It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bill Lets Obama Turn Off the Internet

page: 5
39
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   
instead of shutting down the internet, why not use a massive intrusion detection system and when someone does something stupid, send them a transmission control protocol reset packet. and im not understanding what the legal implementations of this is, overall the internet is a publicly accessible network and i guess people could not really regress either way unless someone is suggesting their own pirate internet broadcast point in which would be federally illegal




posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by bloodcircle

Originally posted by mithrawept
I think this is a real threat.

I've been looking at Tor networks. Check out: Tor

If the internet is really shutdown, it could be a way of keeping ATS 'on the air' or forming information cells.



Tor wont help you at all if the rug is pulled out from under you.

You still need internet access to access tor. Meaning, you still need an ISP who has access to more than itself, more than your own country and generally access to the normal internet.

This is getting a bit nutty.





kind of like the faa shutting down the airports during 9/11 took them a year or two just to recoop from what people were saying



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   
but i can see how traveling through a computer could be a threat to national security, i could essentially beam up anyway, all i need is a quarter and a touch tone phone and make a call and at&t routes the call, but if this is all true then why dont they just turn people off, were all a bunch of hosts, routers and networks essentially, im convinced, that people a strange or something, but if george washington new this, and we are just now understanding it then there is a problem.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by black.sunday2099
 

George W Bush and company to be precise.



I have post George Traumatic Syndrome.



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 03:48 AM
link   
They don't have to shut down the internet. They just have to disconnect the U.S. from it. That alone would seem mind boggling to say the least. I would imagine that it would have to be done by having each ISP shut down their service as well as anyone with a connection to the trunk line(s)

So to make it to where they can actually control it somehow the feds need to have control of all of that. And if they are talking about it where we can hear it then they have been talking about it for a long time where we couldn't. They would have to have the ability to gain access to any and all services in the U.S.

This makes me wonder. Remember the internet was a military plaything that got away from them in the first place. Hearing things like this make me wonder just how it ..Got away.

Being they are wanting to be able to gain access to private servers information also this also must be something they are pretty confident they can do already they just need the permission. I just cannot believe that they are asking to be able to do all this and have not made a plan on how to do it. They have to be doing it now and just not really acting on it. Maybe just gathering intel until they have the legal crap behind them so they don't get spanked for dropping in on networks to gather information.

and the Patriot Act was supposed ot be gone by now wasn't it? Looks to me like they are giving it more teeth. Now that's change we can believe in.



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Astronaut 2005
 



why not use a massive intrusion detection system and when someone does something stupid, send them a transmission control protocol reset packet.


That's impossible.

What you're proposing is a giant DMZ gateway where all internet traffic would have to filter through to the consumer so they can keep tabs on unauthorised breaches.

There's nothing in the world that could filter the amount of daily packets transmitted over the Internet. It must be in the quadrillions.

That's just never going to happen, as much certain political elements want it to.



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Well, who said there was anything wrong with moving to the mountains of Montana, fly-fishing and hunting, and raising a family?
Sounds like a good plan to me.



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   

"These are challenges that no single nation, no matter how powerful, can confront alone," Obama said today in his weekly radio and Internet address. "The United States must lead the way. But our best chance to solve these unprecedented problems comes from acting in concert with other nations."

voices.washingtonpost.com...

Folks, you better make a weekly time mark of the presidential adresses to send all your email during the only time frame when the Internet would be on.



posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by crisko
 





At most, all any goverment can to is filter what you can and cannot see, and you would never know it. I have been to China, Google appears to work fine if you lived there and didn't know any better. Searches only produce goverment "approved" results.

You are correct.
However, it IS possible to disconnect our national electric grid from the Internet. That would solve the problem of the Russian and Chinese Hackers accessing the electrical grid.

Quite honestly, I don't know why they haven't done that already. There are other ways for the regional grids to connect, on an information basis.



posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by News And History
 


Dude... Internet2 is already in place

has been for quite some time....




www.internet2.edu...


I just don't understand how all of these people who claim to be intelligent don't understand that the terms they are using to describe something new are already in place describing something old.

