Cyber Security Act of 2009!?

Is that you Stalin?  How is this not edging ever so closely to communism and totalitarian government?  Power grab anyone?

The days of a large unregulated Internet may be coming to an end.  The government, and especially the democrats, will use the latest crisis of the electronic grid hacking, although China and Russia say it did not occur, to implement a new Cyber Security Act that will control and regulate the Internet.  To be quite frank, I have no idea who to believe.  At this point China, Russia and the Democrats could all be working together for all I know!

The latest from Obama and “our” government:

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 Cyber Security Act of 2009, the president would have the authority to shut down Internet traffic to protect national security.

Does Obama have ultimate authority to police the net?  What criteria is necessary to shut down a website or to remove an individual from the net?  Does anybody get the feeling that the latest DHS report conveniently came out before most recent power grab act of 2009?  Why couldn’t Obama use the DHS report to remove any right leaning websites, blogs, individuals etc.?  I don’t care if you are a Democrat or a Republican this is just plain scary!

Again, I have an issue with the hypocrisy that is taking place.  Liberals screamed and cried over the NSA wiretapping for known terrorists and those who had background information that would lead us to believe they had terrorist ties, but this is ok all of the sudden?  The fact that something as large as the Internet may be policed is worse, in my opinion, than wiretapping.  Even if you don’t agree with wiretapping, it’s not like Obama has banned wiretapping and is now only policing the net – he is doing both!  Why are the liberal sheep so easily blinded by the blatant double standards here?

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 cyber security adviser — commonly referred to as the cyber security czar — within the White House to coordinate strategy with a wide range of federal agencies involved.

Oh, wonderful, another czar…

The need for greater cyber security is obvious:

– Canadian researchers recently discovered that computers in 103 countries, including those in facilities such as embassies and news media offices, were infected with software designed to steal network data.

– A Seattle security analyst warned last month that the advancement of digital communication within the electrical grid, as promoted under President Obama’s stimulus plan, would leave the nation’s electrical supply dangerously vulnerable to hackers.

– And on Tuesday the Wall Street Journal reported that computer spies had broken into the Pentagon’s $300 billion Joint Strike Fighter project and had breached the Air Force’s air-traffic-control system.

I have inside information that the electronic grid that was hacked into could easily be taken out with a gun shot – it’s not that big and it’s not that hidden.  I also know for a fact that on black programs that are highly classified, they are not allowed on the net.  You are placed in a pass-coded room that is closed off to everyone else, you are not allowed to bring blackberries, cell phones, cameras etc. into the room where you work, nor are you allowed to have internet access or email access on the computer containing the classified information.  Your personal computer is placed at the front of the room away from classified material if you need to send emails.  So I’m curious how much people actually know about classified information and why is this “classified” information on the Internet in the first place, when defense companies I have worked for in the past, do not allow that to happen?  I’m only curious…

Nonetheless, the 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.”

Isn’t that a shame?  Most of these people in Silicone Valley, like the Googles and Yahoos of the world, voted for Obama.  I think people really have a hard time understanding what big government really means.

The bill would allow the government to create a detailed set of standards for cyber security, as well as take over the process of certifying IT technicians. But many in the technology sector say the government is simply ill-equipped to get involved at the technical level, said Franck Journoud, a policy analyst with the Business Software Alliance.

“Simply put, who has the expertise?” he said. “It’s the industry, not the government. We have a responsibility to increase and improve security. That responsibility cannot be captured in a government standard.”

ROTFLMAO!  Of course the government doesn’t have the expertise, I’m not sure they have the expertise to run a lemonade stand!  We have seen what they have done to our economy, the banking system, the auto industry, the farming industry, and even the Mustang Ranch.

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 cyber security until a later date.

The fact that the Senators who came up with this idea are not answering questions should send up the red flags!

If the United States was to set its own standard for cyber security, they say, it would create a host of logistical challenges for technology companies, virtually all of which operate internationally.

“Any standards have to be set at an international level and be industry led,” said Dale Curtis, a spokesman for the Business Software Alliance. “This industry moves so fast, and government just doesn’t move that fast.”

How true!  But, yet so many people put their trust and faith in government.  They have treated Obama as if he were God-like and the man himself believes his own hype; Pathetic!

Many Silicon Valley executives remain hopeful that the White House’s recommendations will be more industry-friendly, following what Journoud said was a good dialogue with former Bush administration official Melissa Hathaway, who is leading the White House review and is considered a likely candidate for cyber security czar.

Good luck believing that Obama will be industry friendly, he is just as progressive, if not more so, than FDR, who hated the private sector.  And just to remind everyone… Bush was a big government “conservative.”  I have major qualms with him and his big government policies and spending practices, but I respected him for his efforts in the War on Terror.  There are many politicians on both sides of the aisle that merely want the power and control and this latest act proves that it is only going to get worse from here.

It was nice knowing you Freedom of Speech!  Maybe we’ll meet again one day.

Share on Facebook