Bill would give president emergency control of Internet
 

Link

I happened upon this article and haven't heard a peep about it anywhere else. Any thoughts.

I think its a good thing that the internet is there as, if nothing else, a form of communication when all hell is breaking loose.

Some will see it as a "control" issue - others probably think its our Gov't taking care of us..... Whadda you you think?

Who the hell is Bill and why would he need or want to give the president control of teh interwebz? :confused:

Doesn't bother me in the least. It's no different than what we've already got with the airwaves - the government can step in anytime (i.e. suspending regular broadcasting) to make emergency announcements.

Of course, the birthers and the deathers and the 9-11 conspiracy nuts will all have cows over this... :crazy:

....but but but its in writing - it HAS to be true... :bolt:

The example sounds too much like the entire fiasco and the resulting fears. Since nobody in the George Jr White did that or anything else that day (even fighter pilots never got authorized to defend Washington), then the example suggests the Keystone cops are fighting each other.

When does he movie come out? The one with a fictional story of George Jr commanding the nation's defense from a child's chair in a FL classroom. Keystone cops now wear suits and ties.

:confused: Who did it, then? Somebody shut down the air traffic.

From the 911 Commission: Who made decisions? John S. White. At that time, he was Manager of the System Efficiency Division. He ordered all other airlines grounded. He was not even manager of the facility. The ATC handbook gave the facility no power to do what he did.

Nobody in the George Jr administration made any decisions that day. None called for fighter protection even for the White House. None authorized fighters to shoot down an attacking airliner. Fighter pilots who were dispatched by little people (one request even came from a Secret Service agent asking his friend in the Air Force to launch planes). No fighter was ever given authority to stop an attack.

Airlines grounded their planes. White's own employees were yelling at him to ground planes when he did so. Boston and NY Centers took it upon themselves to ground planes and call for scrambled fighters while mental midgets in the George Jr administration coud not make any decisions. In a conference call between the FAA Commissioner Jane Garvey, the Secretary of Transportation, and the military; the military left that phone call because these mental midgets were not making any decisions.

George Jr did absolutely nothing that day. Neither he nor his entire staff could make any decision. So a Secret Service agent ordered everyone back on Air Force 1 saying that they could make up their minds after the plane was airborne.

Common knowledge - no administration official made a decision that day. Even George Jr sat in a child's chair in FL for 15 minutes without asking a single question. Apparently he was waiting for someone to tell him what to do. Then we reelected him.

Thank you.

. . . no surprise there.

Your quotes say NOTHING about when the administration knew what. How was the communication between the airline and the white house handled? When did the airline share what it knew. This seems like great hindsight to me. What an amazing ability you have to selectively quote things and create a revisionist history to achieve your own agenda.

So what you expected was for 1 man or at best a group of what 10(?) to take over every aspect of everything immediately? Seems to me the people in charge of their respective areas would be the ones to stat doing this, with some type of direction from their leadership. How quickly you forget that this was something totally out of the realm of any rational person's logic?

Typical assumption to achieve a personal agenda, typical.

A huge part of leadership is delegation and allowing those in charge to take care of their respective areas of expertise. What was/is the communication stream from an airline to the administration? Who knew what when and when was it relayed to the actual people you are criticizing?

Define an "attacking airliner." Who is going to make that assessment? How, When? based upon what information? Where are they flying? Over a city, a town hundreds or thousands of people below??? What a ridiculous statement, even for you. Since then we have had multiple incidents where tw has posted just the opposite of this, the plane from Canada is just one example.

All other points aside, this is, yes, exactly what we expect them to do.

I agree with smooth. Yes, that is exactly what I would want them to do, and know how to do.

If nothing else, I think the leaders are more prepared for just about anything. Well, one would hope.

I watch United 93, a real time account, and it's chilling: no one ever expected anything like this. We need to expect anything. Our highest ranking officials should have a game plan, so that yes, they can take over every aspect of everything immediately. Scary and cynical, but true.

Sure they should take charge, but it takes time for the right information to be passed up the line and assessed, even if anyone had foreseen such an attack.
Fortunately the people that had the information acted responsibly.

As much as I dislike Bush, I think he was fully aware the team that travels with him on Air Force one was much more capable than he, in accessing information and acting on it.

The last thing you want in an emergency situation with "fog of war" in effect is for all command decisions to come from the very top. WTF does the Pres know about grounding commercial aviation? "Sir, do you want them to just head to the closest airport from the nearest beacon?" "Wait let me call my buddy who's a pilot and we can figure that out."

The idea is that competent people, when given the "word" from the pres, do the actual "doing." They do what needs done in their particular area of expertise: this to me is just a plan to make it work if there ever were a cyber-attack, rather than everyone running around waiting for permission to do what they already know needs to be done. I certainly wouldn't envision Obama logging on to his computer and start doing all the things that need doing. ;)

No need for a "word". They already have it.

