China waging Cyberwar on USA – Mandiant Report

UPDATE – February 20, 3:15 PM Eastern – Just released on another outlet is a very interesting video that explains how they hack our systems. The video is posted at the bottom of this page. It is entitled: “Fascinating video tracks a real Chinese hacker in action.”

Editor’s Note – We have been reporting on cyber attacks from all avenues; from ‘Anonymous’ to Iran to China and hundreds of other places and types. Now, security firm Mandiant appears to have proof about the vast effort the Chinese are waging upon us.

Read or download the report here: Mandiant_APT1_Report

Elite Chinese unit accused of waging cyberwar against US

By Brendan Sasso – The Hill

An elite military unit of Chinese hackers is likely behind a wave of attacks on U.S. government and business computer systems, according to a report released on Tuesday by the American security firm Mandiant.

Analysts traced a series of attacks to a 12-story building in the Pudong district of Shanghai. They concluded that the building, which likely holds hundreds or even thousands of employees, is almost certainly the headquarters of China’s secretive cyberwar division, the People’s Liberation Army Unit 61398.

A state-owned telecommunications company provided special fiber optic cable to the building in the name of national defense, according to the 74-page report. The analysts said that the hackers, who are required to be proficient in English, likely have a sizeable support staff of liguists, researchers and industry experts.

Mandiant concluded that since 2006, the Chinese unit has stolen data from at least 141 companies across 20 major industries. At least 115 of the companies were in the United States.

The analysts said the hackers periodically revisit the networks of victims over the course of several months or years to steal information such as blueprints, test results, business plans, pricing documents and emails.

“It is time to acknowledge the threat is originating from China, and we wanted to do our part to arm and prepare security professionals to combat the threat effectively,” Dan McWhorter, Mandiant’s managing director of threat intelligence, said in a statement explaining the firm’s decision to release the information.

The Chinese government denied the allegations.

“Cyberattacks are anonymous and transnational, and it is hard to trace the origin of attacks, so I don’t know how the findings of the report are credible,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said at a press conference on Tuesday, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The report did not name any of the victims, but attacks on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Coca-Cola and major media companies including The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal have been tied to hackers in China.

The attack on the Times likely came from a different group, according to the paper.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) has warned that the United States is losing a cyber war with China.

Rogers, along with committee ranking member Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), introduced legislation last week that would allow companies and the government to share more information about cyber threats.

“American businesses are under siege. We need to provide American companies the information they need to better protect their networks from these dangerous cyber threats,” Rogers said in a statement when he introduced the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA).

But privacy advocates and many Democrats argue that CISPA would encourage companies to share their customers’ sensitive personal information with spy agencies, such as the National Security Agency (NSA). The House passed CISPA last year, but the Senate pursued its own legislation.

Democrats and the Obama administration are especially worried about the potential for hackers to disrupt critical infrastructure, such as an air traffic control system or a bank.

Ahead of the State of the Union address last week, President Obama signed an executive order that will create a voluntary set of cybersecurity best-practices for companies that operate critical infrastructure.

The order also requires federal agencies to share more information about cyber threats to U.S. companies and the public.

“The United States has substantial and growing concerns about the threats to U.S. economic and national security posed by cyber intrusions, including the theft of commercial information,” White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said on Tuesday.

Pointing to the executive order, Hayden said the U.S. government is taking an “active approach” to defending against cyber attacks.

“And we have repeatedly raised our concerns at the highest levels about cyber theft with senior Chinese officials, including in the military, and we will continue to do so,” she said. “The United States and China are among the world’s largest cyber actors and it is vital that we continue a sustained, meaningful dialogue and work together to develop an understanding of acceptable behavior in cyberspace.”

Fascinating video tracks a real Chinese hacker in action:


Obama'd distraction ploys – how to defeat them

Editor’s Note – We at SUA could not agree more with Roger L. Simon’s piece on Obama and distractions posted below. It still amazes those of us who followed the election so closely where an incumbent with such a terrible record on so many fronts could fool America into reelecting him. How did he do it? Distraction; there are many theories but perhaps most important is his deft ability to distract the viewer from his record.

There was Mitt Romney’s tax returns and overseas accounts, his wife’s equestrian hobby, the war-on-woman, gay marriage, women in the military, Bain Capital, and so many more issues that were important to many special interest groups, but most certainly they were not the most important issues of the day. The abysmal economy, massive joblessness, wars and unrest across the globe, Iran’s nuclear ambitions along with North Korea’s, Obama Care, the debt ceiling, the fiscal cliff, and all the scandals were just some of the important issues. But perhaps the most egregious were the evasion and/or cover-up of the 9/11 Benghazi terror attack and the Fast and Furious scandal.

