Cybersecurity Bill Suffers Another Defeat - Obama Signs Secret Directive


Desperate Senate leaders eager for control of the internet, brought the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 back to the Senate floor for a vote yesterday, and once again they failed. It was just a couple of votes shy of passing (51-47), but one vote closer than when it was presented back in August (52-46).

Immediately following the August vote, the word was out that Barack Obama was considering an executive order to put in place the very thing the Senate had rejected. In addition, part of the reason was additional things tossed into the cybersecurity bill, such as bits of gun control.

However, the rumors of an Obama executive order then came to be fact as White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said, “An executive order is one of a number of measures we’re considering as we look to implement the president’s direction to do absolutely everything we can to better protect our nation against today’s cyber threats."

Then, within a month Department of Homeland Security Janet "Big Sis" Napolitano testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs that a cybersecurity executive order was indeed near completion.

It seems that following the elections that Democrats were eager to push this bill through. Even the fear mongering of Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta warning of a cyber "Pearl Harbor" or "9-11" was not enough to advance the bill. So the remaining option seems to be for Obama to just sign a piece of paper that has no Constitutional authority to push what the people have rejected.

Many have stood against the government's involvement in controlling the internet including Ron Paul and his son Rand Paul.

According to The Hill, Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) "warned that the president would be compelled to issue the executive order if the Senate voted against moving the bill forward. But he noted that the cyber order would not accomplish everything that legislation could, including liability protection that would safeguard companies from legal action if they're hit by a cyberattack."

"I'm confident that if we fail to act, the president will act," Lieberman said. "I think he has a responsibility to act because if we don’t we’re leaving the American people extremely vulnerable to a cybersecurity attack.”

Lieberman was the one that first introduced the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act in 2010 which was dubbed the Internet Kill Switch bill.

Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) said, "Frankly, the underlying bill is not supported by the business community for all the right reasons. They're the ones that are going to be called to comply with the mandates and the regulations, and frankly it's just not going to give them the protection they need against cyberattacks."

In addition to Chambliss, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) shot back at claims by Democrats that Republicans were threatening national security for not favoring the bill, saying, "disagreements over how to address policy matters shouldn't evolve into accusations about a member's willingness to tackle the issue."

However, The Washington Post reports that Obama signed a secret cybersecurity directive back in mid-October: Presidential Policy Directive 20:

Presidential Policy Directive 20 establishes a broad and strict set of standards to guide the operations of federal agencies in confronting threats in cyberspace, according to several U.S. officials who have seen the classified document and are not authorized to speak on the record. The president signed it in mid-October.

The new directive is the most extensive White House effort to date to wrestle with what constitutes an “offensive” and a “defensive” action in the rapidly evolving world of cyberwar and cyberterrorism, where an attack can be launched in milliseconds by unknown assailants utilizing a circuitous route. For the first time, the directive explicitly makes a distinction between network defense and cyber-operations to guide officials charged with making often-rapid decisions when confronted with threats.

Since the cybersecurity bill has faced defeat twice this year and since we are approaching a new year when people are not paying attention, sort of like they weren't last year when Barack Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with its section on "indefinite detention," I would not put it past this administration to wait till sometime around New Year's and sign his cybersecurity executive order. Then all of the usual fluff pieces about the holidays and record sales will end up dwarfing his undermining of the Constitution and our liberties. I'll keep you posted...

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.


Print Friendly





Comments

comments

  • Wayne Dodd

    This is pure fear mongering by the Socialist Elites and UN NWO. You want to shut down the Internet? Because that is what exactly will happen if any "Cybersecurity" bill is passed. It will either be shut down by Government or Anon, and nobody will have net except the Government so they can monitor you, yes you the slave to the system.

  • Doug H

    Since when did the president have the authority to act on behalf of the legislative and judicial branches of government? Since when did you allow him to become King Barrack I? I am an American citizen, not a subject of the king. Did you forget your place?

  • mutton

    The Obama attack
    is much more deadly than any attack instigated outside the US.

    It is the enemy
    within that needs controlling.

    The 'terrorists'
    are such a convenient boon to dictators throughout the Western world.

    They are so
    useful that they will not profile at airports, will not deport, will not stop
    immigration from 'terrorist' countries and will not do anything that will dissuade
    the terrorists from shouting hate. They need that vociferous voice to pin their own
    'terrorist' acts on.

    They must control the internet because too much truth comes
    out.

    They must control guns so that the terrorists will hand
    their guns in.

    They must control free speech because it will stop radical
    Muslims from spouting their vilifications.

    It is government and politicians that need controlling and
    pretty damn quick before the whole of western society becomes another Beirut.

  • becky

    I wonder when Ohio will wake up and recall that idiot Boehner so we can get a different Majority leader. We need fighters in congress now, not the wimps we have.

  • becky

    It is time for people to very seriously start pressuring their congressmen and senators every single day to pass a law that limits the ability of presidents to use executive orders to make NEW law, or CHANGE existing laws. This has to stop. Start calling people, before we have no country left.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/David-Veselenak/100001118018542 David Veselenak

    Who made this effeminate punk^ss geek dictator? Ithought we elected a president! When are the feckless "Re-PUNK-licans" going to start impeachment charges? Damn, if they are going to lay down, get the F out of the way, we would save a lot of money for not having a useless, pitiful punk of a congress and senators! They are constantly being bypassed so why are they needed! What a bunch of gutless girly-men! I don't know how they can look at their sorry faces in the mirror!

  • jarnkm

    ANOTHER THOUGHT just crossed my mind. IF one is so easily able to fool "We the People" and be able to continue, as in the past, control the media, then why should he not have control of the Internet!!!! That way, Socialism would have it "All Tied Up"! I guess that wasn't a "specific" of the "1963 Communist Goals for America"! Google it and see what you've accepted over the years.

  • jarnkm

    Some few of us have attempted to awaken America, but it fell on deaf ears ... simply because "It wouldn't or couldn't happen in America", was pronounced over and over again by Washington! No matter what they did in Washington, "We the People" just had to feel that they had "OUR best interest at heart". WELL, the news is, Washington doesn't have a heart for "We the People" as a people, but a "sheeple". The Government took control of the media and "Investigative Reporters" were suddenly extinct. The ONLY place one could find the "Real Truth" was by a few "papers", ham radio and then,slowly it started appearing on the Internet, when it became available(however, most seem to be used for Ebay and Gaming, sadly). If one does research on the past histories of just Germany and Russia, they can see the identical thing happening in America. IF and When Obama hasn't been able to get it passed by the senate, he signed an Executive Order!! He knows that IF he was proven to be a "FRAUD", an illegal "PRESIDENT"(probably why he's so 'close' to the illegals) and one who had/has intentionally and purposely "covered his tracks" that he will lose everything. AND there are no doubt some in government that are well behind helping with the "cover-up"!! IF he is successful in gaining control of the Internet, we can kiss all "Freedom of Speech and Press" good-bye. "Truth" will be a thing of the past. THEN, we'll see why FEMA was organized and all of their "WORKS"! The Bible says that "you will know a tree by its fruit", as a man by his works(I assume this would include the plural). As far as Obama, his "fruit" was rotten and full of worms before it hit the ground. His "shorts" are probably red with a hammer and cycle on the back of them!!

  • The Great Ricardo

    Obama. That S.O.B.