[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: How Government and Media Are Prepping America for a Failed 2020 Election Russia, China and Iran are already being blamed for using tech to undermine the 2020 election. Yet, the very technologies they are allegedly using were created by a web of companies with deep ties to Israeli intelligence. As World War II drew to a close in Europe, British philosopher Bertrand Russell wrote that neither a man nor a crowd nor a nation can be trusted to act humanely or to think sanely under the influence of a great fear. Though numerous examples in the post-World War II era have proven Russells point, perhaps one of the best examples was the U.S. publics willingness to swallow lie after lie about Saddam Husseins Iraq due to the climate of fear that followed the September 11 attacks. Those lies, propagated by dubious intelligence, government officials and a compliant media, resulted in catastrophes large and small, both abroad and at home. Today, an analogous narrative is being crafted by many of the same players both in media and government yet it has avoided scrutiny, even from independent media. Over the past several months and with a renewed zeal in just the last few weeks, anonymous intelligence officials, dubious experts and establishment media outlets have crafted a narrative about the coming chaos of the 2020 election, months before it takes place. Per that narrative, certain state actors will use specific technologies to target the American mind in order to undermine the coming presidential election. The narrative holds that those efforts will be so successful that the U.S. will never recover as a democracy. Though these anonymous government sources and their stenographers have already named the countries who will be responsible and the technologies they will use, they also admit that no evidence yet exists to back up these claims, meaning they are at best pure speculation. Headlines such as Hackers Are Coming for the 2020 Election And Were Not Ready, Basically Every US National Security Leader Is Warning About Foreign Interference In The 2020 Election, and U.S. intel agencies: Russia and China plotting to interfere in 2020 election have become increasingly common, despite no available evidence, as have warnings that the American public is defenseless against the old scourge of fake news and the new scourge of deep fakes. Some media reports have gone so far to say that actual foreign meddling isnt even necessary as merely the fear of foreign meddling could be enough to upend the American political system beyond repair. Historically, the goal of such fear-inducing narratives has been the trading of civil liberties for increased security, or rather, the appearance of increased security. Yet, when the need for security is felt due to a fear that is based on government-driven speculation and not on evidence, the goal of that narrative is not about protecting the public from a real, tangible threat but instead about the consolidation of power by the very groups responsible for crafting it in this case, the intelligence community and other key players in the national security state. However, what is particularly odd about this narrative surrounding imminent chaos and meddling in the upcoming 2020 election is the fact that, not only have the instruments of said meddling been named and described in detail, but their use in the election was recently simulated by a company with deep ties to both U.S. and Israeli intelligence. That simulation, organized and run by the Israeli-American company Cybereason, ended with scores of Americans dead, the cancellation of the 2020 election, the imposition of martial law and a spike in fear among the American populace. Many of the technologies used to create that chaotic and horrific scenario in the Cybereason simulation are the very same technologies that U.S. federal officials and corporate media outlets have promoted as the core of the very toolkit that they claim will be used to undermine the coming election, such as deep fakes and hacks of critical infrastructure, consumer devices and even vehicles. While the narrative in place has already laid the blame at the feet of U.S. rival states China, Russia and Iran, these very technologies are instead dominated by companies that are tied to the very same intelligence agencies as Cybereason, specifically Israeli military intelligence. With intelligence agencies in the U.S. and Israel not only crafting the narrative about 2020 foreign meddling, but also dominating these technologies and simulating their use to upend the coming election, it becomes crucial to consider the motivations behind this narrative and if these intelligence agencies have ulterior motives in promoting and simulating such outcomes that would effectively end American democracy and hand almost total power to the national security state. Media, intelligence foreshadow tech-powered doom for 2020 Even though the 2020 U.S. election is still months away, a plethora of media reports over the past six months (and even before then) have been raising concern after concern about how the U.S. election is still so vulnerable to foreign meddling that such meddling is essentially an inevitability. Part of the reason for the recent pick-up in fear mongering appears to have been the release of a joint statement issued by key members of the Trump administration last November. That statement, authored by Attorney General Bill Barr, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan, acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire, FBI Director Christopher Wray, NSA Director Gen. Paul