Alex Jones joins Russia Today to discuss the proposed cyber security legislation recently passed in the US House of Representatives. (Video follows excerpts and commentary)
I’m concerned because almost a year ago Obama’s new head of cyber security resigned, this was in the Washington Post, saying the Pentagon is taking the internet over. So they’re telling the public it’s to stop Chinese and Russian cyber attacks that are basically non-existent. That’s just the cover, it’s a false flag. The real architecture of this is the NSA and the Air Force are building more than a dozen centers around the country, one just a few miles from me here in Austin and San Antonio, that are spying on the American people with Google, that are tracking everything we’re doing. The United Nations that’s controlled by the big central banks that run our nation have called for a net ID, or internet ID, more draconian than Chinese net censorship.
Cyber security, according to the former head of it, who valiantly resigned, is a Orwellian police state takeover of the internet because the people are communicating with each other and exposing the corruption and saying no to the fraud. Our corrupt government is illegitimate and is aware that a peaceful renaissance, a revolution of awakening and understanding similar to what happened in the lead up to 1776, is taking place.
The cyber security legislation is being called a “Resarch Bill”, and is designed to help increase research, education and international coordination of cyber security guidelines.
As a former telecommunications operation manager for a large phone company in the early 2000′s I have seen first hand what a cyber attack looks like and can tell you that the origination of the attack, based on the research performed in our network operations control center, was China.
We experienced a complete loss of data and phone processing for approximately 24 hours, with intermittent service affecting problems the day preceding and following the complete outage. This was not a minor issue and the outage affected 36 metropolitan areas and millions of customers.
It is my view that Chinese hackers have been infiltrating commercial phone, data and utility networks for at least the last decade*. There have also been reports recently that Chinese originated IP addresses have gained complete access to the Pentagon’s intranet, and probably other military networks.
While experts call these cyber infiltrations “attacks,” perhaps a better word would be “evaluations,” as those who hacked our networks did not intend to completely destroy them – not yet, at least.
As we have mentioned previously, we believe that the United States is engaged in a global war. The Chinese, being the “peace” loving communists they are, are always at a state of war so long as other global powers are not communist. “Peace” as defined by a communist, is when everyone else is a communist. This is the psychology of communism, and understanding this concept is critical to understanding the motivations of the Chinese and other communist states.
The internet is just one of many battlefields in this new war. There is no doubt in my mind that the United States is engaging in similar cyber evaluations within Chinese and Russian networks.
In this respect, cyber security is a key element of preventing damage to the US internet infrastructure. Most people would agree that we need to take the necessary steps to prevent infiltration of our water stations, electricity grid, oil/gas transport systems, data networks and phone lines.
The Constitution does give powers to the Federal government for defense of our nation, and cyber threats such as those described above probably fall within this power.
The problem, of course, is that we are looking to a bureaucratic government to effectively provide cyber security. And given the fact that they can’t even provide border security, we question their ability to properly secure the US internet infrastructure, and to do so without infringing on the privacy rights of our citizens.
As we fight wars and send soldiers to die half way around the world in the name of terrorism, our federal government has failed to secure our physical borders right here at home, and have instead, focused their attention within the United States on private citizens.
Cyber security of the United States should not require the cooperation of other countries within the United Nations. This is a national security issue, and should be treated as such.
Though we may disagree on the extent of the cyber threats facing our nation from foreign sources, the fear that Alex Jones has regarding this bill and cyber security legislation going forward is completely justified given the federal government’s history of unconstitutional actions against citizens of the United States. Plenty of evidence exists that when the federal government is given power, they often use it contrary to its stated purpose – and cyber security will be no different. In fact, Mr. Jones’ analogy comparing cyber security to an Orwellian police state is pretty close to what we may have in this country in the very near future, if not already.
If the US government implements cyber security to prevent threats from China or Russia, great, we’re all for it. But the same cyber security that will be used to prevent attacks from other nations can just as easily be turned on the American people, and if history is any guide, it will be.
We must also point out, once again, that if we are dealing with the United Nations being an enforcement arm, then the privacy and rights of US citizens are put into the hands of a global government that does not adhere to our Constitutional protections.
One particular UN resolution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is particularly troubling. This document outlines what rights citizens of the world have, and everything seems well and good until you read Article 29, section 3, which states, “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”
We would not put it past the UN or the US Congress to agree to a broad array of definitions for what does or does not constitute a “cyber threat.” In this case, any discussion on a blog, forum, chat or web site may one day be deemed contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN.
Mac Slavo Views:
Read by 44 people Date: February 8th, 2010 Website:www.SHTFplan.com
Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.
The content on this site is provided as general information only. The ideas expressed on this site are solely the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the opinions of sponsors or firms affiliated with the author(s). The author may or may not have a financial interest in any company or advertiser referenced. Any action taken as a result of information, analysis, or advertisement on this site is ultimately the responsibility of the reader.