printLET US WORRY ABOUT OUR OWN TYRANTS, SHALL WE? The American cognoscenti pompously carries forth about the individual rights of people in blighted and benighted spots like Egypt, Tunisia and China. It’s as though we in the US do not live under a massive, ever-accreting, highly sophisticated Managerial State; are not regulated to the hilt; are not stripped and groped when we travel abroad and across stateliness (http://www.ilanamercer.com/phprunner/public_article_list_view.php?editid1=575); do not sit in jail for decades on violating information socialism laws (http://www.ilanamercer.com/phprunner/public_article_list_view.php?editid1=576), and on ingesting an unapproved substance (http://www.ilanamercer.com/phprunner/public_article_list_view.php?editid1=308).
‘Get some perspective!
While pundits and politicians pontificate about the obvious need for liberty in Egypt, our legislators have decided to refine Hosni Mubarak’s methods and lunge for more of their pliant peoples’ liberties. It’s all very democratic, you know (which is why “democracy is for the dogs” http://www.ilanamercer.com/phprunner/public_article_list_view.php?editid1=333).
The brain infarct is that of Republican Sen. Susan Collins. Via WIRED:
Legislation granting the president internet-killing powers is to be re-introduced soon to a Senate committee, the proposal’s chief sponsor told Wired.com on Friday.
The resurgence of the so-called “kill switch” legislation came the same day Egyptians faced an internet blackout designed to counter massive demonstrations in that country.
The bill, which has bipartisan support, is being floated by Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican ranking member on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The proposed legislation, which Collins said would not give the president the same power Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak is exercising to quell dissent, sailed through the Homeland Security Committee in December but expired with the new Congress weeks later.
The bill is designed to protect against “significant” cyber threats before they cause damage, Collins said.
“My legislation would provide a mechanism for the government to work with the private sector in the event of a true cyber emergency,” Collins said in an e-mail Friday. “It would give our nation the best tools available to swiftly respond to a significant threat.”
Ilana,
This statement “My legislation would provide a mechanism for the government to work with the private sector in the event of a true cyber emergency,”
Needs to be combined with the old neo-con mantra, “be on the lookout for crises for crises can be opportunities.”
Why do we even pretend to a two party system? Maybe these federal politicians should be required to sit together at all future congressional gatherings. Afterall, if stuff like this really does have “bipartisan support” who needs democrats on one side and republicans on the other?
“My legislation would provide a mechanism for the government to work with the private sector in the event of a true cyber emergency,” Please define “Cyber emergency.”
This is how TARP got passed – the country was going to fall and the world was going to come to an end if Bernanke and Paulson weren’t allowed to plunder the Treasury immediately. And don’t ask for any details or oversight because we ain’t going to give it to you. We see how well all that worked out. There is no need for a kill switch on the Internet other than to break the ability of us peasants to stay informed about the crap raining down on our heads from Washington.
DANGER LURKS EVERYWHERE! I was traveling with a co-worker to Atlanta and they were emphasizing the ORANGE ALERT at Dulles and Atlanta Airport on loudspeakers. I was tempted to just start hugging people at random and screaming eeeeek – save us from the terrorists!!!
This paranoid hooey is what passes for “moderation” in the USA.
“Democracy is for the dogs” – well said. If any conceivable “government” adhered to the moral principle of not stealing, there would be very few decisions possible (or room for any legislation).
Taking the concept of theft to it’s logical conclusion reveals that not only are taxes theft, but also regulation because it deprives people of the use of their rightfully-owned property (and of their time).
So “democratic”, “representative”, or “monarchical” are all meaningless points: the “leader” could not make any MORAL decision that would impact the people in any way. Their authority would be limited to declaring the state bird.