Slashdot Mirror


Executive Order Grants US Gov't New Powers Over Communication Systems

An anonymous reader writes "President Obama has issued a new executive order: 'Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions.' EPIC reports: 'The Executive Order grants new powers to the Department of Homeland Security, including the ability to collect certain public communications information. Under the Executive Order the White House has also granted the Department the authority to seize private facilities when necessary, effectively shutting down or limiting civilian communications.' A few key excerpts from the exec order: 'The views of all levels of government, the private and nonprofit sectors, and the public must inform the development of national security and emergency preparedness (NS/EP) [National Security/Emergency Preparedness] communications policies, programs, and capabilities. ... Sec. 5.2. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall: (a) oversee the development, testing, implementation, and sustainment of NS/EP communications, including: communications that support Continuity of Government; Federal, State, local, territorial, and tribal emergency preparedness and response communications; non-military executive branch communications systems; critical infrastructure protection networks; and non-military communications networks, particularly with respect to prioritization and restoration; .... (e) satisfy priority communications requirements through the use of commercial, Government, and privately owned communications resources, when appropriate."

14 of 513 comments (clear)

  1. Extremely misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Read the Exec, Order. This is not about monitoring specific communication, it's about maintaining the integrity of the communication network so that in the event of an emergency communication doesn't go down.

    For those of us in NYC, we should remember core telephone, pager, and cellular infrastructure going down back on 9/11...circuit congestion was through the fucking roof, and someone is turning a "must make communications possible" into "BB is watching you."

    The spin is disgusting, and the brainless will never actually read the executive order and understand it anyway. Da govment gona take my phone! Dey do this in E-jupt and Ly-bia. Fucking retards, the lot of you.

    1. Re:Extremely misleading by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Informative

      > You forgot to quote the part where they are empowered to seize civilian facilities.

      The summary is a gross lie.

      Go read the actual executive order. There is no such place where empowerment to seize civilian facilities is described. In fact the order is just a directive to establish an emergency communications plan.

      Slashdot can be really bad at times. This was one of the worst examples I've seen.

  2. Re:Dear President Obama, by dbcad7 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Typical.. read the summary that is flat out wrong, and go ballistic... First it does not grant power over communications, as in all communications, it is for the governments own emergency communications.. second there is nothing about seizing anything... here it is read it for yourself.. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/06/executive-order-assignment-national-security-and-emergency-preparedness-

    --
    waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
  3. Re:Dear President Obama, by gregulator · · Score: 1, Informative

    I am sure many would express that parent's sentiment, regardless of this article or its summary.

  4. Re:When Egypt or Libya does it, it's bad, of cours by Baloroth · · Score: 4, Informative

    Executive Order != legislation. The President cannot enact legislation. All an order can do is give certain organizations power that the President already holds. If he doesn't hold them already, he cannot designate them to another body, which means TFA is probably wildly exaggerating what the order actually means.

    --
    "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
  5. Re:Not to sound cranky and old... by sunking2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Perhaps you should read the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 before being so certain about what our forefathers would say. The past is not nearly as romantic as we are told.

  6. a careful reading of the actual executive order by RLBrown · · Score: 5, Informative

    Upon a careful reading of the actual executive order, I find, in my humble opinion, that the order does none of things that are being ranted about. First, the bulk of the order are instructions to DHS to develop policies and procedures to ensure that communications will survive in the event of a national emergency. Second, it does allude to ensuring that federal needs will have priority during emergencies, a privilege the government already enjoys. Third, it carefully notes that the authority of the FCC is not being superseded by the order, and that the FCC has control over any communications channels that have been assigned to the federal government, i.e. DHS does not. Frankly, it reads as a get your act together directive, not a sweeping grab of new federal powers.

    --
    -- Perhaps I see less than some, but more than many.
  7. Re:When Egypt or Libya does it, it's bad, of cours by Creepy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Maybe you should refresh yourself on executive orders - they are by definition law, and therefore are legislation without representation. They bypass congress. They have essentially unlimited power. They can only be overturned by the court system and the courts don't have to be informed about them if they are classified as national security. The only people that have to be informed about executive order in this case is the national security council. Oh, and yes, it is a given right to the President in the Constitution.

  8. Re:When Egypt or Libya does it, it's bad, of cours by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Informative

    as bad as O is, it would be worse with republicans in charge.

    I dunno. I mean, we're seeing time, and time again how Obama is pushing for more Federal (and presidential) power concentration, and erosion of citizens'/states' rights and privacy.

    He swapped his vote/position on the Telecommunications act awhile back...has shown nothing but support for Patriot act renewals, and now this.

    Again, it bear saying: The definition of "Insanity" is doing the same thing over and over and over again...and expecting a different outcome.

    I'm not a huge Romney fan....but while he is pretty much an unknown when it comes to these issues....we downright positively know how Obama and his administration treats and supports these issues.

    I don't really see them repealing or even easing up on these types of issues and legislation on a 2nd term unrestricted by the need for re-election...do you?

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  9. Re:When Egypt or Libya does it, it's bad, of cours by gorzek · · Score: 4, Informative

    Meh. Every President at least as far back as JFK has issued Executive Orders like this, giving the President broad powers to seize all sorts of stuff should there ever be a "national emergency." It's unclear whether they are Constitutional or whether anyone would follow orders to enforce them.

    I'm not thrilled with Obama doing it, but let's not pretend this is some novel, new thing that previous Presidents wouldn't have dared.

  10. Re:Not to sound cranky and old... by Bigby · · Score: 3, Informative

    And most everyone was against that. In fact, the next several Presidents were on the side of the political fence opposite John Adams. The people and most founders were like "WTF?!"

    But you are correct that Hamilton and John Adams would be perfectly fine with the use of these Executive Orders (which only seemed to really be abused since Nixon)

  11. Re:When Egypt or Libya does it, it's bad, of cours by gorzek · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yeah, especially since the summary turned out to be a lot of baseless hysteria, and the EO is actually about protecting our communications systems in the event of an emergency--not the government "seizing" them.

  12. Re:When Egypt or Libya does it, it's bad, of cours by s.petry · · Score: 3, Informative

    You believe they are actually on different teams?

    Have you seen "The Obama Deception" on youtube? I was going to type a long ass rant, but will save the trouble. Just watch that movie please.

    Read this wonderful 2 thousand year old story. Then ask yourself why a majority of American's know more about Celebrities and Sports than they do about Politics. It is not a new story mind you, through history we have seen the same thing repeated over and over. It never ends well for the majority that get shammed by people in power.

    There are so many indicators that we are in deep shit, yet very few will talk about them. These types of executive orders dismantling the constitution are not new, but recently they have been quite drastic. Corporate controlled media will not talk about them. I watch and listen to the "News", but can assure you that there is very little "News" to be found.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  13. Re:When Egypt or Libya does it, it's bad, of cours by NotSanguine · · Score: 4, Informative

    as bad as O is, it would be worse with republicans in charge. I truly do believe that.

    That is quite a strong belief system you have with no solid proof to back it up.

    I personally think we have MORE religion than we need in this country.

    Hmmmm.....

    I don't know. 8 Years of GW Bush was proof enough for me.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr