BBV: Is this a problem county? What cities are in Berks County PA?

[Andy_Stephenson]

We at Black Box voting are making a list and checking it twice to find out who's being naughty and who's being nice. Personally I think this county deserves behavior modification in the form of extra observers on election day.

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=72&forum=DCForumID159&omm=0&viewmode=threaded

I am not impressed with self-promoting guardians of what
they believe is the public interest. I answer to my county and state
authorities, NOT to private interest groups. I never will! I'll resign
first.

Sorry, but you found the meanest most vociferous, just plain ornery
opponent of the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail in possibly the
whole wide world! You people are fruitcakes! Go away!

We've used our DRE's since 1989. No one here has ever had
a problem until your gang of idiots invented whole new categories
of paranoia for them. You are a collective menace.

Bring 'em on. Lynn Landes, Rebecca Mercuri, Avi Rubin, Bev Harris
( the biggest idiot on the planet), the whole flock of idiots. They do not
frighten me. I'm a REAL election expert, unlike any of them.

V. Kurt Bellman
Director of Elections
County of Berks, PA
610-478-6495
reply to: [e-mail]


Just one more point "sir". If and when you start asking
questions relevant to our system, you might get a more polite
response. Our system does not, never has, and never will
use modems AT ALL or ANY industry standard data transmission
media (floppies, CD's, etc.) All hardware is proprietary and
our systems use no disk drives at all. All is firmware! Our servers
are secret specifically to maintain security. I do not believe your
version of "transparency " serves any purpose but to endanger
our electoral security. Open source my backside! That's the last
thing that should be considered.

V. Kurt Bellman
Director of Elections
County of Berks, PA
610-478-6495
reply to: [e-mail]


And My mail to him

Dear Kurt,

Pursuant to Pa. Open Records Law PA. CONS. STAT. ANN. Tit. 65, §§66.1 to .4, I am requesting the following records. Because an election is coming soon, I ask that this records request be acted upon as swiftly as possible.


- Please provide us with the type voting system you use, the manufacturer of the system, hardware model #, firmware version numbers and tabulator software version number and manufacturer.

- Please provide the lists you have kept of the names, positions, and employer of every person who has accessed your central tabulator, or your main tabulator computer for votes, from January 1, 2004 until your receipt of this public records request. If you do not keep a list, please indicate that you do not have such a list.

- Please provide a printout of the document called the "audit log" or "event log" or its equivalent, from your central tabulator program or your main tabulator for votes, for your most recent two elections. If your computer system does not make such a log available, please indicate that, and provide documentation on what manufacturer and version number you use for your voting system tabulation.

- Please provide a copy of the "key log" indicating access to your locked central tabulator room, from January 1, 2004 until the present. If you do not maintain a log of who enters the central tabulator room, please indicate that you have no such documentation.

- Please provide the lists you have maintained of the names, positions, and employer of every person who has election modem access, as well as a contact telephone number for each person. If access is granted to individuals employed by other than governmental entities or election equipment vendors, please note the status of the person (such as "volunteer pollworker"), and please still provide a contact number for
each person.

- To clarify this request, by modem access, I mean any person who has been given the modem phone number, user name, and password (or any other log-in or sign-in codes or devices) of the modems used to transmit precinct results on election night, or any subsequent time thereof. If you do not maintain lists of persons granted such access please indicate so by e-mail response.

- Also please send us any information which pertains to any change of the modem phone number and or passwords. Also, please provide us with the names, contact telephone numbers, positions, and employer (or volunteer status) of every person who has been given this number and/or passwords since the change.

-The date time and street address of any and all planned logic and accuracy tests.

The above records will not be used for commercial purposes. Please advise as soon as possible by e-mail of any costs. Please send any records available in electronic form by e-mail.

Mail records to:
Black Box Voting - Attn Cleanup Crew
PO Box 25552
Seattle WA 98165

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Andy Stephenson
Member Blackboxvoting Clean Up Crew
www.BlackBoxVoting.org 501(c)(3)

[TahitiNut]

1. This is the Director of Elections who's throwing out voter registration ..

... forms. The excuse? Too many voter registrations for them to handle since the Democratic drive to register voters was so successful.

He's a criminal.

[harmonyguy]

2. Link please? nt

[TahitiNut]

4. There's a thread in GD ... but Search is off.

It's been discussed today.

[TahitiNut]

14. Here's the GD thread ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2486823

[AndyTiedye]

3. Security Through Obscurity?

> Our servers are secret specifically to maintain security. I do not believe your
> version of "transparency " serves any purpose but to endanger
> our electoral security. Open source my backside! That's the last
> thing that should be considered.

Keeping the code secret won't keep the bad guys out,
it only keeps the good guys from finding the holes in time to stop them.

I do computer security for a living.
"Security through obscurity" is not security.

