RUTHFULLY YOURS

Over the weekend North Korea conducted its six, and most powerful, nuclear test to date. Reports indicate that the impoverished nation is preparing to launch yet another Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM), this time potentially on a standard trajectory. A highly provocative move without regard to overflight of neighboring countries airspace. North Korea’s accelerated nuclear and ballistic missile developments have many in Washington showing more bipartisan interest in missile defense playing a significant role in defending the American homeland.

However, over the past three decades, the path toward a truly robust homeland missile defense system has been precarious. Political support over five presidential administrations wavered, while historical funding for the Missile Defense Agency averaged less than 2% of the overall defense budget. As Washington considers its options for addressing a threat which has evolved more rapidly than expected, it should carefully consider lessons learned from decades of less than adequate support for homeland missile defense. The Trump administration must avoid the mistake of his predecessors and fully commit to investment in expanded missile defense capabilities

The Reagan Administration

In the early 1980’s, fear that the Soviet Union had achieved a nuclear first strike capability led the Joint Chiefs of Staff to recommend developing plans for ballistic missile defense capabilities. On March 23, 1983, President Ronald Reagan delivered an address to the nation outlining an ambitious new plan for ballistic missile defense called the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). During the speech, President Reagan called for a defensive capability that would render nuclear weapons “impotent and obsolete.” In 1984, the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) was established to begin Research and Development (R&D) efforts to create several programs such as Brilliant Pebbles, a non-nuclear, space-based, boost phase anti-missile system. Ultimately, many of the most ambitious SDI technologies were set aside due to political pressure and U.S. obligations to limit testing and development of BMD technology. While the Reagan Administration argued that it could test and develop BMD systems under a “broad interpretation” of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty many in Congress, led by Senator Sam Nunn, argued such an interpretation violated the spirit of the treaty.

The Bush 41 Administration

During the January 29th, 1991, State of the Union Address, President George H.W. Bush citing the success of the Patriot missile defense system during the Gulf War, mandated the “SDI program be refocused on providing protection from limited ballistic missile strikes, whatever their source.” This directive led to the development of Global Protection Against Limited Strikes (GPALS), aimed at stopping small ballistic missile attacks on America and thwarting limited strikes against U.S. troops with the use of theater ballistic missiles. GPALS represented a new Post-Cold War mentality in the United States that focused more on limited theater ballistic missile strikes rather than a large-scale Soviet ICBM strike.

The Clinton Administration

The GPALS concept would ultimately be canceled in 1993 by President Bill Clinton. Rather than taking a global approach to a range of ballistic missile threats, President Clinton’s 1993 Bottom-Up Review concluded that, while the threat from “Third World” countries could not be excluded, the missile threat from Russia and China had diminished. Secretary of Defense Les Aspen ultimately recommended that “a robust theater missile defense effort plus a limited national missile defense technology program is the best and most cost- effective approach” for the overall U.S. ballistic missile defense program.

A major casino operator in Las Vegas is matching employee donations to phony civil rights groups, including HAMAS-linked CAIR and the pro-Antifa hate group Southern Poverty Law Center, in order to fight “hate” in the United States.

In response to terrorist violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, and Barcelona, Spain, MGM Resorts International CEO James Murren denounced “hate speech and hate-based actions.” The huge publicly-traded gambling concern, is reportedly the largest casino operator on the Las Vegas Strip and has a global workforce of 77,000. According to WND, Murren “was a lifelong Republican before he endorsed Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.”

Fed by the establishment media’s exploitation of the tragic death caused by a reputed neo-Nazi at a misnamed “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, and after years of relative indifference to the terroristic and racist violence from the Black Lives Matter and Occupy Wall Street movements, suddenly Murren wants to fight “hate” by giving money to groups that exist solely to generate “hate.”

CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, is an Islamist group linked to international terrorism that favors the imposition of Sharia law on America and undermines the Global War on Terror at every opportunity.

The fabulously wealthy Southern Poverty Law Center is an extreme left-wing group that smears those who dare to express skepticism about Islam and Muslim organizations as bigots and “Islamophobes.” The mainstream-conservative Family Research Council was attacked by a would-be mass murderer who relied on SPLC research that described FRC as a hate group. Another would-be mass murderer shot and nearly killed House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) after accessing SPLC research materials.

