Does Portions of Our Government Have Our Best Interest at Heart?

Jim Kouri has posted on American Daily Review an article titled, Cyber Threats and Vulnerabilities Continue

In his commentary/post Jim Kouri states:

Cyber threats to federal computer systems and cyber-based critical infrastructures are evolving and growing. These threats can be unintentional and intentional, targeted or non-targeted, and can come from a variety of sources, such as foreign nations engaged in espionage and information warfare, criminals, hackers, virus writers, and disgruntled employees and contractors working within a targeted organization.

Moreover, these groups and individuals have a variety of attack techniques at their disposal, and cyber exploitation activity has grown more sophisticated, more targeted, and more serious. As government, private sector, and personal activities continue to move to networked operations, as digital systems add ever more capabilities, as wireless systems become more ubiquitous, and as the design, manufacture, and service of information technology have moved overseas, the threat will continue to grow.

I had to comment and since I type my diatribes slowly I thought to bring my comment here to get more bang for my buck...

I'm a cynic and as a result when I read government names such as "Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative" I instantly ask, "How much graft and corruption is going on there?" So I Googled, Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative (no quotes) and the first hit took me to the NIST.gov website for it... Comprehensive National Cyber Security Initiative: Leap-Ahead Security Technologies
(+$5 million) ...

After reading about it from their website I could see that such a wing of our government could, if run by ethical people, have a benefit to the security of our nation and be in line with the Constitution. You know. The part that says government's purpose is to protect U.S. citizens.

Looks to me like the NIST program could do it's job and do it well IF politicians stay out of it's way. According to this Wired story ... What’s Up with the Secret Cybersecurity Plans, Senators Ask DHS Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) asked questions that I think, if answered, might give cyber terrorists and criminals new directions for hacking that they otherwise may have been ignorant of or ignored.

There does need to be oversight but not at the expense of security.

Pryinng1 sez: If the politicians try to micromanage this department all bets are off regarding it's effectiveness.

~~~~~
Technorati Tags -
Computers -
Politics -
Hacking -
Cyberterrorism -

~~~~~

Is a State Official Driving a Stolen Car?

From Publius Forum we have, "Corruption: State Police Bureaucrat Gets Confiscated Luxury Car Assigned Him"

Warner Todd Huston, of Publius Forum fame, links to a Saint Louis Today story "Illinois bureaucrat driving seized hotrod"

There! Hat tips are in and now on to the story...

(Taken by cut and paste from both links...)

A 2006 Illinois State law allowing state police to seize the personal property of repeat drunk driving offenders resulted in the seizure of a high performance car early this year.

Taken from it’s rightful owner was a 2006 Dodge Charger with a V-8 Hemi engine that speeds from zero to 60 MPH in five seconds and has a topped out speedometer reading of 165. The high-end cruiser had only 26,000 miles on it when the police forcefully took it from its owner.

But instead of using the car to snare lead-footed drivers or selling it to raise money for the state budget, officials assigned it to the director of the State Police Merit Board, according to interviews and a review of records by The Associated Press.

Why isn't the Charger on the road? It's too powerful and conspicuous, State Police spokesman Lt. Scott Compton said.

Compton said there's nothing improper about handing over the sports car to the director of an agency that administers state troopers' hiring, firing and discipline. Merit Board director Ronald Cooley agreed.

"It's not a situation where I'd do anything for them or they for me," Cooley said. "It helped our budget and they had something they couldn't use."

Prying1 sez:

"It's not a situation where I'd do anything for them or they for me," Cooley said. "It helped our budget and they had something they couldn't use."

Analyze that and we see the typical twisted logic necessary for compromising integrity.

They did DO something for you Cooley! They GAVE you a car! (Although "ASSIGNED" does sound official it is still the same thing.) Whose budget did it help? By the word "OUR" did you mean you and your family or the state you are supposed to serve?

I'd like to know also how much taxpayers money was spent on salaries of how many 'public servants' as they farted around figuring out who should be awarded (or is it rewarded?)this vehicle.

Is it politically correct to suggest tar and feathering be brought back into vogue?

(the above was my comment left on Publius Forum comments)

I'd like to know when the public will wake up and realize that the Local, State and Federal Governments are imposing CONFISCATORY FINES on the citizenry to benefit themselves and line their own pockets.


~~~~~
Technorati Tags -
Fraud -
Politics -
Government -

~~~~~