[BevHarris]

5. This county is struggling with those pesky new voters

http://www.pottstownmercury.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13077493&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=18041&rfi=6

Now, if it is Allentown, it's one I'd watch. Lots of blue collar voters, lots of minority voters too.

But then again, what do I know. Berks County has me pegged as the "biggest idiot on the planet" (while he claims his system is safe because it has no disk drives...)

Bev

[ParanoidPat]

6. It appears that they use the Danaher Electronic Voting System......

.....from this link. http://www.hava.state.pa.us/hava/cwp/view.asp?a=1188&q=443138

Danaher Controls (DRE)

Special Markets Division
1675 Delany Road
Gurnee, IL 60031-1282

Contact: Brian J. O'Connor, Director Sales/Marketing
Phone: [phone]
Toll Free: 1 800 888 9527
Fax: [phone]
Web site: http://www.dancon.com
Contact web form: http://www.controls-online.com/gvs/inquiry2.html

(NOTE: Markets ELECTronic 1242 Voting System, formerly known as "Shouptronic" Voting Machine)



http://www.controls-online.com/gvs/vs.html

A Total System Solution

* In setup and ballot preparation, a single Windows 9x/NT database produces all of your election materials, programs machines and prints ballots -- eliminating human errors in design, spelling and typography.

* In the voting process, six redundant memory tables insure accuracy and security Each machine continuously monitors its own operation through a self-diagnostic routine performed instantly after each ballot is cast.

* In tabulating and reporting, vote tallies are completed with the speed and convenience of a PC. Multiple fail-safe audit trails include machine-tables, paper tapes and final cartridge results.

http://www.controls-online.com/gvs/sw.html

High security management of every phase of the election process Easy to use with minimal training

Guardian Election Management Software A powerful companion to the ELECTronic 1242 ® Electronic Voting Machine. It provides all the services needed to create an election database which contains candidate, office, party and proposition entries. Its Windows 9x/NT graphical environment gives you easy to use tools for the design and production of voting machine ballots. After the polls close, the Guardian software controls the collection of election results, then produces reports in flexible, custom formats.

[Andy_Stephenson]

10. Oy Vey

"single Windows 9x/NT database"

:eyes:

[ParanoidPat]

12. Oy Vey is right!

It appears that there is nothing in the way of 'version control'!!! :scared:

[Red Knight]

16. Suspicious of Bellman

They have a mess with the registrations right now. He insists that there is no way all the forms will be processed and he seems to be working with a county commissioner to use FRAUD as a way to toss a lot of forms out. It all looks suspicious really.

As for the electronic voting----we've had these electronic machines a few years and I've always worried about how they really work and how accurate they are.

Shades of Florida?

I sure do hope not.

[newyawker99]

26. Hi Red Knight!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[TorchTheWitch]

7. a bit redneckish...

I live right outside of Philadelphia, but have had on occasion needed to go out that way. There's really nothing much out there. There really are no "cities" out there... pretty much Small Town, USA: Longswamp, Sinking Spring (very apt descriptions, by the way). Contains Reading which is, I believe, one of the top 10 most dangerous places to live in the US (and having been there, I'd say it's more like top 5). The larger towns are dirty, poor and rundown, the more rural towns are dirty, poor and rundown. If there's anywhere nice to live out there, I've never seen it. It's unkind, but pretty much everyone I know in my area considers most residents there as "trailor trash". I work with a lot of people from that area and must admit, they're all like that (not that they aren't nice people). Many of them have horror stories about crime, police problems, etc... when I expressed my outrage at the injustice and questioned why didn't they do XYZ, they'd snort and say something like "Honey, this is BERKS County we're talkin' about here" and roll their eyes at me. Even the folks I know from there call it the Armpit of the USA.

From the few cases that we were willing to deal with for clients out there (I used to work for a law firm), there's no question that corruption is rampant... judicial, police, everybody (I hate even driving through there because of the police). That's even why we got those clients in the first place... the corruption was so blatant they already knew they had no hope for justice without going outside the county for help.

Get all over Berks County like white on rice, flies on poop, fleas on hound, scales on fish... you get the idea.

[Andy_Stephenson]

8. I am on it

like white on rice etc etc.

[Red Knight]

15. You sound like a rightwinger

Trailer park trash???

Jeeesh.

Well, for the record, I live in Berks County--in Reading and I have to wonder if you've ever been here at all. Reading is a mid-size city(and yes--the crime has been bad but we kicked out the corrupt mayor last election. The police chief gets nothing but praise from the community. He's doing a fine job with the budget he has to work with. COBRA has been very successful at cutting down on many of the drug transactions(which I might add are sought by a lot of people who live OUTSIDE the city.)

