And, Yet Another Government Attack on Free Speech
We covered this last month when the idea of controlling the internet was first proposed by the Dark Overlord and his commie buddies. Evidently, things are heating up:
H/T – MeMaw
Senate Proposal Could Put Heavy Restrictions on Internet Freedoms
A proposed bill that would give the president widespread power to shut down the Internet in the event of a cyberattack could have sweeping implications on civil liberties.
FoxNews.com
The days of an open, largely unregulated Internet may soon come to an end.
A bill making its way through Congress proposes to give the U.S. government authority over all networks considered part of the nation’s critical infrastructure. Under the proposed Cybersecurity Act of 2009, the president would have the authority to shut down Internet traffic to protect national security.
The government also would have access to digital data from a vast array of industries including banking, telecommunications and energy. A second bill, meanwhile, would create a national cybersecurity adviser — commonly referred to as the cybersecurity czar — within the White House to coordinate strategy with a wide range of federal agencies involved.
[...]
[T]he proposal to give the U.S. government the authority to regulate the Internet is sounding alarms among critics who say it’s another case of big government getting bigger and more intrusive.
Silicon Valley executives are calling the bill vague and overly intrusive, and they are rebelling at the thought of increased and costly government regulations amid the global economic crisis.
Others are concerned about the potential erosion of civil liberties. “I’m scared of it,” said Lee Tien, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based group.
“It’s really broad, and there are plenty of laws right now designed to prevent the government getting access to that kind of data. It’s the same stuff we’ve been fighting on the warrantless wiretapping.”
Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W. Va, who introduced the bill earlier this month with bipartisan support, is casting the legislation as critical to protecting everything from our water and electricity to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records.
[A Rockefeller, you say? Where are the Leftard conspiracy theorists when you need them?]
“I know the threats we face.” Rockefeller said in a prepared statement when the legislation was introduced. “Our enemies are real. They are sophisticated, they are determined and they will not rest.”
[Then, invest your time and money in a better firewall, you freakin' idiot! But, of course, this isn't really about protecting the Internet; it is all about a power grab to censor free speech!]
[...]
A spokeswoman from Rockefeller’s office said neither he nor the two senators who co-sponsored the bill, Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, and Bill Nelson, D-Fla., will answer questions on cybersecurity until a later date.
[Olympia Snowe... Oh, that's where the "bipartisan" angle supposedly comes in. Yup, congress, no doubt, will do their best to tout the bipartisanship support this bill supposedly has. But, remember this: Olympia Snowe is just another freakin' commie who is wearing the sheepskin of a Republican; She is one of only three Republican asshats who voted against the wishes of their constituency for Obama's socialist trojan horse Stinkulus package. So, it's not really bipartisan support, more like commie's of a feather flocking together.]
[...]
21 April, 2009 at 8:24 pm
Bad move, if the net goes down the legions of “right wing extremists” might decide the war has started and start offing politicians and people stupid enough to still have obama stickers on their cars. Naturally, I would never encourage it but I am a pattern analysis kind of guy and I see signs many have had it. Gun and ammo sales are a key indicator. All you need do is listen to the breakfast crowds at a local diner, it gives me hope but should scare the hell out of the “authorities”. These people distrust the press as much as the government; no cover story will fool them. Word will spread through phones, letters, flyers, and word of mouth. On a positive note only one side is preparing, it will be a short fight.
Americans are unique in this world; when pushed far enough they will strike back. Slavery was a one-time event in our history it will never happen again. We have already fought two wars over taxation without representation. Someone needs to send the clowns in DC a factual history book. Bad move, if the net goes down the legions of “right wing extremists” might decide the war has started and start offing politicians and people stupid enough to still have obama stickers on their cars. Naturally, I would never encourage it but I am a pattern analysis kind of guy and I see signs many have had it. Gun and ammo sales are a key indicator. All you need do is listen to the breakfast crowds at a local diner, it gives me hope but should scare the hell out of the “authorities”. These people distrust the press as much as the government; no cover story will fool them. Word will spread through phones, letters, flyers, and word of mouth. On a positive note only one side is preparing, it will be a short fight.
The ruling elite will fall faster than obamas reputation.
22 April, 2009 at 12:49 am
“Our enemies are real. They are sophisticated, they are determined and they will not rest.”
Who are these enemies? Care to name them? Born in
America, or imports from elsewhere? Horse, stable
door?
22 April, 2009 at 6:58 am
I would like to ask Sen. Jay Rockefeller, and those who support this nonsense, who is going to protect us from those in Congress who wish to take away our freedoms?
22 April, 2009 at 9:19 am
MRE’s in every pantry, APC in every driveway, and a politician or unrepentant bureaucrat hanging from every telephone pole.
I THINK that’s what Hoover may have meant…
22 April, 2009 at 4:38 pm
I’d get a CB radio too, it’s easy to monitor but harder to shut down then a cell phone network that relies on satellites, something we know they have thought about.
If they really were worried about net security they would only be going after sites that have a government or financial function. Blogs, news sites, and entertainment sites have nothing to do with national security. And if someone can put classified information onto their personal web site the government has bigger problems than net security. Sounds more like that want the ability to have a total information blackout rather than the claim they are just worried about net security. Any law this vague is ripe for abuse, and that’s usually the point of making them vague.