Geesh



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
I am trying to fathom how they would turn off a network that was designed not to be turned off.

This is making my head spin just thinking about this. Once you had access, it would be difficult to keep you from doing things on it.


This is another Y2K scare because it sounds plausible on the surface until you actually set and think about it.

You can't "Shut off" the internet. Whoever dreamed this conspiracy up has seen that episode of south park one too many times

there is not a giant wireless modem underground somewhere who's channeling all of the worlds internet.

Don't get suckered into another "y2k" style hysteria. I still make fun of my friends who fell for it and stocked up on water/food/batteries/masks. They fell for it hook line and sinker. A computer is going to recognize that the year is 1900 and it's going to make the conscious decision that it's not supposed to exist and it's going to shut its self down?

Sounds preposterous now, millions fell for it then.
Just like this, it's all garbage....no substance.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fremd


This is another Y2K scare because it sounds plausible on the surface until you actually set and think about it.


It's not just another Y2K scare, it's a Bill (S 773) that's being proposed.


Originally posted by Fremd
You can't "Shut off" the internet. Whoever dreamed this conspiracy up has seen that episode of south park one too many times

there is not a giant wireless modem underground somewhere who's channeling all of the worlds internet.


I'm starting to think you didn't read what the content of this thread is actually all about. There is no "conspiracy" about a Bill being introduced into congress. That's a fact, no conspiracy. It has nothing to do with the "Worlds" internet. It has only to do with the USA's exposure to it and how to mitigate any problems that arise from it. With respect to the UNITED STATES ONLY, yes they certainly CAN and WOULD cut all major traffic providers if there were a major cyber attack on USA infrastructure.


Originally posted by Fremd
Don't get suckered into another "y2k" style hysteria.


No one is. This is informative for those who didn't realize it was being considered at the highest levels of government.


Originally posted by Fremd
I still make fun of my friends who fell for it and stocked up on water/food/batteries/masks. They fell for it hook line and sinker. A computer is going to recognize that the year is 1900 and it's going to make the conscious decision that it's not supposed to exist and it's going to shut its self down?


Seems to me that you didn't have a thorough grasp on what the Y2K issue was at the time then either. There was not a single person (who had capacity for a modicum of intellect) at the time who believed that "all the worlds little nerdy computers" were going to begin having sentient ability and shut themselves down. The ISSUE then was that all of the infrastructure which has years designated with only TWO digits (ie., 99 instead of 1999) would not understand that the turn of the new year was actually an ADVANCE and see ANYTHING flagged as 00 to mean 1900. Which would have meant that NOW, any transactions/documents/packets, etc whose 2 digit only years were not patched to represent 4 digit years could very well be at risk of ignoring time sensitive data and ignore them.
Had it not been for the efforts of millions of IT professionals worldwide in implementing patches to archaic systems, your friends that you "made fun of" would have fared significantly better than you. Fortunately for all of us, that didn't happen.



Originally posted by Fremd
Sounds preposterous now, millions fell for it then.
Just like this, it's all garbage....no substance.



Yes, this is all "garbage". Unless that bill becomes a Law. Then this "garbage" could well shut anyone in the USA that uses the Internet down, and grants any President who deems a "cyber emergency" the power to do just that.


AB1



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Had it not been for the efforts of millions of IT professionals worldwide in implementing patches to archaic systems, your friends that you "made fun of" would have fared significantly better than you. Fortunately for all of us, that didn't happen.


...right. So a computer will think "oh well it's the year 1900...i shouldnt exist" is actually the way, even by your explanation, that the Y2K scare happened.

And any person with a "modicum of intellect" would not have fallen for such a scam to begin with....


And yes, it is a Y2k scare. It's a bill that opts the government to be able to do something that it does not have the ability to do.

You can't "shut off" the internet.

You could shut off parts of it.
You could disconnect several computers where information is stored to view websites and information

but you can't shut off the internet.

