WH Control of the Internet

[PoliticalChic]

Under a White House plan, the Homeland Security Department will have far-reaching oversight over all civilian agency computer networks.

The proposal would codify much of the administration's memo from July 2010 expanding DHS's cyber responsibilities for civilian networks.

The White House, however, is taking those responsibilities further, according to a source familiar with the document. The administration drafted a legislative proposal to give DHS many, if not all, of the same authorities for the .gov networks that the Defense Department has for the .mil networks.

Federal News Radio recently viewed a draft copy of the legislative proposal.
"I have to question why the Executive branch is writing legislation," said the source, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about it. "This is not a proposal or white paper like the White House usually sends to Capitol Hill. This is the actual legislation."

The source said the 100-page document is going through interagency review. DHS sent the document around to agencies late last Friday and asked for comments by Monday. The source said few agencies had time to take a hard look at the document, especially in light of the possible government shutdown.

"The cybersecurity legislation being developed in Congress is a large, complex bill with wide-ranging implications, and several Senate committees are involved in its drafting," said committee spokeswoman Leslie Phillips.
Federal News Radio 1500 AM: White House draft bill expands DHS cyber responsibilities

 

[finebead]

We don't know what the specifics are, but this is probably necessary.

The internet in important infrastructure to the commerce of the nation. It is how we buy and sell stock, interact with our bank, buy merchandise, interact with govt. A cyber attack on the internet would be no different than bombing important bridges on the interstate highway system to halt movement of goods in our economy.

The US used cyber warfare in the Iraq war against Iraq. US banks have been hacked by the Russian mafia. Google was attacked by the Chinese govt., Chinese dissidents and all of their friends were outed plus the emails read.

Do you believe this initiative is unnecessary?

 

[PoliticalChic]

We don't know what the specifics are, but this is probably necessary.

The internet in important infrastructure to the commerce of the nation. It is how we buy and sell stock, interact with our bank, buy merchandise, interact with govt. A cyber attack on the internet would be no different than bombing important bridges on the interstate highway system to halt movement of goods in our economy.

The US used cyber warfare in the Iraq war against Iraq. US banks have been hacked by the Russian mafia. Google was attacked by the Chinese govt., Chinese dissidents and all of their friends were outed plus the emails read.

Do you believe this initiative is unnecessary?

1. Yes...

this is a naked attempt at control of the dissemination of information.
Did you find yourself saying, " gee, I wish the government would control the internet..."?

2. "“Net neutrality” rules must be implemented while the government should quintuple federal funding for public and community broadcasting, argued Ben Scott, the State Department’s recently appointed policy adviser for innovation.

Scott was writing last year in a radical magazine in an article co-authored by Robert W. McChesney (left), an avowed Marxist activist who has called for the dismantlement, “brick-by-brick,” of the U.S. capitalist system, with America being rebuilt as a socialist society. McChesney is the founder of the George Soros-funded Free Press, which petitions for more government control of the Internet and news media.Scott and McChesney also recommended the U.S. impose ownership limits on local radio, TV, and cable channels while pushing for more control of the media by the FCC.

The duo were writing in the January/February 2009 edition of Tikkun Magazine, run by avowed Marxist Michael Lerner. Lerner has been accused of using the magazine to justify Palestinian terror and has written articles in which he suggested the 9/11 attacks were a response to U.S. policies.

“Whatever issue tops your list of priorities, real progress will be impossible unless we first change our media system,” wrote Scott and McChesney. “Currently, access to communications and control over media content are vested in the hands of corporate titans.”

“Net neutrality” refers to government interference to propose a principle for users’ access to networks participating in the Internet.

This past May, Scott was named a policy adviser for innovation at the State Department. He previously served as director of McChesney’s Free Press.

Free Press has ties to other members of the Obama administration. "
Klein: Look who wants to quintuple funding for government media. State adviser, Marxist also want more FCC control of airwaves « RBO

3. Are you certain you are willing to give up any of your of you access to information to government?

 

[finebead]

Cyber Warfare and the Conflict in Iraq

Friday, August 20, 2010

Article by Steven Elliott

When most Americans think about the conflict in Iraq, cyber warfare does not immediately come to mind. However, this high-tech advancement is starting to become more popular with United States military officials and is being utilized in the current conflict in Iraq.

