Ok this I do not like. To much power in one hand and to much room for abuse. I see it as a way to also combat piracy because we all know (joking) that piracy is a part of the national security.

As a dear friend (stevie) put it in a email to me and I totally agree with him:

Any controlling of the US population and our ability to communicate with each other raises all sorts of flags with me. This comes from the same side that thought the part in the Patriot Act about listening to suspected terrorists' communications without advance warning and judges' warrants was a reprehensible violation of civil rights.

Now it seems OK to put measures in place to *shut down* our own population's ability to comunicate as long as the CURRENT administration see it as necessary. Where is the outcry? I'm not hearing it yet. Maybe it's because the new prince is considered "safe" where Bush was considered reckless? We'll see.

We've been down this road many times. Which side usually creates more laws controlling it's own populace? I smell a 7-headed monster.

Bill would give Obama power to shut down Internet, networks during cyber attacks

Federal legislation introduced in the Senate this week would give President Obama the power to declare a cybersecurityemergency and then shut down both public and private networks including Internet traffic coming to and from compromised systems.

The proposed legislation, introduced April 1, also would give the President the power to "order the disconnection of any Federal government or United States critical infrastructure information systems or networks in the interest of national security.â€

This is pretty sweeping legislation,â€ says Harris. "Seems the President could turn off the Internet completely or tell someone like Verizon to limit or block certain traffic,â€ she said. "There is a lot to worry about in this bill.â€

In addition, an agency appointed by the President would control how and when systems are restored.