Despite what you think you know.



and in closing, since you seem to have forgotten the hysterial for y2k at the time


We've got a problem. It may be the biggest problem that the modern world has ever faced. I think it is. At 12 midnight on January 1, 2000 (a Saturday morning), most of the world's mainframe computers will either shut down or begin spewing out bad data. Most of the world's desktop computers will also start spewing out bad data. Tens of millions—possibly hundreds of millions—of pre-programmed computer chips will begin to shut down the systems they automatically control. This will create a nightmare for every area of life, in every region of the industrialized world.

Source
This is just one source, there are hundreds of millions that say the exact same thing.

Here's a tip for you. Before you go shooting from the hip about something you're lacking knowledge of, try doing some research first. Personally, I prefer google.


[edit on 16-4-2009 by Fremd]

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Fremd]



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fremd

...right. So a computer will think



Wrong, a computer will never "think".


Originally posted by Fremd
"oh well it's the year 1900...i shouldnt exist" is actually the way, even by your explanation, that the Y2K scare happened.


Wrong again. A computer is not making a judgement that anything at all "shouldnt exist", it's processing criteria that (if no supporting algorithm states otherwise) dictates to it either yes or no. Do I process this data? Yes or No based upon criteria. Nor was what you allude to anywhere near my explanation.


Originally posted by Fremd
And any person with a "modicum of intellect" would not have fallen for such a scam to begin with....


A scam by way of definition is a fraud. No one was being defrauded at the time, they were simply being told about the imminent anamolies in their computing environments.


Originally posted by Fremd
And yes, it is a Y2k scare. It's a bill that opts the government to be able to do something that it does not have the ability to do.


They certainly do have the ability to do it. Within THEIR sphere of influence. If they cut all traffic via the providers inside the USA, they have "shut off" the internet for all of the USA.


Originally posted by Fremd
You can't "shut off" the internet.


No need to rehash what should be obvious to you by now.


Originally posted by Fremd
Despite what you think you know.


What I THINK I know is 30 years of industry experience and management, at governmental, private sector, and security levels. Again, fortunately for me I don't have to "think" this because it is fact.


Originally posted by Fremd
and in closing, since you seem to have forgotten the hysterial for y2k at the time


I haven't forgotten the hysteria. Hysteria is not tantamount to scam OR fraud. Simply because people becom hysterical about a topic, doesn't mean the topic is disingenuous.


Originally posted by Fremd
Here's a tip for you. Before you go shooting from the hip about something you're lacking knowledge of, try doing some research first. Personally, I prefer google.


I find this to be a pointless baiting technique. I have many credentials that dictate otherwise however, I find it counter-intuitive to qualify that poor attempt on your part. Those who do know more than what you're displaying here (knowledge wise) will be the ones who ultimately know your position and mine.

AB1



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by WinoBot
I read the whole Bill and didn't see one instance where Obama can "shut the internet off." First off, you can't just shut off the internet, it's not centralized at all.




S.773
Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (Introduced in Senate)

SEC. 18. CYBERSECURITY RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY.

The President--

(1) within 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, shall develop and implement a comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy, which shall include--

(A) a long-term vision of the Nation's cybersecurity future; and

(B) a plan that encompasses all aspects of national security, including the participation of the private sector, including critical infrastructure operators and managers;

(2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network;


Section 18 Paragraph 2 is where you would find that.

The bolding is mine and leaves a lot open for interpretation. What is United States critical infrastructure information system? How deep is that? I think that's the part where it gets a little hairy.


AB1



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   
The reason I see them for doing this, if it iwas remotely possible, is in case of a terrorist attack, it keeps members from communicating to each other, they did it with cell phones. If they can do it with cell phones, other means are not far behind.

And that was eight years ago, and the cells have not been messed with since, much less on a large scale.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by crisko
As a Sys Admin for an ISP, I can tell you it would be impossible to turn off the internt. Sure, the U.S. could shut down the root servers, but other nations would jump at the chance to bring some of their own online. In fact, the U.S. is being pushed to do exactly this.


As a Sys Admin for an ISP then, you should realize that they will never tell you to cut your root servers. That's just simply an extranneous use of power. They will tell you to cut your fiber feeds OR will have the capacity to cut it themselves without your intervention.

