Showing posts with label national security threat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label national security threat. Show all posts

Thursday, September 12, 2019

Trump's Theft of Military Funding Harms Military Families

Norfolk Naval Base.
Living in southeast Virginia, the military is a constant presence.  So to are military members and their families who are both friends, neighbors and clients.  They are not props for some ego boosting reality show that exists in Donald Trump's mind.  Yet, these dedicated military members are being compromised by Trump's raiding of military funding to build his ridiculous border wall that serves no purpose other than to fire up his racist, xenophobic base. Yesterday was the anniversary of 9-11, yet true to form, Trump turned it into all about himself, putting his mental disorders yet again on open display.  A column in Newsweek looks at this theft of funds previously allocated by Congress - the branch of government that holds the power of the purse - to fund a boondoggle that merely stokes Trump never satisfied ego and thrills only the ugliest elements of his base who might as well dress in KKK garb on a daily basis. Meanwhile, military families and projects are thrown under the bus.  Here are column excerpts:

As a young man, Donald Trump actively avoided military duty, seeking five draft deferments. But now, as commander in chief, he says that "I'm making up for it rapidly because we're rebuilding our military at a level that it's never seen before." So why is this chicken hawk president stealing $3.6 billion from the U.S. military construction budget?
Trump is asking service members and their families to suffer so he can pay for a wall on our southwest border, a costly and wasteful project that is nothing more than a xenophobic vanity project. . . . . Here are just a few examples of the 127 projects that will be put on hold.
In Virginia, two hazardous materials warehouses built in the World War II era will continue storing harmful materials in "structures that do not meet current life safety/fire safety requirements."
In Kentucky, children of military families will continue attending an overcrowded middle school at Fort Campbell because planned renovations no longer have funding. Shamefully, schools for service members' families take one of the biggest hits in Trump's plan.
In Florida, Tyndall Air Force Base—which only recently got supplemental disaster funds to recover from Hurricane Michael due to repeated Republican delays—will lose funding for a fire and crash rescue station.
From West Point to Pearl Harbor, soldiers in nearly two dozen states will sacrifice projects like fire houses, flight simulation facilities, roads, clinics and dining halls. Similar projects will be postponed at U.S. bases around the globe.
These are construction projects that military leaders asked Congress to fund. Each one was reviewed, prioritized and weighed carefully against fiscal restraints and operational necessity.
Conversely, Trump's wall is a hastily considered response to a campaign applause line. Remember, Mexico, not our military and their families, was the one that was supposed to pay for this wall.
And make no mistake: This [Trumpian] presidential theft of appropriated funds would violate Congress's power of the purse. It is, simply, unconstitutional.
Worse, these cuts put our service members in danger. They degrade the quality of life and morale for them and their families. Just last year, the Pentagon rated more than 30 percent of its infrastructure worldwide as poor or failing. Thanks to Trump, that number will surely climb.
Ultimately, these Trump cuts impede our military readiness and threaten our national security—and all for a project that has repeatedly been rejected by Congress on a bipartisan basis.
Many national security experts agree that such an edifice would be ineffective. Its construction price tag has been both elusive and massive, yet, some argue, it is sure to run over any current estimates.
There are also bound to be enormous unanticipated costs to this physical representation of bigotry and nativism—from forcibly and possibly illegally seizing land, to the environmental cost of disturbing protected land and threatening endangered species. It's possible the United States would have to cede land to Mexico.
[Trump] is not only exhibiting a horrific level of disrespect for our military; he is also asking them to make additional sacrifices—not for our country, but to satiate his own ego. . . . To him, stealing money from our military is just another ratings-generating plot line: like shutting down the government or caging children at the border. As our neighbors and communities suffer the consequences, Trump tweets, lies and moves on to the next harmful policy decision that keeps him in the spotlight.
[Trump] The president would do well to remember that Americans are not characters. Americans are real people. Real people who experience the real impacts of his impetuous decisions. Real service members who will work in unsafe conditions, or keep their kids in overcrowded schools or worry about the failure of mission-critical equipment. Our military deserves better. And our country deserves better.

