Internet kill switch for the USA

[Broletariat]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/17/internet-kill-switch-woul_n_615923.html



A new Senate bill, sponsored by Senator Joseph Lieberman, proposes to give the president the authority "to seize control of or even shut down portions of the Internet," according to CNET (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20007418-38.html).

The authority granted to the government in the bill, known as the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act (PCNAA), has been likened to an Internet "kill switch."

The bill would require that private companies--such as "broadband providers, search engines, or software firms," CNET (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20007418-38.html) explains--"immediately comply with any emergency measure or action" put in place by the Department of Homeland Security, or else face fines.

It would also see the creation of a new agency within the Department of Homeland Security, the National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications (NCCC). Any private company reliant on "the Internet, the telephone system, or any other component of the U.S. 'information infrastructure'" would be "subject to command" by the NCCC, and some would be required to engage in "information sharing" with the agency, says CBS4 (http://cbs4.com/technology/internet.freedom.regulation.2.1757643.html).

Numerous groups, such as TechAmerica, have criticized (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20007418-38.html) the bill, warning of the "potential for absolute power" and expressing reservations about the "unintended consequences that would result from the legislation's regulatory approach."

Liberman recently defended (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20007851-38.html) the PCNAA, arguing that it was imperative the president had the ability to "say to an electric company or to say to Verizon, in the national interest, 'There's an attack about to come, and I hereby order you to put a patch on this, or put your network down on this part, or stop accepting any incoming from country A.'"

He added that the bill is necessary for it would reduce the liability of companies that may need to resort to extreme measures in an emergency situation. Companies might have to "do things in a normal business sense you'd be hesitant to do but national security requires you to do," Lieberman explained, adding "We protect them from that because the action the government is ordering them to take is in national security or economic interest."

CNET (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20007851-38.html)notes an Internet "kill switch" has been proposed before:
A draft Senate proposal that CNET obtained in August allowed the White House to "declare a cybersecurity emergency," and another from Sens. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) would have explicitly given the government the power to "order the disconnection" of certain networks or Web sites.

[AK]

Don't worry guys. America is a free country. Your rulers love you so. This won't pass.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Don't worry guys. America is a free country. Your rulers love you so. This won't pass.

It won't if the people speak up loud enough & large enough.

[this is an invasion]

It won't if the people speak up loud enough & large enough.

Just like with the war, right?

[Broletariat]

I guess we should all enjoy our time on revleft now before they take it from us :/

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Of course it's all in the name of homeland security. Isn't that the excuse for everything now? Illegal immigration= national security problem, Iraq= national security problem, communism= national security problem, and now internet= national security problem? Can't you just about twist everything into a national security problem? Next thing you know free speech will be a national security problem. Oh wait...

[Proletarian Ultra]

http://www4.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Meet+The+Press+8vnGVMNZWBIl.jpg

DO NOT WORRY HU-MANS - ER ER I MEAN FRIENDLY AMERICAN CITIZENS - YOUR "DEMOCRACY" IS ALIVE AND WELL IN OUR NATION'S CAPITAL.

THANK MECHA-CTHULHU - ER ER I MEAN THE JUDEO-CHRISTIAN GOD - FOR SENSIBLE BEINGS OF THE POLITICAL CENTER LIKE POD SENATOR 42-PRIME LIEBERMAN.

[Tablo]

I hope they don't try to shut down websites for a bunch of lunatics with fringe politics(RevLeft). If that happened then I might just cry. :(

[AK]

I hope they don't try to shut down websites for a bunch of lunatics with fringe politics(RevLeft). If that happened then I might just cry. :(
Any bets they'd keep Stormfront up?

[Broletariat]

Any bets they'd keep Stormfront up?
If they do we should all make accounts there and make it our new home

[Q]

I hope they don't try to shut down websites for a bunch of lunatics with fringe politics(RevLeft). If that happened then I might just cry. :(

We'd simply move back to a server in Germany.

[AK]

If they do we should all make accounts there and make it our new home
It'll be the biggest troll invasion known to fash-kind.

[stella2010]

I hope they don't try to shut down websites for a bunch of lunatics with fringe politics(RevLeft). If that happened then I might just cry

don't cry. you need to be observant

[piet11111]

Of course it's all in the name of homeland security. Isn't that the excuse for everything now? Illegal immigration= national security problem, Iraq= national security problem, communism= national security problem, and now internet= national security problem? Can't you just about twist everything into a national security problem? Next thing you know free speech will be a national security problem. Oh wait...

Satellite images from the oil spill are also classified as a national security issue. :rolleyes:

[Chambered Word]

You guys can all come to Australia. :wub:

Seriously though, this is 1984 shit.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Shouldn't we start coming up with ideas on what to really do if the internet was really brought down & find a different means of communication? Anyone have any ideas?

[Wanted Man]

Well, so much for all the jokes along the lines of, "You get a free internet" or "You will be banned from the internet!"

[Lulznet]

Quit attempting to censor the internet. :blink:

[9]

lol, you guys have some serious delusions of grandeur if you think the US government gives a shit about shutting down revleft - of all places, lol - at the present time. I do think inevitably - assuming that there is serious movement toward a potential international revolutionary situation in the future (which fwiw, I don't see as being guaranteed) - the internet will have an extremely important role in it, whether we like it or not (I'm ambivalent). Obviously, if the bill in question passes, it lays a clearer legal framework in terms of authority for (US) state interference, and any direct implications this may have on communists/leftists are much more hypothetical implications for a future situation in which working class struggle is really intensifying, rather than immediate implications. But tbh, I don't think it means much either way - it just doesn't change anything. I mean, in a situation where the rule of the bourgeoisie is seriously under threat, does anyone really believe the ruling class is going to abide by its own laws and nonsense principles like "freedom of speech" anyway? No, of course it isn't. We have already seen this in the past, with McCarthyism among many other examples. Anyway, there is always the executive order.