Also, as a sysadmin for an ISP, clearly you should know all about the (now defunct) DCS-1000 or carnivore wouldn't you. Simply put, a data mine placed between your in/out pipe and the rest of your clients. Now, ALLL that data is being mined for later perousal. Now don't you think, if all of your outgoing/incoming data can be mined, certainly it can also be filtered (scary), modified (even more scary), or turned off (worst case scenario)?

If all of your subscribers have no mechanism to use to get inbound/outbound traffic then root servers from the moon can be online and operating without anyone to get to them.


AB1



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by alphabetaone
 


this is another classic example of conspiracy "theorists" blowing things way out of proportion, exaggerating arguments, and making up lies to cause hysteria

You bolded the nemesis to your own argument.

All people have to do is click your name in the quote to this post, read your bolded statement....it's serioulsy that simple

I'ts not talking about the internet

ti's talking about government agencies connection to such internet.

You cannot shut down the internet.

It's not a tangible object. It's a name given to something to create an illusionary world that only exists through millions of computers world wide.

Until you can shut down millions of computers world wide you CAN NOT shut down the internet.

I'm tired of drumming on with you, so this will be my last post. You have yet to produce anything that proves your "theory" and instead have produced the argument needed to twart your "theory"

thank you and god bless




Wrong, a computer will never "think"


Yes, i realize that. I was being ironic ...
Anyone who bought into the notion of y2k, however, was being the opposite.

The ideal of y2k that created ALL the hysteria in the moronic masses was that computers would think it's the year 1900 and shut down.

if you don't remember that, then im sorry. But do a google search...it's all that is needed.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Fremd]



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Fremd
 


You are right, it's not about shutting down the internet, it's all about control. The fact that this is presented as "Obama's Idea" is laughable at best and only serves to polarize the people and divert there attention from the true danger of what's really going on.

The internet is a threat to Rothchild and the others, it allows people to "assemble" virtually and share ideas over vast distances. The NWO cronies know that if the people wake up en mass their plans are finished. The internet is a great catalyst for waking up the people. It's not about shutting down the internet, it's about total control of the information passed along thereof via 1984 style propaganda.

If you don't think the US government is ready to restrict, regulate, censor and charge you for the trouble think again. This has already happened in China, and as other posters have noted a similar trend in Australia and now Canada/UK/EU are getting sucked into the fold.

And now Senate bills 773 and 778:


A pair of bills introduced in the U.S. Senate would grant the White House sweeping new powers to access private online data, regulate the cybersecurity industry and even shut down Internet traffic during a declared "cyber emergency."

Senate bills No. 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., are both part of what's being called the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, which would create a new Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor, reportable directly to the president and charged with defending the country from cyber attack.

A working draft of the legislation obtained by an Internet privacy group also spells out plans to grant the Secretary of Commerce access to all privately owned information networks deemed to be critical to the nation's infrastructure "without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule or policy restricting such access."

SOURCE


From Section 2 of the bill:


SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) America’s failure to protect cyberspace is
one of the most urgent national security problems
facing the country.


So what does this mean to you? Extra fees, restricted access, and any of your internet usage/ digital property rights can be accessed, monitored or seized.

But the icing on the cake, section 18:


SEC. 18. CYBERSECURITY RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHOR-
ITY.

The President—
(1) within 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, shall develop and implement a comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy, which
shall include—
(A) a long-term vision of the nation’s cybersecurity future; and
(B) a plan that encompasses all aspects of national security,including participation of the private sector, including critical infrastructure operators and managers;

(2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and
order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic
to and from any compromised Federal government
or United States critical infrastructure information
system or network;




Hmmm . . . Participation of the private sector? Shut down of Internet traffic to and from any . . . United States critical infrastructure information
system or network?

When they use the phrase "United States critical infrastructure information system or network" what do you think it is they are talking about?
What part of "shut down internet traffic" do you not understand??


There you have it, in black and white. It's all in the bill.

So along with other executive orders, if there is a "cyber emergency" that can also be classified as a "National Emergency" the Executive Branch can in effect take over the government and control the flow of information through the media and now the internet.

Wake up, call your representatives and senators and tell them to vote "NO" on 773/778

[edit on 4-5-2009 by DrZERO]



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join