Podcasts about national protection

In this week's Security Sprint Andy and Hunter talk about the following topics:Warm Open:• How Healthcare Facilities Can Be Truly Disaster-Resilient. Healthcare Facilities Today spoke with Jon Crosson, director of health sector resilience at Health-ISAC, on what makes a solid resiliency program for healthcare facilities, the importance of real-time information sharing and how healthcare facility managers can use partnerships to improve response and recovery efforts. • Healthcare cybersecurity needs a total overhaul, by Errol Weiss, Chief Security Officer, Health-ISAC• Addressing Risks from Chris Krebs and Government Censorshipo Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Addresses Risks from Chris Krebs and Government Censorshipo Trump Revenge Tour Targets Cyber Leaders, Electionso Gate 15: Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security: Time to Make This Happen, December 15, 2017 Following the House of Representatives, the US Senate needs to approve the re-designation of DHS's National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) to become the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA); The President should nominate, and the Senate should confirm, Christopher Krebs as Under Secretary for NPPD and then as the first Director of National Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security.Main Topics: Hacktivism & Nation-State Influence• CyberAv3ngers: The Iranian Saboteurs Hacking Water and Gas Systems Worldwide• IRGC-Affiliated Cyber Actors Exploit PLCs in Multiple Sectors, Including US Water and Wastewater Systems Facilities• Top 10 Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) Groups That Dominated 2024• The rising tide: A 2024 retrospective of hacktivismPolitical Violence, Executive Protection• ‘Save the white race': Teen who gunned down his parents was plotting a ‘political revolution' that included ‘getting rid of' President Trump, police say• Pennsylvania Man Charged with Making Threats to Assault and Murder President Donald J. Trump, Other U.S. Officials, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agents & ‘Going to assassinate him myself': Man ‘buying 1 gun a month since the election' threatened to kill Trump in multiple YouTube comments under name ‘Mr Satan,' FBI says• Suspect in custody after overnight arson at Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's residenceo Was Cody Balmer 'Upset' With Gov Josh Shapiro Over Property Seizure? o Harrisburg man to be charged with attempted murder of Gov. Josh Shapiro for setting fire to official residenceo Suspect in arson at Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's residence planned to beat him, documents sayo Suspected arsonist Cody Balmer accused of firebombing Gov. Shapiro's home shared disturbing photos onlineo Cody Balmer's Social Media Reveals Anti-Joe Biden Posts• Protect Democracy: How does Gen Z really feel about democracy? 11% believe that it political violence is sometimes necessary to achieve progress.• Arrest made at UnitedHealthcare headquarters after reports of an intruder Quick Hits:• Threat Actor Allegedly Selling Fortinet Firewall Zero-Day Exploit• 8 April 2025 NCSC, FBI, DCSA bulletin – Online Targeting of Current & Former U.S. Government Employees. • FAA Drone Detection Testing. The FAA will conduct drone-detection testing in Cape May, New Jersey, between April 14-25. • Top homeland security lawmaker calls for cautious cuts to CISA• CISA cuts: ‘Open season' for US? • Senator puts hold on Trump's nominee for CISA director, citing telco security ‘cover up' • OCC Notifies Congress of Incident Involving Email Systemo Treasury bureau notifies Congress that email hack was a ‘major' cybersecurity incidento Hackers lurked in Treasury OCC's systems since June 2023 breach• US Cyber Command: Posture Statement of Lieutenant General William J. Hartman

Protecting sensitive information is critical to cybersecurity, but agencies need to learn to operate with fewer secrets in the aftermath of cybersecurity incidents. Sharing information about attacks within the community can help protect against future ones, according to Suzanne Spaulding, who formerly led the National Protection and Programs Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security. Spaulding discussed how a focus on transparency will be advantageous for national defense. She explained why this approach is necessary by highlighting the risks associated with keeping secrets. Spaulding also discussed the impact of CISA's Secure by Design Pledge on the global cybersecurity environment, noting how recent commitments from companies further contribute to the idea of transparency.

Last time we spoke about the invasion of Outer Mongolia and the First Anhui-Zhili War. During the Xinhai Revolution, Outer Mongolia declared independence from the Qing Dynasty. Conflict arose between Mongolian nobles and Chinese authorities, leading to the formation of a provisional government under Jebtsundamba Khutuktu. Then the Russian civil war led to Russian encroachment of both red and white forces. Russian influence grew, particularly through Grigory Semyonov's attempt to establish a pan-Mongolian state. Duan Qirui seized the opportunity to invade Mongolia under the guise it was to thwart Bolshevism. While he did this to save face, it actually resulted in further conflict, this time with the Fengtian Clique. Wu Peifu and Zhang Zuolin combined their cliques to face Duan Qirui winning a very unexpected victory over the Anhui Clique. Duan Qirui resigned from all his posts in disgrace and now the Anhui Clique was a shadow of its former self.   #99 The First Guangdong-Guangxi War   Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. We just covered the first major war in the north, the first Anhui-Zhili War. Out of all the books and even the very few youtube videos I have seen trying to cover China's Warlord Era, typically they do First Anhui-Zhili War, then follow this up with the first Zhili-Fengtian war, second zhili-fengtian war, rarely the anti-fengtian war then suddenly everything jumps south into the Northern Expedition. The reality of China's Warlord era however, is that there really is not chronological series of events. For those statician's out there, its more like a horrifying ANOVA study, if you get the reference, we both share a certain pain haha. Multiple military wars and political wars were raging across China and they all affected other peoples and events, causing this nightmare of incoherency. For this series I am going to try my best to do it in a chronological order, and stating that we are jumping south today.  Back to Yuan Shikai, in 1915 when he was planning to proclaim himself Emperor Walrus over a new dynasty, as we saw multiple provinces declared independence, some even actively rebelled. One of these provinces was Guangxi where Viceroy Lu Rongting declared an open rebellion against Yuan Shikai. Lu Rongting had been appointed governor over Guangxi after the second revolution. Yet after Cai E and Tang Jiyao unleashed the National Protection War, Lu immediately bandwagoned. Some historians suggest Lu Rongting did this because he felt Yuan Shikai was overlooking him and actively preventing him from expanding his sphere of influence into Guangdong. After the death of Yuan Shikai, the new president, Li Yuanhong appointed Lu Rongting as the governor of Guangdong, but this certainly did not sit well with Long Jiguang. Long Jiguang was the current governor of Guangdong and a supporter of Duan Qirui and the Anhui Clique. He was secretly working inline with the Anhui Clique, obeying the Beiyang government, undermining the National Protection movement in the south. When his colleagues such as Liang Qichao, Wang Chonghui and Tang Shaoyi found out they were the ones who asked president Li Yuanghong to get rid of him. Long Jiguang stated he was unwilling to resign his post, and this prompted Lu Rongting to dispatch Mo Rongxin, Ma Ji and Tan Haoming to lead a Guangxi based army to invade Guangdong to get rid of its pesky rebellious governor, or I guess better said anti-rebellious governor.  Now rewinding a bit, when Zhang Xun forced Li Yuanhong to dissolve parliament, Guangdong and Guangxi both declared independence, I think for the 4th time? Hard to keep track of how many times southern provinces declare independence to be honest. When Zhang Xun restored the Manchu monarchy, this prompted Dr Sun Yat-Sen to sail south from Shanghai to Guangzhou to start a rebellion movement, because Mr. Sun is gunna do Mr. Sun stuff. Dr Sun Yat-Sen planned to rely on the power of southwestern provinces to rebel against this new tyrannical monarchy. Then in a matter of days, Zhang Xun's great restoration failed and Duan Qirui became the de facto leader over Beijing with his Anhui Clique dominating the scene in north china. Dr Sun Yat-Sen had planned for a political war, but Duan Qirui dissolved all means of doing so, now the only options were militarily.  On August 25th, a meeting was held in Guangzhou where Dr Sun Yat-Sen announced he was going to launch a Northern Expedition with himself as Generalissimo. A new military government, or I guess you can call it a Junta was formed and Lu Rongting and Tang Jiyao were both appointed Marshals within it. Many armies were mobilized in Hunan, Guangdong, Yunnan and Guangxi. Respective cliques within these provinces all mobilized for their own reasons. One of these armies was commanded by Long Jiguang, though much of his military strength had been depleted during the second revolution. All he had left was 20 battalions, roughly 5000 men. There were several local militia styled armies, such as the “Fu Army” led by Li Fulin or the second Mixed Brigade of Huang Mingtang, but even with these added, Long Jiguang could not hope to face what was coming his way. The armies in Guangxi and Yunnan were better organized, better equipped and more numerous at this time. After the Junta had been created, the Beiyang government took it as a threat obviously and began to put into motion plans to destroy it. At first the governor of Chaomei, Mo Qingyu was sent with military forces to disband the Junta. He was decisively defeated by a coalition army commanded by Chen Bingkun, Shen Hognying, Lin Hu and Dr Sun Yat-Sen. After this Dr Sun Yat-Sen appointed Chen Jiongming to be the commander in chief of the Fujian and Guangdong Army. Then Dr Sun Yat-Sen, through his ally Zhu Qinglan managed to transfer command of the 20th battalion of the Guangdong Army to Chen Jiongming. Chen Jiongming took these troops and immediately attacked the Fujian governor Li Houji, occupying Longyan, Zhangzhou, Tingzhou and other areas along the Fujian, Guangdong border area. After doing this he proclaimed himself a defender of the area and began taxing the populace, being a warlord 101 basically. He established an independence base area in the eastern part of Guangdong and the southern part of Fujian, which was not cooperating with the Old Guangxi Clique.  Now back to Lu Rongting. Lu Rongting was running out of allies. He had backed Duan Qirui, who was forced to give up his posts, and now Feng Guozhang and his Zhili clique were the big dogs in Beijing. Lu Rongting was unsure how to proceed, so he began publicly supporting Dr Sun Yat-Sen and the Guangzhou government. Lu Rongting then tried to dismantle the Guangzhou government through a reconciliation effort with the Beiyang government. Lu Rongting was basically turning everyone against Dr Sun Yat-Sen growing the Old Guangxi Cliques influence. Dr Sun Yat-Sen could see the paint on the wall, so he resigned from his position in May of 1918. An election was quickly held seeing Cen Chunxuan, another Old Guangxi member become president over the Guangzhou government, but in reality, Lu Rongting was pulling the strings. In the meantime, Chen Jiongming over in his area was also doing something similar by trying to negotiate a peace with Beijing. In 1918, Chen Jiongming was appointed by the Guangzhou government as the governor of Fujian province in October. Chen Jiongming set up simple government agencies, actively maintained the social order dominated by local gentry, and vigorously built Zhangzhou's urban infrastructure, reclaimed wasteland, and developed modern education and industry. During the period of protecting the law, merchants gathered in Zhangzhou and the market flourished. While he made Zhangzhou a sort of central government station, overall he was quite the anarchist in how he sought things to be done. By December, Chen Jiongming resigned stating publicly "My governorship over Fujian is in vain because we cannot feed the hungry, clothe the cold, and defend our army in battle. Fujian should be governed by Fujianese”  In December of 1919, Dr Sun Yat-Sen saw Guangdong was building an army and stating publicly  "Today's urgent task of saving the country is to pacify the Gui thieves first and unify the southwest" Dr Sun Yat-Sen planned to return to Guangdong to attack the Old Guangxi Clique forces. Heordered Chen Jiongming several times to send troops to help drive away the Old Guangxi Cliques,  however, in his words "Chen Jiongming made no reply despite repeated calls to urge her to return to Guangdong." Zhu Zhixin, was dispatched 3 times to Zhangzhou with orders of Dr Sun Yat-sen to urge Chen Jiongming to mobilize. He wrote back to Dr Sun Yat-Sen: "Chen Jiongming's forces have exhausted all their strength and are as tired as ever. At this time, the relationship has been hurt, and it is useless to mobilize." Reading between the lines of these sorts of statements and messages, Chen Jiongming clearly had issues with Dr Sun Yat-Sens politics and did not want to get involved at the time. Thus until July of 1920 the Old Guangxi Clique was continuing to negotiate with the Zhili Clique officials controlling the Beiyang government. They agreed to help expel Duan Qirui and his Anhui goons, if the Old Guangxi clique guys would help expel Dr Sun Yat-Sen's followers in Guangdong. On July 14th however, the first Anhui-Zhili war broke out. Li Houji the governor of Fujian at the time, expressed a desire to support the Anhui clique's military and requested Guangdong forces depart southern Fujian. On July 15th, figures in the fractured Chinese navy such as Xu Shaozhen and Li Qian who supported Dr Sun Yat-Sen organized thousands of troops to fight the Old Guangxi clique. Xu Shaozhen became commander in chief and led the forces to attack Guangzhou from 5 different directions. On August 11th, the Old Guangxi clique mobilized their forces, thus beginning the Guangdong-Guangxi War or the first Yue-Gui War. The Old Guangxi Clique had roughly 70,000 troops, but they were by no means a unified force. There were the combined forces of Guizhou Warlords, Yunnan Warlords and Zhejiang Warlords. The Guizhou forces were led by Liu Zhilu, the Zhejiang forces were led by Lu Gongwang and the Yunnan forces were led by Fang Sengtao. The Guizhou would attack Guangdong with the Zhejiang army on their right and the Yunnanese to their left. Guangdong meanwhile would have roughly 25,000 troops led surprising by Chen Jiongming who had a change of heart, he was also aided by Xu Chongzhi and Hong Zhaolin. Chen Jiongming on the 12th of August had suddenly sworn an oath at the Zhangzhou park condemning Mo Rongxin, here is the statement “Ever since Mo Rongxin and others seized control of Guangdong, they have harmed our people in every possible way. The will of the people will be destroyed, the people killed, and expelled...to the extent that they condone the robbers and beggars' soldiers and harass Yan Lu, which is even more difficult to describe. The pain our people suffered from the loss of their provinces was a hundred times greater than the pain suffered by Korea, Annan, and Poland. They are naturally thieves, and seeking money and killing people is their usual skill. Recently, the bandits stationed in Hunan and Guangxi moved into Fujian to oppress our army. Their only intention is to hate the Cantonese people and act as if they are an enemy country... The Cantonese army today is fighting for the hometown and the country, and all its factions and other issues are unknown. It is to swear an oath with tears and to tell each other sincerely. My fellow countrymen, please take this opportunity to learn from me! All officers and men of the Guangdong army kowtowed together”. Chen Jiongming would also go on to accuse Mo Rongxin of "The Gui regards Guangdong as a conquered territory... Now that we are facing heavy troops, it is really unbearable. Although I am weak, I am willing to fight to the death" On August 16th the main bulk of the Old Guangxi clique forces had not yet reached the Guangdong-Fujian border, thus Chen Jiongming set up his headquarters at Zhang Ji Villages, leaving 20 battalions behind in Zhangzhou as a reserve. Chen Jiongming then took personal commander of the central forces, dispatched armies led by Li Bingrong, Deng Benyin, Luo Shaoxiong, Xiong Lue, amongst other officers to attack Raoping and Chao'an from the direction of Pinghe. After this they would break through Fengshun and Zijin, coordinating with a left and right wing. Meanwhile the left wing of Hong Zhaolin and Liang Hongkai led forces from Yunxiao and Zhao'an to attack Chenghai and Shantou while Xu Chongzhi commanding the right wing attacked Jioaling and Shantou from Shanghang. In all around 82 battalions were engaging two major fronts.  The eastern part of Guangdong had been under Guizhou warlord rule for over 4 years when suddenly Chen Jiongming called “the Cantonese people to govern Guangdong and implement democratic politics”. The people there rallied to him, and this would have a profound effect on the war there. The left Guangdong army that departed Zhao'an quickly crossed the border where they defeated troops under Liu Zhilu, the commander of a major Guangxi army. After defeated him they stormed the garrisons at Chaomei, Huanggang, Chenghai and were approaching Shantou. On the 19th, Yu Yingyang, the commander of an artillery battalion under Liu Zhilu had already seized Shantou and declared independence and his desire to defect to the Guangdong army. Honestly this is how most battles worked in the warlord era, subordinate officers looking to dodge a real battle by switching sides, typically selling out their bosses in the process. This prompted Liu Zhilu to flee for Guangzhou. The next day, Deng Keng led the left Guangdong army to capture Shantou and soon they were pursuing the Guizhou forces towards Jieyang and Chaoyang.  Meanwhile the right Guangdong army crossed the border from Yongding to attack Dabu Sanheba. Dabu Sanheba fell on the 16th, and it was followed the next day by Jiaoling. On the 18th an entire day of fighting was seen near Meixian where forces under Liu Daqing, commander of a Guangxi army and the governor of Huizhou were defeated. Meixian was captured on the 19th and Xingning on the 20th. After this the forward Guangxi army had collapsed allowing the Guangdong army to redirect itself towards Longchun and Heyuan. The army in Zhejiang watched the situation, but kept out of it while the Yunnan forces simply began a withdrawal as it seemed clear the Guangdong forces were likely to win. Again, the Guangdong forces were outnumbered perhaps 3 to 1, but these types of battles and lesser wars were won and done by perspectives.  Ye Ju was leading a central thrust for the Guangdong forces, quickly taking Chao'an and Raoping. As he advanced towards Gaopo and Fengshun, there he encountered real resistance. 6 to 7000 men under the Guizhou clique General Zhuo Guiting stood firm, fighting Ye Ju for two days. Then the left wing of the Guangdong army captured Shantou and the right wing the upper reaches of the Dongjiang river, prompting General Zhuo Guiting to order a retreat. As his men fled, the reached the vicinity of Shigongshen where they were intercepted by Yang Kunru leading another Guangdong army who assailed them a long way.On the 26th the Chaomei area in eastern Guangdong was captured. On the same day, Dr Sun Yat Sen proclaimed "The Guangdong army attacked the thieves and recovered Chao and Mei in a few days. The speed of arriving here really broke the courage of the Gui thieves." This caused a panic in Lu Rongting who deployed troops from Guangxi to reinforce the front. The Guangxi army mobilized the first army of Ma Ji, 2nd army of Lin Hu, elements of the 3rd army of Shen Hongying, the 1st Brigade Marine Corps of Li Genyuang and other brigades to the front lines which were now at Heyuan, Boluo and Huiyang. The Guangdong forces continued their march seeing the right wing take Laolong on September 2nd. The battle along the front line was brutal and lost until October. Wei Bangping and Li Fulin representing the Guangzhou government attempted peace talks with the Guangdong forces, as the situation was looking increasingly bad for the Old Guangxi clique. The Old Guangxi clique dispatched police forces to crack down on newspapers, banning numerous publications that were critical of their war efforts. On the 13th of september all newspaper in Guangzhou ceased publications and any newspapers coming over from Hong Kong were confiscated for “publishing false military reports and subverting operations”. Meanwhile, starting in early September the Guangdong forces began working alongside the Cantonese people chanting slogans like “Cantonese people save yourselves, Cantonese people govern Guangdong”.  Heyuan at the frontlines was the gateway to Huizhou. To defend Huizhou, the Guizhou forces had unleashed a month-long bloody battle. To help the war effort, Dr Sun Yat-Sen sent word to Zhu Zhixun over at the Pearl River Estuary, to mobilize the troops garrisoning the Human Fortress to rebel against the Guangxi menace. On September 16th, Zhu Zhixin managed to instigate a small rebellion. The commander of the Human Fortress garrison, Qiu Weinan declared independence from Guangxi, and during the mayhem that soon ensued he was killed by a stray bullet. Despite this, the Guangdong army had won a series of victories, managing to launch a province wide war to expel the Guangxi menace. Civilian forces were uprising against them, in late september Wei Bangping, the director of Police forces for Guangdong and Li Fulin the garrison commander of Guanghui who also happened to be a former Old Guangxi clique member, covertly moved troops from Xiangshen, Foshan and other places to the south bank of the pearl river in Guangzhou. There they declared the independence of Henan on the 26th. All the inland riverway warships and railway lines were taken and soon a letter was sent to Mo Rongxin urging him to quote "Return the power of governing Guangdong Province to the Cantonese people, and lead his troops back to Guangxi to avoid military disasters." Then Wei Bangping and Li Fulin led forces into Sanshui taking control over the vital Guangsan Road, effectively cutting off the Guizhou Army's supply line going from Xijiang to Guangzhou. This was a heavy blow to the Guizhou Army's rear and ability to continue the war effort. During this same time, Huang Mingtang the commander in chief of the 4th army seized Leizhou; Zheng Runqi the deputy commander under Wei Bangpings 5th Army raised a new force in Xiangshan and Chen Dechun the superintendent of Qingxiang and deputy commander of the 2nd army declared independence at Wuyi. From here Taishan, Xinhui, Kaiping, Enping, and Chixi fell under civilian army control. Qujiang, Yingde, and Qingyuan in Beijiang, Gaoyao, Xingxing and other counties in Xijiang, and Qinlian and Qiongya in the south all declared independence one after another. Within the dire circumstances, Mo Rongxin convened a meeting of over 30 representatives from the Guangzhou Chamber of commerce, the Provincial Council and the Public security association on October 2nd. The representatives proposed Mo Rongxin step down so Tang Yanguang could take his position and for the war to end as quickly as possible. On October 14th of 1920, all officers of the Guangzhou Navy held a closed door meeting in Haungpu Park where they unanimously opposed a new effort brought forward by Lin Baoyi, the commander in Chief of their navy to unify the northern and southern navies. On the 19th workers of the Guangdong-Hankou railway then launched a general strike, armed with pistols and explosives which they used against the Guizhou Army forces trying to use railway lines. Over 30 schools in Guangzhou then formed a mass meeting about the entire debacle and what they should do. The principals of the schools proclaimed "if Mr. Mo doesnt leave Guangdong, classes will not be held in each school."  Back on the frontlines, on October the 16th the Guangdong right army finally captured Heyuan, opening the way to Huizhou. Simultaneously the central and left Guangdong armies captured Yong'an, Xiangpu, Lantang, Hengli and Sanduozhu effectively pressing the battle towards Huizhou. Now Huizhou is surrounded by mountains and rivers, making it quite easy to defend. Mo Rongxin concentrated the strength of his 40th Battalion there. At this point the commander of the 2nd army, Xu Chongzhi fell ill, prompting Chen Jiongming to replace him with a man named Chiang Kai-Shek. Chiang Kai-shek joined up in the middle army to begin a siege of Huizhou. The Guangdong forces would captured Huizhou by the 22nd. The very next day, Chen Jiongming held a meeting within the city and the commanders decided to march upon Zengcheng, Shillong and Dongguan in three directions. After this they would attack Guangzhou to finish the campaign.  During this crisis the populations of Bao'an, Sanshui and other nearby cities began an uprising, lashing out against the Guizhou army. As Dr Sun Yat-Sen recalled "The strong people raised their flags and responded, while the old and weak people welcomed them. This is quite the charm of the Revolution of 1911." Within Guangzhou, civilians launched waves of worker strikes, school strikes and general strikes. Mo Rongxin had run out of forces to fall upon, it was all falling apart. On the 24th, Lu Rongting, acting in the name of the president of the Guangzhou government declared the dissolution of the government and the independence of Guangdong and Guangxi. The president of the Guangzhou government, Cen Chunxuan fled for Shanghai. On the 25th of October, Shilon was taken, the next day Dongguan fell and finally seeing the situation was over, Mo Rongxin canceled the supposed Guangdong independence movement. On the 27th Zengcheng fell as Mo Rongxin had the Guangzhou Arsenal blown up and the governors seal was given to Tang Tingguang as he fled the city. Yang Yongtai, the governor of Guangdong province resigned via a telegram, handing his governor seal to Wei Bangping. On the 28th, Jiongming deployed forces to Guangzhou and around the areas of Shougouling and Baiyun to try and catch fleeing enemies. The three Guangdong armies gathered around Guangzhou, launching a general offensive together on the 29th. Mo Rongxin after fleecing after department he could fled with 10,000 remaining loyal troops west as Guangzhou was finally captured. On the 30th, Wang Jingwei and Liao Zhongkai sent telegrams to Dr Sun Yat-Sen stating they were going to appoint Chen Jiongming as the governor of Guangdong; to remove Lin Baoyi as commander in chief of the navy and replace him with Tang Yanguang. On November 1st, Chen Jiongming became the governor of Guangdong and remained the commander in chief of the Guangdong Army. On november 2nd, Chen Jiongming liberated the Guangzhou-Kowloon Railway, denying its use to Cen Chunxuan and Mo Rongxin. The same day, Xu Chongzhi paraded through Guangzhou to raise morale for the citizenry, newspapers reported "the citizens rejoiced and rushed to set off cannons. Looking at all the situations, there was a sign of great joy." On the 6th, Tang Tingguang handed the governor seal to Chen Jiongming and sent a telegram dismissing the governor of Guangdong. On the 10th, Chen Jiongming was officially elected governor over Guangdong. Yet the enemy was still not fully defeated. The Guizhou army was retreating along the Xijiang River, where they performed a scorched earth policy, burning and looting every town they came by along the river. They also set up outposts along the Xijiang and Beijing rivers to prevent the Guangdong army from following. To rid the province of the nuisance, Chen Jiongming reorganized the entire Guangdong Army into 5 armies. The 1st army was personally commanded by Chen Jiongming who also acted as commander in chief; the 2nd army went back to Xu Chongzhi, the 3rd to Hong Zhaolin, the 4th to Li Fulin and the 5th to Wei Bangping. After resupplying, the Guangdong army marched west into two large groups to pursue the enemy to Guangxi. When the Guangdong forces entered Guangzhou, the Guizhou army first retreated to Zhaoqing. Because Wei Bangping and Li Fulin seized control over the Guangsan route, the Guangxi Army could only retreat from the Guangdong-Han Road. While under attack, the Guizhou Army divided its self into two groupsl one led by Ma Ji and Shen Hongying who retreated north along the Yua-Han road, the other led by Lin Hu and Han Caifeng headed further south. The Guangdong army pursued their enemy over both land and river, seizing Zhaoqing on the 15th. By the 21st, Lu Rongting ordered all forces still in Guangdong to return swiftly into Guangxi. This effectively was the end of the Guangdong-Guangxi war. On November 28th, Dr Sun Yat-sen returned to Guangzhou from Shanghai via Hong Kong and announced the reorganization of the military government. Overall what would be the first Guangdong-Guangxi war had ended the old Guangxi Clique. The Old Guangxi clique was not down for the count, but they had severely lost face. Guangxi province was not the most developed one in China, it made it very difficult to raise funds to keep the army going. Lu Rongtings ability to control and influence the Old Guangxi Clique began to dwindle. It would only force him and others to perform an identical war against Guangdong in 1921, in desperation to maintain their power. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. In the grand scheme of things, it was another drop in the bucket, yet it was extremely representative of the regular ongoing of China's warlord era. Wherever you looked from 1918-1928, regional warlords fought petty wars to control strategic regions, simply to further exert their own power. For the Old Guangxi Clique it was a bitter lesson, not that they learnt from it though.