Islam expert Robert Spencer was targeted by the SPLC. His educational website Jihad Watch was accused of “extreme hostility toward Muslims” by the SPLC which led to online payment service PayPal suspending the site as an alleged hate group. PayPal reversed its decision after public backlash.

Liberty Counsel sued charity watchdog Guidestar for posting what it calls SPLC’s “false and defamatory” hate designations on its pages for various mainstream organizations.

But according to MGM’s Murren, CAIR and the SPLC stand against what politically correct left-wingers deem “hate,” so they deserve to be celebrated and funded.

“The events in Charlotttesville and Barcelona can easily cause us to feel overcome by hatred and gutted by violence, leaving open questions about our future – as a nation, a global society and even a human race,” MGM CEO James Murren wrote in a letter to the company’s employees that was published in the Las Vegas Review-Journal. “The protection of human dignity, demonstrated in the form of tolerance and respect for all people is the core of our identity.”

A 28-year-old Ypsilanti, Michigan, man is due in federal court Tuesday on gun-related charges that may be part of a larger terrorism case, yet secrecy surrounds the matter.

Yousef Mohammad Ramadan was stopped on August 15 at the Detroit airport as he and his entire family were scheduled to board a flight to Jordan. According to court documents, he told ICE officials and a FBI agent he intended to move to Bethlehem in the Palestinian Authority-controlled West Bank.

He was subsequently arrested on gun charges.

The Detroit News reports:

The FBI’s counterterrorism team blocked an Ypsilanti man from flying to the Middle East and arrested him Friday after discovering a weapons arsenal in a storage unit, the latest national security-related case in Metro Detroit.

Yousef Mohammad Ramadan, 28, has not been charged with a terror-related crime and an FBI spokesman declined to comment, leaving it unclear why the FBI’s counterterrorism team and the head of the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s national security unit are involved in the case, whether investigators had thwarted a terror attack or stopped a man from traveling overseas to commit terror.

The case is shrouded in secrecy. The U.S. Attorney’s Office quietly brought Ramadan into federal court Saturday for a rare weekend arraignment that happened when federal court was closed to the public. The arraignment, which was not posted on the court’s calendar, ended with a federal magistrate judge ordering Ramadan be held temporarily without bond.

Ramadan has been charged with knowingly possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number, a five-year felony.

More details about the case are expected to be revealed when Ramadan appears for a detention hearing Tuesday in federal court. He’s being held in the Wayne County Jail.

The case is being handled by the counterterrorism division of the FBI Detroit field office, and the U.S. attorney there is handling the case with a high degree of secrecy. An FBI affidavit indicates that, under questioning, Ramadan repeatedly lied about which guns he had and where they were being kept.

Court documents filed in the case indicate there may be additional sealed materials yet to be made public, or possible sealed indictments.

One of the key topics at the federal court hearing later today will undoubtedly be whether Ramadan remains in custody. Federal authorities may also present additional evidence related to other charges.

The Muslim Brotherhood has penetrated every one of our national security agencies, including our intelligence agencies, according to retired Navy admiral James “Ace” Lyons, former commander of the U.S. Pacific fleet. Adm. Lyons made this startling declaration Jan. 16, 2015 during a conference sponsored by the Center for Security Policy, a conservative Washington, D.C. think-tank.

In the two years since, no action has been taken to reverse this dangerous situation. Empowerment of individuals of questionable loyalties within our intelligence community continues unabated, as does a counterfactual view of Islam and thwarting of terrorist investigations. Our government routinely targets and cashiers productive, legitimate counter-terrorism experts and fails to label terrorist organizations as such. U.S. intelligence failures and feckless politicization have gone on for years, rendering our protections against terrorism ineffectual and putting our country at grave risk.

Post-9/11 Infiltration of the FBI

The terrorist attacks of 9/11 paradoxically led to major infiltration, according to Paul Sperry, author of Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington. After 9/11, the FBI sought to rapidly hire more Arabic-speaking translators, Perry writes in his 2005 book. Arabic-speaking Jews applied, many of them retired linguists formerly with Israeli radio and the Israeli army, but only one was ever hired. Then-FBI director Robert Mueller, who had mandated Muslim sensitivity classes for agents, confirmed that the hires were blocked by misgivings over “dual loyalty” and concerns for Arab Muslims who might be offended to work with Jews.

