Bill would give president emergency control of Internet

// added August 28, 2009 // 77 comments //
Image...
TheRealEdwin
A new U.S. senate bill has been redrafted to give President Obama the power of control to shut down the Internet in case of emergency situations. The 55-page draft that was obtained by CNET appears to permit the president to seize temporary control over private-sector networks in a cybersecurity emergency.

If the bill is passed, it would allow control to temporary disable Internet traffic in private-sectors. "A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president's power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001."

Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which contains large Internet and telecommunication companies such as Verizon, Verisign, Nortel and Carnegie Mellon University said "It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill."

The bill is still unclear what power of control President Obama might receive until it is properly addressed after the Senate's summer recess.

The bill is to protect against cyber threats and attacks on critical infrastructures such as the power grid in case of an attack from a broadband connection. Such control over the Internet may never be executed but with hackers getting more creative, national security becomes top priority in emergencies.
  1. groups:
    Tech,   News,   News and Politics,   Politics,   4 more
  2. tags:
    Obama Bush President White House 9 more
  3. recommended by:
    Highr0ller [removed]

77 comments // Bill would give president emergency control of Internet

  • funnicus
    • 0
      funnicus [removed]  
    • Once in a while somebody needs to impeach? (legally or not) a president, just to let them know they can not lie their way into office like bushes and obama have done. Right now, it seems one of the pre-requisites to being elected is to be a master of deception.

      You attack this statement, you attack the founding fathers. You burn the flag. You burn America.

    • 5 months ago
  • Ryan_Schulz
    • 0
      Ryan_Schulz  
    • All I can say is wow. This sounds like something that China would do. What is our country coming to. If you look behind the wool that the president is putting over our eyes the truth is frightening. All our countries foundations are being shaken to the core and frankly, changed. Say Hello to Comrade Obama.

    • 5 months ago
  • kstein
    • 0
      kstein  
    • so very true, so very true ragan, this is history repeating itself though, it has happened befor. What to do What to do?

    • 5 months ago
  • Ragan
    • 0
      Ragan  
    • There is only one little but very important subject here. If the president already has wartime powers to shutdown or control the internet, then why is it necessary to enact special legislation to give the president special powers. Wartime powers supercede all other powers anyway. I would look into this further because as government gradually gains control of all activities in the USA and tax everything that should and should not be taxable, it will soon be that they have used subtelity to gain complete conntrol of the USA and the people have absolutely no power, period. nd if anyone thinks I am paranoid, I suggest that you set down and list everything that is taxed in the nation and total it up and amaze yourself with the staggering amount of taxes collected annually. And how many taxes there is on each and every commodity that we buy. Its laughable and criminal but the Lords of Finance love us.

    • 5 months ago
  • macfan
    • 0
      macfan  
    • i don't get why when Bush
      did things that were not un-constitutional
      we should hope it keeps us safe
      but now that Obama is in office
      when he dose some thing un-constitutional
      and the only thing he has done thats un-constitutional
      is cotineing some un-constitutional Bush policies
      but when Obama dose it we should panic and start
      crying like Beck and do tea parties i don't get it

    • 5 months ago
  • hunzedog
  • macfan
    • 0
      macfan  
    • Bush spayed on us well don't
      get me wrong i think these is bad idea
      but it had 8 years to complain about wiretapping
      and you start complaining now about are privacy
      to little to late face it you conservatives are just
      as partisan as you accuse some liberals
      of being did not believe Bush when said
      wiretapping was to keep us safe so won't
      believe if Obama says this will keep us safe and
      this story was from Cnet which owned by CBS
      which idiots like Rush says is goverment run
      dose this look goverment run im not all the media
      is agest Obama but it's not pro Obama either
      if there bias they don't vary good job.

    • 5 months ago
  • kstein
    • 0
      kstein  
    • macfan:

      well i did complain back then and my Senator Russ Feingold D-WI did vote agianst Bush and the Patroit Act. The only person who did! Big Brother is not wanted but my guy.

    • 5 months ago
  • remanns
  • remanns
  • GodsnLiberals
  • mykuh
    • 0
      mykuh  
    • What part of Private Sector don't you people understand?

      Jeesh. Just more scare tactics to try to invoke mass hysteria.

    • 5 months ago
  • libertyforall
    • 0
      libertyforall  
    • mykuh:

      Ummm it's a proposed bill in the United States Congress. How is it scare tactics.

      What I find more hilarious than anything is that the Obama sheeple were criticizing Bush for these same actions but now it's alright.

