Category Archives: Security

The Veteran

Anyone who served or is currently serving in the military realizes they’re doing a job that most won’t do. It’s a 24/7, 365 day committment.

They come from diverse backgrounds. They are volunteers who do the things that allow everyone else the freedom to say and become what they want.

At the time of their induction, they have given an oath which says they’re willing to lay down their life if necessary to preserve yours.

How many people do you know that will protect you from every threat imaginable in order for you to keep living the life you choose?

They don’t make policy. They’re often used to carry out policy which can be good or bad. It’s everyone’s responsibility to be informed well enough to make good decisions at the ballot box, and to select people who choose wisely how the military is used.

Freedom is full circle choice. To act as if it’s someone else’s job, is to think in ignorance. We all preserve it by learning to be responsible for our own actions. The military is a reflection of our own lives carried out on a massive scale.

If you or I are only interested in ourselves, our wants, to the exclusion of all others,  this will become the work, the policy of our nation. The military will act on that policy and our relationship with the rest of the world community will have the same impact abroad as we have at home.

If you want peace in the world, find a way to live it locally so it will be that way globally.

_________________

 

National Entertainment – Political Soap Opera Lie

☆ The National Blatant – News Entertainment – Political Soap Opera Lie ☆

I know it’s easy to criticize, but when I see or read a story that repeats fiction & drama, packages it as fact on a massive scale, I just have to comment.

I’m referring to this ongoing FBI investigation into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Let me begin by stating the obvious, Donald Trump won the election in 2016 by a simple, well known strategy. He ran a campaign without assumptions on which states “were in the bag”, by visiting those who were supposedly going to vote Democrat. This included among others, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida. His campaign managers knew full well that the key to victory is to win at least 270 votes in the electoral college.

The key to debunking this false story, is to understand how the electoral college vote works. I’m going to quote from an NPR article written 2 November 2016.

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆
“To win the presidency, you don’t have to win the majority of the popular vote. You have to win the majority of electoral votes — that is, 270 of them.”

“In most states, a candidate wins electoral votes by winning the most voters.

“So. Win a state by just one vote, and you win all of its electoral votes (unless you live in Nebraska or Maine, which divvy up their votes a little differently).”
☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

The key is still to win the popular vote. That’s the beginning and ending of this whole national mythical “boogie man”, story. The inherent protection, and incredibly simple, yet intelligent method to select our leadership, is a representative voting system which prevents just a handful of densely populated urban areas as representative of the entire country. It’s possible to gain 270 electoral votes through 11 of the most populated states, such as California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey, for example, but in reality, that’s not how the 2016 election finished.

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in some of the most densely populated urban areas such as, New York City, Los Angeles, Miami, Chicago, Seattle, etc. What she didn’t gain though, were the most states and the majority of the electoral vote. There are 540 votes possible, and Clinton won just 232 while Trump won 306 of the electoral vote. Her overall popular vote was higher, but not the electoral college vote. These facts are key to understand just how much fabrication, or unfounded anxiety, there is in the repeated false narrative, “The Russians Hacked Our Election”.

No they didn’t, and if you follow the rest of my explanation, you should be able to see for yourself, the media and the “Intelligence Community”, are weaving a tale.

Forbes_2016_Electoral_College_map_a

Most people who complain about the electoral college, either don’t understand why it’s such a good system, or refuse to believe it even after it’s explained. It also makes it vastly more difficult to affect the outcome of the election by outside electronic “hacked” alterations.

Since there isn’t a single, nationwide, homogeneous voting system, an outside bad actor, can’t alter the outcome of the election. An outside perpetrator may be able to get into a less than secure, local database, but actual voting tallies are performed at precinct levels and differ widely in methods from other localities, even in the same state. Recall the election when George Bush & Al Gore ran against each other, and there was a big dust up over the punch ballots being used in certain counties in Florida. That system wasn’t even state wide, so “hanging chads”, were unique and paper ballots had to be reviewed. That’s just not a system, as flawed as it is, which could have had a rogue state, or spy agency, come in and electronically alter the outcome.

Why is this so important to know? It’s because once you know this information, and take enough time to think about these basic facts, then the repeated news stories, and all the Mueller, Trump drama, can be seen for what it really is, and that’s political Kabuki theater.

CBS 60 Minutes just did a story on the 2016 election hacking, spy-craft. I encourage you to go to the 60 Minutes Web page and watch the video or go to YouTube to understand what I’m saying a little better. I also probably know more about computer networks, and how they function than the average person, since I’ve worked as an IT professional for many years. I’ve also done large scale communications programming, although that’s not a current skill set.

Here’s a summary of the basic 60 Minutes story.

☆ Some Russian cyber-techs infiltrate Illinois state voting records. After about 3 weeks, their outside network activities intensify. Illinois election records IT personnel take note of how much they’re being slammed from outside network traffic. They inform the FBI, and their IT super techs help investigate the penetration. They agree with the Illinois IT team, you’ve been hacked. Meanwhile, at an unknown point in the time-line, Illinois voting records IT personnel manage to stop the breach. Still, they’re pretty sure their voter database information has been obtained by an outside organization.

