Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lurqer who wrote (36045)	1/23/2004 1:59:33 PM
From: abuelita	Respond to of 89467

...and that ain't never gonna happen. -rose

To: lurqer who wrote (36045)	1/23/2004 2:01:23 PM
From: Rascal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Well, I can relax a little now. Finally everybody's on board. January 23, 2004 OP-ED COLUMNIST Democracy at Risk By PAUL KRUGMAN he disputed election of 2000 left a lasting scar on the nation's psyche. A recent Zogby poll found that even in red states, which voted for George W. Bush, 32 percent of the public believes that the election was stolen. In blue states, the fraction is 44 percent. Now imagine this: in November the candidate trailing in the polls wins an upset victory — but all of the districts where he does much better than expected use touch-screen voting machines. Meanwhile, leaked internal e-mail from the companies that make these machines suggests widespread error, and possibly fraud. What would this do to the nation? Unfortunately, this story is completely plausible. (In fact, you can tell a similar story about some of the results in the 2002 midterm elections, especially in Georgia.) Fortune magazine rightly declared paperless voting the worst technology of 2003, but it's not just a bad technology — it's a threat to the republic. First of all, the technology has simply failed in several recent elections. In a special election in Broward County, Fla., 134 voters were disenfranchised because the electronic voting machines showed no votes, and there was no way to determine those voters' intent. (The election was decided by only 12 votes.) In Fairfax County, Va., electronic machines crashed repeatedly and balked at registering votes. In the 2002 primary, machines in several Florida districts reported no votes for governor. nytimes.com Rascal @CheatingShows.com And how many failures weren't caught? Internal e-mail from Diebold, the most prominent maker of electronic voting machines (though not those in the Florida and Virginia debacles), reveals that programmers were frantic over the system's unreliability. One reads, "I have been waiting for someone to give me an explanation as to why Precinct 216 gave Al Gore a minus 16022 when it was uploaded." Another reads, "For a demonstration I suggest you fake it." Computer experts say that software at Diebold and other manufacturers is full of security flaws, which would easily allow an insider to rig an election. But the people at voting machine companies wouldn't do that, would they? Let's ask Jeffrey Dean, a programmer who was senior vice president of a voting machine company, Global Election Systems, before Diebold acquired it in 2002. Bev Harris, author of "Black Box Voting" (www.blackboxvoting.com), told The A.P. that Mr. Dean, before taking that job, spent time in a Washington correctional facility for stealing money and tampering with computer files. Questionable programmers aside, even a cursory look at the behavior of the major voting machine companies reveals systematic flouting of the rules intended to ensure voting security. Software was modified without government oversight; machine components were replaced without being rechecked. And here's the crucial point: even if there are strong reasons to suspect that electronic machines miscounted votes, nothing can be done about it. There is no paper trail; there is nothing to recount. So what should be done? Representative Rush Holt has introduced a bill calling for each machine to produce a paper record that the voter verifies. The paper record would then be secured for any future audit. The bill requires that such verified voting be ready in time for the 2004 election — and that districts that can't meet the deadline use paper ballots instead. And it also requires surprise audits in each state. I can't see any possible objection to this bill. Ignore the inevitable charges of "conspiracy theory." (Although some conspiracies are real: as yesterday's Boston Globe reports, "Republican staff members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee infiltrated opposition computer files for a year, monitoring secret strategy memos and periodically passing on copies to the media.") To support verified voting, you don't personally have to believe that voting machine manufacturers have tampered or will tamper with elections. How can anyone object to measures that will place the vote above suspicion? What about the expense? Let's put it this way: we're spending at least $150 billion to promote democracy in Iraq. That's about $1,500 for each vote cast in the 2000 election. How can we balk at spending a small fraction of that sum to secure the credibility of democracy at home?

