logo
After Ukraine's surprise drone assault on Russia, new attention drawn to sensitive sites stateside

After Ukraine's surprise drone assault on Russia, new attention drawn to sensitive sites stateside

Yahoo03-06-2025
After Ukraine launched a sudden drone assault on Russian installations, it brought new attention to the U.S.' own vulnerabilities, regardless of which side the U.S. stood on Kyiv's attack.
In recent years, Chinese Communist Party-linked entities have commercially targeted land around the U.S., including in the vicinity of sensitive installations like the Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota.
The Fufeng Group's 300-acre farmland purchase in 2021 first raised the collective antennae of Congress to such under-the-radar transactions – and even Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis swiftly banned them in his state as a result, among other efforts around the country.
On Tuesday, North Dakota's senators agreed that the U.S. must remain vigilant for any malign activity, whether it be from relatively novel drone assaults to potential espionage through real estate transactions.
Ukraine's Surprise Attack Shows It May Take A 'Major Drone Strike' To Change Us Defense Policy, Experts Say
"When adversaries can buy our land, attend our universities, photograph silos in our prairies, perform aerial surveillance, park their ships near our military bases, or even just join our PTAs, they have more opportunities to be nefarious," Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer told Fox News Digital.
Read On The Fox News App
"Our posture must always be vigilant, never assuming foreign actors are benign or have the best intentions," he said. "Whether it's directly spying, indirectly influencing, or sending drones to blow up aircraft, the ability of the enemy increases when we allow them easy access near our national interests."
Cramer's Flickertail State counterpart, Sen. John Hoeven, joined an effort to prevent such land-buys and has worked with federal partners to update the process in which foreign investment is analyzed for approval and decided upon.
"We need to remain vigilant against China and other adversaries," said Hoeven, who is co-sponsoring South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds' bill banning individuals and entities controlled by China, Russia, Iran and North Korea from purchasing farmland or commercial land near sensitive federal sites.
China's Us Influence Could Face Crackdown Under Slate Of New Bills
"At the same time, we're working to update the CFIUS process [which governs federal approval of foreign investments] to ensure proper reviews are taking place as well," Hoeven said.
"We also are working to develop the technology we need to protect our domestic military bases from potential drone threats."
Rounds' bill also has bipartisan support, including from Sen. Catherine Cortez-Masto, D-Nev., whose state also hosts sensitive government sites like Nellis Air Force Base and Area 51.
"It is common sense that we should not allow our foreign adversaries to buy agricultural land next to these locations," Masto said in a statement.
Rounds added in a statement that America's "near-peer adversaries… are looking for any possible opportunity to surveil our nation's capabilities and resources."
Even private-sector entities have expressed concern, including the South Dakota Soybean Association, which said farmland must be protected from foreign purchase for both agricultural and national security purposes.Original article source: After Ukraine's surprise drone assault on Russia, new attention drawn to sensitive sites stateside
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

California Supreme Court halts Republican redistricting lawsuit
California Supreme Court halts Republican redistricting lawsuit

USA Today

time12 minutes ago

  • USA Today

California Supreme Court halts Republican redistricting lawsuit

LOS ANGELES – The California State Supreme Court denied a challenge from Republican state lawmakers to block Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's proposal to redistrict California's congressional map. An Aug. 20 order from six of the seven justices said that Sens. Tony Strickland and Suzette Martinez Valladares along with Assemblymembers Tri Ta and Kathryn Sanchez "failed to meet their burden of establishing a basis for relief." The order showed no dissents but said that Justice Carol Corrigan, the only Republican appointee on the court, was absent and did not participate. The lawsuit, filed Monday, Aug. 18, challenged the bills to put the proposal to a vote in a Nov. 4 special election on California State Constitutional grounds, claiming that the initiative did not meet the 30-day threshold between being introduced in the chambers and the legislature voting on them. Legislative records show that lawmakers used the so-called "gut-and-amend" method on two previously unrelated bills in the State Assembly and Senate to create the Election Rigging Response Act. The original bills were introduced more than 30 days ago. The bills would require a two-thirds majority in both houses to pass and would put the proposed maps, which aim to flip five Republican held seats in the House of Representatives, to a vote in a Nov. 4 special election. California has an independent redistricting commission that is designed to limit partisan influence on the map-drawing process, but Newsom said the measure would allow a new process to draw maps that would go into effect for House elections in 2026, 2028 and 2030, before ceding power back to the commission to draw maps ahead of 2032. California currently has 43 congressional seats held by Democrats and nine by Republicans. The creation of five new Democratic-friendly districts could sway California's delegation to a 48-5 advantage for Democrats. Martinez Valladares, the Santa Clarita Senator, told USA TODAY in an Aug. 21 statement that the legislators would continue to fight the redistricting push. "California voters chose district lines drawn in the open, not engineered by politicians to serve themselves or their partisan agenda. All voters deserve fair, transparent elections and we will never give up fighting for that," she said. Contributing: Joey Garrison, USA TODAY

'Absurd': Amy Klobuchar slams deepfake of her criticizing Sydney Sweeney campaign
'Absurd': Amy Klobuchar slams deepfake of her criticizing Sydney Sweeney campaign

USA Today

time12 minutes ago

  • USA Today

'Absurd': Amy Klobuchar slams deepfake of her criticizing Sydney Sweeney campaign

Sen. Amy Klobuchar said she was surprised when she heard her voice in a clip on X criticizing Sydney Sweeney's American Eagle ad campaign, which aims to sell the company's jeans with the likeness of the actresses' "great genes." The tone and pitch sounded like her, but they weren't her words, Klobuchar wrote in an Aug. 20 New York Times opinion piece. That's when the Minnesota Democratic senator realized it was a deepfake, a digitally altered video or audio recording that uses a person's voice or image, created by artificial intelligence. "A realistic deepfake — an A.I.-generated video that shows someone doing or saying something they never did — can circle the globe and land in the phones of millions while the truth is still stuck on a landline," Klobuchar wrote in the piece, titled "What I Didn't Say About Sydney Sweeney." She called the so-called video of her "a vulgar and absurd critique." Klobuchar has called for AI regulation on the national level – an idea that's not just supported by Democrats. In 2024, she and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, introduced a Senate bill to ban actual and artificial intelligence- generated posts of intimate imagery and deepfakes, and to require online platforms to "promptly remove such depictions upon receiving notice of their existence." President Donald Trump in May signed the TAKE IT DOWN Act, a law meant to outlaw deepfakes and revenge pornography. Now, companies must have a process for people to report deepfakes and nonconsensual intimate images, including revenge pornography, within 48 hours of being notified. Still, the push has its critics. That includes Republican Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, and Eric Burlison, R-Missouri, as well as advocates concerned about how the move could limit national free speech protections. In her opinion piece, Klobuchar accused X of not following the stipulations of the new law. She said the platform didn't take down the deepfake video of her – or label it as a false depiction of her quickly enough. Now, Klobuchar wrote that she's looking for even more policy change to make social media companies remove deepfakes, with some exceptions for free speech protections. Her proposed bill is cosponsored by Sens. Chris Coons, D-Delaware, and Thom Tillis, R-North Carolina, and Marsha Blackburn, R-Tennessee. "That bill was only the first step," she wrote in her op-ed. Taylor Swift explicit AI photos: Are they illegical? Klobuchar accuses X of not taking down video Klobuchar credited tech giants TikTok and Meta for taking the proper precautions to protect her and warn the public that it wasn't actually her speaking in the video. But she slammed X for not following the stipulations of the new law. "X refused to take it down or label it, even though its policy says users are prohibited from sharing 'inauthentic content on X that may deceive people,' including 'manipulated or out-of-context media that may result in widespread confusion on public issues,' she wrote in the opinion piece. "They must at least include labeling requirements for content that is substantially generated by A.I." X did not immediately respond to an inquiry from USA TODAY for a response on Klobucher's comments. What are the repercussions of deepfakes? Reputations are at risk when deepfakes are posted and allowed to linger online, Klobuchar warned in the Times. Deepfakes of other prominent figures, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and even pop star Taylor Swift, have also been posted online and attracted attention to the issue. Deepfakes have also been used by young people as a bullying tactic. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has also cited an increasing threat of deepfake identities. In her op-ed, Klobuchar cited a January 2022 study to show that "people who see this type of content develop lasting negative views of the person in the video, even when they know it is fake." "There is no way to quantify the chaos that could take place without legal checks," Klobuchar wrote later in the piece. "Imagine a deepfake of a bank C.E.O. that triggers a bank run, a deepfake of an influencer telling children to use drugs or a deepfake of a U.S. president starting a war that triggers attacks on our troops. The possibilities are endless." Contact Kayla Jimenez at kjimenez@ Follow her on X at @kaylajjimenez.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store