11:53 AM ET
On Friday, December 19th, the FBI officially named North Korea as the party responsible for a cyber attack and email theft against Sony Pictures. The Sony hack saw many studio executives’ sensitive and embarrassing emails leaked online. The hackers threatened to attack theaters on the opening day of the offending film, “The Interview,” and Sony pulled the plug on the movie, effectively censoring a major Hollywood studio. (Sony partially reversed course, allowing the movie to show in 331 independent theaters on Christmas Day and to be streamed online.)
Technology journalists were quick to point out that, even though the cyber attack could be attributable to a nation state actor, it wasn’t particularly sophisticated. Ars Technica’s Sean Gallagher likened it to a “software pipe bomb.” The fallout, of course, was limited. And while President Barack Obama vowed to respond to the attack, he also said it was a mistake for Sony to back down.
“I think all of us have to anticipate occasionally there are going to be breaches like this. They’re going to be costly. They’re going to be serious. We take them with the utmost seriousness. But we can’t start changing our patterns of behavior any more than we stop going to a football game because there might be the possibility of a terrorist attack; any more than Boston didn’t run its marathon this year because of the possibility that somebody might try to cause harm. So, let’s not get into that — that way of doing business,” he said at a White House briefing on Friday.
But according to cyber-security professionals, the Sony hack may be a prelude to a cyber attack on United States infrastructure that could occur in 2015, as a result of a very different, self-inflicted document dump from the Department of Homeland Security in July.
2015: The Year of Aurora?
Here’s the background: On July 3, DHS, which plays “key role” in responding to cyber-attacks on the nation, replied to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on a malware attack on Google called “Operation Aurora.”
Unfortunately, as Threatpost writer Dennis Fisher reports, DHS officials made a grave error in their response. DHS released more than 800 pages of documents related not to Operation Aurora but rather the Aurora Project, a 2007 research effort led by Idaho National Laboratory demonstrating how easy it was to hack elements in power and water systems.
21st Century Wire
Following the apparent ‘vanishing act’ of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370, many investigators and researchers began to question the likelihood of such an event happening in today’s high-tech world. At 21WIRE, we’ve also looked into the unprecedented disappearance of MH370 and the subsequent downing of MH17, as certain details have come to light regarding the history of the autopilot function within Boeing commercial airliners, seemingly opening the door to the events of 9/11…The Boeing 777 along with other Boeing models, can in fact be flown remotely through the use of independent embedded software and satellite communication. Once this advanced system is engaged, it can disallow any pilot or potential hijacker from controlling a plane, as the rooted setup uses digital signals that communicate with air traffic control, satellite links, as well as other government entities for the remainder of a flight’s journey.
This technology is known as the Boeing Honeywell
‘Uninterruptible’ Autopilot System. The mere existence of this technology would most certainly provide the final piece to a number of seemingly unsolved airline disaster puzzles in recent years…
IMAGE: ‘A jet for the 21st century’ – An interior view of a Boeing 777-200 ER cockpit (Photo becuo.com).
In the case of MH370, the aircraft’s Rolls Royce Trent 892 Engines sent ‘automated pings’ independent of the plane’s transponder, to a British Inmarsat satellite for several hours after subsequently losing contact with air traffic controllers. The automated information gave an up-to-date diagnosis as to the well being of the two engines, which according to data received, were fully operational and showed no signs of electrical damage. Rolls Royce has a partnership that requires the engine to transmit live data to its global engine health monitoring center in Derby, UK, every 30 minutes. Investigators are said to have used the ACARS information uploaded to the engine maker.
Uninterruptible flight controlOn December 4th of 2006, it was announced that Boeing had won a patent on an uninterruptible autopilot system for use in commercial aircraft. This was the first public acknowledgment by Boeing about the existence of such an autopilot system.
The new autopilot patent was reported by John Croft for Flight Global, with the news piece subsequently linked by a Homeland Security News Wire and other British publications around the same time. According to the DHS release, it was disclosed that “dedicated electrical circuits” within an onboard flight system could control a plane without the need of pilots, stating that the advanced avionics would fly the aircraft remotely, independently of those operating the plane:
“The “uninterruptible” autopilot would be activated – either by pilots, by onboard sensors, or even remotely via radio or satellite links by government agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency, if terrorists attempt to gain control of a flight deck.”
The Flight Global news wire goes on to report that the uninterruptible autopilot system was designed for increased security in the event of a manual hijacking situation, as Boeing itself describes the feature as a preventative measure, keeping unauthorized persons out of a cockpit, setting the stage for an industry wide safety protocol:
“There is a need in the industry for a technique that conclusively prevents unauthorised persons for gaining access to the controls of the vehicle and therefore threatening the safety of the passengers onboard the vehicle, and/or other people in the path of travel of the vehicle, thereby decreasing the amount of destruction individuals onboard the vehicle would be capable of causing.”
