After defeat of Senate cybersecurity bill, Obama weighs executive-order option

“In the wake of Congressional inaction and Republican stall tactics, unfortunately, we will continue to be hamstrung by outdated and inadequate statutory authorities that the legislation would have fixed," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said in an emailed response to whether the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

Sourc e

Is this a threat from the administration, or just more political rhetoric building up toward the election?

I think with all of the orders Obama has issued so far, there is probably a good chance that is exactly what will happen. And if that is the route this takes, who knows what other provisions will be added to circumvent the ones that supposedly do need the House and Senate to approve.

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.

Personally, I would like to see executive order powers stripped from the office of the president. I think that is extremely unlikely though.

Allegedly one of the main reasons for this cyber security bill is to protect critical infrastructure systems from hackers and or terrorists. I have come across conflicting reports of how likely it is that this could be done or even if it's possible. But I am leaning more toward the view that someone would have done it by now if they could have.

The fact of the matter is that it isn’t easy to do any of these things. Your average power grid or drinking-water system isn’t analogous to a PC or even to a corporate network. The complexity of such systems, and the use of proprietary operating systems and applications that are not readily available for study by your average hacker, make the development of exploits for any uncovered vulnerabilities much more difficult than using Metasploit.

Source

So what do you think ATS.
Is this a threat by the administration to gain more control over the internet?
Or just more Left vs. Right political posturing?

Are infrastructure systems really that vulnerable?
Or is it just the Govt. fear mongering to gain more power?

reply to post by watchitburn

Are infrastructure systems really that vulnerable?
Or is it just the Govt. fear mongering to gain more power?

My guess is a bit of both. If the internet has provided one massive game changer its the worldwide exposure of corrupt governments. Especially the United States.

So apparently they didn't get the message that this was not the will of the people.? Look at the anger and uprising on the net over sopa, it got it defeated rather soundly...

Go ahead though let them keep pushing us, one day it will be one push to many.

Originally posted by benrl
So apparently they didn't get the message that this was not the will of the people.? Look at the anger and uprising on the net over sopa, it got it defeated rather soundly...

Go ahead though let them keep pushing us, one day it will be one push to many.

Probably when Facebook & Twitter go offline..

at this point they don't surprise me.

I see the government like a traitorous blob of enemies of state,

Like a foreign country that has invaded and send mandates to the puppet government to hurt the people....

I honestly see them as our greatest enemy. there is little doubt IMO..

We have been taken over by traitors and enemies of state. They hate us and want to hurt us....

They are out to make our country a second rate dictatorship. This is just one example of the traitor that is our president and our runaway government. The FBI protects them even though they are there to fight organized crime, yet they target us at the request of obvious power hungry domestic terrorists in office.

I have no respect for our government,.....how can I? Everything they do hurts us, targets us, and makes us scared to react...

Well not me anymore... I openly say that I want them to all go away....how ever. Every thing like this is an example of their hate for us. They hate us and insult us, abuse us, threaten us, cause us all sorts of pain and anguish....we are occupied by enemies of state. Thieves, liars and terrible human beings..Them and those that defend them.

An occupying army would be an improvement. At least people wouldn't give aid and comfort to the enemy the way they do. At least our supposed defenders of the country would know who the real enemy is. Now they lie to themselves and us about how they cant tell..

how is it we all see things like this that the OP talks about and know better then them...?...not buying it. They changed teams. I hope bad things happen to them professionally and personally. I CURSE THEM. They have ruined our country and our world. This is just one example.

enemies of state.....that is what they are.

reply to post by benrl


These types of information sharing programs are need to complete the reinvention of the TIA program.

All of the organizations under DHS which now includes some Pentagon operations is the standing army our forefathers warned us about!

Originally posted by TechUnique

Originally posted by benrl
So apparently they didn't get the message that this was not the will of the people.? Look at the anger and uprising on the net over sopa, it got it defeated rather soundly...

Go ahead though let them keep pushing us, one day it will be one push to many.

Probably when Facebook & Twitter go offline..