Therefore, the U.S. must develop legislation regulating cyber warfare or the slow process of receiving top-level approval could harm future efforts.

This paper recognizes some denied and approved cyber attacks that have been used in Iraq, identifies the major causes of the United States’ apprehension about using cyber warfare, and analyzes how the United States can streamline future use of cyber warfare.

KEY FINDINGS:

Former President George W. Bush’s administration cancelled several planned cyber attacks during the Iraq invasion of 2003 because they were concerned about the potential collateral damage of the attack.
Since as early as 2005, the United States has used cyber attacks to jam Taliban and Iraqi insurgent’s communications devices (Harris 2009).
Cyber attacks have proved beneficial to the war effort.
Fear of retaliatory attacks and collateral damage is the main reason the U.S. government is wary of using cyber warfare.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Learn from past mistakes to hone cyber attack skills.
Form effective policies that will guide future cyber war.
Harden U.S. networks against potential pre-emptive and retaliatory threats.

https://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/6750-Cyber-Warfare-and-the-Conflict-in-Iraq.html

Cyber warfare is HERE and NOW.

The US must defend itself against cyber attacks, NOW. We are under attack, NOW.

Who is going to do it? Our government is going to do it, and nobody else.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Remember, if your against the Government controlling the Internet, then you support Al Qaida. Like we do in Libya.

You, as a good American, should be willing to give up all your rights and freedoms in order to be safe, just as Ben Franklin advised.

 

[finebead]

Remember, if your against the Government controlling the Internet, then you support Al Qaida. Like we do in Libya.

You, as a good American, should be willing to give up all your rights and freedoms in order to be safe, just as Ben Franklin advised.

1. Do you believe there are NO threats to anyone on the internet, especially to the conduct of serious business on the internet? I know the daily operation of my company would be seriously hampered without the internet. The US is conducting cyber war now, do you believe nobody else is capable?

2. If you believe there ARE threats to this key infrastructure of US commerce (the internet), what is the nature of the threats, and how would you defend against them?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"We don't know what the specifics are, but this is probably necessary."

From time to time I find a poster who makes a statement, as above, that reeks of such sophomoric trust of big government, that my cynicism takes over, and I start to see the conspiratorial hand of a Ministry of Propaganda.

Was that statement authorized by the government seminar?

 

[dilloduck]

"We don't know what the specifics are, but this is probably necessary."

From time to time I find a poster who makes a statement, as above, that reeks of such sophomoric trust of big government, that my cynicism takes over, and I start to see the conspiratorial hand of a Ministry of Propaganda.

Was that statement authorized by the government seminar?

I'm sure it's all in the interest of national security. I'm so grateful that scientists have placed us in danger of being ruined by robots.

 

[Intense]

Under a White House plan, the Homeland Security Department will have far-reaching oversight over all civilian agency computer networks.

The proposal would codify much of the administration's memo from July 2010 expanding DHS's cyber responsibilities for civilian networks.

The White House, however, is taking those responsibilities further, according to a source familiar with the document. The administration drafted a legislative proposal to give DHS many, if not all, of the same authorities for the .gov networks that the Defense Department has for the .mil networks.

Federal News Radio recently viewed a draft copy of the legislative proposal.
"I have to question why the Executive branch is writing legislation," said the source, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about it. "This is not a proposal or white paper like the White House usually sends to Capitol Hill. This is the actual legislation."

The source said the 100-page document is going through interagency review. DHS sent the document around to agencies late last Friday and asked for comments by Monday. The source said few agencies had time to take a hard look at the document, especially in light of the possible government shutdown.

"The cybersecurity legislation being developed in Congress is a large, complex bill with wide-ranging implications, and several Senate committees are involved in its drafting," said committee spokeswoman Leslie Phillips.
Federal News Radio 1500 AM: White House draft bill expands DHS cyber responsibilities

I think that The Ministry of Truth is drooling over drawing lines in the sand and that Orwell is turning in his grave.

 

[finebead]

Russians used Black Energy software to block websites and discover passwords
LAST UPDATED 11:28 AM, DECEMBER 22, 2009

The Russian Business Network, a well-known gang of Russian cyber-thieves, is suspected of stealing millions of dollars from Citibank in a year-long scam that was only detected last summer when the FBI and the ultra-secret National Security Agency detected suspicious traffic from security-flagged computers in Russia.

It is not yet clear how much the thieves got away with, or if they gained access to Citibank's systems directly or through a third party. But, says the Wall Street Journal, [B]the incident underscores the blurred lines between the criminal and national-security threats [/B]in this new area of enterprise.

Joe Petro, managing director of Citigroup's Security and Investigative services, denies there has been any intrusion. "We had no breach of the system and there were no losses, no customer losses, no bank losses. Any allegation that the FBI is working a case at Citigroup involving tens of millions of losses is just not true."

However, banks are typically loath to confirm instances of electronic crime. Still, it goes on. Last month, prosecutors in Atlanta named eight suspected Russian and Eastern European hackers, most still at large, who they say broke into a US unit of Royal Bank of Scotland in 2008 and stole $9 million from ATMs in 280 cities world-wide in a matter of hours. The FBI says electronic theft exceeded $260 million in the US last year and attacks are on the increase.

Russian cyber-thieves 'steal millions from Citibank' with Black Energy | Business | The First Post

I can post hundreds of these articles. The companies are not up to the task of defending themselves against sophisticated professionals, although they do a good job against most weekend high school hackers.

This is a problem NOW.

 

[finebead]

Under a White House plan, the Homeland Security Department will have far-reaching oversight over all civilian agency computer networks.

The proposal would codify much of the administration's memo from July 2010 expanding DHS's cyber responsibilities for civilian networks.

The White House, however, is taking those responsibilities further, according to a source familiar with the document. The administration drafted a legislative proposal to give DHS many, if not all, of the same authorities for the .gov networks that the Defense Department has for the .mil networks.

Federal News Radio recently viewed a draft copy of the legislative proposal.
"I have to question why the Executive branch is writing legislation," said the source, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about it. "This is not a proposal or white paper like the White House usually sends to Capitol Hill. This is the actual legislation."

The source said the 100-page document is going through interagency review. DHS sent the document around to agencies late last Friday and asked for comments by Monday. The source said few agencies had time to take a hard look at the document, especially in light of the possible government shutdown.

"The cybersecurity legislation being developed in Congress is a large, complex bill with wide-ranging implications, and several Senate committees are involved in its drafting," said committee spokeswoman Leslie Phillips.
Federal News Radio 1500 AM: White House draft bill expands DHS cyber responsibilities

There is NO mention of the govt. attempting to control ANY content on the internet, only it's SECURITY.

 

[finebead]

Companies are just not good at protecting themselves. They get hacked, who do they call for help? They call the govt. because the govt. employs folks that are much better than industry employs. Govt. employs those folks because they understand how real and how devastating attacks of this nature can be. They understand in the real world you are not dealing with high schooler's or joy riding 20 somethings, you're dealing with sophisticated and motivated professionals.

Computer-Security Firm's Customer Database Hacked
June 21st, 2010

Guidance alerted customers to the incident in a letter sent last week, saying it discovered on Dec. 7 that hackers had broken into a company database and made off with approximately 3,800 customer credit card numbers. the Pasadena, Calif.-based company said the incident occurred sometime in November and that it is working with the U.S. Secret Service on a more detailed investigation.

Michael G. Kessler, president of New York City-based computer-forensics investigative firm Kessler International, received a letter notifying him that the company’s American Express card was among those compromised by the attackers. Kessler received the notice from Guidance at the same time that a company credit-bill arrived with what he said were $20,000 in unauthorized charges for pay-per-click advertising at Google.com.

“I just got our American Express bill and nearly fell out of my chair,” Kessler said. “You’d think Guidance would be the last company this kind of thing would happen to.”

Guidance’s EnCase software is used by hundreds of security researchers and law enforcement agencies worldwide, including the U.S. Secret Service, the FBI and New York City police. John Colbert, the company’s chief executive officer, said Guidance alerted all of its customers less than two days after discovering the break-in, and that it would no longer store customer credit card data.

“This certainly highlights the fact that intrusions can happen to anybody and that nobody should be complacent about security,” he said. Colbert declined to discuss further details of the attack, citing the ongoing investigation.

Dollars And Nonsense Blog Archive Computer-Security Firm's Customer Database Hacked

That's great, computer security company hacked.

The US used cyber attacks in Iraq already, that is part of why the surge was so successful. That is why we know it works, we do it. We therefore know some of the techniques that could be used against us by Al Qaeda (from sitting in Pakistan), from China, from Russia, or from a Russian agent sitting in a coffee shop in Rio.