Nakasone, and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Director Christopher Krebs, claimed that foreign interference in 2020 was imminent despite admitting that there is no evidence of interference having taken place: Our adversaries want to undermine our democratic institutions, influence public sentiment and affect government policies. Russia, China, Iran, and other foreign malicious actors all will seek to interfere in the voting process or influence voter perceptions. Adversaries may try to accomplish their goals through a variety of means, including social media campaigns, directing disinformation operations or conducting disruptive or destructive cyber-attacks on state and local infrastructure. While at this time we have no evidence of a compromise or disruption to election infrastructure that would enable adversaries to prevent voting, change vote counts or disrupt the ability to tally votes, we continue to vigilantly monitor any threats to U.S. elections (emphasis added). Despite the key caveat of there being no evidence at the time the statement was issued, media reports used the statement to claim that foreign interference in 2020 was imminent, such as in these reports from BuzzFeed, ABC News, and Newsweek. In addition to the reports that have cast the involvement of state actors namely Russia, Iran and China as assured despite no evidence, other reports have made the claim that this allegedly imminent interference will inevitably be successful, largely due to claims that the tactics used will rely heavily on technology that the U.S. cant hope to successfully counter. CSO Online, an online news outlets that provides news, analysis and research on security and risk management, recently warned that fixing Americas voting and election infrastructure problems is a long-term proposition, one that wont be fixed in time for the election in November while the New York Times warned of imminent chaos and that stealthier malevolent foreign actors had already created the foundation for an ugly campaign season marred by hacking and disinformation. Wired claimed last year that U.S. election security is still hurting at every level. Election Security A trainer holds a booklet during an exercise for local election officials to simulate 2020 election scenarios in Springfield, Va. Dec. 16, 2019. Alex Brandon | AP In another example, Rolling Stone published an article earlier this month with the headline Hackers Are Coming for the 2020 Election And Were Not Ready, which claims that the reality is that: Weve made progress since the last election but were much less secure than we should be. The article goes on to say that claim that the goal isnt necessarily to hack voting machines or change results, but to merely create the impression of an attack as a way to undermine our faith in the electoral process. It continues: The target is the minds of the American people, says Joshua Geltzer, a former counterterrorism director on the National Security Council. In some ways, were less vulnerable than we were in 2016. In other ways, its more. Nearly every expert agrees on this: The worst-case scenario, the one we need to prepare for, is a situation that causes Americans to question the bedrock of our democracy free and fair elections. Well before this type of rhetoric made its way into the U.S. media, Israeli intelligence-linked tech firm Cybereason claiming in a release on its website that messing with a voters mind would have a bigger impact than changing vote totals, even before the 2016 election. That release, published by Cybereason prior to the last presidential election, was authored by the companys CEO, Lior Div, who used to lead offensive hacking operations against nation-states for Israeli military intelligence. Notably, of all of these media reports, there is a clear consensus that one of the main tactics that will soon be used to meddle in the coming U.S. election will be the use of so-called deep fakes. Deriving its name from a combination of deep learning and fake, deep fakes involve video and audio that has been manipulated using artificial intelligence (AI) to create media that appears to be authentic, but is not. Concern about its use in the upcoming election has spurred not only a wealth of media reports on the matter but has prompted both the U.S. military and Congress to take action to limit its potential misuse. One thing that stands out about the media narrative regarding election meddling and deep fakes is that several news organizations have published articles that state that deep fakes will be used to undermine the 2020 election, as opposed to stating that they could be used or that they are a phenomenon worthy of attention (though some reports have taken this more measured approach). The reason for this level of confidence may owe to statements made by prominent U.S. intelligence officials last year, including those made by Dan Coats, the former Director of National Intelligence (DNI), who claimed in the 2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment for the U.S. Intelligence Community that deep fakes and other hi-tech forms of fake media would be used to disrupt the 2020 election. Coats specifically stated: Adversaries and strategic competitors probably will attempt to use deep fakes or similar machine-learning technologies to create convincingbut falseimage, audio, and video files to augment influence campaigns directed against the United States and our allies and partners. Since Coats made the warning, numerous media reports have promoted the concern with little scrutiny, representing just one of the numerous times in U.S. history where narratives first authored by U.S. intelligence are subsequently promoted heavily by U.S. media, even when the claim made by intelligence officials is speculative, as it is in this case. Indeed, the narratives being promoted with respect to the 2020 election involve many of the same intelligence agencies (American and Israeli) and media outlets who promoted claims that were later proven false about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion, among other pertinent examples. Notably, deep fakes figured prominently and was the tool most used by malevolent hackers in Cybereasons 2020 election simulation, which saw both video and audio-only deep fakes used to spread misinformation on national and local TV channels in order to impersonate police officers and election officials and to create fake bomb threats by posing as the terror group Daesh (ISIS). Cybereason also happens to be a partner of the organization funding the most well-known creator and producer of deep fakes in the world, an organization that much like Cybereason itself is openly tied to Israeli intelligence. Aside from deep fakes, other technologies weaponized in Cybereasons election simulation have also been the subject of several media reports, such as the hacking of Internet of Things (IoT) devices and appliances and even the hacking of vehicles that have some form of internet connectivity. In the Cybereason simulation, IoT hacks were used to cut power to polling stations and disseminate disinformation while vehicles were hacked to conduct terror attacks against civilians waiting in line to vote, killing several and injuring hundreds. Most media reports have claimed that these technologies will be part of the coming explosion in cyber warfare in 2020 and do not specifically link them to imminent election meddling. Others, however, have made the link to the election explicit. Naming the culprits in advance In addition to the apparent consensus on how foreign meddling will occur during the 2020 election, there is also agreement regarding which countries will be responsible. Again, this is largely based on statements made by U.S. national security officials. For instance, the joint statement issued last November by the DOJ, DOD, DHS, DNI, FBI, NSA, and CISA regarding 2020 election security, states that Russia, China, Iran, and other foreign malicious actors all will seek to interfere in the voting process or influence voter perceptions before adding at this time we have no evidence. Similarly, the 2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment for the U.S. Intelligence Community, written by then-Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, names these same three countries in relation to imminent 2020 election interference and states that their interference in the 2020 election is almost certain. The assessment adds the following about each nation: Russia: Russias social media efforts will continue to focus on aggravating social and racial tensions, undermining trust in authorities, and criticizing perceived anti-Russia politicians. China: China will continue to use legal, political, and economic leverssuch as the lure of Chinese marketsto shape the information environment. It is also capable of using cyber attacks against systems in the United States to censor or suppress viewpoints it deems politically sensitive. Iran: Iran, which has used social media campaigns to target audiences in both the United States and allied nations with messages aligned with Iranian interests, will continue to use online influence operations to try to advance its interests. Coats assessment was enough to spawn numerous stories on the imminent threat that these three nations pose to the 2020 election, with headlines such as U.S. intel agencies: Russia and China plotting to interfere in 2020 election. The vast majority of warnings regarding future election interference have come from U.S. intelligence officials with a dubious record of trustworthiness and a history of using the media to spread propaganda and disinformation, most famously through Operation Mockingbird. Most if not all of the recent and numerous articles on imminent interference rely heavily on claims made by the two aforementioned government documents, documents crafted by U.S. intelligence agencies for public consumption, as well as claims made by anonymous U.S. officials. 2019 National Threat Assessment A screenshot from the 2019 National Threat Assessment lists Russia, China and Iran as primary threats to the United States A recent New York Times article, for example, titled Chaos Is the Point: Russian Hackers and Trolls Grow Stealthier in 2020, is based almost entirely on interviews with dozens of officials and experts, though the only government official named in the article is Shelby Pierson, the intelligence communitys election threats executive. The most quoted experts named in the article are Ben Nimmo, formerly of the hawkish, NATO-funded Atlantic Council and now with Graphika, and Laura Rosenberger, director of the neoconservative-created Alliance for Securing Democracy. The article nonetheless cites American officials and current and former officials several times to make claims about imminent election interference that paint a bleak picture of the current election season. A recent article from The Hill relies on the acting head of DHS, Chad Wolf, as its only source, citing Wolfs claim that we fully expect Russia to attempt to interfere in the 2020 elections to sow public discord and undermine our democratic institutions amid other warnings that Wolf gave about Chinese and Iranian cyber threats to U.S. elections. Other articles, including one titled Russia, China plan to adjust their tactics to hack, influence 2020 elections cite only Shelby Pierson of the U.S. intelligence community as its source for that headlines claim. Another titled Russia isnt the only threat to 2020 elections, says U.S. intel cites only anonymous U.S. intelligence officials, as the headline suggests. Though Russia and China have consistently been named as the most likely election meddlers, reports have also been drumming up the likelihood that Iran will emerge as 2020s foreign meddler of choice, especially in the months prior to and weeks after the killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani by the Trump administration. A recent informal poll conducted by the Washington Post asked hawkish think tank fellows, employees at companies like Raytheon and current and former federal officials if Iran would likely retaliate against the U.S. via cyberattack. The Post ran the results of the poll under the headline Get ready for serious cyberattacks from Iran, experts say. Despite the medias numerous warnings of imminent and serious cyber-retaliation from Iran, the only cyberattack attributed to the country after Soleimanis death was the vandalism of the Federal Depository Library Program website, a rather benign act that was nevertheless blasted across headlines such as US government website hacked with pro-Iranian messages, image of bloodied Trump. The U.S. government is quoted in that article as saying that At this time, there is no confirmation that this was the action of Iranian state-sponsored actors. Also notably absent from media reports is the fact that WikiLeaks revealed in 2017 that the CIA had stockpiled a library of stolen cyberattack techniques produced in other nations, including Russia and Iran. Those revelations, part of the Vault 7 release, revealed that the CIAs UMBRAGE group was capable of misdirect[ing] attribution [for cyberattacks actually done by the CIA] by leaving behind the fingerprints of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. In other words, the CIA was more than capable of conducting false flag cyber attacks and blaming them on foreign actors. Notably, one of the viruses being blamed on Iran for cyberattacks targeting the U.S. ahead of the 2020 election called Shamoon was stolen by the CIAs UMBRAGE and cited in the WikiLeaks release. Conflict of interest-ridden Microsoft defends democracy Last year saw the tech behemoth Microsoft join the effort to blame foreign state actors, specifically Iran, for cyberattacks against the U.S. This helped to bolster assertions that had largely originated with a handful of U.S. intelligence officials and hawkish, neoconservative-aligned think tanks as media reports on Microsofts related claims treated the company as an independent private sector observer. Yet, as MintPress investigations have revealed, Microsoft has clear conflicts of interest with respect to election interference. Its Defending Democracy program has spawned tools like NewsGuard and ElectionGuard that it claims will help protect U.S. democracy, but upon closer examination instead have the opposite effect. Last January, MintPress exposed NewsGuards neoconservative backers and how special interest groups were backing the program in an effort to censor independent journalism under the guise of the fight against fake news. Subsequent investigations revealed the risk that Microsofts ElectionGuard poses to U.S. voting machines, which it claims to make more secure and how the platform was developed by companies closely tied to the Pentagons infamous research branch DARPA and Israeli military intelligence Unit 8200. ElecionGuard software has since been adopted by numerous voting machine manufacturers and is slated to be used in some Democratic Primary votes. Notably, the push for the adoption of ElectionGuard software has been spearheaded by the recently created Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which is the federal agency tasked with overseeing election security and is headed by Christopher Krebs, a former high level Microsoft executive. In recent months, Microsoft has also been at the center of claims that Iran attempted to hack U.S. presidential campaigns ahead of 2020 as well as claims that Iran plans to target the U.S. power grid and other critical infrastructure with cyberattacks. Last October, Microsoft penned a blog post discussing a threat group it named Phosphorus that they believe originates from Iran and is linked to the Iranian government. The post went on to claim that Phosphorus attempted to target a U.S. presidential campaign, which later media reports claimed was President Trumps re-election campaign. Microsoft concluded that the attempt was not technically sophisticated and ultimately unsuccessful, but felt compelled to disclose it and link it to Irans government. Though it provided no evidence for the hack or its reasons for believing that the attack originated from Iran, media reports treated Microsofts declaration as proof that Iran had begun actively meddling in the 2020 election. Headlines such as Iranian Hackers Target Trump Campaign as 2020 Threats Mount, Iran-linked Hackers Target Trump 2020 Campaign, Microsoft says, Microsoft: Iran government-linked hacker targeted 2020 presidential campaign and Microsoft Says Iranians Tried To Hack U.S. Presidential Campaign, were blasted across the front pages of American media. None of the reports scrutinized Microsofts claims or noted the clear conflict of interest Microsoft had in making such claims due to its efforts to see its own ElectionGuard Software adopted nationwide. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|