Additionally, in the article entitled, “Diagrams: Boeing patents anti-terrorism auto-land system for hijacked airliners,” Croft outlines the clandestine oversight that government has with respect to the uninterruptible autopilot, making note of the auto-land function of the system and stating that the technology has its own power supply self-sufficient of the the aircraft:
“To make it fully independent, the system has its own power supply, independent of the aircraft’s circuit breakers. The aircraft remains in automatic mode until after landing, when mechanics or government security operatives are called in to disengage the system.”
IMAGE: The United States patent for the Boeing Honeywell Uninterruptible Autopilot dated November, 28th 2006 (Photo flightglobal.com).
Boeing and Honeywell have been heavily involved in UAV technology for both civilian and military applications. Some researchers have suggested that both corporations could ‘recoup’ the cost of their applied science technology for military development from the commercial sector. It has also been said that Boeing and Honeywell developed existing patents for the Department of Defense for over 40 years including the BHAUP system.
A pilotless pursuit with precision guided munitions
Politicians are still trying to hand over your data behind closed doors, under the guise of ‘cybersecurity’ reform. Have we learned nothing?
by Trevor Timm
Saturday 12 July 2014 09.43 EDT
Senator Dianne Feinstein says a new cyber security bill helps share information ‘through a purely voluntary process and with significant measures to protect private information.’ Did you volunteer your information? Photograph: KylaBorg / Flickr via Creative Commons
One of the most underrated benefits of Edward Snowden’s leaks was how they forced the US Congress to shelve the dangerous, privacy-destroying legislation– then known as Cispa – that so many politicians had been so eager to pass under the guise of “cybersecurity”. Now a version of the bill is back, and apparently its authors want to keep you in the dark about it for as long as possible.
Now it’s called the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (Cisa), and it is a nightmare for civil liberties. Indeed, it’s unclear how this kind of law would even improve cybersecurity. The bill was marked up and modified by the Senate intelligence committee in complete secrecy this week, and only afterward was the public allowed to see many of the provisions passed under its name.
Cisa is what Senator Dianne Feinstein, the bill’s chief backer and the chair of the committee, calls an “information-sharing” law that’s supposed to help the government and tech and telecom companies better hand information back and forth to the government about “cyberthreat” data, such as malware. But in reality, it is written so broadly it would allow companies to hand over huge swaths of your data – including emails and other communications records – to the government with no legal process whatsoever. It would hand intelligence agencies another legal authority to potentially secretly re-interpret and exploit in private to carry out even more surveillance on the American public and citizens around the world.
Under the new provisions, your data can get handed over by the tech companies and others to the Department of Homeland Security (not exactly a civil liberties haven itself), but then it can be passed along to the nation’s intelligence agencies … including the NSA.
And even if you find out a company violated your privacy by handing over personal information it shouldn’t have, it would have immunity from lawsuits – as long as it acted in “good faith”. It could amount to what many are calling a “backdoor wiretap“, where your personal information could end up being used for all sorts of purposes that have nothing to do with cybersecurity.
But it’s not just privacy advocates who should be worried: transparency also takes a huge hit under this bill. Cisa would create a brand-new exception to the Freedom of Information Act (which is already riddled with holes), all the better to ensure everything in this particular process remains secret.
In typical intel-committee fashion, the Foia amendment wasn’t even made public until after it was passed by committee.
And despite the current administration’s unprecedented use of the Espionage Act to go after sources and whistleblowers, the intelligence committee apparently wants to give the government even more power to go after journalists’ sources, indicating in the bill that the government could use data obtained beyond anything to do with actual cybersecurity to go after anyone charged under the Espionage Act. That’s why the Sunshine in Government coalition sent a letter to the intelligence committee, calling on Senators to reject the bill as a clear danger to press freedom.
Given how much we’ve learned about the US government’s willingness to re-interpret the law in secret, these two secrecy provisions don’t exactly inspire confidence that Cisa won’t turn into yet another mass surveillance vehicle. This is why civil liberties groups are already mobilizing against it, imploring constituents to call their representatives before the bill gets any further. Last time Cispa came around the even the White House issued a veto threat based on privacy protections. But will they have the courage to do it again?
Nullification is the people’s tool – use it! Afterall, if the federal government is incapable, or criminally deliberate in disrupting our society, culture, sovereignty and economics, let the people participate in their own defense!
|Georgia’s SDF served since 1733. Here it is in 1923|
The Georgia State Defense Force’s rich heritage dates back to England. Under the direction of General James Edward Oglethorpe, Sergeants of the Guard trained future colonists in militia tactics. Georgia settlers arriving in 1733 became members of General Oglethorpe’s militia. These militia forces later joined General George Washington to secure American Independence.
State Defense Force
|State defense forces: army
units highlighted in red, naval
units in blue, those with both
in green, inactive in purple.