[Lulznet]

lol, you guys have some serious delusions of grandeur if you think the US government gives a shit about shutting down revleft - of all places, lol - at the present time. I do think inevitably - assuming that there is a potential international revolutionary situation in the future (which fwiw, I don't see as being guaranteed) - the internet will have an extremely important role in it, whether we like it or not (I'm ambivalent). Obviously, if the bill in question passes, it lays a clearer legal framework in terms of authority for (US) state interference, and any direct implications this may have on communists/leftists are much more hypothetical implications for a future situation in which working class struggle is really intensifying, rather than immediate implications. But tbh, I don't think it means much either way - it just doesn't change anything. I mean, in a situation where the rule of the bourgeoisie is seriously under threat, does anyone really believe the ruling class is going to abide by its own laws and nonsense principles like "freedom of speech" anyway? No, of course it isn't. We have already seen this in the past, with McCarthyism among many other examples. Anyway, there is always the executive order.
Implying shutting down Revleft is the largest thing to worry about.

Censorship of any form on the internet is something to worry about. :(

[9]

Implying shutting down Revleft is the largest thing to worry about.

I'm not sure what this means?



Censorship of any form on the internet is something to worry about. :(Sorry, I'm not really sure what you're saying - would you mind clarifying?

[Lulznet]

I'm not sure what this means?

Sorry, I'm not really sure what you're saying - would you mind clarifying?
I'm saying the internet shouldn't censored and the free flow of data should be respected. :thumbup1:

[9]

I'm saying the internet shouldn't censored and the free flow of data should be respected. :thumbup1:

I certainly agree. But I have no illusions about the probability of this actually happening, with or without the legislation in question.

[Lulznet]

I certainly agree. But I have no illusions about the probability of this actually happening, with or without the legislation in question.

Its already happened in both Australia and China.

Lets not have it happen again. :rolleyes:

[9]

I think you are missing my point. As it stands, it isn't up to us.

[Lulznet]

I think you are missing my point. As it stands, it isn't up to us.
How isn't it up to us to make sure this doesn't happen? Its only not up to us if we don't say anything and make this an important issue which it is a very important issue as it deals with direct censorship of the internet and then direct censorship of other things afterward. :cool:

[AK]

You guys can all come to Australia. :wub:
What, with our internet censorship?

[The Fighting_Crusnik]

How brilliant... the government is in a position where they can give themselves the power to kill the lifestream of communication in the modern world. First, lets hope that this doesn't pass and that if it does, that someone is able to form a solid case against its constitutionality. Secondly, lets hope that if it does pass, we get fair leaders who love freedom and will choose not to use it.... though that may be wishful thinking...:(

[Ravachol]

Of course it's all in the name of homeland security. Isn't that the excuse for everything now? Illegal immigration= national security problem, Iraq= national security problem, communism= national security problem, and now internet= national security problem? Can't you just about twist everything into a national security problem? Next thing you know free speech will be a national security problem. Oh wait...

This is what Giorgio Agamben refers to as the State Of Exception (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Exception_(2005)#State_of_Exception_.2820 05.29)



The state of exception invests one person or government with the power and voice of authority over others extended well beyond where the law has existed in the past.


The increasing profileration of this state of exception can become a permanent de-facto extension of authority without the de-jure justification. The Reichstag Fire decree is such an example where the Weimar Republic was simply put 'on hold'



“The entire Third Reich can be considered a state of exception that lasted twelve years. In this sense, modern totalitarianism can be defined as the establishment, by means of the state of exception, of a legal civil war that allows for the physical elimination not only of political adversaries but of entire categories of citizens who for some reason cannot be integrated into the political system"

[this is an invasion]

How isn't it up to us to make sure this doesn't happen? Its only not up to us if we don't say anything and make this an important issue which it is a very important issue as it deals with direct censorship of the internet and then direct censorship of other things afterward. :cool:

It's not up to us because we don't have any power within bourgeois democracy. They are going to do this if they really want to, regardless of what working people have to say.


Remember that whole "War on Terror" thing? And how the US government invaded Iraq?

Yeah, do you also remember how many people have protested it since the beginning? In case you haven't noticed, they didn't give a shit about people protesting.

[Psy]

Well, so much for all the jokes along the lines of, "You get a free internet" or "You will be banned from the internet!"
We'd simply bring back FidoNet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FidoNet) that used phone lines to form a worldwide network of BBS.

[Chambered Word]

What, with our internet censorship?

It's not very popular here and face it, the American govt. does anything it wants. :(


Its already happened in both Australia and China.

Lets not have it happen again. :rolleyes:

Australia's internet is still uncensored.

[pdcrofts]

This bill is a load of rubbish anyway, the internet was designed specifically to be a communication network that could continue to function even if large sections of it were knocked out (e.g. by nuclear attack). The US gov't must know that, their military helped design the thing.

[The Vegan Marxist]

This bill is a load of rubbish anyway, the internet was designed specifically to be a communication network that could continue to function even if large sections of it were knocked out (e.g. by nuclear attack). The US gov't must know that, their military helped design the thing.

They do know this. The use of fear is a daily weapon by the govenrment & media - for example, Y2K. Fear controls people. Fear is an enemy to the proletarian struggle.