The threats, both criminal and national security are real. This is too easy, there is an endless list of examples already, it is happening now. What we have not seen is a coordinated actual war attack from an adversary. We have developed the capability. We know our foes are working on it and could mess us the commercial world very bad, if mob hackers can do it.

If I were preparing to attack anyone like russia or china, I'd hack and scramble the computers of all their major banks, airlines, stock exchanges, retailers. Of course I'd try to attack their military computers (after having them under internet surveillance for a few years) and try to shut down their command and control. And it is the internet that would give me the access to them, except for those they keep on private networks not hooked to the internet (if they are that smart, did they protect all of them that needed protection?) Maybe I'd try to take authority over them, plant a few trojan horse bombs in them, then demand ransom for the antidotes. Hmmmmm.....

 

[Mad Scientist]

1. Do you believe there are NO threats to anyone on the internet, especially to the conduct of serious business on the internet? I know the daily operation of my company would be seriously hampered without the internet. The US is conducting cyber war now, do you believe nobody else is capable?

Oh you mean like StuxNet that was created by the US and/or Israel governments? Yes, there are threats on the Internet, but none that can't be controlled by commonly available Internet Security software in combination with the basic, redundant Internet Architecture itself.

2. If you believe there ARE threats to this key infrastructure of US commerce (the internet), what is the nature of the threats, and how would you defend against them?

The internet has built in redundancy (multiple servers) that re-route traffic when certain nodes get attacked or face heavy traffic (or DOS Attacks) The Internet is essentially "self-healing". Egypt tried to shut down the internet during it's uprising a few months ago, see how that worked out?

The problem with allowing governments to control large portions of the Internet is that you really can't verify WHERE the attacks came from. The Government could launch a StuxNet type attack on a web site it doesn't want operating and shut down those sites saying it came from an "Al Qaida" type internet terrorist. And who would know there was a serious threat beyond the Government saying it is? You notice that the Government has been seizing domains? That's just a start.

If another country attacks us with conventional weapons it's pretty easy for everyone to see who it was and verify from multiple news sources. But when an Internet attack happens we're supposed to trust what the Government says is true? If you believe the Government can and did lie about WMD's in Iraq then you must also believe that same government would lie about Internet attacks right?

Just go to the Homeland Security website, checkout who they list as "potential enemies" and you'll see who they MAY want to shut down:
http://www.tdbimg.com/files/2009/04/30/-hsra-domestic-extremism-lexicon_165213935473.pdf

 

[PoliticalChic]

Under a White House plan, the Homeland Security Department will have far-reaching oversight over all civilian agency computer networks.

The proposal would codify much of the administration's memo from July 2010 expanding DHS's cyber responsibilities for civilian networks.

The White House, however, is taking those responsibilities further, according to a source familiar with the document. The administration drafted a legislative proposal to give DHS many, if not all, of the same authorities for the .gov networks that the Defense Department has for the .mil networks.

Federal News Radio recently viewed a draft copy of the legislative proposal.
"I have to question why the Executive branch is writing legislation," said the source, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about it. "This is not a proposal or white paper like the White House usually sends to Capitol Hill. This is the actual legislation."

The source said the 100-page document is going through interagency review. DHS sent the document around to agencies late last Friday and asked for comments by Monday. The source said few agencies had time to take a hard look at the document, especially in light of the possible government shutdown.

"The cybersecurity legislation being developed in Congress is a large, complex bill with wide-ranging implications, and several Senate committees are involved in its drafting," said committee spokeswoman Leslie Phillips.
Federal News Radio 1500 AM: White House draft bill expands DHS cyber responsibilities

I think that The Ministry of Truth is drooling over drawing lines in the sand and that Orwell is turning in his grave.

Oh, no! Now, see what you made me do:

1984 Part 1, Chapter 4
George Orwell - 1984 - Part 1, Chapter 4

1. "With the deep, unconscious sigh which not even the nearness of the telescreen could prevent him from uttering when his day's work started, Winston pulled the speakwrite towards him, blew the dust from its mouthpiece, and put on his spectacles. Then he unrolled and clipped together four small cylinders of paper which had already flopped out of the pneumatic tube on the right-hand side of his desk.
2. times 3.12.83 reporting bb dayorder doubleplusungood refs unpersons rewrite fullwise upsub antefiling
a. In Oldspeak (or standard English) this might be rendered:

The reporting of Big Brother's Order for the Day in The Times of December 3rd 1983 is extremely unsatisfactory and makes references to non-existent persons. Rewrite it in full and submit your draft to higher authority before filing.

