It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


White House Sounds The Death Knell For CISPA With Veto Threat

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 11:18 PM
The infamous CISPA bill seems to be destined to go the way of SOPA and PIPA. The President's advisory staff are recommending he veto the bill on the grounds that the language contained in it is too vague.

I certainly hope he does veto this despicable bit of legislation. If this goes down the crapper, I extend a round of applause to everyone that took action to tell our government that we won't stand for it.

CISPA looks to be headed the way of SOPA.

The White House issued a statement Wednesday threatening to veto the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, the controversial bill designed to allow more sharing of the private sector’s digital threat data with government agencies like the Department of Homeland Security. The president’s advisors now say they fear the bill’s vague language would allow too much of users’ private information to be leaked to the government and that it doesn’t go far enough to offer real defenses against digital attacks, and they say they’ll recommend Obama veto the bill if it’s passed by Congress.

“Cybersecurity and privacy are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, information sharing, while an essential component of comprehensive legislation, is not alone enough to protect the Nation’s core critical infrastructure from cyber threats,” the statement reads. “The Administration looks forward to continuing to engage with the Congress…to enact cybersecurity legislation to address these critical issues. However, for the reasons stated herein, if H.R. 3523 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.”

edit on 25-4-2012 by N3k9Ni because: typo

posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:09 AM
Let me remind those who missed it that he was dead-set against signing the NDAA also. His last word on the matter was that he would not sign it. Until he did--under cover of secrecy, while everyone else was busy not paying attention on a New Year's Eve night.

I suspect there were "signing statements" involved. But since signing statements are not disclosed, we can only speculate about their content. My guess is it went something like this: "I am already all-powerful and do not require no stinkin' Congress to tell me what I can and cannot do. I can kill American citizens in faraway countries. BAM! I just did!"

So let me remind you that you cannot take what he says at face value. He might or might not sign it; you sure as hell can't judge what he will do by what he says he will do.
edit on 4/26/2012 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:13 AM
reply to post by Ex_CT2

Good point. I do know that what he says and what he does are not always the same.


log in