Further, Mueller onerously screened Jewish applicants but expedited Arab Muslim candidates, hiring some without full background checks. One Pakistani woman earned a top-secret clearance despite a prior FBI investigation of her father’s Taliban and al-Qaeda ties. Once hired, she proselytized, led prayer groups, and lobbied for separate bathrooms for Muslim translators. Six months later, the FBI discovered its radio frequencies leaked to Pakistan. Even more astonishing, the woman’s sons were later hired to translate classified material.

Sperry’s book details how Mueller allowed thousands of potential terrorists to apply by seeking translators from CAIR, ISNA, and the American Muslim Council, an organization founded by convicted terrorist Abdurahman Alamoudi.

Indeed, some Arab Muslim translators who were hired went on to warn individuals under government investigation, failed to translate large sections of surveillance log conversations, and created a backlog by translating slowly. Translators also accepted gifts from foreign targets and had romantic ties to terrorists.

An al-Qaeda leader warned American Muslims that they’re headed for “concentration camps” unless they pick up arms and fight, quoting late American al-Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki stating that “surely your situation is becoming similar to that of the embattled Muslim community of Spain after the fall of Grenada.”

Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb leader Abu Musab Abdel Wadoud, aka Algerian Abdelmalek Droukdel, made the comments in this week’s new issue of the English-language Inspire magazine from al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which included a lengthy how-to on attacking the train system with a homemade derailment tool placed on the tracks.

“How many lone jihad operations have had the impact of changing policies, bringing about the fall of political parties or even governments in some of the strongest and most influential countries of the world! This is why the martyrdomseeker

and Inghimasi (storm trooper) instills more fear in the hearts of the enemy than other fighters,” Wadoud said in a Q&A. “It is due to the positive results of lone jihad operations that we invite the sons of our Ummah [Muslim community] to adopt this new method of jihad and hold on to it firmly.”

He said that though the United States “is impossible to invade for a power outside the American Continent since it is surrounded by 6000 kilometers of the Atlantic Ocean,” lone jihad operations are “uncostly in terms of lives and expenses for Muslims, its impact on the enemy is significant and almost disproportional.”

“There is little doubt that this type of jihad enrages the disbelievers even more when a revert from their own race or nationality carries out such an operation… someone who had once been part of their community before Allah guided him to Islam and jihad,” Wadoud continued. “This is enraging for the enemies of Islam because it proves that Islam transcends their narrow nationalism and a Muslim’s loyalty is to his religion and not to his homeland. This aspect is harder for them to digest than the operation itself, so let us reflect on it. This is one of the weak spots in which there is enragement of the disbelievers.”

“Due to the edge that a Muslim living in the West enjoys, many scholars and leaders of jihad have encouraged carrying out martyrdom operations in the West. The reward and station of such an individual is no less than the reward of those who migrate to the theaters of jihad.”

Wadoud discussed how “crime rates in America are much higher than other nations, and it comes as no surprise that most crimes are of a racist nature.”

“And this is something that Obama on the eve of his departure from the White House himself admitted frankly,” he added. “The inescapable result of Trump’s victory and the coming to power of his likes in Western countries means that the room for co-existence in the West is being eroded with every passing day. And this does not affect Muslims alone, but all races other than the ‘white race’ (as they love to portray themselves). With the permission of Allah, this trend will prove to be in the interest of Muslims, since it will awaken the conscience of the Ummah and make it cognizant of the reality of Western Crusader savagery.” CONTINUE AT SITE

The mad scramble to signal virtue can operate contrary to the virtue under consideration. Being opposed to racism is virtuous. Seeking to proclaim this quality to the world by booting neo-Nazis off the Internet is not. Those on the activist left may not always be wrong about everything, but it’s a useful working assumption that they are.

