Executive order, Internet Off Switch!!

[partypilot1]

While obama has everyone in a tiff over the gun worries he slid in this executive order. This communication tool would be needed to organize any future government resistance

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/07/world-wants-obamas-hands-internets-switch/54459/

[Guest CCI]

It's like America has become the New Russia!

[Guest ThePunisher]

It's like America has become the New Russia!

And Obama is the Czar.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

This was originally brought up a couple years ago.

No one believed it then, but maybe since you found

it recently people might wake up. Internet kill switch

was brought up in the guise of Internet terrorism.

That's not the only reason they wanted it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest ThePunisher]

... but maybe since you found it recently people might wake up.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You think...

[TMF]

Eh, the government also has a nuclear arsenal capable of extinguishing all life on this continent. Not that I am all about the government having more power, I just don't know if that is the intent of whatever they're up to with these policies. I read the story, but there isn't anything concrete in there that says what these policies are or that such a capability even exists. There is one part in the article that the writer believes references a "kill switch." Then again, as we've seen in Egypt and Syria, a government is capable of shutting down all internet, phone and cell commo if they want to even without a "kill switch" as it were.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The Internet kill switch worked quite well for the Iranian

government during the student revolt. It was used

there to quell speech, and their citizens/subjects were

killed. If it wasn't for the few Tweets that got out, it

could have been much worse. The rest of the world

found out.

The idea of killing the Internet in times of emergency

doesn't hold water. We use the Internet to find out

information and communicate as much as we used

other technology. Just imagine if your government

took that away, under the auspices of "national

security". I don't care for that thought one bit, but

there are some who will allow the government to

do anything it wants. If you reserve your judgement

until after you lose it, what are you going to do then?

It is a big deal.

Actually, I heard about it being tested awhile back.

Won't swear to it, though.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TrickyNicky]

^^^ This

[DaveTN]

Business is done on the internet. To shut down business would require something equal to Federal Martial Law. Between Martial Law and the Nation Defense Authorization Act (among others) he already has the authority, not sure when he would need any more legislation. The question would be does the government have the ability.

[TMF]

Well, to put it in perspective, most everyone has some sort of internet service provider. Does a gov need a "kill switch" if they declare martial law and order all commo services to go offline? History would say not. Syria and Egypt are examples. Of course, with the amount of technology out there that folks have, plenty of people would have internet access that is not provided by an American ISP through satellite based internet with terminals in other countries. I dunno, it just seems like a myth that such a thing even exists, but if it does it would seem unnecessary for a government that has assumed supreme power anyway.

[enfield]

Eh, the government also has a nuclear arsenal capable of extinguishing all life on this continent. Not that I am all about the government having more power, I just don't know if that is the intent of whatever they're up to with these policies. I read the story, but there isn't anything concrete in there that says what these policies are or that such a capability even exists. There is one part in the article that the writer believes references a "kill switch." Then again, as we've seen in Egypt and Syria, a government is capable of shutting down all internet, phone and cell commo if they want to even without a "kill switch" as it were.

It's a lot more difficult to shut down all shortwave radio communications. I was on a 75 meter net this morning that involved, among others, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, North Carolina and West Virginia amateur radio stations, both fixed and mobile. Probably a 400 mile radius and it was a 'local' net.

[Caster]

SHTF...NO TGO

:panic: :panic:

What will we do?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I don't think it's a myth. Senator

Joe Lieberman sponsored one

or two bills directly related to

Internet control. I think they are

dead, it's moot since Obama

likes EO's as well.

I imagine the hams would be

much more difficult to block

since it is over the air, instead

of being stuck in a cable. Good

thing.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest adamoxtwo]

Shutting down the internet is one thing. Shutting down short HF/VHF/UHF Communications is different. With the internet and cell towers down PTT communications are easier to intercept, triangulate and target. Shutting down the internet will most likely confuse the younger folks more then anything. The older folks will resort to courier's to deliver messages vital to the Revolution....because face it that would be the only time they would try to shut down America's Communications. Martial Law will not matter because the government will fall apart quickly and the soldiers who would enforce martial law will be divided and conflicted. That is when we will see who are True Military leaders are. Just my pennies on it.

[R_Bert]

By the time Internet government shutdown happens, I will have resorted back to off-grid coms and gone-to-ground. Been looking for a reason to dump Comcrap anyway.

[Glock30]

Obama must have figured out that if he's going to install himself as dictator, he's going to need to strike the Amendments in order. Skipping the 1st Amendment and going straight to the 2nd won't accomplish anything. First, take away the right to say something, THEN go gun grabbing, not the other way around.

[Guest uofmeet]

Um, i would think it would take many switches to kill the interwebs.....

[Oh Shoot]

Um, i would think it would take many switches to kill the interwebs.....

TMF has it. Just needs HS or whoever to lean on all the ISPs. They can get a court order is it makes ATT, Comcast, Charter, etc. feel better about immediate caving.

Wouldn't be a "switch", but internet access could be 90% zapped in 24 hours as things exist now, IMO.

- OS

Edited July 25, 2012 by OhShoot

[TMF]

TMF has it. Just needs HS or whoever to lean on all the ISPs. They can get a court order is it makes ATT, Comcast, Charter, etc. feel better about immediate caving.

Wouldn't be a "switch", but internet access could be 90% zapped in 24 hours as things exist now, IMO.

- OS

Keep in mind also that there are thousands of freelance "journalists" out there that have their own global internet capability via satellite commo. There is nothing that could go on here that couldn't be broadcast to the outside world if the situation arose.

[Guest bkelm18]

If there's one thing that would unite this country against the gov't, using an internet kill switch might just be it.

[Oh Shoot]

Keep in mind also that there are thousands of freelance "journalists" out there that have their own global internet capability via satellite commo. There is nothing that could go on here that couldn't be broadcast to the outside world if the situation arose.

You don't think the ComSats owned by US concerns (which is most of them) wouldn't be shut down as easily? Except for gummit access.

Doesn't much matter if the rest of the world can communicate, if the rank and file in US can't. No real revolution without phones/texting, email, IM. Shortwave would become da bomb, just like in all the post apocalypse stories.

Of course, we wouldn't need communications for anarchy, which The Meltdown would probably be rather than revolution, even with full communications still functioning for a while at least.

- OS

Edited July 25, 2012 by OhShoot

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'd say anything connected to the pipeline which

would be severed by a switch would be effectively

killed by the properly placed switch, satellites and

all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TMF]

You don't think the ComSats owned by US concerns (which is most of them) wouldn't be shut down as easily? Except for gummit access.

Doesn't much matter if the rest of the world can communicate, if the rank and file in US can't. No real revolution without phones/texting, email, IM. Shortwave would become da bomb, just like in all the post apocalypse stories.

Of course, we wouldn't need communications for anarchy, which The Meltdown would probably be rather than revolution, even with full communications still functioning for a while at least.

- OS

I was referring to portable immarsat devices which have ground stations that terminate outside our borders. Stuff that gives you global internet connectivity. Lotta freelancers and globe trotting adventure types have that stuff.

[oldmustangjunkie]

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The problem still remains as in the effectiveness of the government to be able to kill communications to a massive

group of folks who will be unable to communicate with anyone, other than their neighbors directly. That kind of

power is too much too allow our government to take. Marshal Law is scary enough and should be fought against.

I remember the way we discussed the topic of "Net Neutrality" and the way some thought it would actually be a good

thing, but it is in the same place as the "kill switch" idea.

There are quite a lot of things the government needs to be kept from grabbing. All of them only give them carte

blanche power over the individual. Dangerous and has no justification, but I guess that only depends on how much

you trust your government.