In this week's episode of Right Up Your Algae, Clara and Emily discuss how different Orcas can be pod to pod. From communication differences and hunting tactics to in-depth social relations and sense of self, some scientists argue orcas may have cultures. But what do you think? Emily also dives into the ethics of captivity and gets sentimental about the special place orcas have in her heart. Sources:Social structure of killer whales (Orcinus orca) in a variable low-latitude environment, the Galápagos Archipelago: http://surl.li/lyfirThe Killer Whale (Orcinus orca) Vocal Tradition: Acoustic Communication and its Role in the Orca Family Unit: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cnso_stucap/133/Apparent death of 47-year-old orca matriarch could have serious effects on pod, scientists fear: http://surl.li/lyfjcNational Wildlife Federation; Orca: http://surl.li/lyfjgCetacean Societies: http://surl.li/lyfjmShark-eating offshore killer whales are the 'mystery animals' of B.C. waters: http://surl.li/lyfjqOrcas: http://surl.li/lyfjtAntarctic Peninsula killer whales (Orcinus orca) hunt seals and a penguin on floating ice: http://surl.li/lyfjxCooperative hunting behavior, prey selectivity and prey handling by pack ice killer whales (Orcinus orca), type B, in Antarctic Peninsula waters: http://surl.li/lyfkaKiller Whales (Orcinus orca) of Patagonia, and Their Behavior of Intentional Stranding While Hunting Nearshore: http://surl.li/lyfkhAll is Whale That Ends Whale? The Deficiencies in National Protection for Orca Whales in Captivity: http://surl.li/lyfkmKiska, 'the loneliest whale in the world,' dies at Canada amusement park: http://surl.li/lyfkpAnimal Welfare Institute: http://surl.li/lyfkrThe harmful effects of captivity and chronic stress on the well-being of orcas (Orcinus orca): http://surl.li/lyfkuLonely Bay of Fundy orca may help researchers understand species' behaviour: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/old-thom-orca-dolphin-research-1.6925351Killer whales (Orcinus orca L.) and saithe (Pollachius virens L.) trap herring (Clupea harengus L.) in shallow water by taking advantage of steep bottom topography: http://surl.li/lyfld

