Skip to main content

Lieberman's S.3480 bill sounds so paternal and safe: Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010.  Our Daily Cup of Joe wants to free our "cybercommunity" of "cyberterrorists" by giving our President a "kill switch" to shut down the internet in the name of "cybersecurity" and "cyberdefense."

Listen to this US Senate link yourself and hear Senator Collins hair-on-fire warning,  "We cannot wait for a cyber9/11!," and Senator Lieberman's worries about "cyberwarriors," "cyberspies," "cyberbandits," and "cybercriminals."

LIEBERMAN, COLLINS, CARPER UNVEIL MAJOR CYBERSECURITY BILL TO MODERNIZE, STRENGTHEN, AND COORDINATE CYBER DEFENSES

"Cyberparanoid" Joe accused Ned Lamont's campaign of "cyberattacking" his wonky website and called in the FBI and MSM, which broadcast his conspiracy theory (CT) all over the state of Connecticut (CT) on the day of the Democratic primary for US Senate.  

Although the FBI informed Lieberman and the Connecticut Attorney General in October, 2006 that no one hacked joe2006.com, this information wasn't imparted to the general public until well after the general election.

In the following clip, Lieberman blames the internet for his loss to Ned Lamont in the 2006 Democratic Senate primary, Lieberman complained to law enforcement that his website was hacked by "devious anti-Lieberman forces," Lieberman called the Connecticut Democratic Party Chair to ask the Lamont campaign to call off his "cyberallies," ABC Jack Tapper reported that the hacking incident was symbolic of the "tornado of anti-war liberal Internet writers, called bloggers, that Lieberman faced" followed by a clip of the DailyKos logo and [gasp] that Lamont "even put one blogger from the popular DailyKos website in a campaign ad!," CNN dutifully reported Lieberman's false accusation that Lamont's campaign hacked his website the day before the primary, and Lieberman refuted a DailyKos diary, CT-Sen: Why Lieberman's site is down, by kos, claiming the diary accused them of not paying their bills, but what kos actually said was:  

They are paying $15/month for hosting at a place called MyHostCamp, with a bandwidth limit of 10GB. MyHostCamp is currently down, along with all their clients.

Here's the deal -- you get what you pay for. My hosting bill is now over $7K per month. A smaller site doesn't need that much bandwidth, but if you're paying $15 because your $12 million campaign is too freakin' cheap to pay for quality hosting, then don't go blaming your opponent when your shitty service goes out.

Media that reported Lieberman's hacking charge against Lamont supporters have yet to report FBI found "no evidence of (an) attack", MediaMatters for America, April 29, 2008.

Despite having reported the August 2006 allegation by Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman's re-election campaign that supporters of Ned Lamont, then his rival in the Democratic Senate primary, had "hacked" Lieberman's campaign website, numerous media outlets -- including ABC, CNN, and CBS -- have yet to report that an FBI investigation reportedly concluded before the November 2006 general election that there was "no evidence of (an) attack."

On the August 9, 2006, edition of ABC's Good Morning America, senior national correspondent Jake Tapper reported: "Lieberman's campaign complained to law enforcement that its website was hacked yesterday by devious anti-Lieberman forces. Lamont said he knew nothing about the hacking. But the incident was symbolic of the tornado of anti-war liberal Internet writers, called bloggers, that Lieberman faced."

(I emphasized in bold: tornado of anti-war liberal Internet writers, called bloggers, that Lieberman faced.)

Remember the Lieberman "hack attack"?, Salon, War Room, April 9, 2008.

A federal investigation has concluded that U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman's 2006 re-election campaign was to blame for the crash of its Web site the day before Connecticut's heated Aug. 8 Democratic primary.

The FBI office in New Haven found no evidence supporting the Lieberman campaign's allegations that supporters of primary challenger Ned Lamont of Greenwich were to blame for the Web site crash.

Lieberman, who was fighting for his political life against the anti-Iraq war candidate Lamont, implied that joe2006.com was hacked by Lamont supporters.

"The server that hosted the joe2006.com Web site failed because it was overutilized and misconfigured. There was no evidence of (an) attack," according to the e-mail.

Media that reported Lieberman's hacking charge against Lamont supporters have yet to report FBI found "no evidence of (an) attack",  MediaMatters for America, April 29, 2008.

According to an April 22, 2008, Advocate article, the office of state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said it "never saw or read the [October 25, 2006] FBI e-mail until its contents were reported by The Advocate" on April 9.