Obama and team figured out long ago how to manipulate the discourse, with a compliant and/or colluding media, usually through distraction. Don’t look behind that curtain, the Great Oz commands you. Add ‘magician’ to his resume!

It is time to use his own tactics against him.

Distractions — Defeating Obama with Aikido

By Roger L. Simon – PJ Media

Barack Obama is a master of distraction. It is perhaps the single thing he does best. Indeed, with the help of his loyal media claque, the president is almost as good with distraction as Roger Federer with a tennis racquet or Mickey Mantle with a baseball bat.

When the public starts looking closely at what he is doing, making him vulnerable on matters of genuine significance, Obama changes the subject, distracting the public with a relatively minor issue. That this new issue usually has “hot button” overtones only helps him because it plays into the anger management issues endemic to the human race. Everyone almost always wants to be right about everything, myself unfortunately included.

So his opponents — the GOP — forget about the big issues, concentrate on the insignificant, and end up in disarray, losing elections and turning on each other.

Obama has always behaved this way but now, in his second term, it has become more blatant and the GOP’s reaction more befuddled and extreme, the Tea Party and the Establishment wings going at each other like nitwit cousins in a hillbilly soap opera.

As I write this, the big issues on the national agenda appear to be not the economy and foreign policy, but gun control and immigration.


This is going on while unemployment remains at near record numbers (who knows what the real numbers are?), the deficit appears headed for Alpha Centauri, many of our states and cities are bankrupt or near it, higher education is becoming either useless or unaffordable, North Korea just blew up an atom bomb, Iran is about to get theirs, the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies have taken over or are about to take over most of the Middle East and a fair amount of Africa from the Horn to Morocco, and Russia is back to its old ways (assuming it ever left them), flying military aircraft over Guam. And that leaves out China.

I could go on, but you get the point.

And we are arguing about gun control and immigration. Talk about distractions!

But let’s examine them a bit more closely. The whole gun-control debate seems to revolve around two questions — whether background checks should be universal and just how many bullets we should be allowed to have in a magazine. Excuse me while I yawn.

Yes, I know that we are being handed a crock of manure and that Connecticut had some of the most stringent gun legislation in the country when Newtown occurred, but so what? This is still an absurd distraction. What real difference would it make to our lives if background gun checks were universal?

And, yes, I know the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the populace from a totalitarian government, but do you really think — in today’s world of drones, lasers, communications satellites, and other high-tech weapons and apparatus we don’t even know about, all in the hands of the government — whether a citizen has ten or twenty bullets in his magazine has a significance beyond the level of a low-grade band-aid, and a used one at that? Even a howitzer in every house wouldn’t mean much anymore, considering what the government has at its disposal.

If you really are worried about totalitarianism, better to spend your efforts trying to dismantle the NSA or leading a campaign for everyone to give up their cell phones, undoubtedly the greatest spy apparatus ever invented. And we all use them willingly.

Whatever you do, spending a lot of time debating how many shells you can carry is a monumental distraction and only helps the other side. Just roll your eyes and move on. They’re not going to do very much about this anyway. They’re only doing it for show — and that’s the point. They don’t even care about this themselves. They just care about making you look bad. Don’t let them. Don’t engage.

Practice the Japanese martial art of aikido in which you win by using your opponent’s energy against him — rather like a basketball player who steps back from the player he’s defending and lets him stumble and fall. It’s called “pulling the chair,” as Blake Griffin of the L.A. Clippers discovered, much to his chagrin:


The immigration debate is another area in which to practice this aikido and pull the chair. The obvious point of this debate is to paint Republicans as bigots and cement the growing Hispanic vote for Democrats. Conservatives get on their high horse about the principles of lawful immigration and they are of course right. But again, so what?

In reality, illegal immigration is less of a problem than it has been in ages for a reason most people know: the employment picture, for once, is better south of the border.

This will change, most probably, but before it does, Republicans should seize the so-called high ground and lead the charge to solve the problem as quickly as possible, take all the phony racist accusations off the table, even if it means the dreaded word amnesty (which, as we know, didn’t bother Ronald Reagan) or some euphemism for it.

Don’t like that? Well, ask yourself this. How in the world are we going to repatriate eleven million illegal aliens without organizing one of the biggest bureaucracies this country (or the world) has ever known? And what are we going to do with that bureaucracy after the illegals have gone (if they ever do)? Is that something small-government conservatives, of all people, should want?

Moving beyond gun control and immigration, I have one more suggestion for Republican use of that great reverse-English aikido. Start accusing Democrats of racism for not fixing the economy when African-Americans have suffered worst of all. Do it loudly and often. It would be justified.