Kicking off the 20th Annual Cybersecurity Awareness Month, we welcome back to the podcast Eric Goldstein, Executive Assistant Director for Cybersecurity for the Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). He shares insights on the exciting new cybersecurity public awareness campaign just launched, “Secure Our World”. It features simple ways to protect yourself, your family, and your business from online threats. Eric also shares some key takeaways from the recent headline making MOVEit attack impacting 60M+ individuals and sparking a new $10M bounty from the US State Department for the Clop ransomware group. And we dive into CISA's Strategic Plan which focuses on how we will collectively reduce risk and build resilience to cyber and physical threats to the nation's infrastructure. This is an awesome episode you won't want to miss! https://www.cisa.gov/secure-our-world Eric Goldstein, Executive Assistant Director for Cybersecurity, CISA Eric Goldstein serves as the Executive Assistant Director for Cybersecurity for the Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) as of February 19, 2021. In this role, Goldstein leads CISA's mission to protect and strengthen federal civilian agencies and the nation's critical infrastructure against cyber threats. Previously, Goldstein was the Head of Cybersecurity Policy, Strategy, and Regulation at Goldman Sachs, where he led a global team to improve and mature the firm's cybersecurity risk management program. He served at CISA's precursor agency, the National Protection and Programs Directorate,from 2013 to 2017 in various roles including Policy Advisor for Federal Network Resilience, Branch Chief for Cybersecurity Partnerships and Engagement, Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Cybersecurity, and Senior Counselor to the Under Secretary. At other points in his career, Goldstein practiced cybersecurity law at an international law firm, led cybersecurity research and analysis projects at a federally-funded research and development center, and served as a Fellow in Advanced Cyber Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, among other roles. He is a graduate of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, the Georgetown University School of Public Policy, and Georgetown University Law Center. For links and resources discussed in this episode, please visit our show notes at https://www.forcepoint.com/govpodcast/e253

The Cognitive Crucible is a forum that presents different perspectives and emerging thought leadership related to the information environment. The opinions expressed by guests are their own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of or endorsement by the Information Professionals Association. During this episode, Suzanne Spaulding from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) explains why she thinks malign influence and disinformation are national security threats. She also discusses the Foreign Malign Influence Center, various United States authorities, and civics. Resources: IPA Members Only Social and Live Podcast Recording Phoenix Challenge Conference (last week of April 2022) Cognitive Crucible Podcast Episodes Mentioned #32 Treverton on Intelligence Global Trends and Technopolitics US delays intelligence center targeting foreign influence Beyond the Ballot Report Swedish Psychological Defence Agency Civics Secures Democracy Act Link to full show notes and resources https://information-professionals.org/episode/cognitive-crucible-episode-84 Guest Bio: Suzanne Spaulding is senior adviser for homeland security and director of the Defending Democratic Institutions project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Suzanne has served in a variety of influential national security roles within the Intelligence Community, the Department of Homeland Security, and within the United States Congress. Likewise, her private sector experience covers a wide-range of legal, risk, and security issues. Suzanne Spaulding is senior adviser for homeland security and director of the Defending Democratic Institutions project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). She also served as a member of the Cyberspace Solarium Commission. Previously, she served as under secretary for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), where she led the National Protection and Programs Directorate, now called the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, managing a $3 billion budget and a workforce of 18,000, charged with strengthening cybersecurity and protecting the nation's critical infrastructure, including election infrastructure. She led the transformation of budget, acquisition, analytic, and operational processes to bring greater agility and unity of effort to an organization that had experienced dramatic growth through acquisition of new entities and missions over several years. Throughout her career, Ms. Spaulding has advised CEOs, boards, and government policymakers on how to manage complex security risks across all industry sectors. At DHS, she led the development and implementation of national policies for strengthening the security and resilience of critical infrastructure against cyber and physical risks, including the National Infrastructure Protection Plan and key presidential directives and executive orders. She worked with industry to establish CEO-level coordinating councils in the electric and financial services sectors, chaired the federal government's Aviation Cybersecurity Initiative to identify and address key cyber vulnerabilities in the national aviation system, and worked with many foreign governments on critical infrastructure and cybersecurity, including negotiating agreements with China and Israel. Ms. Spaulding also led security regulation of the chemical industry, biometrics and identity management, emergency communications, and the Federal Protective Service. As a member of the board of directors for the First Responder Network Authority, Ms. Spaulding helped oversee the complex and unprecedented effort to deploy the first nation-wide broadband network for public safety. She is currently on the board of directors for Defending Digital Campaigns and for Girl Security, and advisory boards for Nozomi Networks, Splunk, MITRE, Harvard University's Defending Digital Democracy project, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and the Technology Law and Security Program at American University. She is a member of the Homeland Security Experts Group, sits on the council of executives for the Center for Cyber and Homeland Security at Auburn University, and is on the faculty of the National Association of Corporate Directors. Following the attacks of 9/11, Ms. Spaulding worked with key critical infrastructure sectors as they reviewed their security posture and advised the CEOs of the Business Roundtable. In 2002, she was appointed by Governor Mark Warner of Virginia to the Secure Commonwealth Panel to advise the governor and the legislature regarding preparedness issues. She was managing partner of the Harbour Group, a principal in the Bingham Consulting Group, and of counsel to Bingham McCutchen LLP. Ms. Spaulding has served in Republican and Democratic administrations and on both sides of the aisle in Congress. She was general counsel for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and minority staff director for the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. She also spent six years at the Central Intelligence Agency, where she was assistant general counsel and legal adviser to the director's Nonproliferation Center. She was a member of the CSIS Commission on Cybersecurity for the 44th Presidency, which developed a bipartisan national cybersecurity strategy in advance of the 2008 election; executive director of the National Commission on Terrorism and the Commission to Assess the Organization of the Federal Government to Combat the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction; and a consultant on the Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. She is former chair of the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Law and National Security, founder of the Cybersecurity Legal Task Force, and was a member of Harvard University's Long-Term Legal Strategy Project for Preserving Security and Democratic Freedoms in the War on Terror. About: The Information Professionals Association (IPA) is a non-profit organization dedicated to exploring the role of information activities, such as influence and cognitive security, within the national security sector and helping to bridge the divide between operations and research. Its goal is to increase interdisciplinary collaboration between scholars and practitioners and policymakers with an interest in this domain. For more information, please contact us at communications@information-professionals.org. Or, connect directly with The Cognitive Crucible podcast host, John Bicknell, on LinkedIn.

On today's episode of The Daily Scoop Podcast, Suzanne Spaulding, senior advisor at CSIS and former undersecretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security, discusses the cyber threats posed by Russia, China and other adversaries. The Department of Defense will stand-up a zero trust program office to lead the Pentagon's deployment of the cybersecurity model. Defense Logistics Agency Chief Information Officer George Duchak explains the three key components to DLA's zero trust implementation. This interview is part of FedScoop's “Zero Trust Begins With Smarter Password Protection” series, sponsored by Keeper Security. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every weekday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify and Stitcher. And if you like what you hear, please let us know in the comments.

Reviewing funding for Advanced Battle Management System Gen. Hawk Carlisle (USAF, Ret.), president and chief executive officer of the National Defense Industrial Association and former commander of Air Combat Command, and Deborah Lee James, 23rd secretary of the Air Force and author of “Aim High: Chart Your Course and Find Success,” discuss the Air Force's challenge of demonstrating ABMS program value to Congress The latest on IG government shutdown legislation Jon Rymer, principal at Lynch Consultants and former Inspector General at the Department of Defense, and Daniel Levinson, former Inspector General at the Department of Health and Human Services and the General Services Administration, present their thoughts on legislation for IGs to work during shutdowns and a proposal to investigate telework success The latest on cybersecurity initiatives in federal agencies Essye Miller, chief executive officer of Executive Business Management and former principal deputy chief information officer at the Defense Department, and Suzanne Spaulding, senior advisor of homeland security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and former under secretary at the National Protection and Programs Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security, discuss investment in cyber resilience and progress on top cyber position confirmations

"Many of the founders and the next generation after them advocated: we have to educate the citizenry how to best handle the rights and responsibilities we gave them, we promised them in the Declaration of Independence, and we gave unto them in the Constitution.” On today’s program, a special panel discussion about civic education as viewed as a national security imperative. This program, a collaboration with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), features three distinguished guests with varied backgrounds but a common goal. Civics education and national security— what do they have to do with each other? With the proliferation of potentially dangerous information and questionably-sourced news bombarding us unfettered online, these three “civic musketeers” are on a mission. A mission to convince institutions, schools, and the general public that our national security is directly related to general knowledge about out country and how it was meant to work. --Dean Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker joined Pacific McGeorge School of Law as its eighth dean in 2002, after serving as general counsel for the 26-campus University of Wisconsin System. Her fields of expertise include national security and terrorism, international relations, public policy and trade, technology development and transfer, commerce, and civil rights and liberties litigation. Dean Parker has served as general counsel of the National Security Agency (1984 – 1989), principal deputy legal adviser at the U.S. Department of State (1989 – 1990), and general counsel for the Central Intelligence Agency (1990 – 1995). She is also a presidentially appointed member of the Public Interest Declassification Board and a member of the Director of National Intelligence’s Security Advisory Group. --Suzanne Spaulding is senior adviser for homeland security and director of the Defending Democratic Institutions project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). She also served as a member of the Cyberspace Solarium Commission. Previously, she served as under secretary for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), where she led the National Protection and Programs Directorate, managing a $3 billion budget and a workforce of 18,000, charged with strengthening cybersecurity and protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure, including election infrastructure. Spaulding has served in Republican and Democratic administrations and on both sides of the aisle in Congress. She was general counsel for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and minority staff director for the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. --Ted McConnell is the executive director of the Campaign for the Civic Mission of Schools, a coalition of more than 60 national organizations, which are committed to improving the quality and quantity of civic learning in the nation’s schools. He has spent more than 20 years, promoting quality law-related education in Congress, state houses, board rooms, universities, and classrooms across the nation. McConnell has been involved in political and governmental sectors for more than 40 years, holding positions such as: Congressional affairs assistant to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, assistant to the chairman of events for the Commission on Bicentennial of the U.S. Constitution, and 1980 presidential transition assistant. -------------------------------------- www.talkingbeats.com Please consider supporting Talking Beats with Daniel Lelchuk via our Patreon: patreon.com/talkingbeats

"What happens to US society when public trust in our institutions, such as the just department or the intelligence community, is eroded by malevolent foreign players?" On this episode, Suzanne Spaulding takes listeners on a guided tour of some of the most dire national security threats, with a special emphasis on this fundamental question. National and cyber security expert Suzanne Spaulding has held a number of highly distinguished positions throughout her career including General Counsel for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Legal Adviser to the Director of Central Intelligence’s Nonproliferation Center, and the Presidentially-appointed, Senate-confirmed Under Secretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) at the Department of Homeland Security. She is currently a member of The Homeland Security Experts Group and Senior Advisor in the International Security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

In this special episode of TF7 Radio, we have Three Tier I Cyber Security guests on the show that are set to appear at what is the first event of a four part Series at the University of Oklahoma on Global Risks and Threats. Our first guest, Thomas Finan, served as a Senior Cybersecurity Strategist and Counsel with DHS's National Protection and Programs Directorate. Tom is also the former Staff Director and Counsel for the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment with the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security. Cheemin Bo Lin is the CEO and President of Peritus Partners. She is one of the 2019 “Top 50 Board of Directors in the US, named “Top 100 CEOs in STEM”, named “Most influential Woman in Silicon Valley,” and inducted into the “Hall of Fame for Women in Technology.” Dr. Shad Satterthwaite is the Director for Executive Business Programs in Aerospace and Defense, and is a colonel in the U.S. Army Reserves.

Steve Grobman is Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer at McAfee. In this role, he sets the technical strategy and direction to create technologies that protect smart, connected computing devices and infrastructure worldwide. Grobman leads McAfee’s development of next generation cyber-defense and data science technologies, threat and vulnerability research and internal CISO and IT organizations. Prior to joining McAfee, he dedicated more than two decades to senior technical leadership positions related to cybersecurity at Intel Corporation where he was an Intel Fellow. He has written numerous technical papers and books and holds 27 U.S. patents. He earned his bachelor's degree in computer science from North Carolina State University., Jeanette ManfraAssistant Director for Cybersecurity, Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Ms. Manfra leads the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) mission of protecting and strengthening the nation’s critical infrastructure from cyber threats. Previously, Ms. Manfra served as Assistant Secretary for the Office of Cybersecurity and Communications (CS&C) for the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) before the agency became CISA on November 16, 2018. Prior to this position, Ms. Manfra served as Acting Deputy Under Secretary for Cybersecurity and Director for Strategy, Policy, and Plans for NPPD. Ms. Manfra also served as Senior Counselor for Cybersecurity to the Secretary of Homeland Security and Director for Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity on the National Security Council staff at the White House. At DHS, she held multiple positions in the Cybersecurity Division, including advisor for the Assistant Secretary for Cybersecurity and Communications and Deputy Director, Office of Emergency Communications, during which time she led the Department’s efforts in establishing the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network. Before joining DHS, Jeanette served in the U.S. Army as a communications specialist and a Military Intelligence Officer. , Matt TurekProgram Manager, Information Innovation Office, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Dr. Matt Turek joined DARPA’s Information Innovation Office (I2O) as a program manager in July 2018. His research interests include computer vision, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and their application to problems with significant societal impact. Prior to his position at DARPA, Turek was at Kitware, Inc., where he led a team developing computer vision technologies. His research focused on multiple areas, including large scale behavior recognition and modeling; object detection and tracking; activity recognition; normalcy modeling and anomaly detection; and image indexing and retrieval. Turek has made significant contributions to multiple DARPA and Air Force Research Lab (AFRL) efforts and has transitioned large scale systems for operational use. Before joining Kitware, Turek worked for GE Global Research, conducting research in medical imaging and industrial inspection. Turek holds a Doctor of Philosophy in computer science from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, a Master of Science in electrical engineering from Marquette University, and a Bachelor of Science in electrical engineering from Clarkson University. His doctoral work focused on combinatorial optimization techniques for computer vision problems. Turek is a co-inventor on 14 patents and co-author of multiple publications, primarily in computer vision. Moderated by James A. Lewis, SVP & Director, CSIS Technology Policy Program 1:45PM - Registration Opens  2:00PM - Speaker Introductions  2:05PM - Opening Remarks                            2:20PM - Moderated Discussion Begins...

Salary caps, lengthy onboarding and rigid career ladders have historically made it hard for federal agencies to recruit top cyber talent, and as threats increase, the competition is only going to get stiffer. Nextgov talks to Homeland Security Department’s Chief Human Capital Officer Angela Bailey and former undersecretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate Suzanne Spaulding about the challenges the agency faces when recruiting cybersecurity pros and how officials have tried to overcome them.    Sponsored by Raytheon

The global response to the rising challenge of refugee displacement has been marked by two contradictory trends. First, at the international level there has been a recognition of the gravity of the problem and a move toward responsibility sharing and global governance of refugee situations—most notably through the adoption of the Global Compact on Refugees in December 2018. At the same time, a very different trend is emerging among countries in the Global North as a number of governments have actively narrowed their protection frameworks, tightened asylum policies, and limited the rights of refugees through laws and policies, effectively strengthening barriers to movement for those who are seeking refuge or asylum. This conversation explores the factors behind this divergence between the international community and national policies and what it means for cooperation at the international level.  MPI’s Kathleen Newland discusses what has been accomplished through the Global Compact on Refugees and what its implementation is likely to accomplish. Mary Giovagnoli, of Refugee Council USA, examines how protection policy has shifted in the United States and the implications this has for the ability of the international community to respond to global refugee needs. David Scott FitzGerald shares insights from his book, Refuge beyond Reach, regarding how asylum policies in high-income democracies have been adapted to shut down most legal paths to safety for refugees through a range of deterrence methods that, while complying with the letter of their international commitments to refugees, do not adhere to them in spirit.      

This episode is brought to you by https://www.yiotanicolaidou.com JOIN SECURITY INNER CIRCLE for exclusive content here: https://www.yiotanicolaidou.com/security-inner-circle-signup/ Ask Yiota a question here: https://www.yiotanicolaidou.com/askyiota/ Learn how to control your environment here:  https://www.yiotanicolaidou.com/contact-me/