It would be incredibly stupid to plan violence or other criminal activity on Facebook. Now take a look at the neo-Nazis. Do they strike you as overly burdened with intelligence? When the Third Reich fanboys frolic on the Daily Stormer, it’s extremely helpful to law-enforcement agencies and the rest of us. Anyone can access the site and learn what these idiots are thinking, hoping, planning. They’re so stupid that they actually think using a pseudonym in Internet comments makes it hard to learn who they are. It doesn’t. Forcing them off the Internet is a way of forcing them to get smart: If they start organizing via text messages on burner cell phones, they’ll be much more difficult to track.

Yet Google, Apple, Twitter, and much of rest of the tech world have allowed themselves to be prodded by lefty activists into booting white-power idiots off their platforms. What will be the consequences of that? More resentment and whining about being treated unfairly by the lads with the 88 tattoos. (H is the eighth letter: 88 means “Heil Hitler.”) That need not concern us overmuch except that the more outraged they get, the more paranoid they get — and the more paranoid they get, the more violent they’re likely to get.

So Richard Spencer’s l’il stormtroopers should be allowed access to every Internet platform, social-media app, and hotel ballroom they seek out. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. The more clips of their meetings show up on the Internet to be ridiculed by Stephen Colbert, the better. If those meetings are held in dank secret basements rather than at the Holiday Inn on Route 5, we won’t know what is going on in them.

And it’s better to know. Anti-terrorism squads should be watching everything the neo-Nazis say and do. Undercover agents should infiltrate them, keep close tabs on them, and sow internal discord among them.

To the Left, all white supremacists look the same. Indeed, to the Left, Ronald Reagan wanted to blow up the world and George W. Bush was the Hitler of Crawford, Texas. But within the brownshirts there is apparently much heated discussion about the finer points of hate. Michael German, a former FBI agent who infiltrated neo-Nazi groups in the 1990s, told the Wall Street Journal that back then, various organizations despised each other so much that anyone who belonged to one group was blackballed by the others.

While Islamist terrorists have committed fewer attacks in America since 9/11 than “far-right-wing violent extremists,” they have killed more victims. — United States Government Accountability Office report, released on April 6, 2017. Titled “Countering Violent Extremism: Actions Needed to Define Strategy and Assess Progress of Federal Efforts”.

Both right-wing and Islamic extremists are the enemies of Western civilization; all must be investigated and penalized. The attempt by the Left to minimize the dangers of the jihadists among us is not only counter-productive; it is immoral.

Well before Donald J. Trump was elected to the U.S. presidency, many have been claiming that more Americans have been killed by “right-wing extremists” than by Islamic terrorists.

A study released in June 2015 by the New America Foundation on “Terrorism in America After 9/11” ostensibly gave credence to this assertion. Focusing on one graph in the study and the authors’ summary of the statistics – that the “death toll [from attacks since September 11, 2001] has been quite similar to other forms of political, and even non-political, violence that Americans face today” — a number of media outlets and progressive groups pounced on the data.

Referring to the New America Foundation findings, Time magazine’s Joanna Plucinska reported:

“Since 9/11, white right-wing terrorists have killed almost twice as many Americans in homegrown attacks than radical Islamists have… [During this period], 48 people were killed by white terrorists, while 26 were killed by radical Islamists.”

In March 2017, the self-described “multi-media network for the latest Progressive news, commentary and analysis,” The Ring of Fire, also referred to the New America Foundation study. In a program titled “Right Wing Extremist Have Killed More Americans than Terrorists,” broadcaster Farron Cousins said:

“In terms of people from Muslim countries coming to the United States committing any kind of act of terror, 50 people have died in the United States since 9/11 attacks. 254 have died since the 9/11 attack from right-wing extremists violence and acts of terror here in the United States.”

He went on to state that right-wing extremists “are killing five times more American citizens than anyone from any Muslim country… coming into the United States.”

More recently, on August 14, 2017 — two days after a deranged white supremacist killed a woman and wounded 19 other demonstrators in Charlottesville, Virginia — MSNBC also pointed to the New American Foundation study. The network’s Stephanie Ruhle announced, “Between 2001 and now, we have seen three times more deaths caused by right-wing extremists than Islamic terrorists.”

This repeated assertion is both disingenuous and politically motivated. Far more reliable is the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, released on April 6, 2017. Titled “Countering Violent Extremism: Actions Needed to Define Strategy and Assess Progress of Federal Efforts,” the report illustrates that while Islamist terrorists have committed fewer attacks in America since 9/11 than “far-right-wing violent extremists,” they have killed more victims.