Thursday, March 28, 2019

US Government: Gay App Grindr is a National Security Risk

The intrusiveness of social media platforms allowed Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election and in the process mined all kinds of personal information about unwitting Americans.  Now, the gay chat/dating app Grindr is in the spotlight as concerns grow over the purchase of the app by a Chinese company and possible access to account holder information by the Chinese government.  A piece in Metro Weekly picks up on a story in Reuters that indicates the US government views the gay chat/dating app Grindr as a national security risk seemingly because of its use by so many members of the U.S. military and intelligence personnel.  Yes, here in Hampton Roads, there are LOTS of service members on Grindr.  Apparently the same holds true for intelligence personnel, all of whom can be geographically located with precision via Grindr.  Similarly, all of the personal information can be accessed.  Here are article highlights:
Gay dating app Grindr is to be sold by its Chinese owners because of a potential threat to national security.
That’s the news from Reuters, which reports that the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) has told Beijing Kunlun Tech Co Ltd that its ownership of the app is a national security risk.
[S]peculation is rife about why Grindr is considered a security risk, though both Reuters and Engadget have speculated that the presence of U.S. military and intelligence personnel on the app could be to blame.That’s in part because the U.S. government is becoming increasingly interested in how app developers handle their users’ personal information, particularly private or sensitive data — such as the location of U.S. troops or an intelligence official using the app.
Misuse of data is a particularly sore spot for Grindr, which has been hit with a number of unflattering headlines over the past year, including the revelation that the app was sharing users’ HIV status with other companies.
Grindr, which is currently celebrating its tenth anniversary, admitted to sharing users’ HIV status with two outside companies for testing purposes, as well as the “last tested date” for those who are HIV-negative or on pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP).
[T]he data being shared was so detailed — including users’ GPS data, phone ID, and email — that it could be used to identify specific users and their HIV status.
Another insight into Grindr’s data security policies came early last year when a D.C.-based developer created a website that allowed users to see who had previously blocked them on the app — information that is normally inaccessible.
The website, C*ckBlocked, tapped into Grindr’s own APIs to display the data after developer Trever Faden discovered that Grindr stored the list of who a user had both blocked and been blocked by in the app’s code.
Faden also revealed that he could use Grindr’s data to generate a map showing the breakdown of individual profiles by neighborhood, including information such as age, sexual position preference, and general location of users in that area.
With regards Grindr’s sale, Reuters reports that the app will be put up for auction, after Kunlun’s original plans to float Grindr for an initial public offering (IPO) were abandoned. Kunlun assumed control of Grindr in 2016, buying total control of the app in 2018.

Be it Facebook, Twitter, or now Grindr, apparently we have no secrets from those who want to spy on us.

Friday, January 18, 2019

Pentagon: Essential Military Bases Threatened by Climate Change

Naval Base Norfolk - sea level has risen 18 inches. 
The Trump/Pence regime continues to deny the reality of global warming and climate change and is hell bent on rolling back regulations that protect the environment and seek to reduce carbon emissions into the atmosphere.   Now, Trump's acting Secretary of Defense - Jame Mattis resigned and was forced out early by Trump - has over seen the release of a report that notes that essential military bases are under threats from climate change yet, Democrats argue, tries to down play the severity of the danger and fails to meet the statutory requirements for the congressional mandated report.  A piece in The Hill looks the report as well as the alleged deficiencies in it which refuse to look at the imminent dangers faced by bases.  Joint Base Langley-Eustis referenced in the article is located in Hampton, Virginia and York County, Virginia.  I can see the Norfolk Naval Base located across the harbor from our bedroom window.   Here are highlights :

A Pentagon report reveals that more than two-thirds of operationally critical military installations are threatened by the effects of climate change over the next 20 years, including repeated flooding and wildfires.
The 22-page report released this week, titled the “Effects of a Changing Climate to the Department of Defense,” took a look at 79 “mission assurance priority installations” from the Army, Air Force and Navy that are based in the U.S.
Of the 79 installations, 53 are at risk for flooding now, and seven additional locations are at risk in two decades. 
“The effects of a changing climate are a national security issue with potential impacts to Department of Defense missions, operational plans, and installations,” the report states.
The congressionally mandated document was delivered to lawmakers on Thursday but was not officially announced or released to the public. Numerous environmental organizations released the report publicly on Friday.
The report follows the November release of the National Climate Assessment, which was created by 13 federal agencies and found that climate change is expected to quickly interrupt the way people live day-to-day, with current efforts to stop it deemed insufficient.
President Trump, however, has continued to cast doubt on the scientific consensus that climate change is caused by human activity and, at the time of the assessment’s release, said, “I don’t believe it.”
The Defense Department report, however, notes several examples of how military bases are already running into issues caused by climate change.
“Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia, has experienced 14 inches in sea level rise since 1930,” with flooding at the base becoming “more frequent and severe,” the report states.

