How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Why?   [ Page: 1  2  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Why?

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


25 posted 04-07-2009 03:30 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
Does your U.K. version give such authority to the Prime Minister?


If you mean would the Prime Minister have the authority to remove the compromised government or critical system from the internet Denise, then yes, he could authorise that. He could also authorise the isolation of any private network that was found to be the source of an attack on a government or critical system.

It would be stupid not to give someone that power.

.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


26 posted 04-07-2009 03:35 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

No, what I mean Grinch, is it codified in your law explicity giving him the authority to proclaim a cyber emergency or threat and then to limit or shut down internet systems, with no checks and balances on his decisions and actions?
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


27 posted 04-07-2009 07:47 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Denise,

          The Brits take great and justifiable pride in their constitution and their rights, as great as we do here.  But I suspect that you make a mistake when you think of it as a written one.  The Brits feel their constitution is the stronger for not being written down in a single document, as ours is, and can give you a very good argument about that.  Their notion of checks and balances is pretty real as well, but not, as I understand it, as formal as is ours.  In order to get a good answer from Grinch you'll probably have to work around this American notion that it all has to be written down to get the sort of answer you're looking for.  I can't say for sure, since I'm from the U.S. as well, but I think this may be some of the source of your difficulty in getting the sort of information you're looking for.

     Of course, I may just be looking foolish, as well, which goes very well with the new outfit I'm looking for, for all the spring shindigs.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


28 posted 04-07-2009 10:38 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Yes, he explained it in the other thread, Bob. Their form of government is more like a business model with the Prime Minister essentially being the CEO of that business.

You don't look foolish at all, Bob. And I'm sure your new outfits will be most suitable for your Spring shindigs!
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


29 posted 04-08-2009 09:37 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Followed the news today, Denise?  Power grid, Russians, Chinese, etc.?

     If they didn't do it, they'd be absolutely idiotic not to; it's cheap and effective methodology for crippling an industrialized and information intense country.  In the same way that we'd be silly not to be able to carry out proportionately less effective attacks against them because they are less centralized at this point.  I think.

     It's not that I think that your suspicions may not have some sort of basis in terms of an attack on privacy (The Atlantic Monthly was writing Cover Stories about this as far back as 1968 or 1970, by the way); it's that we need to make plans to cope with the realities of this stuff after pretending there was nothing to it for almost 40 years.  You have a perfect right to be distressed.

     Blaming Obama for saying that it's time to deal with it simply doesn't make much sense.  You didn't believe the first 40 years worth of messengers; and now, suddenly, this one is is tyrant for reminding you of the truth when you can't escape it?  You act as if the threat was new and as if you knew nothing about it, and had no chance to contribute to the discussion.

     Car 54 where was you?

     Sincerely, Bob Kaven
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


30 posted 04-10-2009 12:24 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I'm not against safeguards and measures to protect against cyber threats and attacks, Bob. I just think that the proposed legislation needs to be cleaned up a bit so that it doesn't give such broad unchecked authority to one man, the President.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


31 posted 04-11-2009 04:29 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Grinch explained that that wasn't the case, and how, and gave examples, didn't he?
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


32 posted 04-11-2009 04:39 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K




     From what Grinch says, the President is still restrained by law.

     Granted, after what the last president did with his assurances about being restrained by law (about wire-taps, for example), I can see why you might not want to trust any President, ever again.  And that's part of the damage that needs to addressed and undone in this administration; and it may not be possible to undo damage that deep and lasting very quickly at all.  It will probably take at least a few decades of administrations, Democratic and Republican, acting honorably, to get things back on track.

     Or we may not be able to recover at all.  The whole country was very badly wounded, I think, domestically and abroad.  I think it very important we get this right.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


33 posted 04-11-2009 07:49 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Congrats, Bob. The streak continues....
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


34 posted 04-11-2009 04:31 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



The editing, Balladeer?  If that's what you mean, I didn't catch it, and I am sorry.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


35 posted 04-11-2009 04:33 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     If you mean something other than the faulty editing, you'll need to be specific.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


36 posted 04-11-2009 04:36 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I meant working Bush into a reply. That pointing finger MUST be getting tired by now, surely!
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


37 posted 04-12-2009 05:43 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



      You still manage to comment on Carter, Mike, with apparent venom.  I don't feel I am a better man than you are, and I find it unlikely that Carter might be charged with war crimes or crimes against humanity at this late date in a war crimes tribunal.  Nor are there still decisions to be made yet as to whether he might be tried for murder.