Knee-jerk Gun Laws – the impact on other shores

Editor’s Note – The gun control debate rolls on. Every time one throws a stone into a pond, one never knows completely what the waves will look like, how big they will roll and propagate, how long they will last, or what ancillary damage may occur on disparate shorelines. As liberals across the country act emotionally about gun laws, and their claim that more are needed impacts everyone somehow, we are starting to see the new shorelines being created and/or destroyed.

This means that America needs to educate themselves on all facets of the issue before knee-jerk laws are conjured up as they were in New York State. Governor Cuomo gave an impassioned speech supporting the new law, though its now known that he wanted more, including confiscations, and it was quickly enacted. Now come the waves; and in this case we see examples of the economic impact. We are also seeing a call to embargo other municipalities and states as is witnessed in the following two articles.

There is a growing backlash that the liberals could not foresee  nor were they ever worried about them it seems. Even New York forgot to allow law enforcement to have more than seven rounds, now they may pay in other ways. If enough manufacturers and suppliers embargo New York, they will see steeper prices and less availability for municipalities, and likely some further rise in the “exit” strategy – time to leave to friendlier climes.

York Arms Cancels All Its New York Police Orders

Buxton, ME –-( Based on the recent legislation in New York, we are prohibited from selling rifles and receivers to residents of New York.

We have chosen to extend that prohibition to all governmental agencies associated with or located within New York.

As a result we have halted sales of rifles, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, machine guns, and silencers to New York governmental agencies.

For “civilian” customers residing in New York: At your choice, we will:

  • Complete your order and ship to a dealer of your choice outside of NY.
  • Refund your payment in full.
  • Hold your items here for up to 6 months, at no charge – if you are in the process of leaving NY and taking residence in another state.

For LE/Govt customers in New York: Your orders have been cancelled.

AmmoLand supports and recommends York Arms please visit these patriots and support their brand.  . If you think SIG, Smith & Wesson, and Glock should do the same you can email them at with the tool found here: .

Colorado ammo magazine maker Magpul threatens to leave state over gun bill

By Kurtis Lee – The Denver Post

Colorado’s largest and most profitable manufacturer of high-capacity ammunition magazines has vowed to leave the state if lawmakers pass a measure banning the devices — a move officials with the company say could cost hundreds of jobs and upward of $85 million in potential spending this year.

Magpul’s threat has Democratic lawmakers scrambling to strike a balance that remains true to their goal of limiting the number of rounds a magazine can hold without frightening off businesses.

“If we’re able to stay in Colorado and manufacture a product, but law-abiding citizens of the state were unable to purchase the product, customers around the state and the nation would boycott us for remaining here,” said Doug Smith, Magpul’s chief operating officer. “Staying here would hurt our business.”

House Bill 1224 bans individuals from possessing high-capacity ammunition magazines of more than 15 rounds — an amendment earlier in the week raised this number from 10 rounds — but allows manufacturers to stay in Colorado and produce the devices.

Mandate “burdensome”

Under the legislation, manufacturers would be required to engrave each magazine with a serial number and date upon which it was produced — something Smith called “burdensome and unnecessary.”

“None of this helps protect people,” said Smith, who added that only if the Democrat-sponsored bill fails to pass the legislature would the company stay in Colorado.

State Rep. Daniel Kagan, D-Cherry Hills Village, said he plans to offer an amendment Friday that seeks to soften the bill’s impact on magazine makers in the state.

“It needs to be clear that manufacturers will be able to still sell and transfer these high-capacity magazines to individuals in other states, the U.S. military and law enforcement,” Kagan said. “We want them (Magpul) to stay here in Colorado. It would be sad to see them leave.”

State Rep. Joe Salazar, D-Thornton, agrees with Kagan and insists state lawmakers are still giving the Erie-based company an option to do business in Colorado.

“It’s imperative to keep jobs here,” Salazar said.

Still, neither Kagan or Salazar said they would be willing to vote against the bill banning high-capacity ammunition magazines in an effort to keep Magpul in Colorado.

“We will leave if it passes,” Smith said.

State Democrats hold a 37-28 majority in the House and a 20-15 majority in the Senate, but not all Democrats are on board with the bill — nor is the party unified on other gun-control proposals.

Meanwhile, Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper, known to be pro-business, found himself meeting with Magpul officials to discuss the party’s bill Thursday.

The company this year enlisted RD Sewald, a former Hickenlooper top adviser, to lobby against bans on high-capacity magazines.