[snip]

Thomas Carson, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney, said in a statement that the office updated the Lieberman campaign and Blumenthal on the investigation in late October 2006.

If you believe that Joe Lieberman only has our best interest at heart, then don't worry about Joe's "kill-switch" bill.  

If you believe that politicians and government agencies never abuse their power and never suppress information from voters that exonerate anti-war candidates they falsely accused of a cybercrime, then don't worry about Joe's "kill-switch" bill.

If you believe that politicians would never shut down a site simply because he or she couldn't control information, then don't worry about Joe's "kill-switch" bill.

If you believe that Joe Lieberman would never promote a bill that would diminish our freedom to write and read what we please on line, then don't worry about Joe's "kill-switch" bill.

If you believe that Joe would only shut down the internet for a real cybemergency - not a hoax, then don't worry about Joe's "kill-switch" bill.

If you believe that Joe only means to silence the terrorists, not a tornado of anti-war liberal Internet writers, called bloggers, then don't worry about Joe's "kill-switch" bill.

But if you don't trust Joe Lieberman, who didn't do the honorable thing and inform the media that he was wrong to accuse Lamont's campaign of hacking his joe2006.com website when the FBI informed him in October, 2006 of the real reason his site crashed, then please, please call your Congressman and Sentators to ask them to vote against S.3480: Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010

US Capitol Switchboard Toll-free Numbers

1-866-220-0044
1-877-851-6437
1-800-833-6354
1-888-355-3588
1-866-808-0065
1-877-762-8762
1-800-862-5530

Originally posted to Cindy Casella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 08:46 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  IMO no (3+ / 0-)
    Dkos doesn't tend to do things that actually threaten national security. Wikileaks, on the other hand......

    I agree, this kill switch is a bad idea.

    •  The bill is a shield, not a sword. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mll, QuestionAuthority

      It would cover infrastructure - like stock exchanges and energy networks - rather than sites the state doesn't like.

    •  So far, Wikileaks has published a video that we (5+ / 0-)

      need to see, "Collateral Murder."

      So far, Wikileaks has acted as a hero to our democracy by letting us see the truth of the extent of the war crimes committed against innocent people in all of our names and with our tax dollars.

      The real enemy to our national security is the loss of our free press.  We have been fed yellowcake and mushroom clouds to start illegal wars.  The horror of these wars is hidden from our citizens.

      Lieberman is one of the biggest warmongers of all, and he and the war machine have been attacking the internet, because many of us have realized that the MSM has been reporting their lies, and have turned to the internet to read the truth.

      It's the loss of prestige and respect for the US due to the extreme cruelty we espouse in our foreign escapades that is creating national security issues, and the more our citizens realize that the better for our country to regain its stature as a beloved nation, not as an aggressor that kills photographers and guests at weddings.

      Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

      by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:19:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sorry I don't understand (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    burrow owl, mll, high uintas

    What is your evidence for Leiberman targeting DKos?

    You posit a question then proceed to breathlessly not answer it.

    I am on the same side as you regarding this but this treatment doesn't help one bit.

    The Teabaggers are the GOP base

    by stevej on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 08:55:13 AM PDT

    •  Lieberman lied about kos's diary and the MSM (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nicolemm, esquimaux, orangecurtainlib

      depicted bloggers in a negative light and as a threat.  MSM depicted DailyKos in particular as something ominous.

      Lieberman blamed the internet for losing the Democratic Primary to Lamont.

      I'm concerned that Lieberman's bill could regulate the internet to make it difficult to blog, not only on the DailyKos, but on other websites as well.  They could censor the internet, take down webpages, and add costs to make it difficult to afford websites such as DailyKos.

      The MSM and Lieberman are clearly at war with bloggers, because they can no longer control information (propagandize) at will.

      Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

      by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:05:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  However apart from the fact (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        burrow owl, bnasley

        that Lieberman doesn't like dKos, you offer zero in the way of evidence that the bill in question would or could be used to target left-wing sites.  

        "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

        by lgmcp on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:07:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Between the lines (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          nicolemm, CIndyCasella

          "This Bill is targeting bloggers the government/GOP does not approve of."

          Joe Lieberman will never say that explicitly. Just like the conservatives never explicitly stated that that they were going to kill all social programs by appointing incompetents and underfunding to the point of stagnation.

