White House may make NSA the 'traffic cop' over U.S. computer networks

Roy garlic at garlic.com
Tue Feb 15 22:08:36 UTC 2005


I think that puts HomeLand Security in the same category as Congress :-)

Roy Engehausen

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:

>On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:44:27 EST, "Brance Amussen :)_S" said:
>  
>
>>The question... 
>>How soon before all AS owners passing *any* government traffic, will be
>>required to install "Homeland Security (NSA) taps"? Even if the traffic is
>>in transit to another AS.. 
>>Not all government agencies are on the NMCI. 
>>Somewhere along the line, they are going to say they need taps to maintain
>>security *premeptive security* that is.. 
>>In the interest of Homeland Security I doubt it will be long.. 
>>    
>>
>
>Especially in light of *this* little gem:
>
>http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleprint/2664/-1/315/
>
>Congress Votes to Waive All Laws for Homeland Security
>
>» OMB Watch » Home » Regulatory Policy » In Congress » DHS Above the Law
>
>Published  02/10/2005 04:33 PM
>
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>Contact: Robert Shull, (202) 234-8494
>
>WASHINGTON (February 10, 2005) ­ The House of Representatives voted 243 to
>179 today to reject an amendment that would have stripped section 102 from
>the ³REAL ID Act of 2005² (H.R. 418). The bill, as passed, would empower
>the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive any federal laws, without
>limit, in the course of building barriers along the nation¹s borders. This
>controversial, precedent-setting legislation received no hearings or
>extended debate prior to passage. The bill now moves to the Senate for
>consideration.
>
>The following is a statement by J. Robert Shull, Senior Regulatory Policy
>Analyst with OMB Watch.
>
>³America is a nation founded on the rule of law, but apparently not when
>homeland security is involved. This is a license to waive any law, for any
>reason ­ or for no reason at all.
>
>³If enacted, this bill would grant the Homeland Security Secretary
>unbridled authority to act however he sees fit, without consequence. His
>actions also would be exempt from judicial review, making him unaccountable
>to any authority.
>
>³Laws that protect the environment, safeguard public health, ensure
>consumer and workplace safety, prevent unfair business practices, and ban
>discrimination ­ none of these laws, or any others, would apply to the
>Department of Homeland Security.
>
>³No government agency should be above the laws that preserve America¹s
>democracy.²
>
>
>  
>




More information about the NANOG mailing list