    • 5 months ago
  • macfan
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • Hail the new Caesar?

      This is why they didn't want Bush impeached. They can now take the power he took and expand on it under the guise of "safety."

    • 5 months ago
  • manfreddrake
    • 0
      manfreddrake  
    • It all comes back to the bill of rights and the assault it is under. Dems, Repubs, it doesn't matter any more; it is the people who must take back control. Vote for qualified people who have a track record of actions, not words. The bedazilling of a the greatest neation to ever have walked the face of the Earth will pass into history if these self-serving tyrrants are not removed from power.
      Everyone...at the next opportunity, vote-out the incumbant, regardless of party affiliation. It is our only hope to put the government back in our hands.

    • 5 months ago
  • funnicus
  • hunzedog
  • libertyforall
  • slarabee
    • 0
      slarabee  
    • More hyperbolic bullshit.

      Any network engineer will tell you that the government already has the power to "shut down" the internet in the event of a national crisis.

      Cyber security is important and the simple fact is that this "power" is really not a big deal.

      Fact is that there is not a President that would use this power to "shut down" the internet without a damn good reason.

      The economic ramifications of shutting down the internet would be devastating so it is not something that would be done just to control the citizens. The price would be just to high, not to mention the political ramifications.

      Those people that grab at little parts of legislation and use it to pump up fear of our President are charlatans and scumbags.

    • 5 months ago
  • libertyforall
    • 0
      libertyforall  
    • slarabee:

      Well, you've made me feel a lot better about the bill. Since the government will only use it when they have a "damn good reason" then I have nothing to fear. Government only does what is in the best interests of the citizens.

      And yes, we know the government already has the ability to do it. However, it would be illegal at this point.

      What I find more disgusting and disturbing is the flippant attitude people take towards governmental abuse of power.

    • 5 months ago
  • slarabee
    • 0
      slarabee  
    • slarabee:

      It would not be illegal at this point.

      War powers trump those legalities.

      The point I was trying to make is not that it would not be done just because "they care about us". I am not that naive.

      My point was that it would be political and economic suicide and if I know anything about politicians it is that they do not do things that are not in there own best interest.

      This issue is as overblown as the health care "death panels" and re-education camps, and his birth certificate and all the other bullshit that is being thrown around.

    • 5 months ago
  • libertyforall
    • 0
      libertyforall  
    • slarabee:

      Re-education camps and the birth certificate thing have no legal proof behind them. This is a bill in the Untied States Congress. This is no conspiracy theory.

      And yes, it would be illegal at this point. The President does not legally have the power to shut down the internet. The War Powers Act does not grant him that ability.

      You are extremely naive if you think it will be used only when it is needed.

    • 5 months ago
  • lamborghini
  • libertyforall
    • 0
      libertyforall  
    • Bush took the power to declare martial law and now Obama is going to take the unconstitutional power of declaring martial law on the internet.

      I thought we needed Hope and Change? More broken promises from Obama.

    • 5 months ago
  • Jonf119
    • 0
      Jonf119  
    • The Iranian government would have loved to have this power during their elections. This is just a way for the Obama administration to shut down the publics freedom of speech.

    • 5 months ago
  • macfan
    • 0
      macfan  
    • Jonf119:

      Bush had a terror watch list ,the patriot act,
      declared martial law and wiretapped journalist
      he didn't like and people in 2004 there where two kicked out of a Bush rally for having anti-Bush
      shirts you should of complained about peoples
      freedom speech and privacy being taking away
      8 years ago why didn't you start with Bush
      why did wate for Obama when it was happening
      before are going to tell Bush did it to keep us safe
      then why dont we tell the government but us all in
      jail sell and waterbored every one then we will all be safe how about that really it's to little to late this was happening befor Obama.

    • 5 months ago
  • Mike_Johnston
  • brit50
    • 0
      brit50  
    • I am completely against any type of regulation of the internet. It is a virtually free resource that no single country should have the right to touch, or run.

    • 6 months ago
  • Ragan
    • 0
      Ragan  
    • Since the Congress and the senate would like top gain complete control of our lives. I would suggest that the People 3establish a law giving the people the last vote on all laws. Since all politicians would like nothing better that have a government whereby they are the law, the judge and jury. They should not be trusted any further with laws that take away any further freedoms. I also still maintain that all medical plans for all politicians and people be shredded and start a new plan that includes all people from the president down to the common laborer. There is nothing special about politicians except they are corrupt to the bone. Remove that temptation from them and they will strive for a living just as we common people. Stop all corporate donations to candidates and nomonees from president to Congress, after all the governmewnt is for the people not the corporations. As for the internet the politicians will continue to try to tax the internet so be very careful of what more power you give to these tax crazy bastards.

    • 6 months ago
  • elementaljim
  • MoonLoon
  • spacemikey
  • clownpuncher
  • TopScruffy
  • macfan
    • 0
      macfan  
    • MoonLoon:

      then guess Bush was hitler because
      he spayed on us well don't
      get me wrong i think these is bad idea
      but it had 8 years to complain about wiretapping
      and you start complaining now about are privacy
      to little to late face it you conservatives are just
      as partisan as you accuse some liberals
      of being did not believe Bush when said
      wiretapping was to keep us safe so won't
      believe if Obama says this will keep us safe and
      this story was from Cnet which owned by CBS
      which idiots like Rush says is goverment run
      dose this look goverment run im not all the media
      is agest Obama but it's not pro Obama either
      if there bias they don't a vary good job.

    • 5 months ago
  • MoonLoon
  • kstein
    • 0
      kstein  
    • Its great to blog but you need to email YOUR states Reps also. This just the tip of the Demos agenda for Big Brother. We have become puppets on a string. Isnt this the way Hiltler started out? Supreme cencorship, having the government come into our homes to tell us How to live, what to teach our children, what books music and radio to read and not to read? I believe that bill {attached to a different bill} passed a few weeks ago Time to wake up and smell the socialism

    • 6 months ago
  • sharingcaring
    • 0
      sharingcaring  
    • The sponsor for this bill is the nephew of Mr New World Order/The Bilderbergers, himself: David Rockefeller. From the Senate, the co-sponsors are:
      - Sen Evan Bayh, [INDIANA]
      - Sen Nelson, Bill [FLORIDA]
      - Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [MAINE]

      CNET's more-detailed article on this subject is pretty good. To those voters from these senator's districts, please send these charlatans a message letting them know that you are indeed a constituent that is watching their actions....

    • 6 months ago
  • heimbachae
    • 0
      heimbachae  
    • Guys. Read the article. It says the Senate is going to give him power (not him giving it to himself) to shut down Private Sector Networks.

      That means NONE OF OUR INTERNET WILL BE TOUCHED.

    • 6 months ago
  • kstein
    • 0
      kstein  
    • heimbachae:

      What do you think the private sector networks are? Im wondering if this also included radio and tv now that we went digital. I wish CNN and other news reporters would return to being more in depth agian. All it is is a push of a satilite button

    • 6 months ago
  • el_capitan001
    • 0
      el_capitan001  
    • @ hunzedog
      ...AND phone companies can triangulate a phone's position even when it's off. not the government...phone companies!! that's crazy!

      else
      now think of what our GOVERNMENT is REALLY capable of, really. then ask: "is this really a big deal?" i think the proposed bill is to justify when they actually try to shut down (i agree w/ edbr that it's not likely possible) private sector networks; it just makes their future actions legal. if it is possible, the gov't will do it bill or no bill, if "need be"...

    • 6 months ago
  • TopScruffy
    • 0
      TopScruffy  
    • if they cut off TV and phones they cut off internet = ALREADY HAVE THIS POWER

      this will just make it so they can keep communication lines open while they protect the grids

    • 6 months ago
  • clownpuncher
  • hunzedog
  • jh64487
  • MoonLoon
  • edbr
    • 0
      edbr  
    • The funniest thing about this article is that there is NO WAY to shut down the private-sector Internet ... Someone would have to physically shut off a substantial number of the battery-backed-up servers. It would be a real feat just to shut certain parts of it down. Not that I think the gov't couldn't do it, I'm just saying that this story, or maybe it's the bill, smells of bullshit ...

    • 6 months ago
  • bryterjonas
    • 0
      bryterjonas  
    • Rome would put a dictator in charge in troubling times, yet you overdramatic, Orwellian wannabe prophets feel losing control of the internet is necessarily a bad thing? Think things over before completely breaking out the Alex Jones BS.

    • 6 months ago
  • phillyphil
    • 0
      phillyphil  
    • bryterjonas:

      ya, some of those dictators never left.... remember julius caesar? put someone in charge that knows only war, and you will continue to get war.

      on a side note, absolute power corrupts absolutely

    • 5 months ago
  • MoonLoon
  • onemalefla
  • stopnoise
  • sgwhites
    • 0
      sgwhites  
    • Before the inevitable massive freakout, it's also worth noting that the bill was sponsored by 4 Senators, and it doesn't appear that Obama has weighed in one way or the other.