          Norquist is the only conservative that is so outspoken. Someone has to keep the aim in sight.

          •  Um, no (0+ / 0-)

            IT risk management is about things like encryption and firewalls.  Not about content on blogs.  

            "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

            by lgmcp on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:54:14 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  If the government wraps up a site with enough red (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              nicolemm

              tape and regulation that takes a lot of man hours to fill out, the website could find that they can no longer afford to be on line.

              We know that Lieberman tried to give Bush the green light to start a war in Iran with his bogus Kyl Lieberman amendment, which was supposed to be benign, too.

              You should read about Lieberman's antics.  Anything this man does should be viewed with skepticism.  

              This bill is not all sweetness and light.

              Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

              by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 10:18:49 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The fact that Lieberman is a douche (0+ / 0-)

                still doesn't mean there's anything in this bill that would affect individual sites.  Mostly it looks to me like a way to generate more blizzards of paper inside federal agencies as they scramble to document that they've made a plan to make a plan.    

                "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

                by lgmcp on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 10:23:18 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Why does it have a "Kill Switch"? (0+ / 0-)

          Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

          by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:53:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A kill switch, were it to come about, (0+ / 0-)

            would hardly be well-suited to selective targeting.  Such abuses might someday occur, but not by means of a blanket emergency shut-off.  

            If I turn off the main electric breaker to my house, it disables ALL the power to ALL the appliances.  Not just to the Democratic lightbulbs.  

            "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

            by lgmcp on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 10:01:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  After Pat Tillman died, they cut internet and (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              nicolemm

              phone lines so that the real story could not get out.

              We know now how the Army covered up who killed him and even burned his uniform, which was against regulations.

              Come now, haven't we seen enough of what our country is doing to thwart truth and information reaching the American people to naively trust Lieberman's cyberbill?

              Do you trust turncoat Lieberman?  

              Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

              by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 10:22:36 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  The CIA, nukes, FAA, etc. are air-gapped from (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          nicolemm

          internet, so not under threat of cyber attack.  The banking systems, etc., just need to get their own firewalls in order, and there is no reason the government should stick its nose into ALL websites.

          These warmongers didn't try hard to regulate the oil industry or Wall Street, and we've seen the disasters caused by their neglect, but the internet, which tells the truth about their shenanigans, unlike the fawning MSM, is priority one to wrap in a blizzard of red tape?

          Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

          by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 11:05:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Watch the clip, and you will see how angry (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nicolemm, orangecurtainlib

      Lieberman was at bloggers, DailyKos in particular.

      Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

      by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:07:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Lieberman's utter idiocy about imaginary hacks (3+ / 0-)

    of his campaign site notwithstanding ... the Internet IS an incredibly critical element of modern life, and it would be insane not to make security contingency plans around it.  

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 08:58:02 AM PDT

    •  I'm a little confused about the sensibility of (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chidmf, CIndyCasella, PhilJD

      a "kill switch." What is anyone afraid of? Pooties pushed to everyone's computer desktop?

      The whole idea seems nonsensical . . . like a switch to turn off all of the nations roadways or electricity or something. Under what scenario would it ever be remotely necessary to shut down the internet?

      •  The sensibility is to destroy the enemy's (0+ / 0-)

        ability to communicate.

        Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

        by k9disc on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:03:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, then it makes just as much sense to vacate (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          k9disc

          the country of food, water, and oxygen to destroy the enemy's ability to eat and breath.

          But I'm a CTer, so those plans probably already exist somewhere in the Pentagon.

          •  The idea is that important systems - say, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mll

            the tubes controlling a nuclear plan - should have a plan in place to continue functioning in the event of a cyberattack.

            •  Wouldn't those tubes be better off existing on (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Nespolo, CIndyCasella

              their own network?

              National Security networks should be closed systems.

              I'd imagine this to be the case, and if not, then perhaps that should be LIEberman's beef.

              Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

              by k9disc on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:19:40 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Nukes on the internet? You call me fanciful? (0+ / 0-)

              The Myth of Cyberterrorism: There are many ways terrorists can kill you--computers aren't one of them., by Josh Green, Washington Monthly

              Take nuclear weapons. The biggest fallacy about their vulnerability, promoted in action thrillers like WarGames, is that they're designed for remote operation. "[The movie] is premised on the assumption that there's a modem bank hanging on the side of the computer that controls the missiles," says Martin Libicki, a defense analyst at the RAND Corporation. "I assure you, there isn't." Rather, nuclear weapons and other sensitive military systems enjoy the most basic form of Internet security: they're "air-gapped," meaning that they're not physically connected to the Internet and are therefore inaccessible to outside hackers. (Nuclear weapons also contain "permissive action links," mechanisms to prevent weapons from being armed without inputting codes carried by the president.) A retired military official was somewhat indignant at the mere suggestion: "As a general principle, we've been looking at this thing for 20 years. What cave have you been living in if you haven't considered this [threat]?"

              Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

              by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 10:43:34 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  No one's proposed a kill switch. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chrississippi, mll, lgmcp

        The argument is that the bill provides authority that is open-ended enough such that a future, devious president could order sites it deems "critical infrastructure" to be shut down.

        •  I should have read the links . . . (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          burrow owl, lgmcp

          I wrongly assumed the diarist had a point. My bad.

          •  There are reasonable criticisms of the bill (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            chrississippi, nicolemm, lgmcp

            (if it's not closely tailored and doesn't provide checks of the executive branch, it could be misued); the diarist's scenario is a bit fanciful. (to put it mildly)

            •  Read this. How are you an expert on this bill? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              nicolemm, esquimaux

              http://www.geekosystem.com/...

              Bill S.3480, or the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act (PCNAA), has been dubbed the Internet "kill switch." According to the legislation, in the case of national emergencies, any private company that relies on the U.S. "information infrastructure" would be forced to comply with any orders (e.g. encrypt data, install a patch, or block web traffic) given by the president via the National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications (NCCC), a proposed agency that would be created under the Department of Homeland Security. I guess American freedom only goes so far!

              the bill would give a newly-formed National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications the authority to monitor the "security status" of private websites, ISPs and other net-related business within the U.S. as well as critical internet components in other countries. Companies would be required to take part in "information sharing" with the government and certify to the NCCC that they have implemented approved security measures. Furthermore, any company that "relies on" the internet, telephone system or any other part of the U.S. "information infrastructure" would also be "subject to command" by the NCCC under the proposed new law.

              Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

              by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 10:11:38 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Lieberman doesn't get the net (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nicolemm

    Hes too old, out of touch and too clueless to figure out how it all works.

    •  That describes 95% of congress (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rogneid, Nespolo

      I bet if you took a poll a majority of Senators would have no idea how to use a computer.

      How sad is that?

      I hated Glenn Beck before it was cool.

      by ChrisFromMaine on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:21:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "It's a series of tubes" (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Rogneid, Nespolo, CIndyCasella

        "Ten movies streaming across that, that Internet, and what happens to your own personal Internet? I just the other day got...an Internet was sent by my staff at 10 o'clock in the morning on Friday. I got it yesterday [Tuesday]. Why? Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the Internet commercially.
        [...] They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the Internet. And again, the Internet is not something that you just dump something on. It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material." - Ted Stevens - describing the Internet in the context of network neutrality. On June 28, 2006,

        You might as well fall flat on your face as lean over too far backward - James Thurber

        by orangecurtainlib on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:43:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Wikileaks (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nicolemm, esquimaux

    This is more a target of Wikileaks than anything else, but will, of course, be used as a blanket "kill any discussion the Republicans don't like" button when needed.

    But yeah, think about this in a different light.  Lieberman wants the ability to completely blanket censor anything he wants.  The same Lieberman who gives "Silver Sewer" awards to shows he doesn't like then admits he's never watched them before.

    If this was offline, this would mean the government would have the right to, for example, tell all newspapers in the country they are legally prohibited from discussing, say, the war.  Or the latest Republican scandal.  Or publishing any criticism of Israel.

    If you don't like it, some very nice men in suits will be happy to escort you off your property, cut power, and lock up the building until you change your mind.

    Wikileaks would be offline in SECONDS.  DailyKos et all would be offline hours later.  Ned Lamont's website within days.  Remember the Do Not Fly List?  Yeah.  Imagine that, only for websites.  "Oh, we have no idea why MoveOn's homepage was set to be a Terrorist organization.  We'll let it back online in 3-4 weeks, after an investigation.

    Oh, and if you don't like it, and send Lieberman an email saying so?  Congratulations, you're a Cyberstalker, aka a Cyberterrorist, and it's suddenly illegal for ISPs to let you online.

    Isn't life fun?