“They (lawmakers) might end up having to compromise” on the magazine bill, Hickenlooper said Thursday. He also expressed support for the effort to limit the magazines.

“Democrats are caught on the horns of a tough dilemma with this one,” said Bob Loevy, a professor emeritus of political science at Colorado College. “Clearly there’s going to be unintended consequences that have Democrats taking the blame for putting a small dent in the state’s economy if the company does in fact leave.”

Established in Colorado in 1999, Magpul says it employs more than 200 people at its manufacturing and shipping headquarters, while there are another 400 employees of subcontractors that work with the company throughout the state.

$85 million at stake

In addition to a wide array of gun-magazine products, the privately-held Magpul makes many other products, including cases for mobile phones and tactical sights for firearms. This year, the company says it expects to spend upward of $85 million in Colorado alone on employee payroll, manufacturing subcontractors, suppliers and service providers.

Smith said much of Magpul’s business comes from out-of-state sales, contracts with the U.S. military, and with local and national law enforcement.

In committee testimony earlier in the week, several opponents to the measure said Democrats are being hypocritical.

“On one end they’re saying we want the jobs and revenue from producing these magazines, but on the other end, they’re saying, if you live in Colorado, then you can’t possess one,” said Lee Reedy a resident of Brighton.

Andy Molchan, director of the National Association of Federally Licensed Firearms Dealers, said Magpul is right to leave Colorado.

“It’s almost like a symbolic move,” Molchan said. “Why would they stay and do business in a state that doesn’t allow people to have their products?”

Brennan convert to Islam? Rumors and sources say yes

Editor’s Note – Is the nominee for CIA Director, John Brennan actually a Muslim? That is the latest rumor, and here at SUA we believe that he is because several trusted and highly placed sources have indicated that this is true. Our sources are independent from the article below, so please read and judge for yourself.

The rumor is not new however, its just comes out now because he is the nominee for the top intelligence slot for the United States. If he is a Muslim, how does that effect his ability to investigate or control work at CIA on extremist Muslims who wish to tear America down?

He has said some pretty outrageous things regarding the Muslim Brotherhood and more that many see as an indicator that he does not have a clear head on the subject, and those of us who study Islam and Jihadist activity know that all true Muslims must believe and foster the goal of world domination under sharia law. That is the core of their prophet’s teachings. Therefore, SUA believes that he would not be disposed to keep America’s interests first and is therefore totally inappropriate for this job as well as the one he has held for the past few years under Obama.

Barack Obama’s choice for CIA chief ‘converted to Islam’ former FBI agent claims

  • John Guandolo claims John Brennan converted while in Saudi Arabia
  • Former FBI agent says Mr Brennan visited Mecca and Medina during Hajj

By KERRY MCDERMOTT – Daily Mail Online UK

The incoming head of the CIA converted to Islam while working as a station chief in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s, a former FBI agent has claimed.

John Guandolo, who retired from the FBI in 2008, said in a radio interview that John Brennan – who has been nominated by Barack Obama as the new director of the CIA – visited the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina accompanied by Saudi officials who may have persuaded him to convert.

Accusations: John Brennan (right) has been nominated as the new Director of the CIA by President Barack Obama.

Mr Guandolo’s tale echoes elements of the plot of hit show Homeland, in which U.S. Marine Nick Brody converts to Islam while being held prisoner by al-Qaeda, only to begin working for the CIA after his release.

Mr Guandolo told the Trento Radio Show via Skype that Mr Brennan visited the holy sites during the Hajj season – in sees hundreds of thousands of Muslims converge on the cities to perform a series of rituals – while serving as CIA station chief in Riyadh between 1996 and 1999, a report on Al Arabiya News said.

Non-Muslims are prohibited from entering Mecca, and are not permitted to enter the city centre, or sacred core, of Medina.

The ex-FBI agent told the radio station Mr Brennan was ‘unfit’ to take charge of the CIA, and claimed U.S. government officials based in Saudi Arabia during that period ‘were direct witnesses to his growing relationships with individuals who work with the Saudi government and they witnessed his conversion to Islam’.

Mr Brennan, 57, has spent more than three decades working in intelligence.

He was nominated as the new head of the CIA on January 7 by President Obama, after predecessor General David Petraeus was forced to resign amid a scandal surrounding an affair with his biographer.

In the critically-acclaimed series Homeland Lieutenant Nick Brody was ‘turned’ by his captors during an eight year stint as a prisoner of war.

Upon his release he is welcomed back to the U.S. as a war hero and soon attracts the interest of high-level politicians who encourage him to run for Congress. But the newly devout Muslim is secretly working for terrorist Abu Nazir.