     Manufacturing an unnecessary war on fabricated charges and then looking for reasons to stay in it by itself would be reason enough to remember him.  But it's most important not to allow other people to forget what happens when you allow neoconservatives to control the government and to make it over into their image of what government should be like:  Controlled by the executive branch (do you remember the phrase "unitary executive"? and the efforts of the vice-president and the president to concentrate power in the hands of the executive branch?  Do you remember "signing statements" that attempt to undercut the law making authority of the legislature that were such a frequent part of the President's signing ritual?

     These were attacks on the balance of powers in the constitution, and should be remembered as clearly as FDR's ill considered attempts to pack the Supreme Court.  We forget these intrusions on our liberty, by left or by the right, at our peril.

     Whatever my admirations are for FDR, and I have many of them, this should not be forgotten.  And the efforts of President bush were on what seem to my mind to be a much grander scale.  If I can remember the flaws of a personal hero who died before I was born, what do you suggest my policy should be for somebody whose flaws I consider to be substantially more egregious, and which I am uncertain that our democracy will survive?

     And when was the last backhanded slap I heard you make at a Democratic President or Vice-President currently out of office?  Whatever the length of my criticism of the former President Bush, it has been at least eight years shorter than that, hasn't it?  

     Considering the amount of venom being poured on the head of the current President, much of it without attribution, I consider it a bit confusing when you feel that enough has been said, with attribution and references, about our Last President.  

     I'm afraid that "The pointing finger" (the phrase is yours in this case, from the posting above.  From the FitzGerald translation of Omar Kayyam, I think.  "The moving finger writes, and having write, moves on..."  If I've pegged it incorrectly, all corrections appreciated.) will continue to deployed where I feel it appropriate, as in those cases in which responsibility is being transfered without having been first acknowledged as to origins.  In this spirit, I commend the line directly following the one you make reference to in The Rubiyyat.

Bob Kaven

    
    
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


38 posted 04-12-2009 09:22 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

True enough, Bob, but it would appear we have met the moving finger that doesn't move on. I find it interesting that, whenever I used to mention Slick Willie, I got a barrage of "Get over it. He's not the president any more", and yet some reference to Bush seems to show up in a large percentage of your posts, whether relevant or not. That's your right. I simply gave you the acknowledgement of remaining true to your plan.

I understand that, whatever goes wrong with Obama's platforms, will somehow be the fault of Bush. A wide variety of Bush's platforms, not to mention the state of the current housing market, can be dated back to Clinton - but, to mention that, draws the "get over it" reprisals so I say, for those who have difficult time commenting without working GW into it, "get over it".

Happy Easter, Bob....
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


39 posted 04-12-2009 05:45 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     No, though if you're  willing to document clearly, as I would have to agree also, and give President Clinton the appropriate title President Clinton, in this case, I would be interested.  The nickname you use is derogatory, as you well know, and belies the pretense of adult discussion.  Accepting an invitation to talk without that respect would be a sham, which is why I had trouble with our discussions before.  But if you are interested in talking about this sort of thing, I think I have considerable to learn from such a discussion and would be happy to talk.

     I have no need to defend everything President Clinton or even the Democratic Party did, so it should be an interesting discussion indeed.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


40 posted 04-12-2009 05:52 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     No, though if you're  willing to document clearly, as I would have to agree also, and give President Clinton the appropriate title President Clinton, in this case, I would be interested.  The nickname you use is derogatory, as you well know, and belies the pretense of adult discussion.  Accepting an invitation to talk without that respect would be a sham, which is why I had trouble with our discussions before.  But if you are interested in talking about this sort of thing, I think I have considerable to learn from such a discussion and would be happy to talk.

     I have no need to defend everything President Clinton or even the Democratic Party did, so it should be an interesting discussion indeed.

     And, as much as you would appear wish to frame History as if it began when the current President took office, all the Brave cries of "Get over it!" in the world will not erase a single word of it.  As the Rubiyyat says.

     Thank you for the Easter wishes, Mike.  Mine to you as well.

Bob Kaven
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Why?   [ Page: 1  2  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors