this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2026
34 points (100.0% liked)

politics

30937 readers
1980 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Late last week, federal authorities issued a stern warning saying “malicious cyber actors” were targeting water and wastewater facilities in at least seven states across the US. Minnesota appeared to be the hardest hit with 30 of its water systems hit by cyber-attacks, leading to disruptions in the state’s water supply.

The problems ranged from low-pressure water flow in people’s homes to some utilities announcing boil-water notices. But there have been no reports of drinking water contamination.

“These threat actors are targeting water entities of all sizes,” the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa) said in a statement last Thursday.

The agency highlighted the fact that critical infrastructure systems can be especially vulnerable to cyber-attacks in the digital age. Much of the problem stemmed from water facilities’ connection to the internet, which made it possible for hackers to infiltrate, change passwords and lock out operators. To mitigate continued disturbances, the agency advised utilities to take their systems offline and switch to manual mode.

The culprit of the coordinated attack is suspected to be Iran, according to officials across the government who have spoken anonymously to various news outlets. Tehran has reportedly stepped up its cyber-attacks on the US since the war began nearly six months ago, but so far has only had nominal success. While the FBI announced that it opened an investigation into the hack, it stopped short of putting the responsibility on Iran.

Donald Trump, however, has said the attack is Minnesota’s fault.

“I blame it on Minnesota because they’re grossly incompetent,” Trump said at a cabinet meeting last Friday at Camp David in Maryland, without providing evidence to support his claims. “I would blame it on Minnesota and the governor, the corrupt governor of Minnesota … Iran’s got bigger problems than worrying about Minnesota.”

top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Who’s to blame?

The malicious cyber actors.

Potentially, the government of Iran, and by extension the US government for provoking them by directly attacking Iranian municipal water systems.

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Do you think they are lying about the cause to place blame on an invisible enemy and it's just that data centers over use of fresh water, unregulated water pollution, and poor maintenance of infrastructure is the cause ? (Aka incompetence and capitalism greed).

It sure seems fishy that cyber attacks would lower water pressure and make water unsafe to drink.

I can't see how they could possibly do that. But 🤷

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

Attribution can be masked/falsified

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/

[–] TransNeko@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

honestly this shit looks like a cia false flag operation. or maybe a mossad one... but probably a cia one as there were less bodies involved.