Both right-wing and Islamic extremists are the enemies of Western civilization; all must be investigated and penalized. The attempt by the Left to minimize the dangers of the jihadists among us is not only counter-productive; it is immoral.

The latest issue of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula’s English-language Inspire magazine names Amtrak’s D.C. to Boston Acela Express and several other passenger rail lines in the United States as prime targets for their new focus on train derailment operations that the group says has been more than a year in the planning stages.

Inspire, which contains vivid picture instructions on how to build devices used for jihad, has served as an instructional guide for American jihadists who don’t necessarily claim allegiance to al-Qaeda, including Boston Marathon bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

The article focuses on metro trains operating within cities, regional routes serving population-dense corridors, and long-distance trains with remote tracks that are impossible to fully police. Trains can be attacked by targeting the cars, the stations or the tracks; the article focuses on the last, stressing that the method makes suicide operations unnecessary and the same person can return to strike more lines if not captured.

“America’s railroads are estimated to be a 1/3 of the world’s railway. So how can they protect 240,000 km of railroad … it is practically impossible. The same goes to Britain, with 18,500 km and France, with 29,473 km. It is a daunting and almost impossible task to protect the long railroad length, and yet one of the easiest to target. That may result to great damage and destruction on different levels,” al-Qaeda’s “Lone Jihad Guidance Team” wrote, adding that “it is time that we instill fear and make them impose strict security measures to trains as they did with their Air transportation.”

“We have to expose more of their vulnerabilities in their security. And when they spend millions of dollars to tackle a vulnerability we should be ready to open a new [front]… we expect that there will be no effective solution to the security gaps that may be caused by these types of operations that target the train system.”

The magazine includes 17 pages of step-by-step, pictorial instructions to make a “derailment tool” of rebar, reinforced concrete, rubber and sheet metal to clamp onto a track a suggested 10 minutes before a train is scheduled to pass.

The Acela is singled out as a high-speed route that the terror group anticipates would see higher casualties and damage from the use of the derailment tool.

“This is the most suited condition for a successful train derail operation. When a train reaches high speed then it has to be reduced to around 100 km/h. This is because a train at a very high speed is hard to control or manage using brakes. For example America’s high-speed train ‘Acela’ requires a whole mile so that it can come to a halt, this is because of the train’s very high speed. Another reason is that the train losses weight and stability when it is at high speeds,” the article states. “Therefore a Mujahid must be aware of areas where the train increases its speed and places where the train moves at a high speed.”

The Inspire issue details, in photos, the specific types of derailments that jihadists can aim for, including a train coming off the tracks and striking a mountain to “attain the desired result,” striking man-made structures including buildings and bridges, and falling from elevated tracks.

“Dual operations” are also emphasized, in which a train carrying hazardous materials can derail in a populated area — “an issue that makes the different security agencies sleepless.”

In my writings (and speeches) over the past few years, I have communicated the imperative for protecting critical infrastructure against the threat of both cyber and physical attacks. Below is a short compendium of several articles I composed on the topics. Thanks for reading and sharing!

———————————————————————————————————-
Emerging focus on cyber-threats to energy infrastructure

by Chuck Brooks in the Federal Times https://www.federaltimes.com/management/2016/10/18/emerging-focus-on-cyberthreats-to-energy-infrastructure/

Recently, the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security hosted an exercise simulating attacks on the power grid and government computer networks. Participants included law enforcement, first responders, and private sector representatives engaged in health and security.

The exercise centered on how the state would react if hackers were able to take down Kentucky’s energy grid while simultaneously engaged in the exfiltration of information from government computer networks. The goal was to provide a gap model and develop best practices that can be utilized by other states and by the federal Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Also last week, InfraGard of the National Capital Region announced a partnership between the FBI and the private sector to protect critical infrastructure and provide a comprehensive effort to recognize and support National Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience Month. The initiative supports the DHS’ National Protection and Programs Directorate’s (NPPD) Office of Infrastructure Protection mission to raise awareness around critical infrastructure protection during the month of November. The energy sector has been a key area of attention for the NPPD.