I don't think this would be too far off the mark if Facebook and Twitter went down.



Teens and twenty-somethings would be camped out on the White House lawn.

reply to post by BIHOTZ


Well, you went ahead and hit the nail square on the head.

I don't think there is anything to add after that, well said.

Sooooo how many EOs does this make from obama?

2nd

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


you are right.....our government has our best interests in mind...they use domestic spying and Anti terror laws to target AMERICANS overwhelmingly because they care......I see the light now.....Obama cares....

Sorry. I thought they hated us and laughed at how stupid we are and how they can get away with doing what ever the hell they want.....even if we all in our vast MAJORITY do not want it...

They know better huh....yeah, that´s it.....they are so smart that they can tell that the real enemy of the USA is the people of the USA.....

ok. thanks for that. To think that I thought they just had a fixation with paranoia and domestic terrorism... because we are all secretly hateful ignorant monkeys and they need the tools to do the job of zoo keepers.....damn, they have it rough. We are a horrible people that deserve punishment and harassment.....silly us.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Oh look, it's the title of the article, copied from the story it came from.

I'd be making the same thread if it was Romney in office or even if Bush was still in. The fact of the matter is Obama has signed over 600 executive orders into law.

That's not how this country is supposed to work.

So you can take your partisan nonsense elsewhere.

ETA: The correct number of Executive orders is 132.

Obama is sucking up to the UN and their upcoming agenda with their world conference less than three month's away on re-writing the treaty on governing the internet. Unfortunately, for Obama, some of the more intelligent members in the Senate are on to this agenda.

The International Telecommunications Union meets in Dubai shortly to discuss how they "can get their ugly globalist money-making fee-imposing global-controlling tentacles" in America's business.

And Obama is the man to do it!! After all, he wants to "fundamentally change America". You bet he does.

More than all the other presidents put together if you exclude Bush, who did quite a few himself. I don't see 600 orders in my search, can you please provide link? I think there should be a limit of 3 per term or something like that.

reply to post by watchitburn

The fact of the matter is Obama has signed over 600 executive orders into law.

That's not how this country is supposed to work.

So you can take your partisan nonsense elsewhere.

Partisan nonsense...like lying about the amount of executive orders Obama has issued????

To Date...Obama has signed 131 EOs...far less than your false claim of over 600. Bush issued 290 EOs...just for a little perspective.

www.archives.gov...

reply to post by Gridrebel


Sure thing.

A Comprehensive List Of Obama’s Worst Executive Orders

And here is a thread discussing the startling number of EOs President Obama has issued.
Do Obama's Executive Orders Reveal A Pattern?


ETA: Upon Further research the information provided in these links is not accurate.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by watchitburn

 

The fact of the matter is Obama has signed over 600 executive orders into law.

That's not how this country is supposed to work.

So you can take your partisan nonsense elsewhere.

Partisan nonsense...like lying about the amount of executive orders Obama has issued????

To Date...Obama has signed 131 EOs...far less than your false claim of over 600. Bush issued 290 EOs...just for a little perspective.

www.archives.gov...

edit on 5-8-2012 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)

But ISNT 131, still TOO MUCH?

Or can you justify it ONLY, because its Obama, and he can do NOTHING wrong?

Sad.....

One more thing. IT IS Partisan Nonsense, as you brought in George Bushes record, to make your case....

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


I stand corrected.

Obama has issued 132 executive orders so far. Federal Register

I used a story I saw someone else post about a few weeks ago without looking into it. I was wrong.


And accusing someone of being a liar, when the inaccuracy was an honest mistake is not in keeping with ATS principals of civilized debate. But I gave you a star anyway for pointing out my mistake.

reply to post by sonnny1


I agree, even 1 executive order is too many. It goes against the entire concept of a Constitutional Republic.

US presidents have issued executive orders since 1789. Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 4. Most Executive Orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties

Wikipedia

Their whole reasoning for that power to even exist seems pretty shady and flimsy to me.

With the increase of Obama's inappropriate use of Executive Orders (bypassing the legislative branch of government) the Senate should weigh the impeachment option.