Wishful thinking - I really do not see how that is a practical expectation for decisionmaking in any "organization" the size of our Gov't. That's what the delegation of responsibilities is for.

So what you are saying is all the people on that plane should have waited for a call from GWB before taking any action???? HUH?

You nailed it, as usual.

I want the people with the most knowledge and experience, the most competance and the most cool under fire to act when there is a situation It is the president's job to be in charge at all times. Maybe it shouldn't be. I for one am glad that Bush was not ruling the roost at this point.

HUH? right back atcha. I was referring to the timeline of the decision making events. Have you seen the movie?

Yes, about 5-6 times. Why?

Oh, you're going to do that?

Never mind.

Gonna do what? To what are you referring?

Lesson learned from the recent election unpleasantness in Iran?

Isn't there some saying about "who controls the flow of information?"

The Chief of Staff whispers in his ear, "A second plane has just struck the World Trade Center. American is under attack." So what does he do? He did exactly what you as an extremist would do. He sat there. He did nothing. He never even asked one question. After 15 minutes he finally got out of a child's chair - while America was under attack for another 15 minutes.

He could not decide what to do next. His next major decision was to get out of a child's chair (even if it scared FL school children). Eventually a Secret Service agent had to make obvious decisions.

Common knowledge - not even debatable. The George Jr administration was incompetent everywhere. That original post is a complete lie. No wonder wackos did everything they could to subvert the 911 Commission - also a well documented fact. Otherwise their extremist disciples could not post lies here. And yet one would post a lie – and then deny it is a lie?

The original post is as suspect as its source. "A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president's power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001." Anyone with minimal grasp of reality knows that is a complete lie. “A second plane has just struck the World Trade Center.” The president just sits there doing nothing until sometime after 9:20. Never even asks one question. So John White at 9:25 does what he does not even have the power to do. He – not the mental midget – commands a nationwide ground stop. Because nobody would make a decision. George Jr was too busy trying to decide to get up from a child’s chair – did not even ask one question. Wacko extremists cannot deal with this reality. classicman even denies it.

Then wackos blamed Saddam! Of course, sooner or later, Obama will be blamed. Wackos will say anything, even here, to defend routine extremist incompetence. Defend obvious incompetence on 11 September.

Now those wackos deny they were blaming Saddam for 11 Sept? Extremists must rewrite history including “President Bush grounded all aircraft”. He could not even decide to get out of a child’s chair. No problem. Extremists will tell us how to think and who to fear. That is what the original post does - tell us who to fear. Enemies are still lurking everywhere waiting to kill us all. Axis of evil: anyone who read the 911 Commission report.

The original post is obviously suspect due to its source. It even lies about George Jr. Any honest person knows wackos could never make a decision to protect America – which even explains why we must refight the Afghanistan war all over again.

What is the greatest threat to America? The author of that original post and anyone who would entertain the fears that wackos need to promote. It even rewrites history as any good wacko would do: George Jr ordered a nationwide ground stop. Who is still so demented as to believe that? Only a wacko.

Now tw, stop... breath...in, out, in, out, in, out... take a sip of water...

It goes like this (paraphrase, of course):

Me: I think...blah blah blah, because if you pay attention to the timeline there were a lot of decisions that could have been made more efficiently...blah blah blah the movie illustrates this...blah blah blah.

You (or a number of other posters): HUH? Are you stupid. Those people on the plane...

Me: Have you seen the movie? I'm not talking about the people on the plane...

You: Yeah, 9000 times. What of it.

(At this point I'm thinking "what of it" is that I was referring to the timeline of events that we weren't prepared for and perhaps we could be better prepared but what the fuck am I doing hitting this brick wall again) so I say:

Oh, you're going to do that? Never mind.

You: Going to do what?

That is your circular argument crap. Y'all may not think I have anything to add or anything worthy to say. That's fine. Just don't pull the crap you pull on tw. You don't want intelligent discourse, like so many others, you want drama and crap.

I just get really tired of trying to add something to the conversation, when it's really quite futile.

You know why some of you hate the T-dub? Because he's usually right.:eyebrow:

This post should not be lost in the tempest.


And about this "emergency control", he couldn't over-ride rule 34, could he?

Sorry- Shaw - perhaps my huh came out wrong in text. I was honestly asking which part you were referring to in the movie. I've got a LOT on my plate and was looking for a little distraction. Now I got you. Also you have much to add to these discussions and I wish you would get off the "you all think..." crap and say what you think. Personally, I think you have more to add and more people are interested in hearing/reading it than you think.

Oh and welcome back Tommy. You still gotta work on getting them under 1000 words, avoid using "wacko extremists", insults and actually address the point instead of just posting another anti-Bush rant, but its nice to see your blood is still flowing.

I fixed that for ya.:p

Hate? Pretty strong word there. Wacko extremist? Yea. :p

Dude, you should have acknowledged literary license in that post.