3. Winston dialled 'back numbers' on the telescreen and called for the appropriate issues of The Times, which slid out of the pneumatic tube after only a few minutes' delay. The messages he had received referred to articles or news items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, as the official phrase had it, to rectify.

4. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of The Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead. This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs -- to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance. Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct, nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary.

5. In no case would it have been possible, once the deed was done, to prove that any falsification had taken place.

6. And the Records Department, after all, was itself only a single branch of the Ministry of Truth, whose primary job was not to reconstruct the past but to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels -- with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child's spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary."


Thank heaven Winston Smith is there to protect us all!

 

[finebead]

1. Do you believe there are NO threats to anyone on the internet, especially to the conduct of serious business on the internet? I know the daily operation of my company would be seriously hampered without the internet. The US is conducting cyber war now, do you believe nobody else is capable?

Oh you mean like StuxNet that was created by the US and/or Israel governments? Yes, there are threats on the Internet, but none that can't be controlled by commonly available Internet Security software in combination with the basic, redundant Internet Architecture itself.

You miss the real problem. If it was that easy to control, banks would not be hacked and lose millions on dollars in a matter of hours as my post above shows. The internet is part of the system, it is the part that allows ACCESS to the sites to be attacked, from anywhere. If an enemy is attacking many sites, simultaneously or under program control and the attack is proceeding at machine speed (far faster than humans ability to understand there IS an attack going on, analyze the NATURE of the attack, take steps to NEUTRALIZE the attack, it may be necessary to shut down the internet temporarily to deny the attackers ACCESS to the sites to attack them. The internet itself has value as the transport mechanism, but commerce is conducted and recorded on the sites themselves and that must be protected from attacks. The US has conducted cyber war in Iraq, our enemies attack sites in the US today, and the internet redundancy is NOT a defense against attacks on the sites that reside on the internet. Therefore, the problem is not solved in todays world, as we sit.

2. If you believe there ARE threats to this key infrastructure of US commerce (the internet), what is the nature of the threats, and how would you defend against them?

The internet has built in redundancy (multiple servers) that re-route traffic when certain nodes get attacked or face heavy traffic (or DOS Attacks) The Internet is essentially "self-healing". Egypt tried to shut down the internet during it's uprising a few months ago, see how that worked out?

The problem with allowing governments to control large portions of the Internet is that you really can't verify WHERE the attacks came from. The Government could launch a StuxNet type attack on a web site it doesn't want operating and shut down those sites saying it came from an "Al Qaida" type internet terrorist. And who would know there was a serious threat beyond the Government saying it is? You notice that the Government has been seizing domains? That's just a start.

If another country attacks us with conventional weapons it's pretty easy for everyone to see who it was and verify from multiple news sources. But when an Internet attack happens we're supposed to trust what the Government says is true? If you believe the Government can and did lie about WMD's in Iraq then you must also believe that same government would lie about Internet attacks right?

Just go to the Homeland Security website, checkout who they list as "potential enemies" and you'll see who they MAY want to shut down:
http://www.tdbimg.com/files/2009/04/30/-hsra-domestic-extremism-lexicon_165213935473.pdf

It is a matter of fact that there ARE domestic groups who are opposed to our govt., in some cases violently so.

Who are we at greater risk from:
a. Russian mafia
b. Russian govt.
c. Al Qaeda (all Islamic extremists)
d. Chinese govt.
e. all of the above (a, b, c, d)
f. the US govt.

Myself, I'll go with E.

If E is true, and we need protection from them (and I have SHOWN some of the attacks so we do need protection), the risk from the govt. (which has not been shown to have a real world example) is much smaller than the risk from E (which I have shown real world attacks).

I am ok with DHS having a plan to protect the internet and the sites on the internet from cyber attack, as this is a real threat that has already occurred many times.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Under a White House plan, the Homeland Security Department will have far-reaching oversight over all civilian agency computer networks.

The proposal would codify much of the administration's memo from July 2010 expanding DHS's cyber responsibilities for civilian networks.