      Also, the bill hasn't even made it out of Committee yet. So, not exactly a done deal.

    • 6 months ago
  • clownpuncher
  • sgwhites
    • 0
      sgwhites  
    • sgwhites:

      Two, points actually.

      First, that it's ridiculous to claim that it's some sort of vast plan of Obama's when he hasn't commented on the bill. For all any of us know, he thinks it's a horrible idea. Or he could support it. But until he weighs in, attribute any plans to Sen. Rockefeller, not Obama.

      Second, a ridiculous number of bills get authored and introduced every day in Congress. Most of them never make it out of committee. If this one starts gaining momentum, then perhaps alarm is justified. But a lot of people start running around screaming the sky is falling when it's not even clear if the bill has a chance of success.

    • 6 months ago
  • TopScruffy
  • samthesixth
  • hunzedog
  • hunzedog
  • GeishaDoll
    • 0
      GeishaDoll  
    • If you don't want sensitive information being seen, don't post it on-line! This is pretty outrageous. People should have the freedom to read, view, and research whatever they want, even during a time of emergency and/or crisis. Prohibiting information is just crazy, and people should have the knowledge to asses whatever is going on.

    • 6 months ago
  • Null81
    • 0
      Null81  
    • I don't think that this is a grab for global or cyber complete domination, I think that Obama really means good.

      Think about what would happen if our infrastructure was attacked through the internet, america would be left defenseless. Communications would be down, the public would become a hysteric mass, and we would be in a vulnerable state. I think this is the same thing as what we had set up in the cold war, if they shoot missiles at us, then ours are automatically set to fire.

      It seems like a failsafe to me.

    • 6 months ago
  • current89
  • spacemikey
  • Ihatethemall
  • samthesixth
  • Highr0ller
  • good_stuff
    • 0
      good_stuff  
    • I have a feeling that this is a lot less sinister than it seems. Remember, the president has the power to declare martial law, which would seem to be much more restrictive and imposing than preventing you twatting about what you had for breakfast.

    • 6 months ago
  • samthesixth
    • 0
      samthesixth  
    • When will Obama's power grabbing cease? Why does he need control of the internet even in a supposed "emergency?"

      If one was opposed to the patriot act, how could they be for this?

    • 6 months ago
  • hollyMiamiFla
  • macfan
  • libertyforall
  • samthesixth
  • macfan
  • hombre76
    • 0
      hombre76  
    • OK can i just point out one little thing here? That is regardless of what party or the emergency situation the government, and lets be more specific here, the power of the land, the ones with all the big guns and money, they will and can shut off what ever they like regardless of the law. They can and will shut off TV broadcasting and telephone and cell service and even power. They can choke off gas and food delivery to different areas....ect ect... the point here is when, if , the shit ever hits the fan between the rich and powerful and all the rest of us the only leg we have to stand on is our will to resist and prevail, and that is all the leg we need. the winner makes the laws in the end game scenario that law addresses and all that kind of law does is try and justify their actions to themselves if they win, it will mean nothing to us when we win.

    • 6 months ago
  • samthesixth
  • lj111
  • GodsnConservatives
    • 0
      GodsnConservatives  
    • I have an idea for the government -- get your own internet, this one is ours. If you're afraid of hackers, don't expose sensitive systems to the internet.

      The internet is anarchy. It belongs to the people and I strongly oppose ANY regulations.

      I have a feeling that if they begin meddling in the internet and limiting our freedoms, there would be populous outrage. But then again, we let them get away with the Patriot Act, so I'm not so sure.

    • 6 months ago
  • jh64487
  • raiderguyx
    • 0
      raiderguyx  
    • what a crock of crap!!! guess that way, when they socialize everygoddamn industry in America, they can attempt to crush our rebellion before it gets started, ala Iran...

    • 6 months ago
  • TopScruffy
  • MoonLoon
    • 0
      MoonLoon  
    • raiderguyx:

      "Top", please stop making excuses for gov't. intrusion and interference of our right to speak out against violations of the Constitutional amendments. Our basic rights are being hi-hacked by both parties in an attempt to gain power.

    • 5 months ago
  • TopScruffy
    • 0
      TopScruffy  
    • raiderguyx:

      all i'm saying is they already have this power. shoulda been bitching ages ago. and, also, THE SENATE is doing this, not obama. poor headline. poor critical thinking.

      if they needed to protect the grids without this bill we would also lose all TV and telephone communication. this is opening our rights, not taking them away.

    • 5 months ago

Add your comment

current videos