The second season of Homeland sees Brody forced to begin covertly helping the CIA in its hunt for Nazir after his cover is blown by agent Carrie Mathison.

The CIA is yet to respond to the MailOnline regarding Mr Guandolo’s claims.

VIDEO: Ex-FBI agent John Guandolo on CIA nominee John Brennan: (More video here on his interview.)


For additional proof, watch this video as well. Brennan and his own words:


Lew – How do you trust such a nominee – hypocrites?

Editor’s Note – Where and when does the hypocrisy end? The only truth anyone can faithfully glean from the eternal campaigner-in-chief and his cronies is that whatever they say about their opponents, you can be sure they are at least twice as guilty of the same transgression.

The examples of such are far too voluminous to list again, and again, but here is the latest. Remember, Jack Lew has already been caught giving false testimony during budget discussions to Congress. This man cannot be trusted with America’s checkbook and ‘the full faith and credit’ of the country.

The ‘do as we say, not as we do’ mentality oozes from there deflections, obfuscations, and blatant disregard for the truth  – so we ask again: “America, what the heck were you thinking on that one Tuesday last November?”

Obama’s hypocrisy on Jack Lew

By Marc A. Thiessen – Washington Post

In a brutal campaign ad last year, Barack Obama showed Mitt Romney warbling “America the Beautiful” while pictures of a sandy beach appeared and the ad declared: “He had millions in a Swiss bank account . . . tax havens like Bermuda … and the Cayman Islands.” It concluded: “Mitt Romney’s not the solution. He’s the problem.”

Well, apparently someone else is part of the “problem”: Obama’s nominee for Treasury secretary, Jack Lew.

It turns out Lew had $56,000 invested in a Citigroup venture capital fund based in . . .wait for it . . . the Cayman Islands. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), a member of the Finance Committee before which Lew will soon appear, declared, “The irony is thick,” pointing out that “President Obama has been almost obsessively critical of offshore investments.”

Grassley is right. Just last week, during a “60 Minutes” interview before the Super Bowl, Obama declared, “When you look at some of these deductions that certain folks are able to take advantage of, the average person can’t take advantage of them. The average person doesn’t have access to Cayman Island accounts.”

It’s a recurring theme for the president. In a 2009 speech, Obama focused his ire on “a building in the Cayman Islands that had over 12,000 businesses claim this building as their headquarters” — a building called Ugland House. Obama said, “And I’ve said before, either this is the largest building in the world or the largest tax scam. And I think the American people know which it is: The kind of tax scam that we need to end.”

Well, guess who was involved in the “largest tax scam” in the world? Jack Lew. According to the New York Times, Lew’s Cayman Islands fund was based in “the notorious Ugland House, a building whose mailboxes are home to nearly 19,000 corporate entities, many of them tax shelters.”

Someone else who was deeply concerned about Ugland House is the man who will consider Lew’s nomination, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.). In a 2008 hearing, Baucus said of Ugland House, “Many of those tenants are feasting at America’s taxpayers’ expense.” Now he must decide whether to confirm one of those tenants as our next secretary of the Treasury.

Lew’s defenders point out that his investment was “only” $56,000. Well, $56,000 may be a small amount in Washington and on Wall Street, but it is more than the annual income of the typical American family. They say that he sold his Cayman holdings for a loss three years ago. But Lew divested himself and sold his investment for a loss only when confirmed as director of the Office of Management and Budget. Before that, even as a senior State Department official, he had no problem parking his money offshore.

Democrats point out that Republican Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson also had investments in the Cayman Islands and that Republicans did not view this as disqualifying. But the ethics of investing in the Cayman islands is not the issue here. The issue is Obama’s hypocrisy.

Obama excoriated his opponent in last year’s election as being unfit for office for having such investments. So by Obama’s own standard, shouldn’t Lew be considered unfit for office as well? Obama specifically called the investment Lew held the world’s biggest “tax scam.” Should the man responsible for U.S. tax policy be someone the president says was involved in a “tax scam”? Someone the Democratic Senate Finance Committee chairman says was “feasting at America’s taxpayers’ expense”?

A White House spokesman, Eric Schultz, pointed out that Lew broke no laws and “paid all of his taxes and reported all of the income, gains and losses from the investment on his tax returns.” But last year Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said that while Romney had not technically broken any laws by keeping his money in offshore tax havens, “is not technically breaking the law a high-enough standard for someone who wants to be president of the United States?” Well, is not technically breaking the law a high-enough standard for someone who wants to be secretary of the Treasury?

Investing in the Cayman Islands does not make Lew unfit to be Treasury secretary. But it does make him unfit to be Obama’s Treasury secretary.