The White House, however, is taking those responsibilities further, according to a source familiar with the document. The administration drafted a legislative proposal to give DHS many, if not all, of the same authorities for the .gov networks that the Defense Department has for the .mil networks.

Federal News Radio recently viewed a draft copy of the legislative proposal.
"I have to question why the Executive branch is writing legislation," said the source, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about it. "This is not a proposal or white paper like the White House usually sends to Capitol Hill. This is the actual legislation."

The source said the 100-page document is going through interagency review. DHS sent the document around to agencies late last Friday and asked for comments by Monday. The source said few agencies had time to take a hard look at the document, especially in light of the possible government shutdown.

"The cybersecurity legislation being developed in Congress is a large, complex bill with wide-ranging implications, and several Senate committees are involved in its drafting," said committee spokeswoman Leslie Phillips.
Federal News Radio 1500 AM: White House draft bill expands DHS cyber responsibilities

There is NO mention of the govt. attempting to control ANY content on the internet, only it's SECURITY.

Again, I see the hand of the govenment in your words....another poster who demands that the totalists tell all up front what they have in store for the rest of us....

Folks like you, who are either paid by the government, or dupes of the government, fail to announce the slow but steady take-over by the totalists, and perpetuate the false idea that things will go on just as they are if we just allow the government to protect, or help us.

Here's how it was done in ObamaCare:

"The illusion is perpetuated by ambiguity in the writing, administrative complexity, thousands of pages of legislative text and deferred decision making." http://www.aei.org/docLib/MillerHealthAffairsPoliticsofHealthReform.pdf


"There is NO mention of the govt. attempting to control ..."

What did the fox announce when you put him in charge of the henhouse?

 

[finebead]

Under a White House plan, the Homeland Security Department will have far-reaching oversight over all civilian agency computer networks.

The proposal would codify much of the administration's memo from July 2010 expanding DHS's cyber responsibilities for civilian networks.

The White House, however, is taking those responsibilities further, according to a source familiar with the document. The administration drafted a legislative proposal to give DHS many, if not all, of the same authorities for the .gov networks that the Defense Department has for the .mil networks.

Federal News Radio recently viewed a draft copy of the legislative proposal.
"I have to question why the Executive branch is writing legislation," said the source, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about it. "This is not a proposal or white paper like the White House usually sends to Capitol Hill. This is the actual legislation."

The source said the 100-page document is going through interagency review. DHS sent the document around to agencies late last Friday and asked for comments by Monday. The source said few agencies had time to take a hard look at the document, especially in light of the possible government shutdown.

"The cybersecurity legislation being developed in Congress is a large, complex bill with wide-ranging implications, and several Senate committees are involved in its drafting," said committee spokeswoman Leslie Phillips.
Federal News Radio 1500 AM: White House draft bill expands DHS cyber responsibilities

There is NO mention of the govt. attempting to control ANY content on the internet, only it's SECURITY.

Again, I see the hand of the govenment in your words....another poster who demands that the totalists tell all up front what they have in store for the rest of us....

Folks like you, who are either paid by the government, or dupes of the government, fail to announce the slow but steady take-over by the totalists, and perpetuate the false idea that things will go on just as they are if we just allow the government to protect, or help us.

Here's how it was done in ObamaCare:

"The illusion is perpetuated by ambiguity in the writing, administrative complexity, thousands of pages of legislative text and deferred decision making." http://www.aei.org/docLib/MillerHealthAffairsPoliticsofHealthReform.pdf


"There is NO mention of the govt. attempting to control ..."

What did the fox announce when you put him in charge of the henhouse?

The US has conducted cyber war in Iraq, I have shown that. US corporations are being attacked by organized crime and we believe we have been attacked by the Chinese govt. (do some searches).

Consider the attack by the Chinese as a night raid, see where the defenses are, see if we can determine if the US even knows we're raiding.

Google Points the Finger at the Chinese Government In Latest Cyber Attack

Sunday March 20, 2011

In another apparent attack on its computer systems, the world’s largest search engine, Google Inc., is publically pointing the finger at the Chinese government for allegedly manipulating how some of its services function in China.

This is a REAL and PRESENT problem. What should we do about that? Nothing?

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is NO mention of the govt. attempting to control ANY content on the internet, only it's SECURITY.

Again, I see the hand of the govenment in your words....another poster who demands that the totalists tell all up front what they have in store for the rest of us....