    •  No, not at all. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nicolemm

      If this was offline, this would mean the government would have the right to, for example, tell all newspapers in the country they are legally prohibited from discussing, say, the war.

      It would be like the government demanding that a military factory have adequate security to protect the permiter and prevent infilitration.

  •  Here's the actual content (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    burrow owl, nicolemm, mll, chidmf

    of the proposed legislation:

    Key elements of the legislation include:

    1. Creation of an Office of Cyberspace Policy in the Executive Office of the President run by a Senate-confirmed Director, who will advise the President on all cybersecurity matters. The Director will lead and harmonize federal efforts to secure cyberspace and will develop a national strategy that incorporates all elements of cyberspace policy, including military, law enforcement, intelligence, and diplomatic.  The Director will oversee all related federal cyberspace activities to ensure efficiency and coordination.
    1. Creation of a National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications (NCCC) at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to elevate and strengthen the Department’s cyber security capabilities and authorities. The Director will regularly advise the President on efforts to secure federal networks.  The NCCC will be led by a Senate-confirmed Director, who will report to the Secretary. The NCCC will include the United States Computer Emergency Response Team (US-CERT), and will lead federal efforts to protect public and private sector cyber and communications networks.
    1. Updates the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) to modernize federal agencies practices of protecting their internal networks and systems. With strong leadership from DHS, these reforms will allow agencies to move away from the system of after-the-fact paperwork compliance to real-time monitoring to secure critical systems.
    1. Requiring the NCCC to work with the private sector to establish risk-based security requirements that strengthen cyber security for the nation’s most critical infrastructure that, if disrupted, would result in a national or regional catastrophe.
    1. Requiring covered critical infrastructure to report significant breaches to the NCCC to ensure the federal government has a complete picture of the security of these sensitive networks.  The NCCC must share information, including threat analysis, with owners and operators regarding risks to their networks. The Act will provide specified liability protections to owners/operators that comply with the new risk-based security requirements.Creation of a responsible framework, developed in coordination with the private sector, for the President to authorize emergency measures to protect the nation’s most critical infrastructure if a cyber vulnerability is being exploited or is about to be exploited. The President must notify Congress in advance before exercising these emergency powers. Any emergency measures imposed must be the least disruptive necessary to respond to the threat and will expire after 30 days unless the President extends them.  The bill authorizes no new surveillance authorities and does not authorize the government to "take over" private networks.
    1. Development of a comprehensive supply chain risk management strategy to address risks and threats to the information technology products and services the federal government relies upon. This strategy will allow agencies to make informed decisions when purchasing IT products and services.
    1. Requiring the Office of Personnel Management to reform the way cyber security personnel are recruited, hired, and trained to ensure that the federal government has the talent necessary to lead the national cyber security effort and protect its own networks.

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:10:21 AM PDT

  •  If Lieberman could he would (3+ / 0-)

    shut down this site and the others like it, and then throw us all in jail.

    And when Joe Lieberman says "don't worry".. that's when we all NEED to worry.

    I hated Glenn Beck before it was cool.

    by ChrisFromMaine on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 09:20:29 AM PDT

  •  Myth debunked here (0+ / 0-)

    by TPM.

    •  Cyberterrorism Myth debunked here (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nicolemm, esquimaux

      Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

      by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 10:39:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So? The point is your diary title is a myth. (0+ / 0-)

        There is no "Lieberman's internet 'kill switch.'": It doesn't exist.

        •  No. The cyberterrorists are coming to get us is (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          nicolemm

          a myth based on which Joe Lieberman is trying to pass a bill that gives the government too much control over the internet.  

          The bill does have a "kill switch," which gives a President way too much power to shut down the internet or to tell a website what it must do during a cybercrisis, which probably will never happen.

          As we know, in the past, President Bush lied us into a war and claimed that Saddam Hussein was coming to get us.  He succeeded in fooling the public, because the MSM is now owned in large part by a few entities, which make money from war, and the MSM broadcast Bush's & Cheney's lies and propaganda that made the American people so afraid that they went along with Bush's war against Iraq.

          Now, many people go on the internet and read news from foreign newspapers and other sources that actually tell the truth.  This scares warmongers like Joe Lieberman, who wants us to go to war with Iran very badly.  He sponsored the Kyl Lieberman amendment so that Bush could go to war with Iran, by declaring Iranian forces as terrorists.  

