News

**It's Hot Here**

Shit has got to f*cking stop...you're not a f*cking king.

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley...der-option

Senate Republicans recently blocked cybersecurity legislation, but the issue might not be dead after all.

The White House hasn't ruled out issuing an executive order to strengthen the nation's defenses against cyber attacks if Congress refuses to act.

“In the wake of Congressional inaction and Republican stall tactics, unfortunately, we will continue to be hamstrung by outdated and inadequate statutory authorities that the legislation would have fixed," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said in an emailed response to whether the president is considering a cybersecurity order.

"Moving forward, the President is determined to do absolutely everything we can to better protect our nation against today’s cyber threats and we will do that," Carney said.
The White House has emphasized that better protecting vital computer systems is a top priority.

The administration proposed its own legislation package in 2011, sent officials to testify at 17 congressional hearings and presented more than 100 briefings on the issue. In a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, President Obama warned that a successful cyber attack on a bank, water system, electrical grid or hospital could have devastating consequences.

The president urged Congress to pass the Cybersecurity Act, which was offered by Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine). The bill would have encouraged private companies and the government to share information about cyber threats and would have required critical infrastructure operators to meet minimum cybersecurity standards.

**Kanigo2** lop guest User ID: 97971 08-06-2012 02:17 AM

Is this is the same bill that requires ISP's to retain all traffic information, like the one Anon just hacked?

**LoP Guest** lop guest User ID: 112981 08-06-2012 02:21 AM

What is the point to congress? I know some folks in need of a pink slip.

They don't read the bills the lobbyists write for them before signing them. They don't stop the president from over stepping his bounds. They don't hold the DOJ responsible when he doesn't do his job at all.
The Federal Reserve issues the money.

WTF is the point of these assholes?

**It's Hot Here**

Kanigo2 Wrote:

Is this is the same bill that requires ISP's to retain all traffic information, like the one Anon just hacked?

Dunno believe so...yes more regs on business, just what we need, cause SOX and HIPPA have done wonders to clean up the system and make things better and more efficient.

But Senate Republicans, led by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), worried the bill would burden businesses with unnecessary and ineffective regulations.

The bill's sponsors watered down the regulatory provisions, replacing the security mandates with voluntary incentives, but that wasn't enough to win over Republicans. The bill mustered 52 votes in the Senate, well short of the 60 needed to overcome a filibuster.

If Obama issues an order on cybersecurity, it wouldn't be the first time that his administration has resorted to executive action to bypass Congress.

Obama uses the slogan "we can't wait" to argue that some issues are too important to be allowed to stall in Congress.

When lawmakers refused to pass the Dream Act to give legal status to students brought to the country illegally, the administration announced that it would stop deporting young immigrants who would have been eligible to stay under the bill.

Jim Lewis, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, explained that Obama could enact many of the core provisions of the Cybersecurity Act through executive order.

Many companies managing vital computer systems are already heavily regulated. Lewis said the president could order agencies to require the industries they regulate to meet cybersecurity standards.

"You don't need new legislative authority to do that," Lewis said.

**LoP Guest** lop guest User ID: 102152 08-06-2012 02:23 AM

What's the point of congress of the president can just issue executive orders?

To keep the illusion that we are still in a Republic?

**It's Hot Here** · (This post was last modified: 08-06-2012 02:27 AM by It's Hot Here.)

LoP Guest Wrote:

What's the point of congress of the president can just issue executive orders?

To keep the illusion that we are still in a Republic?

Yep...really all I can say. Sorry but any and I mean any f*cking prez that thinks he knows better, especially about security and technology can suck my hat...Jesus Christ, most CiO's are morons at about tech at that level. Who the f*ck is this assclown paying off, paying back?

**Smilin' Eyes**

Arrggghhh, what part of the balance of power in the Constitution doesn't Bam-Bam the wanna be boy king understand???

Here's a freaking clue Bam-Bam, if the House and Senate doesn't pass something and you decide to do an Executive Order, that is un-Constitutional and NOT the way the balance of power SHOULD operate.

Tissue

Ahhh, crap why do I even bother? No matter what us peons think the puppet at 1600 will do as his master's bid him to do. Does Congress stand up and impeach him on ANY of his crap? No. Does the MSM ever hold his feet to the fire? No, with the slight exception of Fox News, but then they do overkill on it.

WTF needs to be done to stop this?!?

**Kanigo2** lop guest User ID: 97971 08-06-2012 02:28 AM

couple of links here on the bill CISPA

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/...cy-rights/

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/2012041...lems.shtml

and the pdf

http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/inte...HR3523.pdf

**It's Hot Here**

Kanigo2 Wrote:

couple of links here on the bill CISPA

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/...cy-rights/

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/2012041...lems.shtml

and the pdf

http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/inte...HR3523.pdf

Thx K!

**silversides**

**It's Hot Here**

silversides Wrote:

He noted that some regulatory agencies, including the Federal Communications Commission and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, are independent and not bound to follow executive orders. But Lewis predicted that even the independent agencies would likely enforce an executive order on cybersecurity.

Lewis said the Office of Management and Budget is already working on security standards for federal computer systems, and said those guidelines could form the basis of standards for the private sector.

Lewis acknowledged that the provisions of the Cybersecurity Act that would have torn down legal barriers to information-sharing would have to be enacted by Congress. Although those provisions were the ones most strongly supported by the business community, Lewis expressed skepticism that they would do much to improve cybersecurity anyway.

"You can have them or don't have them. Who cares," he said.

But Lewis said that an executive order could even partially address information-sharing. The FCC, for example, has set up a voluntary system for companies to share information about cyber threats with each other, he said.

An executive order may accomplish many of the goals of the Cybersecurity Act, but it could also further raise the ire of Republicans and the business groups, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who lobbied against the legislation.

Republicans have already accused President Obama of making illegal power grabs with his previous executive actions, and a cybersecurity order would likely elicit similar howls of disapproval.

Although Sen. Collins was frustrated by the defeat of her bill, she reacted coolly to the idea of the president bypassing Congress.

"I'm not for doing by executive order what should be done by legislation," she said.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), one of the main co-sponsors of the Cybersecurity Act, said she prefers that Congress address the problem, but she is open to presidential action if Congress fails.

"I suppose if we can't, the answer would be yes," she said when asked whether she would support an executive order.

**It's Hot Here**

Really? On an Internet conspiracy forum no one else cares about this?

**It's Hot Here**

**fnord** lop guest User ID: 112989 08-06-2012 03:32 AM

If congress can't do their job, let a dictatorial president dissolve it. That will end the last shred of federal legitimacy. Then the people can get on with forming a new government of the people, not run by the present white caucasian mafia.

**It's Hot Here**

fnord Wrote:

If congress can't do their job, let a dictatorial president dissolve it. That will end the last shred of federal legitimacy. Then the people can get on with forming a new government of the people, not run by the present white caucasian mafia.

So what do you propose? Apparently you're either not white or have white guilt. We've got Chavez as our prez right now, IMO and I'm not digging it. Congress doesn't like it but follow the trail and figure out why 44 wants this. True change will come with the overthrow of congress...I guarantee if you ask 100 teenagers what the 3 branches of gov is they won't know...