Latest baseball scores, trades, talk, ideas, opinions, and standings

Archive for the ‘have we weakened US security interests abroad’ Category

>One Number For All Net Accounts – What A Dumb Idea

>

National Security ID For Internet? What A Bad Idea!

By Don White

If you believe it is a good idea for the Commerce Department to have your identity sign-in number that will work for all websites you enter, you believe in  the conditions described in George Orwell’s 1984. It’s scary, man! Actually, I see a security breach for all Americans over this one. Think about it, you’ll figure it out. If hackers want to put their grimy fingers on you, all they need now is one security number and you’re theirs.

The phony reason given by the Obama  Administration is that it will help you remember and you won’t have to maintain all the passwords and usernames. If you believe that, you believe government is out to help you in every instance and in every case. It’s not! Too much government is stifling. And what business does the government have encroaching upon the Internet.

Government doesn’t own the Internet.

“Get away from me, Big Brother. You’re poisonous. A darned skunk just spryed you, and now you want me to smell like you? No thanks”

“No, I like you,” government would reply. “You might have some unreported taxes to pay.”

Then why didn’t the IRS take over the Internet and be done with it. I demand government be done with the lies and the subterfuge, dishonesty, and deceit. Government doesn’t give, it always takes. I don’t want some wicked government bureaucrat knowing which sites I like, where I go on the Internet. My password on Click Bank or on PayPal. My password into my bank.

No, I’m not a porn watcher; I don’t gamble; I don’t look at naked women; I don’t rob banks or use drugs, either.But it appears some government workers would be set up well for cyber-theft if they had everyone’s number or password into their most private accounts.

If you want to make a great investment, invest in companies that protect you from identity theft because I’ll tell you right now. There’s going to be an outbreak of identity theft in America over this one.

Just imagine how much easier it would be for big government to keep track of us if they  could track our trips on the Internet. Where’s the sacred right to privacy in America. And just imagine how much easier it would be for someone in government to assume our identities if that person had ourr one master security number.

I view this as just one more infringement upon our rights of privacy. Now they have my driver’s license number, probably my library card number, and all other numbers. Now they know what I like, what I order over the Net – like if I order guns, pep pills and vitamins over the Net, or clothing, or garage equipment or furniture for my house. Too much knowledge by government means too much power to meddle in the lives of U.S. citizens who used to be covered by the Constitution for privacy.

. “Get away from me, Government, you literally stink, and soon so will I”
__________________________________________________________________
.Government monitoring of what Americans are doing in cyberspace has moved a bit closer to reality, as President Barack Obama announces plans to hand over authority to create an Internet ID for all Americans to the U.S. Commerce Department, a White House official tells CBS News.

obama, computer, personal, idThe plan, touted as the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, is raising eyebrows about privacy issues over concerns that creating a centralized database is an infringement on Americans’ rights. It is expected to be released in the next several months.
Go to Newsmax For entire story: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Obama-Internet-ID-Americans/2011/01/10/id/382368?s=al&promo_code=B6F0-1

Read more: Obama Eyes Internet ID for All Americans
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama’s Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Advertisements

>The Next Terrorist Attack May Be Economic

>US security threats?

Matt Apuzzo and Eileen Sullivan of the Associated Press have posted a story telling us that if we over-concentrate on a physical assault like a car bombing on Wall Street we may be missing the point.

Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair testified on Capitol Hill
that while trillions of dollars in government spending might stabilize the economy, it may have weakened some U.S. security interests abroad and hampered the nation’s ability to respond financially to an attack at home.

That curious conclusion by security and financial analysts reveals one of the unexpected consequences that could emerge from the government’s bailout and stimulus plans. It also shows how intertwined the economy and national security have become. The top U.S. intelligence official, Dennis Blair, recently said the economy was the nation’s foremost security concern.

“We have set the stage for a catastrophe,” said James Rickards, a financial consultant at the research firm Omnis Inc. of McLean, Va., who provides security research for the Pentagon and others in the intelligence field.

Security officials long have worried about threats to financial institutions. In 2004, police increased security at the New York Stock Exchange and elsewhere in response to a perceived al-Qaida threat. But the focus was on car bombs, suitcase nuclear weapons or hijacked airplanes, not economics.

That’s the way it has been for years.

The FBI and the Homeland Security Department’s joint report on potential terrorist attack methods last year did not mention economic sabotage. The Homeland Security’s five-year threat assessment focused primarily on weapons of mass destruction, leaving the limited discussion about economic attacks to a section on computer hackers.

If terrorists or countries wanted to send U.S. financial markets into a tailspin, they would not need an explosion. Several financial doomsday scenarios have circulated in intelligence and financial circles.

One goes like this: A foreign government or a terrorist group with substantial financial backing sets up several overseas hedge funds. Acting together, they dump U.S. stocks, perhaps by short-selling a major financial index or by targeting key U.S. companies. The attack begins slowly, picking up speed over several hours as it creates panic and confusion in the market.

The U.S. is more susceptible to such an attack today, analysts say, because Wall Street is so shaky. For instance, after the 2001 terrorist attacks, the government pumped money into the banking system to bolster the economy. Doing so again wouldn’t be as easy. The government has already spent trillions on bank bailouts and short-term lending to try to prop up banks, with mixed results.

“Now, if the stock market crashes, banks are not going to be in a position to jump in. We’re on our own,” Rickards said.

To pay for the bailout and stimulus plans, the government must issue bonds, many of which will be bought by China and other countries. Beijing could use those bonds as a weapon. Selling them in bulk would send U.S. interest rates rising, providing a new drag on the economy.

Such a move could backfire on China because the economies of the two countries are closely tied. But U.S. officials have expressed fear about the threat. In January 2008, the Congressional Research Service said the best way for the government to allay those fears would be to stop spending so much and start saving more.

Yet spending in the name of economic recovery has reached record levels. That will make it harder for the U.S. to get tough with Beijing on human rights or threaten economic penalties during a diplomatic dispute, said George Foresman, a former Homeland Security undersecretary who now provides security consulting to financial companies.

Blair’s words surprised some lawmakers, including Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., who questioned any change of focus away from threats such as al-Qaida, Iran and North Korea.
“My intent in drawing attention to the economic crisis was more to inform policy of the things that could really cause real problems for the United States if they developed a certain way,” Blair replied.

But Blair said he wouldn’t be using the nation’s spy satellites to look at economic data.