And perhaps the most concerning of news activity was the announcement by head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, International Atomic Energy Agency Director Yukiya Amano, that a nuclear power plant in Germany was hit by a “disruptive” cyberattack within the past three years. Amano was quoted by Reuters as saying: “This issue of cyberattacks on nuclear-related facilities or activities should be taken very seriously. We never know if we know everything or if it’s the tip of the iceberg.” And he noted that this is ” not an imaginary risk.”

It should also be noted that in 2014, a computer in the control room at Monju Nuclear Power Plant in Tsuruga, Japan, was subjected to malware, but possibly by accident. And in 2015, South Korean hackers targeted Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power Company, but luckily to no avail. Most cyber experts believe that North Korea was behind the attempted cyberattack. These incursions are a wake-up call as there is a very real and growing fear that a future cyberattack on a nuclear plant could risk a core meltdown.

Non-nuclear power plants have also been subjected to intrusions and breaches. A hack in Ukraine was held up as a prime example. In December 2015, hackers breached the IT systems of the electricity distribution company Kyivoblenergo in Ukraine, causing a three-hour power outage.

Refineries, dams and data centers are all potential targets of cyber incursion. According to a report released last month titled “The Road to Resilience: Managing and Financing Cyber Risks,” oil and gas companies around the world could face costs of up to $1.87 billion in cybersecurity spending by 2018.

There have been attempted cyberattacks on grids and utilities, many via phishing and ransomware, and some have been successful. Adm. Mike Rodgers, head of the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command, has stated that only two or three countries have the ability to launch a cyberattack that could shut down the entire U.S. power grid and other critical infrastructure.

Much of our grid still relies on antiquated technologies, and more investment in defenses are needed. As technology exponentially advances and as threat actors (including cyber mercenaries) gain tools via the dark web, that number of potential state-sponsored adversaries could expand in the near future.

In 2013, President Barack Obama issued Executive Order 13636, “Improving Critical Infrastructure Cyber-security,” which called for the establishment of a voluntary risk-based cybersecurity framework between the private and public sectors.

Congressman Trent Franks R-Ariz., chairman of the congressional EMP Caucus, and considered the foremost expert in Congress on electromagnetic pulses, has introduced legislation ( HR 3410) called the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act. The law would enable DHS to implement practical steps to protect the electric grid by training and mobilizing first responders for possible EMP events.

Along with Franks and Peter Prye, who heads the Task Force on National and Homeland Security (a congressional advisory board), several noted industry and policy experts, including former CIA Director Jim Woolsey; Frank Gaffney, former deputy secretary of defense and president and CEO of the Center for Security Policy; and Michael Del Rosso, former chairman of IEEE-USA Critical Infrastructure Protection Committee have been especially active in alerting the public to the critical need to find near-term solutions to protect the grid.

Clearly the entire energy critical infrastructure is justified in garnering the attention of DHS, states, regulatory organizations and the many subject-matter experts on the topic of cybersecurity.

While the threats are complex and the threat actors varied among hackers, state sponsors, organized criminal enterprises and terrorists, there are several themes to adhere to mitigate risk. These include:

Remain vigilant and continually analyze and game the energy cyberthreat landscape, as the methods, means and malware variants are constantly morphing.
Share and communicate cybersecurity information between the public and private sectors (a majority of the energy infrastructure is owned by the private sector). The government and industry are currently using pilot programs including Cybersecurity Risk Information Sharing Program and the Trusted Automated eXchange of Indicator Information to facilitate rapid sharing of security information. DHS NPPD has established an active and successful program in the area. DHS’ Cybersecurity Emergency Response Team responded to 295 cyber incidents in the energy sector in 2015.
Follow industry protocols, especially related to Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA). Power companies use SCADA networks to control their industrial systems, and many of these networks need to be updated and hardened to meet growing cybersecurity threats.
Maintain robust access management control and cyber incident response programs. This includes following National Institute of Standards and Technology, North American Electric Reliability Corporation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and U.S. Nuclear Energy Regulatory Commission cybersecurity protocols.
Invest in next-generation security controls and cybersecurity technologies.