          Thus, my comment was explaining that this bill is not all sweetness and light, but based on a myth.  It's an attack against our freedom to read whatever source we want to read on the internet to get our news.

          If you read my diary and watch the video, you will see how angry Lieberman was that, despite the fact that the MSM in Connecticut was spewing news in favor of Lieberman, many people were going to vote for Lamont, because they read the internet, not the lies put out on CNN, ABC, NBC, New York Times, Clearwater Radio, etc.  

          Lieberman's MSM pals broadcast his lies about Lamont hacking into his website over and over and over again, but when the FBI cleared Lamont, the MSM didn't inform the public.  

          Clearly, we are not free if our press is in cahoots with people as evil as Lieberman, who want us to go to war for no good reason, but based on lies.

          Thomas Jefferson said that if he had to choose between a representative form of government or a free press, he would choose a free press.

          We know now why he would make that choice.  We now have a representative form of government, but our press is bought and paid for by special interests.  We have Wall Street Ponzi schemes that have decimated people's life savings and destroyed our economy thanks to their lobbyists telling their puppets in Washington to remove regulations, we have an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, thanks to BP lobbyists succeeding in evading regulations and bribing government officials, and we have wars based on lobbyists telling our Congress critters to vote for these wars or else they will sic their MSM, which they control, on them 24/7, calling them soft on "terrorism," etc.

          Our country is in shambles.

          You see, Lieberman isn't a very nice  or honest man.  He is a warmonger, and if he wants to control the internet, it's not a good thing.

          I hope you can understand now what I was trying to say.

          Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

          by CIndyCasella on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 05:54:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, the bill does not (0+ / 0-)

            have a kill switch. It actually limits powers the president already has under existing law. Read the TPM article:

            Joe Lieberman and the Myth of the Internet Kill Switch.

            In other words, as Phillips told us, the President already has an Internet kill switch: he can't shut off a website, but he can shut off any and all wireless or wired Internet access... The "kill switch," though, won't be coming to the underside of the President's desk anytime soon, though. In fact, Lieberman's people seem to be correct: their bill actually just takes it away.

            •  Watch Lieberman talk about how China can (0+ / 0-)

              disconnect parts of the internet during times of war and how we need that capability, too.

              That's scary talk.  Not only frightening, but unAmerican.  I don't use that phrase lightly, but Lieberman is a turncoat to more than just the Democratic Party, but to our nation's very core.

              Considereing how Lieberman and the warmongers consider us in a perpetual state of war, they can disable websites that tell us the truth about the atrocities committed in our names.

              There's a reason that during these illegal wars, only embedded reporters are allowed and they don't do body counts.

              Public opinion.

              There's a reason why the MSM doesn't cover these wars hardly at all.

              Public opinion.

              There's a reason why the IDF smashed cameras and jammed broadcasting during the raid on the Mavi Marmara.

              Public opinion.

              There's a reason why Joe Lieberman, who is a warmonger, wants to pass this sneaky bill.

              To sway public opinion without the pesky internet telling the truth getting in the way.

              There's a lot of information on the internet which could start investigations going which would make things awfully difficult for Lieberman and his friends.

              Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

              by CIndyCasella on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 05:00:03 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Look (0+ / 0-)

                Lieberman's a schmuck. But the bill does not do what you claim it does. There's no internet kill switch in the bill!

                And your response to my pointing that out is to rant about what a bad guy Lieberman is. Well, yeah, he betrayed the Democratic party and supports the neocons and whatnot. He sucks. But that's irrelevant to whether or not there's a kill switch in the bill. There is not.  

                The video does not support your claim. As the TPM article -- which you apparently have not bothered to read -- explains, the president already has the power to shut down the internet in the US in an emergency. The bill actually limits his existing power.

  •  Remember Kyl-Lieberman bill? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nicolemm, CIndyCasella

    Lieberman's been wrong in his hawkish stand for the debacle in Iraq, and tried to push us into war with Iran, too.  Why should we trust him?

  •  Death Panels! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mll

    they're gonna kill Granny Kos.

  •  The right is also afraid of something like this. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nicolemm, CIndyCasella

    At least according to talk radio yesterday, afraid that conservative blogs will be hit by the kill switch.

    As long as they let me keep my access to Hot for Words, I guess that'll be ok. lol!

    Moderation in most things. Except Reactors. IFR forever!

    by billmosby on Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 10:49:06 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site