Moderators: peeker643, swerb, Ziner
by RC » Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:21 pm
by Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Aug 28, 2009 2:15 pm
RC wrote:http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.htmlA bill is being proposed that would give the president emergency control of the internet in case of 'emergency'.Quote from the article above:'The new version would allow 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. 'I don't think this is a good idea at all. Who gets awarded these 'licenses'? What is considered an emergency? My mistrust for the government alarm is seriously going off here.Thoughts?
by RC » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:05 pm
RC wrote:This is a perfect example of how the mainstream media is biased as liberals mainly because if this was the Republicans pushing this the NBCs and CNNs of the world would be going nuts right now.I haven't really heard a peep of an issue about this from them listening to radio all day.
by Mr. MacPhisto » Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:44 am
Cerebral_DownTime wrote: This cracks me up, it really does. The ol' "Liberal Media Bias".....For years people in this country and US citizens overseas (including Soldiers and Aid Workers) had their phones illegally tapped and were spied on without warrants. I didn't hear a peep about it from you. And FTR, i'm against this bill, just like I was against the Patriot Act.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:21 pm
The congressional oversight committees said Thursday that the Americans targeted included military officers in Iraq who called friends and family in the United States.The allegations were made by two former military intercept operators on a television news report Thursday evening.A terrorist surveillance program instituted by the Bush administration allows the intelligence community to monitor phone calls between the United States and overseas without a court order -- as long as one party to the call is a terror suspect.Adrienne Kinne, a former U.S. Army Reserves Arab linguist, told ABC News the NSA was listening to the phone calls of U.S. military officers, journalists and aid workers overseas who were talking about "personal, private things with Americans who are not in any way, shape or form associated with anything to do with terrorism."David Murfee Faulk, a former U.S. Navy Arab linguist, said in the news report that he and his colleagues were listening to the conversations of military officers in Iraq who were talking with their spouses or girlfriends in the United States.According to Faulk, they would often share the contents of some of the more salacious calls stored on their computers, listening to what he called "phone sex" and "pillow talk."Both Kinne and Faulk worked at the NSA listening facility at Fort Gordon, Georgia. They told ABC that when linguists complained to supervisors about eavesdropping on personal conversations, they were ordered to continue transcribing the calls.
Bush added: "Yesterday the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports, after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk."
by RC » Mon Aug 31, 2009 9:53 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:43 pm
RC wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote: This cracks me up, it really does. The ol' "Liberal Media Bias".....For years people in this country and US citizens overseas (including Soldiers and Aid Workers) had their phones illegally tapped and were spied on without warrants. I didn't hear a peep about it from you. And FTR, i'm against this bill, just like I was against the Patriot Act.Well, I wasn't really posting on this board when the whole Patriot Act mess was going on so I can't prove I was against the wiretapping. But I was. I don't like the govt (Repub and/or Dem) controlling communications nor different types of media since we can't trust either group to not abuse their powers.That is why I have a problem with the internet bill that is being proposed.I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the Liberal Media Bias thing.
Return to No Holds Barred
Users browsing this forum: ybot and 2 guests