To: lurqer who wrote (36045)	1/23/2004 3:13:06 PM
From: NOW	Respond to of 89467

"The best allegory for New Racism is the tradition of "turkey pardoning" in the United States. Every year since 1947, the National Turkey Federation has presented the US President with a turkey for Thanksgiving. Every year, in a show of ceremonial magnanimity, the President spares that particular bird (and eats another one). After receiving the presidential pardon, the Chosen One is sent to Frying Pan Park in Virginia to live out its natural life. The rest of the 50 million turkeys raised for Thanksgiving are slaughtered and eaten on Thanksgiving Day. ConAgra Foods, the company that has won the Presidential Turkey contract, says it trains the lucky birds to be sociable, to interact with dignitaries, school children and the press. (Soon they'll even speak English!) That's how New Racism in the corporate era works. A few carefully bred turkeys--the local elites of various countries, a community of wealthy immigrants, investment bankers, the occasional Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice, some singers, some writers (like myself)--are given absolution and a pass to Frying Pan Park. The remaining millions lose their jobs, are evicted from their homes, have their water and electricity connections cut, and die of AIDS. Basically they're for the pot. But the Fortunate Fowls in Frying Pan Park are doing fine. Some of them even work for the IMF and the WTO--so who can accuse those organizations of being antiturkey? Some serve as board members on the Turkey Choosing Committee--so who can say that turkeys are against Thanksgiving? They participate in it! Who can say the poor are anti-corporate globalization? There's a stampede to get into Frying Pan Park. So what if most perish on the way? " commondreams.org

To: lurqer who wrote (36045)	1/23/2004 3:35:40 PM
From: T L Comiskey	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

Former UN weapons inspector replaces David Kay as Iraq WMD adviser ...................................................... "His( Duelfer's) views contrast sharply with those of Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) who argued in an interview with National Public Radio this week that the discovery of two tractor trailers with equipment were "conclusive evidence" that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction programs. Although the CIA presented the trailers as a likely mobile biological weapons lab after they were found last year, Kay in an interim report last October said that had not been corroborated." .................................................................................. WASHINGTON (AFP) - CIA (news - web sites) director George Tenet named former UN weapons inspector Charles Duelfer to succeed David Kay to lead the search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, an effort that so far has failed to substantiate pre-war US claims. "Given his knowledge of Iraqi weapons programs and his understanding of the nature and extent of Iraqi efforts to conceal these programs, I can think of no one better suited to carry on this very important work than Charlie Duelfer," Tenet said in announcing Kay's resignation. He expressed confidence that Duelfer and the Iraq (news - web sites) Survey Group (ISG), the 1,400-member team assigned to track down Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, "will continue to make progress in the months ahead in determining the status of the former Iraqi regimes WMD programs." Tenet also praised Kay, who will return to the private sector, for providing "a critical strategic framework that enabled the ISG to focus the hunt for information on Saddam's WMD programs." The group has so far failed to find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and scant evidence of active chemical, biological or nuclear programs at the time of the US-led invasion of Iraq last year. The failure to find banned weapons or programs has become a major embarrassment for Washington, which made them the central element of its case for war against Iraq. Kay, in a statement released by the Central Intelligence Agency (news - web sites), said, "While there are many unresolved issues, I am confident that the ISG will do everything possible to answer remaining questions about the former Iraqi regimes WMD efforts." Duelfer, 51, said he was approaching his assignment "with an open mind and am absolutely committed to following the evidence wherever it takes." As Tenet's special adviser on matters regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs, Duelfer will direct the efforts of the Iraq Survey Group. In Duelfer, Tenet has selected an American expert with deep experience in tracking Iraqi weapons of mass destruction programs but also one who in recent comments has expressed doubt that any weapons would ever be found. "The prospect of finding chemical weapons, biological weapons is close to nil at this point," he said this month in an interview with PBS, the public television network. "There has been every incentive in the world for the Iraqi people and the Iraqi scientists to come forward and say this is where the weapons are. That hasn't happened. So I think the problem right now is what is the extent of the problem and where was it headed? What were the intentions of the regime?" From 1993 to 2000, Duelfer served as the number two in the UN Special Commission (UNSCOM) formed to disarm Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites). A former diplomat, he specialized in arms control and security issues over a ten year period prior to that at the State Department. "He's intimately familiar with the whole issue of weapons of mass destruction, and should be able to come right up to speed," a defense official said. His views contrast sharply with those of Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) who argued in an interview with National Public Radio this week that the discovery of two tractor trailers with equipment were "conclusive evidence" that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction programs. Although the CIA presented the trailers as a likely mobile biological weapons lab after they were found last year, Kay in an interim report last October said that had not been corroborated. Kay's interim findings fueled a still raging controversy over pre-war US intelligence estimates that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and whether the intelligence findings had been exaggerated by the administration to make its case for war. The ISG, Kay reported, found no stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons. Kay's team uncovered dozens of WMD-related program "activities," including a missile program, according to the October report, but little or no evidence of a capacity to produce chemical weapons and no evidence Iraq took significant steps after 1998 to produce nuclear weapons or fissile material. Another interim report is scheduled to be made to Congress in February. It was unclear whether that task will fall to Kay or his successor.