23 April, 2009 at 5:34 am
Rockefeller: CFR Sodomite
Snowe: CFR Whore
Nelson: CFR Catamite
The Freemasons at the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith kindly provide “Law” Enforcement Officers with clues on spotting dangerous “extremists”. Unfortunately, they failed to let cops know how to spot Freemasons — their secret handshakes and garbled Hebraisms and occult incantations and such-like. As a public service, I’ve decided to publish these helpful suggestions, with my comments in square brackets.
Officer Safety and Extremists: An Overview for Law Enforcement Officers
The focus of this officer safety overview is primarily on the dangers posed by those groups and individuals that are often called “right-wing” extremists, specifically members of hate groups or anti-government groups.
Even if members of hate groups are less common than spouse abusers, officers will eventually encounter them. Extremist criminals pose all the same risks to officer safety as other criminals. However, because of their beliefs, extremist criminals also pose additional risks and concerns.
Extremists who commit criminal acts may be lazy, careless, stupid, or cowardly. Yet because their ideology motivates them differently than more common motives such as greed or anger may motivate typical criminals, police officers cannot afford to assume that extremist criminals they encounter are going to act or react in familiar ways.
Extremist criminals are often very angry; in fact, it is their anger—against the government, people who are different from them, creditors, spouses or relatives—which may attract them to extreme ideologies in the first place.
…
Members of many fringe movements are susceptible to belief in one or more conspiracy theories. Many such theories describe shadowy, behind-the-scenes figures secretly manipulating and ruling the entire world.
The most common conspiracy theory among anti-government movements such as the militia and “sovereign citizen” movements is the New World Order conspiracy, which involves an imminent takeover of the U.S. by the United Nations in order to establish a socialist, authoritarian, one-world government.
Other popular conspiracy theories are antimasonic, targeting Freemasonry. Many extremists mix and match among these differing theories.
Many extremists adhere to ideologies so anti-government in nature that they insist that they have “constitutional” or “God-given” rights to do virtually anything without any interference from the government. When the government does try to interfere, anti-government extremists can become extraordinarily hostile.
…
The “Ruby Ridge” Factor
The well-known standoffs at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco, Texas, in 1993 significantly agitated and galvanized the extreme right-wing in the United States. Some extremists have expressed a desire for another such event to re-energize the extreme right. Consequently, there is a danger during any standoff or confrontation, perhaps even those not involving extremists, that one or more extremists on the outside might attempt to precipitate “another Ruby Ridge.”
…
Extremist Identifiers
Perceptive officers may often be able to detect visual and verbal clues that help them recognize that the person with whom they are dealing may adhere to an extreme ideology. Visible extremist identifiers are often observed on motor vehicles and may be noticed at a person’s residence as well. Verbal identifiers may present themselves during conversations with such persons.
Vehicular Identifiers: Vehicles belonging to extremists often display clues as to the ideological convictions of their owners or drivers.
Bogus license plates or driver’s licenses: Homemade plates range from crude cardboard plates sporting terms such as “Militia” or “UCC1-207″ to realistic looking metal plates with fictitious countries on them such as “Washitaw Nation” or “British West Indies.” An identifier that sometimes appears on driver’s licenses is the use of strange phrases or abbreviations following someone’s signature. Common terms used in this way include “UCC1-207″ and “TDC” (the former indicates that they are not giving up their rights by signing; the latter indicates that they have signed under “threat, duress, or coercion”). Similarly, the complete absence of plates, license and registration might also be a sign.
They might also have offensive or simply very unusual bumper stickers, such as “Americans Don’t Wear U.N. Blue.”
Any drastic and odd modification to a vehicle, especially in order to express some political view, ought to be a warning sign.
Some extremists display “No Trespassing” signs on their property that are noticeably different from normal “No Trespassing” signs: they are directed specifically at law enforcement officers or government agents. Sometimes these notices are homemade, but several places sell manufactured versions of these signs.
Unusual banners or flags: Extremists may display a sign with a red line through a United Nations logo or an upside down American flag.
Signs of “fortification”: Some extremists may reinforce walls, store weapons in every room of a house, or in other ways prepare for some sort of violent conflict. Boarded up windows in an occupied house, slits that could be used to fire weapons through, cleared “fields of fire,” metal plating on walls—these are all possible signs of homemade fortifications.
Unusual references to Bible/Constitution: Many anti-government extremists have developed elaborate religious or political justifications for why they can ignore traffic laws and regulations. A person without a valid driver’s license or registration who gives unusual Biblical or Constitutional rationalizations for his or her actions, such as “this Bible is my driver’s license,” may be identifying themselves with verbal clues.
Use of strange/pseudolegal language [such as that used by the US Supreme Court or Barack Obama]: Members of extreme anti-government groups believe in a plethora of unusual pseudolegal theories.
…
When an extremist spouts outlandish theories or makes outrageous statements, it is entirely natural to try to argue against those views. However, this is almost invariably counterproductive, as there is little chance that the extremist will change his or her mind, and a much greater chance of raising the agitation level of that person.
…
Sometimes an officer may spot an opportunity to distract an extremist or derail their train of thought.
…
If law enforcement officers are to uphold their oath to “protect and serve,” they must be able to protect themselves as well.
http://brianakira.wordpress.com/2009/04/23/adl-how-to-spot-right-wing-lunatics/
23 April, 2009 at 7:10 am
CavMom,
I’d kind of like to think of it as “who’s going to protect those in Congress who seek to abolish our freedoms?”
There WILL be a straw that breaks the camel’s back soon, I’d count on it; the ammo shortage, more and more legislation aimed at law-abiding citizens rather than criminals, the general smug tone and attitude of “mainstream media” tells me a breaking point is soon to arrive.