's what I am reading:

WASHINGTON (CBS4) ―

The White House is one step closer to having the authority to flip the Internet "kill switch" in case of emergency.

The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs approved a cybersecurity bill called PCNAA, or Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act on Friday. The bill would give the president the power to call it lights out for the Internet if there is "a cyber attack capable of causing massive damage or loss of life."

The legislation would force companies such as broadband providers, search engines, or software firms that the government selects to "immediately comply with any emergency measure or action developed" by the Department of Homeland Security. Anyone failing to comply would be fined

PCNAA Bill Would Give President an "Internet... | Gather

Lieberman defended the PCNAA bill by saying that it was important to give the president the right to "say to an electric company or to say to Verizon, in the national
interest, 'There's an attack about to come, and I hereby order you to put a patch on this, or put your network down on this part, or stop accepting any incoming from country A.'"

Now, what I see there is the potential of DHS to decide that they don't like the information that is being disseminated through the net and shut it down. For instance, they don't like the criticism they are receiving in regards to Heathcare Reform... flip the switch and shut down the criticism.

So where are you seeing this reduction in powers?

Immie

I have already posted a link to an article which discusses the Telecommunication Act of 1933 which shows that the govt already has the power to shut down the Internet. I even quoted the section of the Act that does this.

 

[Gremlin-USA]

FOlks, it turns out that the govt already has the power to "kill" the internet under the 1934 Telecommunications Act (as amended in 1996)

Joe Lieberman And The Myth of The Internet Kill Switch | TPMDC

At least we now know for sure Bush did not do this one

There are a lot of stupid laws on the books, let's just hope no one is stupid enough to pull the plug on the Internet!!!


.

If you had read the article I linked to, you would see that this new legislation is meant to restrict the 1934 Telecom Act. I would think that a conservative such as yourself would support a reining in of Fed power; not calling it stupid

And the law only applies in time of war. I guess you want the enemy to continue to be able to communicate using the Internet.

I was responding to you rettoric of Bush did it

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2455365-post5.html

Reining in and Stupid in this case seem to fit.

Now of course in an all out war on America, shutting the internet Down would be the least of our problems.

You think we can shut down the Internet around the World?

I have no idea, but my guess would be we can only shut down access to the Internet in this country, not others

.

 

[Immanuel]

The law referred to in the OP reduces the power of the Feds to shutdown the internet. If you really don't trust the govt too far, you should support this proposed legislation

Really?

Here's what I am reading:



PCNAA Bill Would Give President an "Internet... | Gather

Lieberman defended the PCNAA bill by saying that it was important to give the president the right to "say to an electric company or to say to Verizon, in the national
interest, 'There's an attack about to come, and I hereby order you to put a patch on this, or put your network down on this part, or stop accepting any incoming from country A.'"

Now, what I see there is the potential of DHS to decide that they don't like the information that is being disseminated through the net and shut it down. For instance, they don't like the criticism they are receiving in regards to Heathcare Reform... flip the switch and shut down the criticism.

So where are you seeing this reduction in powers?

Immie

I have already posted a link to an article which discusses the Telecommunication Act of 1933 which shows that the govt already has the power to shut down the Internet. I even quoted the section of the Act that does this.

Doesn't change anything, if this bill allows the President to do as mentioned in the article.

Even if he did have that power before, this only expands or clarifies it for the internet, right?

Immie

 

[sangha]

At least we now know for sure Bush did not do this one

There are a lot of stupid laws on the books, let's just hope no one is stupid enough to pull the plug on the Internet!!!


.

If you had read the article I linked to, you would see that this new legislation is meant to restrict the 1934 Telecom Act. I would think that a conservative such as yourself would support a reining in of Fed power; not calling it stupid

And the law only applies in time of war. I guess you want the enemy to continue to be able to communicate using the Internet.

I was responding to you rettoric of Bush did it

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2455365-post5.html

Reining in and Stupid in this case seem to fit.

.

I guess you're just not smart enough to realize that I have already acknowledged, several times, that the power to stop the Internet was given to the Feds in 1933.

 

[sangha]

Really?

Here's what I am reading:



PCNAA Bill Would Give President an "Internet... | Gather



Now, what I see there is the potential of DHS to decide that they don't like the information that is being disseminated through the net and shut it down. For instance, they don't like the criticism they are receiving in regards to Heathcare Reform... flip the switch and shut down the criticism.

So where are you seeing this reduction in powers?

Immie

I have already posted a link to an article which discusses the Telecommunication Act of 1933 which shows that the govt already has the power to shut down the Internet. I even quoted the section of the Act that does this.

Doesn't change anything, if this bill allows the President to do as mentioned in the article.

Even if he did have that power before, this only expands or clarifies it for the internet, right?

Immie

Wrong. It reins in the Presidents power to do so, according to the article i posted, not "expand" it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Internet Kill Switch Approved by Senate Committee - cbs4.com

quote:

"Initially, the bill would have given the president unlimited authority on how long he could control the Internet, but an amendment passed Friday says he would have to get the approval of Congress to shut down the Internet for more than 120 days."


Please contact your congressman today and voice your opinion on this. We simply can not allow DC to take the internet. Think China, Iran, Venezuela.......

So that I don't have to repeat myself, this has been extensively discussed here:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...ill-have-the-right-to-shut-down-internet.html

Which means you do not care.