COMPUTER FRAUD SUMMARY
__________________________________________
How George Bush used computer fraud to steal the election
Condensed Version
1. No Paper Trail
The Republicans passed the Voting Act in 2002 authorizing the use of electronic voting machines with no requirement that they produce a paper receipt (a “paper trail”), which would allow an ironclad, independent assessment of whether the DATA IN THE voting machines accurately reflected the votes cast.
2. Conservative Republican Owned Voting Machine Companies
The Bush administration then insured that the majority of these electronic voting machines were made by Diebold and ES&S. The President of one of these companies and the VP of the other are brothers. Both are staunch Republicans and Diebold contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republican campaigns. The CEO of Diebold was Chairman of the Bush Reelection Campaign in Ohio , and promised to deliver the state of Ohio to George Bush in the 2004 election.
3. No Recounts Possible
Without the capability of generating a "paper trail", there is no way of having a recount of the votes as required by law.
4. Diebold Voting Machines Can Be Hacked.
Dr. Avi Rubin (Professor of Computer Science, John Hopkins University ) evaluated Diebold's source code, which runs their e-voting machines. Diebold voting machines use “Digital Encryption Standard”, whose code was broken in 1997 and is NO LONGER USED by anyone seriously interested in insuring that a computer is secure from tampering and hacking. Moreover, the KEY was IN the source code, such that all Diebold machines respond to the same key. Unlock one, and you have then ALL unlocked.
5. According to an analysis of the 2004 Presidential election by Dr. Steven Freeman of the University of Pennsylvania
"…In ten of eleven consensus battleground states, the tallied margin differed from the predicted (exit poll) margin, and in every one, the shift favored Bush.” (See: “The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy” in “Scholarly Analyses” at shadowbox.i8.com/stolen.htm). The discrepancy favored Bush in Ohio (6.7%), Pennsylvania (6.5%) and Florida (4.9%), and, according to Dr. Freeman, the odds of this being due to random errors are 250 million-to-one.
6. No Government Oversight of Voting Machine Industry
Interestingly, no one in the U.S. federal government seems to be
paying attention . . . as usual. There is no federal agency that has
regulatory authority or oversight of the voting machine industry—not the
Federal Election Commission (FEC), not the Department of Justice (DOJ),
and not the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The FEC doesn't even have a complete list of all the companies that count votes in U.S. elections.
Once again we are witness to an "eyes closed, hands off" approach
to protecting America . The 2004 election rests in the private hands
of the Urosevich brothers, who are financed by the far-out right wing and
top donors to the Republican Party. The Democrats are either sitting
ducks or co-conspirators. I don't know which.
7. None or Criminally Negligent Government Oversight of Voting Machines
Your local elections officials trusted a group called NASED – the National Association of State Election Directors -- to certify that your voting system is safe.
This trust was breached. NASED certified the systems based on the recommendation of an"Independent Testing Authority" (ITA). What no one told local officials was that the ITA did not test for security (and NASED didn't seem to mind). The most important test on the ITA report is called the "penetration analysis." This test is supposed to tell us whether anyone can break into the system to tamper with the votes. "Not applicable," wrote Shawn Southworth, of Ciber Labs, the ITA that tested the Diebold GEMS central tabulator software. "Did not test."
8. Criminal Records of Diebold’s Senior Executives
Check this out - No less than 5 of Diebold's developers are convicted felons, including Senior Vice President Jeff Dean, and topping the list are his twenty-three counts of felony Theft in the First Degree. To sum up, he was convicted of 23 felony counts of theft by - get this - planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection. Do you trust computer systems designed by this man? Is trust important in electronic voting systems?
9. How Easy It Is to Change the Vote
On the other hand, the Central Vote Tabulation systems are a very inviting target – by simply compromising one Windows desktop, you could potentially influence tens or hundreds of thousands of votes, with only one attack to execute and only one attack to erase your tracks after. This makes for an extremely attractive target, particularly when one realizes that by compromising these machines you can affect the votes that people cast not only by the new touch screen systems, but also voters using traditional methods, such as optical scanning systems since the tallies from all of these systems are brought together for Centralized Tabulation.
10. Why Votes Do Not Match Exit Poll
There are numerous examples in Florida and Ohio where the votes
do not match the exit polls but only in those precincts where
electronic voting machines with no paper trail were being used. All
of these discrepancies are in favor of George Bush by five to 15%
despite many of the precincts having a strong Democratic majority.
In those precincts where there was a machine with a "paper trail",
the exit polls matched almost exactly the actual vote.
11. Conclusion
The above are some of the lines that connect the dots of the Bush Conspiracy to steal
this election. As Fox News’ "fair and balanced" Bill O'Reilly says repeatedly "we report, you decide".
_______________________________
Longer Version And More Info. Available Here...
bushstole04.com
bushstole04.com |
