Question by _______: Is the reason the army wasnt given authority to protect civilian computer networks because Obama wants control?
Who in their right mind would support giving the president the authority to unilaterally shut down private computer networks on a whim??
http://blogs.computerworld.com/14627/obamas_emergency_powers_over_internet_cybersecurity_bill_s_773
Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet. They’re not much happier about a revised version. … CBSNews.com has obtained a copy.
…
The new version allows the president to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “non-governmental” computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for “cybersecurity professionals,” and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.more
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124623073971766069.html
If the idea of the military having to pay protection money to the mob seems silly, imagine what Monty Python could do with last week’s White House decision on security. It announced a new “Cyber Command” to protect information infrastructure, but stipulated that the military is allowed to protect only itself, not the civilian Internet or other key communications networks. When President Barack Obama announced the plan, he stressed that it “will not — I repeat — will not — include monitoring private-sector networks or Internet traffic.” It’s like telling the military if there’s another 9/11 to protect the Pentagon but not the World Trade Center.
The announcement shows that our political system is still ambivalent about how to defend communications networks such as the Internet. We expect privacy, but we know that intrusive techniques are required to protect the system from cyber attacks. How to balance privacy with preventing attacks that would undermine the system altogether?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/13/us/politics/13cyber.html
President Obama has said that the new cyberdefense strategy he unveiled last month will provide protections for personal privacy and civil liberties. But senior Pentagon and military officials say that Mr. Obama’s assurances may be challenging to guarantee in practice, particularly in trying to monitor the thousands of daily attacks on security systems in the United States that have set off a race to develop better cyberweapons.
Much of the new military command’s work is expected to be carried out by the National Security Agency, whose role in intercepting the domestic end of international calls and e-mail messages after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, under secret orders issued by the Bush administration, has already generated intense controversy.
There is simply no way, the officials say, to effectively conduct computer operations without entering networks inside the United States, where the military is prohibited from operating, or traveling electronic paths through countries that are not themselves American targets.
yaya…..”I’d love to see all of you join the rest of us in trying to heal this country that we love so much. ”
I’d love to see the “healing” crowd start thinking about a few things……..
Best answer:
Answer by Todd
Obama wants to TOTAL control of everything we do.
WAKE UP AMERICA.
Add your own answer in the comments!