Folks like you, who are either paid by the government, or dupes of the government, fail to announce the slow but steady take-over by the totalists, and perpetuate the false idea that things will go on just as they are if we just allow the government to protect, or help us.

Here's how it was done in ObamaCare:

"The illusion is perpetuated by ambiguity in the writing, administrative complexity, thousands of pages of legislative text and deferred decision making." http://www.aei.org/docLib/MillerHealthAffairsPoliticsofHealthReform.pdf


"There is NO mention of the govt. attempting to control ..."

What did the fox announce when you put him in charge of the henhouse?

The US has conducted cyber war in Iraq, I have shown that. US corporations are being attacked by organized crime and we believe we have been attacked by the Chinese govt. (do some searches).

Consider the attack by the Chinese as a night raid, see where the defenses are, see if we can determine if the US even knows we're raiding.

Google Points the Finger at the Chinese Government In Latest Cyber Attack

Sunday March 20, 2011

In another apparent attack on its computer systems, the world’s largest search engine, Google Inc., is publically pointing the finger at the Chinese government for allegedly manipulating how some of its services function in China.

This is a REAL and PRESENT problem. What should we do about that? Nothing?

No, the REAL and PRESENT problem is the perceived gullibility of so many of our citizens.

 

[finebead]

Again, I see the hand of the govenment in your words....another poster who demands that the totalists tell all up front what they have in store for the rest of us....

Folks like you, who are either paid by the government, or dupes of the government, fail to announce the slow but steady take-over by the totalists, and perpetuate the false idea that things will go on just as they are if we just allow the government to protect, or help us.

Here's how it was done in ObamaCare:

"The illusion is perpetuated by ambiguity in the writing, administrative complexity, thousands of pages of legislative text and deferred decision making." http://www.aei.org/docLib/MillerHealthAffairsPoliticsofHealthReform.pdf


"There is NO mention of the govt. attempting to control ..."

What did the fox announce when you put him in charge of the henhouse?

The US has conducted cyber war in Iraq, I have shown that. US corporations are being attacked by organized crime and we believe we have been attacked by the Chinese govt. (do some searches).

Consider the attack by the Chinese as a night raid, see where the defenses are, see if we can determine if the US even knows we're raiding.

Google Points the Finger at the Chinese Government In Latest Cyber Attack

Sunday March 20, 2011

In another apparent attack on its computer systems, the world’s largest search engine, Google Inc., is publically pointing the finger at the Chinese government for allegedly manipulating how some of its services function in China.

This is a REAL and PRESENT problem. What should we do about that? Nothing?

No, the REAL and PRESENT problem is the perceived gullibility of so many of our citizens.

No, the real problem is the ignorance of so many of our citizens of the real threats, and their unwillingness to adequately prepare for to defend ourselves against the threats we are actually enduring today, which is the tip of the iceberg.

I show a pattern of attack that business has failed to stem, they always call the govt. after they have been attacked to try and find out what happened, and you have NO SOLUTION. Fail.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The US has conducted cyber war in Iraq, I have shown that. US corporations are being attacked by organized crime and we believe we have been attacked by the Chinese govt. (do some searches).

Consider the attack by the Chinese as a night raid, see where the defenses are, see if we can determine if the US even knows we're raiding.



This is a REAL and PRESENT problem. What should we do about that? Nothing?

No, the REAL and PRESENT problem is the perceived gullibility of so many of our citizens.

No, the real problem is the ignorance of so many of our citizens of the real threats, and their unwillingness to adequately prepare for to defend ourselves against the threats we are actually enduring today, which is the tip of the iceberg.

I show a pattern of attack that business has failed to stem, they always call the govt. after they have been attacked to try and find out what happened, and you have NO SOLUTION. Fail.

Friend beady, something that just occurred to me...I wonder if you'd favor me with a response to what might be a personal question:

You've been accused, or at least it has been suggested, that- based on your easy acceptance of the benign designs of the government- you might be a tool, and agent, a dupe, and possibly paid or assigned to post pro-big gov polemics....

Don't you feel the need, or desire at least, to deny same? Unless, that is, the suggestions are true....


Or, possibly you see Hobbes, rather than Locke as your guiding light....you know, the idea that citizens should willingly surrender rights to an all-powerful sovereign?

What's the deal, beady? I'm curious.