The World Energy Council says countries must raise their game in combating cyberattacks on nuclear and other energy infrastructures. They note that the frequency, sophistication and costs of data breaches are increasing. The expanding cybersecurity focus on energy infrastructure by both the public and private sectors is certainly a welcome development.

———————————————————————————————————
Meeting Security Challenges Through Vigilance, Readiness and Resilience

by Chuck Brooks

This photo, taken during the International Cybersecurity Forum held in Lille, France, shows cables attached to a protective cybersecurity system.

Photo: Philippe Huguen/AFP/Getty Images

In 2017 we are facing a new and more sophisticated array of physical security and cybersecurity challenges that pose significant risk to people, places and commercial networks. The nefarious global threat actors are terrorists, criminals, hackers, organized crime, malicious individuals, and, in some cases, adversarial nation states. Everyone and anything is vulnerable, and addressing the threats requires incorporating a calculated security strategy.

According to Transparency Market Research, the global homeland security market is expected to grow a market size of $364.44 billion by 2020. A large part of the spending increase over the past year is directly related to cybersecurity in both the public and private sectors.

A security strategy to meet growing challenges needs to be both comprehensive and adaptive. Defined by the most basic elements in managed risk, security is composed of:

Layered vigilance (intelligence, surveillance);
Readiness (operational capabilities, visual command center, interdiction technologies);
Resilience (coordinated response, mitigation and recovery).

The specifics of a security approach may vary according to circumstances, but the mesh that connects the elements is situational awareness combined with systematic abilities for critical communications in cases of emergency.

Because society is undergoing such a rapid technological change, the traditional paradigms for addressing threats are evolving with the security challenges. Two particular security challenges characterize the current and future connective landscape in both the public and private sectors: protecting critical infrastructure, and protecting the Internet of Things (IoT) and Smart Cities.
The Security Challenge of Protecting Critical Infrastructure

During a week that witnessed the departure of several prominent members of President Donald Trump’s White House staff, his current National Security Adviser, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, removed former U.S. Army Col. Derek Harvey, the top Middle East advisor on the National Security Council (NSC), from his post.

The Trump White House openly confirmed the decision, but stopped short of explaining the circumstances behind the firing of yet another staff member who worked under Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn who was canned after he allegedly lied to the Vice President.

In fact, critics of McMaster claim his goal is to remove any of the holdovers from Flynn’s days at NSC.

The McMaster and Harvey date their relationship back to their time in the Army serving in Iraq. Both men were reputed to have been loyal followers of retired Gen. David Petraeus, but they’ve also had some disputes while serving in the Trump administration.

For example, Harvey was known for being a “hawk” on Iran and had been pushing proposals to expand the U.S. military mission in Syria to go after Iranian proxy forces more aggressively. But other national security voices such as Defense Secretary James Mattis pushed back on such proposals, as did McMaster.

Harvey was selected for his NSC post by Gen. Flynn. After Trump sadly had to let Flynn go in February, some of Flynn’s loyalists left with him. However, Harvey and several others remained in their jobs.

According to Harvey’s personal bio, he’s a retired Army colonel who was credited with recognizing — before anyone spoke about it — that the Bush43 administration had a full-blown insurgency on its hands in Iraq following the swift U.S. invasion in 2003, the ouster of Saddam Hussein, and the disbanding of the Iraqi military forces.

In May, Bloomberg Radio reported that Harvey had come up with memo that described what he called “Obama holdovers” at the NSC whom he suspected were leaking to the anti-Trump news media. When chief strategist Stephen Bannon and President Trump urged McMaster to fire them, he simply refused.

In an interview with Al-Monitor, Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA official, said Harvey was handpicked by Petraeus, the former U.S. commander in Iraq and later CIA director, to devise the surge strategy for overcoming the insurgency in Iraq and stabilizing that war-torn country.

Several sources have told Conservative Base that the Trump team must purge the “swamp” within the White House since there’s a good chance most of the leaks are emanating from those surrounding Trump and his inner-circle. “Trump has his work cut out for him: he must endure attacks from the Democratic Party, some Republican Party members, most of the denizens of the news industry and even members of the White House staff,” said former military intelligence officer and police commanding officer Michael Snipes.

“Once the ‘right’ people are purged from the White House, Trump can begin draining the swamp in earnest,” Snipes advised.