But the spell has broken. Not for all of course, but for enough. Enough people have started to question the officially sanctioned narrative and this wavelength moves through the deep sea of people and TPTB don't know where it is exactly but they're worried that a rogue wave is about to swamp their luxury liner command center.
That damn internet. If it wasn't for that damn internet they could pull everything off without a hitch. They've tried controlling the internet and filling it with plants but the truth keeps popping up anyway. Maybe if there was an emergency, something kind of terrifying, and if we had a bill authorizing the president to take control of the nation's critical infrastructure....
Yeah yeah, that's the ticket....
But they don't have time for that. They have serious PR emergencies RIGHT NOW. Not to worry. These things can always be arranged. That's what the Unitary Executive is for -- to Protect National Security!
When Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the original bill in April, they claimed it was vital to protect national cybersecurity. "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs--from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records," Rockefeller said.
...Rockefeller's revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a "cybersecurity workforce plan" from every federal agency, a "dashboard" pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months--even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete.
See? All they have to do is deem some internet companies "critical" to National Security in an emergency situation, like say a terrorist attack, and they fall magically under the umbrella of government control. Voila. I'm sure companies like AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and all the big boys will be deemed critical. And any little independent companies not deemed critical will probably come under suspicion for aiding and abetting terrorists or something like that. Should be fun. Nobody will know what's going on and they'll have to watch tv to get any information.
Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security."
...Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
It's all to Keep You Safe, and Don't You Forget It (wink wink wink)! In fact, here's a dramatic statement, dripping with every power word they can possibly cram into it, provided by Jena Longo, deputy communications director for the Senate Commerce committee:
The president of the United States has always had the constitutional authority, and duty, to protect the American people and direct the national response to any emergency that threatens the security and safety of the United States. The Rockefeller-Snowe Cybersecurity bill makes it clear that the president's authority includes securing our national cyber infrastructure from attack. The section of the bill that addresses this issue, applies specifically to the national response to a severe attack or natural disaster. This particular legislative language is based on longstanding statutory authorities for wartime use of communications networks.OK that seems pretty clear that the president can secure (control) the national infrastructure from attack as part of the national response to a severe attack or natural disaster based on statutory authorities for wartime use of communication networks. Right?
WRONG! THAT'S NOT WHAT IT SAYS CAN'T YOU READ?????
To be very clear, the Rockefeller-Snowe bill will not empower a "government shutdown or takeover of the Internet" and any suggestion otherwise is misleading and false.Oh wow, that's so confusing. The statement says one thing, and then it says the complete opposite! Yes you will allow the president to secure the private infrastructure based on the Rockefeller-Snowe bill based on longstanding statutory authorities for wartime use of communications networks, but no you will not suggest that the Rockefeller-Snowe bill empowered the president to shutdown or take over the internet. That would make you a LIAR.
So here's the instruction: "Securing the private infrastructure based on longstanding statutory authorities for wartime use of communications networks" IS NOT "shutting down or taking over the internet."
YES IT IS.
NO IT'S NOT.
YES IT IS.
The purpose of this language is to clarify how the president directs the public-private response to a crisis, secure our economy and safeguard our financial networks, protect the American people, their privacy and civil liberties, and coordinate the government's response.No. The purpose of this language is mind-fucking people into supporting the government takeover of the internet after a false-flag terrorist attack. You will support President Obama. You will listen to whatever he says. Turn on the teevee.