Hi Guys and welcome to Finance and Fury the Furious Friday edition. This is part 7, the last episode of the miniseries about all things politics. Sorry it took a while to cover, I wanted to do this topic justice and explain all the steps and outcomes instead of jumping to conclusions. We have covered a lot, there are many bits of the puzzle. Who, what, how, why, and potential outcomes – We have been through the Fabians, the political spectrum and democracy, then how a population is organised (Rules For Radicals), the fair go, then political progress for equality, then how the west got to be in such a good position, and how we may lose it. If you made it all the way through, awesome work. Thanks for listening to me rant on this Final part: What should the government be involved in? What services should they be involved in? To start: Have a quick real-world example to look at US Government Shutdown: It’s been almost a month, shutdown since 22/12/18. It’s the longest in US history, everyone has called it a crisis Over border funding: $5.7bn for a wall, already compromised to make it steel rather than concrete As a comparison: US gave Israel $25bn to help build their wall Total Government spending (the Fed, States, Etc) is $7.56trn: this is $20.7bn spending a day The Wall is a 0.07% cost to the budget for the year Enter the blame game: Irony is Schumer and Pelosi were in favour of a wall: Until Trump came along. Showing it was mainly just talk More political infighting: First time I have seen Democrats oppose spending more of someone else’s money Question: is the US still spinning? Is life going on? The longer that the shutdown occurs, the more people in the US are waking up to how little they need it But not for the Government workers and the IRS (their tax department) Workers aren’t being paid, but they will be. They will get back pay, for the time of the shutdown whilst they were not working. Is that a good deal? But private citizens are stepping in, picking up trash in parks and helping where they can Truth is that the Government has little to do with lives directly, unless It is paying you, it is taxing/regulating you, or it is arresting you Indirectly though, unfortunately, it affects all of our lives Leads to the last part: What should the Government be involved with, or provide for a country? This differs for where you sit on the political spectrum. It’s no secret which side I sit on, I value individual freedom and empowerment rather than the group thinking that everyone should have equal outcome For this episode, I will try and put my bias aside. The measurement for this episode is: has there been a net positive benefit or loss to a country based on Government Intervention? Progress from betterments to our lives, more freedoms, better health, etc or does it detract? Excluded "moral hazards", not saving money because of the knowledge that the State will provide an age pension and subsidised housing, and over-use of "free" health services in the absence of price signals to consumers. All of which isn’t really free Won’t have time to do this topic justice in 30 minutes. I will give the 1,000-foot view. If you are interested in a deeper dive, let me know If I don’t explain something fully, or you disagree, let me know as well!   What the Government is good at: Net positives Funding: Science and R&D. For the past 100 years, most advancement is in fields with the most money and manpower Technology and science: Government Funding has been great. Advancements over 100 years have been from this, like medicine, the internet etc Technological advancements in weaponry and nuclear science during the WWII. Government Funded Rocketry and telecommunications during the Space Race. This was all Government Funded Concentrating a large number of engineers and scientists to work together on the same project will, almost every time, produce more net advancement compared to if every member worked alone. DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) Funded things like the Internet, Google and Google maps, Windows, WWW, video conferencing, Siri, GPS, Facebook This is good: there is a measurable benefit, which the population adopted. Through being a demonstrable fact Most major developments come when the government diverts large budgets to achieve progress (rockets and planes). A vast difference in plane technology from WW1 to WW2. Major boost to development, with the failing of technology progress through history, boils down to individuals with no money or ability to share it Okay for measurable technology, like integrated circuits, they’re very competitive. If your circuits are faster and cheaper it can boost profits for your company. Other forms of technological progress. Less quantifiable as potential improvements, the outcomes are unknown If they not seen as profitable less funding from the private sector is likely If research and development are financed by investors, they want to see as high returns as possible But this is only part of the story. The acceleration of technological progress suspiciously correlates with the population growth A higher population creates a higher net number of scientists /engineers, who can provide more research/work China was advanced until the 1400s. There was a trial by error: high populations, then the EU took over with trial by experiment The issue: The Government mandated and Government ran research. Government bodies paid to research problems will always find a problem. What happens if there is no problem? No money, so then there is no social platform to run on As long as the Government doesn’t take over tech or directing the research, but acts as an investor, this could even make money. Just like universities. It’s a double-edged sword: The faster things change, the more creative destruction. This is not a bad thing. For example in the past with farming, too much at once is bad and it creates unrest. The Government doesn’t like it, and the population gets unhappy with them. Other research: $850,784 for a study of Italy’s Catherine de Medici, a noblewoman who became queen consort of King Henry II (King of France) 1519-1559. Is this needed?   National Protection and services: All good Police and Firefighters: Emergency services workers all help the population. They protect and keep us safe, and enforce the rule of law.   On the Fence: Positive and negatives preface Education and health are perfectly fine But not perfect with funding models: there are no incentives to minimise costs, it’s the opposite. If you don’t use all of your budget, you won’t get more to use next year  Infrastructure: On the fence, It is needed but at what cost? East West link in Melbourne: Estimated $800-900m has been spent on a road to never be built NBN: has cost at least $50bn to date and simply a huge high-risk mistake, no private company would ever have built it. (Rudd) The government ignored improvements in wireless technology and continuing moves away from landline. NBN will face stiff competition from 5G mobile technology and sold at a huge loss. Valuation only at $10bn Health: National Health is declining even though we are more advanced than ever Cost blowouts: Royal Adelaide Hospital is the 3rd most expensive building in the world (per square foot) it has 600 beds and cost $2.5bn Still teaching the food triangle that depicts that carbs are great, but stay away from healthy fats and proteins Where do most of the world’s advancements in medical technology and medication come from? The USA. If Americans didn’t have a profit system, we would not have most of the meds or medical tech we do Education: Is great. But, where have you learnt more? At school or on the job? If still at school, it’s hard to answer I am no expert, I need to learn more. I have got a few books by John Gatto and others to finish What I do know so far? Government Education is a new concept in past 100 years, it’s modelled around factory workers Education levels are higher now, looking at literacy rates. Was it government policy, or a changing world? When the Government took over in the early 1900s, the population needed to work, not go to school (Farmers, etc). it forced education they didn’t need, there was low attendance. Today there is a higher % of population in non-trade/construction/manufacturing positions All schools private: More competition, lower fees all around. 35% are independent/ catholic currently But wouldn’t work: not really private, Australia has no-profit schools (private higher education does, there are 170 of them) Australian Average Education is $20-30k for independent schools. One of the highest education costs in the world What might help: Education (Self Education focused on the individual around needs) I went to school in Austria for a while. The system is set up more for the kids’ interests There are nine years of education. Then there are a series of vocational-technical and university tracks to follow University, gymnasium, and Trades like the Polytechnische Schule Putting everyone through the same meat grinder ends up leaving everyone behind, becoming a learned helplessness What it hurts Economic: The quest for equality, where most research funded from the government or special interest groups show the need for government intervention with this In the early-20th century: the view that progress was being stifled by vast economic inequality  The cause was minimally regulated laissez-fairecapitalism with monopolistic corporations; Often violent conflict between workers and capitalists would erupt due to the claim, so it needed to be addressed Sherman Antitrust Act: made it illegal for anti-competitive practices (monopolies, cartels, predatory pricing) in the 1890s This was helpful and helped improve competition and remove monopolies But is it obsolete? 60-80% of advertisements through Facebook and Google. Twitter and their competitor Gab just gets shut down 21st Century: Legislation to redistribute, which is not so good. Tax people to pay for things for others, in other words, Social Democracy Welfare state: Reliance on government also increases what revenues governments need Tax: Mandatory financial charge imposed on the taxpayer by the Government From 1915 to 1942 Income taxes were introduced. A relatively new concept in society as previous taxes were on wealth and land ownership Rome had a 1-3% tax on value of wealth owned for citizens, in times of war you got a vote if you paid tax Progress: Everyone gets a vote and can vote for more redistributions, changes voting a bit Equality through social organisation. A change of policy to affect the population, where we get political activism Question: Is it better to let people choose to adopt something or are they forced to? Legislate for compelled compliance in society, introduce laws to control society. Make it the way progressives want Governmental power of the population is increased when some of the population want it Issues: Speech (limits freedom) with racism and ‘speech laws’, or ‘hate speech’ who defines hate? Already illegal to incite violence through speech, telling people to hurt someone Sonja Kruger was taken to court for blasphemy for her comments 2 years ago about a ‘Muslim ban’ in the US Only from nations with links to Terrorism, not Indonesia (1# for Muslims), or Egypt (1# for Arab) Claimant took her to human rights tribunal, she pays costs upfront and taxpayers pay for claimant The individual is the extreme minority. If you don’t protect the individual’s rights you are failing at protecting minorities. Islamophobia or homophobia is incorrect terminology as a phobia is an irrational fear Rewriting history to suit a narrative, Australian History lesson: Labor party was the one who implemented the White Australia Policy, the ALP wanted more direct methods of exclusion than the dictation test Menzies and Holt (two Liberal Conservatives) were the ones to start dismantling it. Interesting how perception changes Environment: Is the improvement in cleanliness from Government Regulations, or from improving technology? Nobody wants to see pollution or to ruin the earth. But for all the taxes on climate change, what benefit is there? Water: Green/ALP opposition to building new water storages. State governments tried to reduce demand by increasing prices (also generating revenue). Haven’t had a dam built for a capital city since Melbourne’s Thomson Dam in 1984 Drought reappeared from 2003 to 2010. There is little scope for further water savings State governments panicked and rather than build dam, they started spending on desalination plants (massively more expensive to build and operate than storage dams that can fill at virtually no cost). Melbourne plant cost $4 billion, Sydney cost $1.803 billion, Gold Coast cost $1.2 billion, and Adelaide plant cost $2.2 billion Sydney plant's costs are more than $500,000 a day, and it has not supplied any water since 2012 Desalination also uses enormous amounts of electricity and (despite not being used) is responsible for adding $100 to $200 annually to household water bills. Electricity: Destroying electricity system, replacing cheap and reliable coal-based generators with wind and solar power. Electricity costs are double those of US and Canada. Power prices have increased 60+% in the last ten years Huge subsidies for renewables and a failure of regulation are the main causes. Subsidies paid to producers of renewable electricity are $3 billion per year, yet power is more expensive Coal and nuclear are the two cheapest sources of base load power Carbon emissions by the rest of the world. Our efforts to reduce "greenhouse" emissions won't work We make up about 1% of global emissions, which is high for our population Australia's shunning of coal or nuclear energy is the equivalent to Saudi Arabia banning the domestic use of its oil. While wanting to regulate prices, we can’t have both (low prices with low supply) Side note: immigration 3rd to 1st world, individuals use 20 times the emissions they did previously. Logically, for lower emissions, against immigration automatically as it increases emissions being produced. How far do we go? Currently, people want the Government to have large involvement in ‘combating climate change’ Religious fervour about it, like modern blasphemy Again, nobody wants to live in a toxic environment (pollution). But, everything is relative. The US in 2009 gave $26.1bn to climate change, $641m was climate science You are a scientist, it is easy funding and good pay. But have to prove that the problem is there, just like before if there is no problem, then no money School kids and protesters demanding the Government drop emissions We are the ones that emit, but they need a parental figure to walk in a fix the problem for them Introducing stresses in their brain which increases cortisol. A constant confusion, fear of climate can lead to long term negative impact on brain development To wrap up this series: A lot of what the Government does can be handled by the private sector If private companies or employees don’t perform, they get replaced. The Government never replaces itself What you can do: Talk about politics (only if you are interested). There is a stigma in society about talking about politics, why? Best way to have population avoid it altogether if it is never spoken about, and then no need to pay attention and removes the possibility of people discussing ideas Same with money, it's impolite to talk about money? Why? Opening facts into the public conversation, it makes people think for themselves, not just repeat false rhetoric Most people know more about what is happening in their favourite tv shows than in politics. The tv show has very little impact on your life compared to current political events. Opens a debate about the issue, rather than silencing one group, everyone should be heard Don’t be afraid to speak your mind, learn as much as you can for what is relevant Make your own path in life and be less reliant on external forces. This is what gives you individual liberty Which is at the heart of financial freedom!   If you made it through, thank you very much for listening to this series. I hope it wasn’t boring and was actually interesting. If you have any questions or want me to explore one of these topics further, you can let me know on the contact page here.  

When the old National Protection and Programs Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security got a new name, a lot changed. It's now called the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. The new title also brought new status, as Bloomberg Government analyst Laura Criste described on Federal Drive with Tom Temin.

Can we ensure our election security infrastructure is safe from attack? Ahead of the midterm elections, Chris Krebs, Under Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security’s National Protection and Programs Directorate, discusses the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (ES-ISAC), which helps states and localities share information about cyberthreats. He warns that influence operations are just as formidable a threat to our elections as infrastructure risks.

The Homeland Security Department has been trying for nearly four years to rename its National Protection and Programs Directorate to something that actually describes what it does. Last week, the Senate gave it the go-ahead to do just that. DHS says the news name will be the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. The department also plans to reshuffle the offices within it. Federal News Radio's Amelia Brust has been covering the change, and she joined Federal Drive with Tom Temin for more.

Jessie Chandler is the award-winning author of the Shay O'Hanlon Caper series and the National Protection and Investigation Unit Operation series. Her novels have garnered two Golden Crown Awards, an Independent Publisher Book Award, and a USA Book Award for LGBTQ fiction. Two too-adorable-for-their-own-good pooches allow Jessie and her wife of twenty years to hang with them in Minneapolis, Minnesota, as long as they are fed three squares a day—interspersed with numerous snacks. When Jessie isn't writing, you can find her selling T-shirts, books, and other assorted fun stuff at festivals, craft shows, and a multitude of other strange locations.

July 25, 2018 | Chris Krebs, DHS Undersecretary for National Protection and Programs Directorate joins the show to talk with Todt and Cressey about his cybersecurity priorities, next week's DHS National Cybersecurity Summit, and the renewed focus on risk management.    

The Washington Post’s Derek Hawkins sits down with the undersecretary of National Protection and Programs Directorate at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Christopher C. Krebs, to analyze the government’s cybersecurity priorities.