Navy Base Coronado in California, meanwhile, “experiences isolated and flash flooding during tropical storm events,” with the main installation reporting “worsening sea level rise and storm surge impacts that include access limitations and other logistic related impairments.”
Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jack Reed (D-R.I.) bashed the document as “inadequate, incomplete” and “partisan.”  Reed pointed out that the report did not include a list of the ten most vulnerable installations from each military service, as required of the document in the fiscal 2018 National Defense Authorization Act. The report also was supposed to include a cost estimate to alleviate climate change risks at installations. 
“Unfortunately, under the leadership of the Acting Secretary, the Department transmitted a report that failed to adequately answer the litany of reporting elements required by law and instead produced an alphabetical list of 79 military installations. ... The report reads like an introductory primer and carries about as much value as a phonebook,” Reed said in a statement. . . . . under current leadership, the Department is treating climate change as a back burner issue.”
In a separate statement, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.) said the report “demonstrates a continued unwillingness to seriously recognize and address the threat that climate change poses to our national security and military readiness.” 
The report “fails to even minimally discuss a mitigation plan to address the vulnerabilities” and “failed to estimate the future costs associated with ensuring these installations remain viable. That information was required by law,” Smith said.

Thursday, July 28, 2016

Trump’s Call for Russia to Hack the U.S. Might Be a Felony


If it wasn't clear before now, it should be obvious that Donald Trump thinks he is above the law and above the moral code that most Americans live by.  He lies incessantly, he cheats and screws people over in business, and now he thinks he can invite a foreign enemy to engage in cyber attacks on America, both to hurt his political rival and to keep himself in the news cycle - something his narcissism demands.  However, as a piece in The Daily Beast notes, Trump may have just committed a felony by inviting such a cyber attack.  The man is a menace and must be defeated in November. Here are article highlights:
Did Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump just call for a felony to be committed? On Wednesday, he urged a foreign government to hack an American citizen and release personal emails.
“Russia, if you're listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing” from emails that Hillary Clinton turned over to the State Department, Trump said in a lengthy press conference in Doral, Fla. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens. That will be next. Yes, sir.”
Trump himself has had financial interests in Russia.  He has also praised Russian President Vladimir Putin and has said that if Russia were to invade NATO members, the United States might not come to their defense. 
Trump’s incendiary comments came on the heels of the theft and leak of emails from the Democratic National Committee, an operation that, as The Daily Beast first reported, U.S. official believe was carried out by the Russian government and may have been designed to help Trump in the polls.
Trump appeared to urge a U.S. adversary suspected of criminal activity essentially to go further and attack his opponent. The comments drew ire from  across the national security community.
Trump allies were at pains to explain the nominee’s plea for Russian intervention. Newt Gingrich said Trump had simply made a  “joke.”
A top Clinton adviser quickly condemned Trump’s comments. “This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent,” aide Jake Sullivan said in a statement. “That’s not hyperbole, those are just the facts. This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.”
The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff, added that the call for illegal hacking “shows staggeringly poor judgment even for him.” 
“With so many unanswered questions about Trump’s ties to the Kremlin, it’s imperative that Trump immediately release his tax returns and disclose his financial ties to Russia,” Schiff added.
“It’s probably the most egregiously stupid thing I’ve ever heard a party nominee say ever,” said Bradley Moss, a lawyer specializing in national security law. 
Moss believes that there’s a legal case to charge Trump for his comments, because he was calling for Russia to take “imminent lawless action,” which is speech not covered by the First Amendment.
Moss added that Trump could theoretically be charged as a conspirator under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.
“You could argue what Trump was urging Russia to do was hack Hillary’s server and release the contents to the media—conspiring with them to hack into a private server and release confidential information to the public,” Moss explained.
However, it’s unlikely, Moss continued, because the Department of Justice and FBI are unlikely to want to be “diving into a political nightmare.”
Now that Trump is the GOP presidential nominee, he will be eligible to receive classified intelligence briefings, something that top intelligence officials are sweating over, given Trump’s penchant for talking extemporaneously.
Not knowing his intent, such statements could limit the amount of classified information U.S. officials give to Trump, which he is entitled to as a presidential nominee, an official familiar with the process explained to The Daily Beast. Trump and Clinton will reportedly begin receiving classified briefings after this week’s convention.
As Trump called for Russia to infiltrate Clinton’s servers, some of his fellow Republicans were torching the Kremlin for the DNC hack.
"Every American, without regard to political party, must face this grim reality: While the Obama Administration idles with empty platitudes and fantasy resets, Mr. Putin’s Soviet-style aggression has escalated to levels that were unimaginable just a week ago,” Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse said in a statement. “America is digitally exposed. The United States must take serious offensive and defensive actions now. Russia must face real consequences."
Trump’s cozyness with Putin and his advisers’ ties to Russia highlight a growing chasm within the Republican Party, which for the last 35 years has lionized Ronald Reagan’ as the ultimate cold warrior who stood up to Soviet expansionism and aggression.
Skepticism of authoritarian governments—and Putin in particular—has been a key feature among conservative foreign policy thinkers. Trump appears to be trying to drag the party toward Putin almost on his own, and traditional forces are pulling back.
The party of Lincoln and Reagan is dead.  Something nightmarish has replaced it.