Chinese Censorship; Welcome To America

The authority to “kill” the Internet in the event of a national cyber attack came a bit closer to reality when the Senate Committee responsible for such things passed the controversial plan. The plan, if enacted into law, would give Barack Obama (and anyone who succeeds him) the ability to shut down critical networks for up to 120 days without Congressional approval.

There is no indication as to what constitutes a critical network and though this is touted as a way to fight a cyber attack, it is actually a method to allow the government to shut down discourse just as they do in China.

Make no mistake about it, the federal government is trying to put in place the same methods used by China to silence critics. Joe LIE-berman said as much in an interview:

“Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” said Lieberman.

The Senator’s reference to China is a telling revelation of what the cybersecurity agenda is really all about. China’s vice-like grip over its Internet systems has very little to do with “war” and everything to do with silencing all dissent against the state.

Chinese Internet censorship is imposed via a centralized government blacklist of any websites that contain criticism of the state, porn, or any other content deemed unsuitable by the authorities. Every time you attempt to visit a website, you are re-routed through the government firewall, often making for long delays and crippling speeds.

LIE-berman wants the same power for our government that China has and China uses its power to blacklist sites, silence critics, and keep information from being shared. This comparison is no accident because our government wants the same power. They cannot control the people on the Internet who are able to post every gaffe, every misstep, and every action or word that goes contrary to what they say they will do. Politicians are tired of being held accountable and want to be able to censor us.

Why else do this? According to LIE-berman, any president already has the authority to shut down critical wired systems:

The senators rejected the “kill switch” claim, arguing that the President already had authority under the Communications Act to “cause the closing of any facility or station for wire communication” when there is a “state or threat of war”. The Sydney Morning Herald

So if the authority to do what the bill allows already exists, why do they need a new law? Is it because under current law a president must have Congressional approval and the new law would allow him to shut things down for 120 days without such approval? Is it because the real issue here is to censor dissent and the best way to do that is to have the Executive shut things down under the guise of national security rather than have Congress vote to authorize?

Yes, LIE-berman is not being honest. If the authority exists then no new law is needed unless a change is needed that is part of the hidden agenda. If a change to existing law is needed then amend that law but do so without allowing the Executive to shut things down on some claim of national security. It will be abused and any liberal who denies that is full of dung. They claimed the terror alert system was abused for political gain. Certainly, the amount of power granted in this bill would be abused.

And what happens when a faux emergency arises that requires parts of the Internet to be shut down? Do businesses that rely on the Internet just fold up and go bankrupt? Do they get a bailout?

How about if all workers decided to stop working for the same 120 day period that the Internet was shut down?

How about the American public gets permission to shut down the White House or Congress for 120 days without needing approval? That would truly be in the interest of the country and improve our national security.

Barack Obama and his corrupt regime has a REAL national security issue to deal with. Our southern border is being infiltrated by illegals from all over the world. People, drugs, guns, and violence are being brought across our borders and Obama is dithering. While LIE-berman and other morons work on squashing free speech by worrying about some perceived cyber attack, we are actually being attacked and that attack is a true national security concern.

Obama is not willing to address the national security concern on our border until he gets what he wants with immigration reform. This is how the Chicago thug “leads.” He is ignoring our national security in order to get what he wants.

Meanwhile, acres and acres of OUR territory are closed to us as those invading are free to roam around and cause trouble.

Far removed from the border, Congress and the Obama regime are working on bringing Chinese censorship to us in the name of national security.

Here is an idea, instead of pulling the plug on the Internet, how about we pull the plug on the morons in Congress and the White House in 2010 and in 2012?

They are as much of a national security threat as any cyber attack.

And a hell of a lot more annoying.

Others:
Prison Planet
TechWorld

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

2 Responses to “Chinese Censorship; Welcome To America”

  1. Clarence Carson noted in 1967 that modern liberals believed that “freedom” equates to nothing more than freedom of expression plus the vote. Well, today, both those things are under attack — by liberals. Control of the Internet is an integral part of that. Which says something rather pointed about liberals’ attitude toward freedom, doesn’t it?

  2. Blake says:

    I am saddened that Lieberman(and really Graham also) believe that this is necessary, or right.
    Franklin once said that those who would give up any amount of freedom, in order to purchase a modicum of safety, deserved neither.
    Remember- Government works best that works least.