The National Protection and Program Directorate, one of four Homeland Security Department directorates, said its federal partners know that NPPD is in charge when it comes to cybersecurity. The agency said it has all the authorities it needs to help protect federal networks and work with the private sector to mitigate cyber threats to critical infrastructure. But it just needs one other thing from Congress. Federal News Radio's Nicole Ogrysko had more on Federal Drive with Tom Temin.

America's History of Recalcitrance De jure discrimination Racism online is evolving in a way that is consistent with the way racism has always evolved--from explicit to subtle. Plaintiff-side civil rights lawyers have found it easiest to win -- if civil rights cases can ever said to be "easy"--  in cases in which they can convincingly demonstrate defendants' explicit discriminatory policies. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, the United States Supreme Court's 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and their subsequent cases and amendments comprise the bulk of American civil rights law.  The Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Brown held segregation in public schools to be unconstitutional. In interpreting a statute, judges will consider Congressional intent, which includes the circumstances under which Congress enacted the law. Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act  in an era of widespread de jure segregation in the South. Every 6th grader knows that, prior to Brown, state and local authorities in the South required "colored" and "white" students to attend segregated schools. Black students usually attended inferior schools with old books and in dilapidated buildings.  Southern authorities also required colored and white citizens to use separate facilities such as water fountains, restrooms, waiting rooms, and buses. They also enabled most private establishments, such as restaurants and hotels, to segregate as they pleased. Following  Brown, Southern racists remained undeterred. For example, on June 11, 1963, fully 9 years after Brown, Alabama Governor George Wallace famously "stood in the schoolhouse door" to prevent Vivian Malone and James Hood from entering and registering for classes at the University of Alabama. President Kennedy deployed the National Guard to remove Wallace, which they did. Virginia's response to Brown is also illustrative of the Southern response to it. Virginia Senator Harry F. Byrd, Sr. and his brother-in-law, Virginia General Assembly leader James M. Thomson, together pursued a  "Massive Resistance" strategy to oppose desegregation. Under Massive Resistance, the Virginia Assembly passed laws to prevent and punish local school districts for integrating in accordance with Brown. Further, Virginia authorities continued to enforce Massive Resistance initiatives well into the 1960s, even after federal and state courts ordered them to end their recalcitrance. The Civil Rights Act finally codified the nation's civil rights policy. Given the context in which the Civil Rights Act was enacted, courts are most likely to strike down laws and policies that contain explicit "suspect" classifications; namely, those that refer to race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Indeed, courts subject such de jure discrimination statutes and policies to the Constitutional "strict scrutiny" standard--the highest standard of judicial review. Paradoxically, laws designed to help traditionally marginalized groups, and which mention those groups explicitly, are also subject to strict scrutiny and thus likely to be struck down. (The intricacies of the strict scrutiny standard go well beyond the scope of this post. However, if you are interested in learning more about strict scrutiny and the other levels of scrutiny courts are likely to apply in interpreting the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause, click here.) De facto discrimination After many years of resisting civil rights laws, racists in the North and South had an a-ha moment. If they could figure out a way to maintain their supremacy using things that looked like something else, but achieved the same ends, they were golden! And so de facto discrimination--laws and policies that are not discriminatory on their face, i.e. they are facially neutral, but have discriminatory effects, have been the order of the day ever since. Stop-and-frisk? Check. Insanely long prison sentences for minor offenses? Check. School segregation based on merit? Check. Proposed cuts to Medicaid? Check.  Voter re-districting? You get the point. Welcome to the age of stealth racism. "I thought this post was about racism online." It is. The same racist ideologies that prevailed in 1964 prevail today. Since 1964, opponents of the Civil Rights Movement, many of whom are still alive today, and their descendants and allies, have persisted in their efforts to preserve their supremacy. They have taken racism online. This is the story of some of the measures the tech sector has taken, such as Google's Conversation AI, to curtail racism online and how defiant hate speakers have evaded those measures by creating their own code language. Hate speech is indeed protected speech and that's the problem. Researchers at the Rochester Institute of Technology peeled back the top layer of the internet and found hate speech teeming underneath. My guest today is Rijul Magu (@RijulMagu). Rijul co-authored, along with Shitij Joshi and Jiebo Luo at the Rochester Institute of Technology, a report entitled "Detecting the Hate Code on Social Media". He's the lead author. Rijul is currently a Masters Student at RIT and he earned his undergraduate degree at Jaypee Institute of Information Technology in Noida, India.   Resources University of Rochester School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Department of Computer Science (homepage of Graduate Studies Faculty Advisor Jiebo Luo) Detecting the Hate Code on Social Media by Rijul Magu, Kshitij Joshi, and Jiebo Luo Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future by Peter Thiel News Roundup The New York State Commission on Forensic Science has adopted a new controversial policy regarding the use of suspects' DNA evidence.  The Commission voted 9-2 to allow police to collect not just suspects' own DNA evidence, but also the DNA evidence of close relatives. While the measure has the support of prosecutors, opponents of the bill pointed out procedural flaws with some describing the new policy as a kind of genetic stop and frisk. Nathan Dempsey has the story at Gothamist. A Department of Homeland Security official --Jeanette Manfra, acting deputy undersecretary of cybersecurity and communications for the agency's National Protection and Programs Directorate --  told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee last week that Russia targeted election systems in 21 states during last year's presidential election. Ranking Member Mark Warner wrote Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly to make public the names of the states that were targeted. However, Secretary Kelly has thus far not released that information claiming that to do so would harm national security. Edward Graham covers this in Morning Consult. Uber CEO Travis Kalanick has resigned following the fallout from former Attorney General Eric Holder's report on the company's frat boy culture. However, several employees have attempted to have Kalanick reinstated. Rebecca Savransky has the story in the Hill. The Congressional Black Caucus wrote a letter Monday to Uber leadership urging them to improve racial and ethnic diversity in hiring and promotions at the company. A new Politico and Morning Consult report shows 60% of Americans either strongly or somewhat support the FCC's current net neutrality rules the new Trump-era FCC under Ajit Pai appears to be in the process of overturning. Two-thousand and fifty one registered voters were surveyed. The FCC has recommended a $122 million fine on a suspected robocaller--the highest-ever FCC fine. Officials suspect the alleged robocaller, Adrian Abromovich, a Florida man, made some 100 million robocalls over three months. Harper Neidig has the story in The Hill. The FCC also unanimously passed a rule change last week that will allow law enforcement to bypass blocker called IDs belonging to callers making imminent threats. Harper Neidig has this one in The Hill as well. We may soon be able to access Internet via an internet connection made from space. Doing so would significantly speed up upload and download speeds. The FCC approved a plan of Greg Wyler who plans to link up 720 satellites to deliver high speed broadband from space as soon as 2019. Brian Fung has the full story in the Washington Post. President Trump met with tech executives, including drone developers last week. The president said he'd work to give tech companies the "competitive advantage they need" and "create lots of jobs". David Shepardson covers the story in Reuters. In a unanimous 8-0 decision, the Supreme Court ruled last week that a North Carolina law that prevents registered sex offenders from going on Facebook is unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Lydia Wheeler covers this in the Hill. FCC Chaiman Ajit Pai testified at a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing last week about the agency's budget. Pai recommended a budget cut of over 5.2% since last year, or $322 million, which Chairman Pai conceded would come from the elimination of over 100 Commission jobs.

This week The Cipher Brief's Executive Editor Fionnuala Sweeney sits down with Suzanne Spaulding, Under-Secretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security. Fionnuala talks to Suzanne about the development and execution of cyber security policies in the federal government. 

Suzanne Spaulding, Under Secretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security, joins Lawfare's Benjamin Wittes for interview on cybersecurity and the role of DHS is cyberdefense in front of a live a audience.

In our 111th episode of the Steptoe Cyberlaw Podcast, Stewart Baker, Alan Cohn, and Kaitlin Cassel discuss: Senate bill on encryption: Senator Wyden pledges to fight the limits on encryption, Whatsapp turns on encryption for a billion users, Divided White House; Panama Papers; Law firm compromised by a phishing scam; US adds China’s Internet controls to list of trade barriers. In our second half we have an interview with Suzanne Spaulding, Under Secretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) at the Department of Homeland Security. The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of the firm.

In a bonus 106th episode of the Steptoe Cyberlaw Podcast, Stewart Baker and Alan Cohn interview Phil Reitinger, former DHS Deputy Undersecretary for Cybersecurity and Sony Corporation CISO and current Director of the new Global Cyber Alliance. They discuss the impact on DHS’s National Protection and Programs Directorate from President Obama’s recent creation of a Federal Chief Information Security Officer in the Executive Office of the President and the launch of the Global Cyber Alliance. The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of the firm.