* The facts behind the Illinois database access; the hackers extracted personal information on roughly 90,000 registered voters, and none of the information was expunged or altered.

The FBI compares their collected network data, to the patterns (signatures or fingerprints which they like to call it, but that’s not a technical description), to other states voting records IT management, and at least 20 other states are likely to have been penetrated. In addition to that, the Democrat National Committee data records have been hacked. Understandably, because if you know anything about network spy-craft, your weakest links are usually the same everywhere. The biggest, most important users, are often those with the patterns sought out by hackers. They’re not IT disciplined, they don’t like to follow rules, and they seldom use strong, secure passwords. This isn’t always the way ‘hackers’ get in, but it’s a common recurring problem, and even the lead IT person can only politely suggest that the head honchos follow their rules.

We saw that huge security problem play out on national TV, when Hillary Clinton faced a Congressional committee and insisted she was justified in using her own private servers. No matter which side of the issue you found yourself on in that past extravaganza, it’s a prime example of how arrogance and power always win over any technical support opposition. Public or private, any tech person, if they want to keep their job, will go along with their bosses requests, no matter how impactful those decisions are on security.

So, we know there were multiple breeches performed by clever outsiders. The information they gave us through the media outlets are, John Podesta, Hillary Clinton, and Huma Abedin, emails revealed the Democrats in power, and under the influence of the Clinton campaign undermined the campaign of Bernie Sanders in the Democrat primary runoff. This was later confirmed by Former DNC Chair Donna Brazile in her Tell-All Book.

And we know that some of Donald Trump key people conducted meetings with influential Russians, to see if there was any dirt they could dish on Hillary Clinton and her campaign.

Overall conclusion’s by the 60 Minutes story? Russian hackers broke into some of our voter record databases and emails (NEWS FLASH: they’ve been doing that to large US Corporations for a couple of decades – including our banks). Even 60 minutes, and the people they interviewed were careful enough with the facts to not make the false claim, that success in breaching voting records changes the actual vote, in November. What they did claim was, “it undermines the integrity and the confidence Americans might have in our Democratic system.”

And here’s the final point I wish to make. That’s a far stretch, our politicians have been successful in undermining our country and election process for decades. Can anyone recall, Watergate? If you wish to remain ignorant on how votes are cast, collected, and counted; then you’re going to believe that somehow the Russians set the fox loose into the chicken coop, and rousted all the chickens, making them (this implies you), to change your vote for Trump. I’m quite certain you didn’t decide to change your mind on who to vote for because those rascally Russians have your name, home address, and phone number.

In case you want to know something more, the IP address they revealed in the 60 Minutes story can be traced to the following. No, they didn’t give you this info, but I found it out of curiosity.

registered person: Vilko Damianov
address: 4000, Bulgaria, Plovdiv, 2 Lyuben Karavelov, unit 5.

☆ Don’t be an unwitting pawn ☆

I just found this related information on “Hacking the Vote”.

_____________________________________________________

Do We Have a Gun Problem?

The reaction by the public varies after another school or public place shooting. Whenever such a horrific crime occurs, there’s a huge outpouring of emotions, which is understandable.  There are all types of opinions expressed on what should be done, but before we decide on a solution, shouldn’t we first understand the problem?

The U.S. population increased from 133 million in 1945 to 313 million in 2012. A 235% increase in population.

In 1945 there was an estimate of 47 million guns. At the end of 2012, it is estimated there were 347 million. That’s a 738% increase.

The number of firearms confiscated and destroyed or sold to buybacks, wear, abuse, neglect and are lost, are not figured in, so the total number may be lower than 347 million.

The term homicide is used when a human being is killed by another human being. Criminal homicide takes several forms, for example murder; but homicide is not always a crime, it also includes affirmative defense, insanity, self-defense or the execution of convicted criminals. Gun deaths are only a portion of the total number of homicides.

Taking into account all homicides in 1950 compared to 2012, we see a slight increase. This number as defined above, doesn’t just isolate homicides by firearm, it includes everything, criminal as well as non-criminal. The number of homicides in the US per 100,000 in 1950 were 5.1 • The number for 2012 ▪▪ 5.4

Even though we had a large increase in population, and an even larger number of known available guns, there doesn’t seem to be a significant statistical increase in homicides.

In the decade following the banning of handguns in the UK in 1997, the number of recorded violent attacks increasd by 77% to 1.2 million in 2007- or more than 2 attacks every minute!

The war on drugs in the United States has taken on a civil, enforcement, criminal, judicial struggle apart from all others. The results to the ban of illegal drugs, as well as theft and reselling of legal drugs has gone on unabated. Deaths from drug overdoses in the United States significantly increased from 17,000 in 1999 to 41,000 in 2012.

If the claim is, we have a gun problem, where’s the evidence? We have had an increase in population of over 235%, and an increase in known available firearms of over 700%, yet the overall homicide rate has barely increased.

Moreover, shouldn’t we be looking toward solutions to prevent murders in our schools that seem to be working at airports, government buildings, and sports venues? It seems reasonable to suggest that preventing someone from entering a school with a weapon is more effective than a sign which claims the area to be a gun free zone.