State defense forces (SDF) (also known as state guards, state military reserves, or state militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are partially regulated by the National Guard Bureau but they are not a part of the Army National Guard of the United States. State defense forces are authorized by state and federal law and are under the command of the governor of each state.
State defense forces are distinct from their state’s National Guard in that they cannot become federal entities (all state National Guard personnel can be federalized under the National Defense Act of 1933 with the creation of the National Guard of the United States). The federal government recognizes state defense forces under 32 U.S.C. § 109 which provides that state defense forces as a whole may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces of the United States, thus preserving their separation from the National Guard. However, under the same law, individual members serving in the state defense force are not exempt from service in the armed forces (i.e., they are not excluded from the draft). Under 32 USC § 109(e), “A person may not become a member of a defense force . . . if he is a member of a reserve component of the armed forces.”
Nearly every state has laws authorizing state defense forces, and 22 states, plus Puerto Rico, have active SDFs with different levels of activity, support, and strength. State defense forces generally operate with emergency management and homeland security missions. Most SDFs are organized as army units, but air and naval units also exist.
From its founding until the early 1900s, the United States maintained only a minimal army and relied on state militias to supply the majority of its troops. As a result of the Spanish-American War, Congress was called upon to reform and regulate the training and qualification of state militias. In 1903, with passage of the Dick Act, the predecessor to the modern-day National Guard was formed. It required the states to divide their militias into two sections. The law recommended the title “National Guard” for the first section, known as the organized militia, and “Reserve Militia” for all others.
During World War I, Congress authorized the states to maintain Home Guards, which were reserve forces outside the National Guards being deployed by the Federal Government. The Secretary of War was authorized to furnish these units with rifles, ammunition, and supplies.
In 1933, Congress finalized the split between the National Guard and the traditional state militias by mandating that all federally funded soldiers take a dual enlistment/commission and thus enter both the state National Guard and the newly created National Guard of the United States, a federal reserve force. In 1940, with the onset of World War II and as a result of its federalizing the National Guard, Congress amended the National Defense Act of 1916, and authorized the states to maintain “military forces other than National Guard.” This law authorized the War Department to train and arm the new military forces that would come to be known as State Guards. Many states took advantage of this law and maintained distinct state military forces throughout the war to defend their own territories, shorelines, and airspaces.
Check out your own state below. If not listed, go here. (If you’re a vet, I bet they’d appreciate your interest):
California State Military Reserve
Georgia State Defense Force
Indiana Guard Reserve
Maryland State Defense Force
Massachusetts State Defense Force
Michigan Volunteer Defense Force
Mississippi State Guard
New Mexico State Guard
Oregon Oregon State Defense Force
South Carolina State Guard
Tennessee State Guard
Texas State Guard
Vermont State Guard
Virginia State Defense Force
Washington State Guard
Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency
“Normally they have tickets or arraigned transportation to go somewhere in the interior [of the U.S.].”
South Dakota has Raked in $100 Million in Homeland Security Grants Despite No Known Terrorist Threats.Ever
|Hostage drill in Yankton South Dakota (photo:
Kelly Hertz, Yankton Press and Dakotan)
To reach a ‘compromise’ and the restoration of “peace”, a feather will be plucked from each ‘wing’ and “negotiate” our country into a shared oligopolistic economic system with their agent of enforcement being a totalitarian government. Enslaving the world is not a disputed objective, only the brand of totalitarianism is now being decided. We do not envision an attempt again just yet to re-launch the NAU upon us, although open borders is a element of implementation.
First, however, Europe must be brought under a stronger heel of suppression. Eurozone member states cannot be permitted to come and go with independence.
For those familiar with the 1956 Hungarian revolt from the Soviet Union, the similarities with today are striking!
No questions will be allowed during the tour, but questions will be addressed later
No interacting with staff and children at the shelter
We will provide photos of the facility after the tour
Weapons of Mass Destruction-Rapid Response teams on the ground
NorthWest Liberty News
In the interview below, I speak to an eyewitness who followed four of these vehicles through town. At one point, they were flanked by air support with a .50 caliber machine-gunner on back. Please take the time to comment on this article below if you live in the Flathead Valley and you have seen similar vehicles.
Newly Released Documents Show Outgrowth of ‘Homeland Security’ Is Corrupted Federal and Local Law Enforcement
|Washington, DC Police Pose Next to High Tech
Equipment Provided by the U.S. Navy’s Naval Research
Laboratory to Monitor Protestors on September 27,
Threatening cartel billboards warning police to choose ‘silver over lead’ come complete with hanging mannequins appearing in Texas
- Two billboards along highways in El Paso, Texas were vandalized and had mannequins hanging off of them
- One reads ‘silver or lead’ in Spanish which is taken to mean that police and business owners can either take drug cartels’ bribes or die
- Worries spreading that cartels that have ruled Mexican border towns with violence may be headed north