Pentagon joins Homeland, FBI in eyeing oversight, control of elections – question of national security?

election-security
War or Peace: Can the U.S. military be trusted to not interfere with this election by swinging the presidency to Hillary Clinton and getting America involved in a potential war with Russia?
October 2016WASHINGTON Concerns about Russian hacking into the November 8 election have now reached the Pentagon where the military’s top cyber official has outlined a plan to help the FBI and Department of Homeland Security to track an election altering attack. What’s more, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, commander of U.S. Cyber Command, has added his voice to that of Homeland Secretary Jeh Johnson who is considering whether the election system is critical infrastructure, like the power grid and financial sector, and subject to federal oversight.
“What is critical infrastructure in this digital age? Data, I would argue, is taking on a very different value in and of itself. And the ability of individuals to harness the tools of big data analytics now make access to large data concentrations…very attractive,” Rogers said at Harvard University this month in a video released Wednesday. “I look at the election sequence for example, as an example of, ‘Do we need to step back and reassess this? Hey, look, this really is part of our critical infrastructure?” he said.

vote-cyber-treat

Rogers, at an event sponsored by Harvard’s Institute of Politics speaker program, quickly added that the military is and won’t be involved in elections, but instead in tracking foreign attackers if there are any. “What we do is we are trying to understand the actions of foreign actors as they are trying to approach the network, if you will,” he told the student audience. Rogers said that there is an advantage to having 50 separate state election systems instead of a national one that would be an easier target. But he noted that one state could make a difference if results are manipulated. If a probe were required to determine if the election was hacked, he said Homeland would take the lead. Johnson recently said, “There’s a vital national interest in our election process, so I do think we need to consider whether it should be considered by my department and others critical infrastructure.”
In a hack situation, Rogers explained what would happen. “Were there concerns that they thought there were an issue that would call into question the result, [states] potentially would approach the federal government. The Department of Homeland Security would likely have overall responsibility, they likely would turn to the FBI, us, and maybe one or two others, to say, ‘Can we put together a team and harness the breadth of this knowledge and insight and capability that you have to come back with an assessment: Do we think the result is valid? Do we think it was manipulated in any way? So that’s how I think it would play out,” said the admiral. “I would not be surprised in the aftermath of the election that we go in a broader, more long term effort to step back, assess it, and ask ourselves, ‘Are we really comfortable with this structure, do we need to make changes?’” he added.  –Washington Examiner

Utopia book

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Act of terrorism, Acts of Agression, Age of Decadence, Arms Race, Civil Unrest, Civilization Unravels, Computer Hacking, Conflict Among Nations, Cyber Attack, Economic Collapse, EMP Threat, Escalating hostilities, Espionage, Flashpoint for war, Geopolitical Crisis, Hierarchal Control, Lost of National Sovereignty, MiIlitary Draft, Military Alliances, Mistrust, Nations Collapse, New World Order, Nuclear Proliferation, Preparation for War, Protests, Rumors of War, Tech Crimes, Tech War, Terrorism threat, The Pyramid Model. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Pentagon joins Homeland, FBI in eyeing oversight, control of elections – question of national security?

  1. Dennis E. says:

    War or Peace: Can the U.S. military be trusted to not interfere with this election by swinging the presidency to Hillary Clinton and getting America involved in a potential war with Russia?

    Pentagon has an ethic issue in my opinion. War means more money to buy , increased enlistments or draft and the reassignment of economic priorities.
    I think the military has since WWII, wanted a conflict with The Russians.
    I also think there has been a morality shift in the country. Look how militant/warlike we have become. Look at all the “Tactical Equipment/accessories” available on-line or in stores. It is like we breathe it and what comes to mind was the Spartan Culture of The Ancient Greeks or if you are a sci-fi fan The Klingon’s or Romulan cultures which lead only to destruction. I am not dissing the purchasing of such products, it is just the mind frame, like the Generals, they know the toys they have and perhaps are itching to see the results of their use.

    Need to remember, they have the

    Again, such talk has occurred throughout our relations with The Russians and I remember it.
    For example, during the Cold war Era, One Russian General once said, not a since American Missile would reach Moscow if fired.

    Different times we live in… The move to Globalism is in full swing….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s