Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Hmmm, first link I picked.
|
Nice cherry picking of information and not understanding the context of the article.
For context, the article in question states the following"
"On Friday, September 6th, as we mark 60 days before the U.S. elections, experts from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and the Federal Bureau of Intelligence (FBI) provide a summary of the current threat environment and what steps are being taken to ensure election integrity in the 2024 U.S. elections."
This is a discussion with ODNI officials, speaking to the election infrastructure, which would not actually be in place for another 30 days or more, depending on state and county, and the risks affecting the election. This is clearly stated in the ODNI's introduction.
"I’d like to start and note that we’re 60 days out from the election, and as we approach November, we observe IC – we observe foreign actors ramping up their election influence efforts.
In this update, we will discuss foreign election interference versus foreign election influence, and provide updates on the big three election influence actors. I’ll start with election interference versus influence. "
Then if you had presented the full passage you quoted, for context, that would have greatly changed what the ODNI official actually said.
"We have not observed any foreign actors seeking to interfere in the conduct of the 2024 elections. Nonetheless, this is a top priority in the IC, and our interagency election partners remain vigilant in case foreign actors change their approach. In particular, we are monitoring for any activities that could enable election interference, especially cyber or physical disruptions of election infrastructure."
And then if you would have included the passage that followed, establishing the how.
"Instead of interference, the IC assesses adversaries so far are focused on using information operations and propaganda to try to shape voter preferences or undermine confidence in the election. We continue to monitor efforts to cast doubt on the electoral process or claims that they have interfered in the process when they have not actually done so, a tactic known as perception hacking. "
Then the ODNI gets into the why.
"In addition, we’d note that reports of cyber espionage against election or campaign infrastructure do not necessarily mean that an actor is trying to affect the conduct of an election. Foreign actors sometimes use cyber tools to collect information that helps them tailor their influence messages to certain U.S. audiences, or embarrass or denigrate particular candidates through leaks. For example, we have seen foreign actors work to compromise political entities, and foreign actors – all key foreign actors have engaged in such efforts during this election cycle."
Then the money shot, where the ODNI speaks directly to the who.
"Now transitioning to the big three foreign influence actors, Russia, Iran, and China are all trying by some measure to exacerbate divisions in U.S. society for their own benefit, and see election periods as moments of vulnerability. These actors most likely judge that amplifying controversial issues and rhetoric that seeks to divide Americans can serve their interests by making the U.S. and its democratic system look weak, and by keeping the U.S. Government distracted with internal issues instead of pushing back on their hostile behavior globally.
Now moving to Iran, the IC assesses that Iran is making a greater effort than in the past to influence this year’s elections, even as its tactics and approaches are similar to prior cycles. Like Russia, Iran has a multi-pronged approach that looks to stoke discord and undermine confidence in our electoral process. Tehran has also sought cyber access to individuals with direct ties to the presidential campaigns of both political parties, while elements have also denigrated the former president. Iran has a suite of tools at its disposal, as demonstrated in recent reports outlining Iran’s cyber operations, including the hack-and-leak operation against the former president’s campaign. Iran is also conducting covert social media operations using fake personas, and is using AI to help publish inauthentic news articles.
China, for its part, is focused on influencing down-ballot races. The IC continues to assess that China is not attempting to influence the presidential race. China is also continuing its longstanding efforts to build relationships with U.S. officials and entities at state and local levels because it perceives Washington as largely opposed to China. This view likely informs Beijing’s greater interest in some non-presidential races. The IC is aware of PRC attempts to influence U.S. down-ballot races by focusing on candidates it views as particularly threatening to core PRC security interests. China’s influence actors have also continued small-scale efforts in social media to engage U.S. audiences on divisive political issues, including protests about the Israel-Gaza conflict, and promote negative stories about both political parties."
And that was just one of the ODNI staff to speak. The whole discussion was to explain the risk environment and the steps the ODNI were taking to counter such actions. Their goal was to instill confidence in the system and speak to the actions they would be taking as the election infrastructure was kicked into gear and what they expected to see.
It's like you ignored the context and body of the article and picked that one passage that said what you wanted it to say - again, out of context - to score points. Such a weird behavior. Such a weird person.