Reading is surrounded by beautiful hills and some small mountains. It's hardly the swamp you've made it out to be. In fact, many people who work in Philly have moved to Berks to live and commute. There is a lot of rural land(although development is taking a big bite out of that) and our districtsa were carved up neatly by the Republicans before the last election to favor the right. Still, we're confident that Lois Murphy will unseat one of them this time around.

Reading is a grand slam for Kerry and if the numbers say differently there should be an investigation. Surrounding communities though--lean more toward Bush. I think Kerry will win the county but it may be close.

[ParanoidPat]

17. Welcome to DU Red Knight!

Good to have someone on the ground in Berks County. :hi: :toast:

[friesianrider]

36. Ummm....excuse me??

Trailer trash? Dirty, poor, and rundown?

I live 10 minutes from Wyomissing in Berks Co. You must not have been here anytime recently because Wyomissing and the surrounding areas are quite affluent areas. Very, very similar to Harleysville and areas of Chester and Mont Co (where we moved from).

I really resent that you call us "trailer trash" and our towns dirty and rundown. Many parts of READING are like that, but not the majority of Berks County. There's rundown areas EVERYWHERE, not the least of which in Mont Co. Unless you consider living in a brand new $600,000 home on 11 acres "trailer trash"...we don't even lock our doors at night, and have had no crime whatsoever to speak of where I live (other than stealing our Kerry signs!). :eyes:

Please. If you don't know what you're talking about:

"...have had on occasion needed to go out that way."

THEN DON'T.

[ParanoidPat]

9. Risk Assessment of Danaher Controls DRE Electronic Voting System

http://www.seventy.org/electioninfo/DREReceipts2004.html

Philadelphia City Commissioners Office

Report on Proposed "Ballot Receipts"

Risk Assessment of Danaher Controls DRE Electronic Voting System and Philadelphia Procedures

Prepared by: Bob Lee, Voter Registration Administrator

March 28,2001; Revised – March 9, 2004



A. Receipt Proposal



There numerous news articles about a small number of individuals who assert that existing Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting systems are not reliable because they lack a paper ballot or paper audit trail to verify each voter's individual ballot selections. These individuals have suggested that DRE voting systems should provide a printed receipt of voter selections that each voter can view either before, or after, executing and recording their ballot.



The proponents assert that a system that provides receipts would provide the following security advantages over current DRE systems:



1. It would allow a voter to view a printed record of all of their candidate selections to ensure that the DRE device is accurately recording their ballot selections.



2. The ballot receipts could be used after an election to provide a paper audit trail to conduct a recount to verify the electronic results reported by the voting device.



These individuals claim that computerized systems require these receipts because a person intent on corrupting the voting process, or programming errors, could result in a DRE device indicating to the voter that it was accurately recording the voter's selections, while actually altering the selections and recording votes for candidates not selected.



A superficial glance by a layperson might find the receipt suggestion attractive and based upon reasonable concerns.



However, the proponents have not explained how an individual intent on fraudulently altering results would obtain access to the electronic voting system and voting devices in light of the security features of the system or procedures in place to prevent such events. They have also failed to explain how this activity would go undetected.



This paper attempts to highlight issues related to these proposed ballot receipts, including:

· The standards for testing and using existing DRE systems;

· The capabilities and functionality of existing full-face ballot DRE systems;

· The questionable value of these proposed receipts:

· The pragmatic issues related to receipts; and

· The impact of receipt production and review on the voting process.



This review evidences the fact that the addition of ballot receipts will not provide the outcome desired by proponents, that they are not necessary, not feasible and could be detrimental to the voting process.

<More>

Watched HELL! They need to be REMOVED FROM OFFICE! :mad:

On Edit: They also need to read this!

http://www.bostonreview.net/BR26.5/ansolabehere.html

The Search for New Voting Technology
Changing the way we vote is more urgent—and less complicated—than you think.

Stephen Ansolabehere

<Snip>

Here are some conclusions that the Voting Technology Project team has reached about the current technologies:

• In the 2000 election, the United States lost 1.5 million presidential votes because of the equipment used to cast and count votes. Over the last election cycle, we lost approximately 3.5 million votes for senator and governor because of voting equipment.

• Voting technology in the United States is highly variable: counties use at least five different types of voting technology.

• Paper ballots—either hand-counted or optically-scanned—could cut the incidence of lost votes due to voting equipment in half. In short, of the available technologies, paper ballots remain the best.

Our support for both hand-counted and optically-scanned paper ballots stands in contrast to current proposals for an aggressive, wholesale "modernization" of voting technologies. The voting equipment industry for instance (the firms that build voting machines and the election officials that purchase them) is pushing strongly for electronic and/or Internet voting, using touchscreen computers, that resemble ATMs. Most touchscreen voting equipment is nothing more than an off-the-shelf Windows-based computer with a touchscreen instead of a conventional screen. Existing machines then upload ballots via a modem or the Internet. Arizona has already experimented with Internet voting in the Democratic primary, and the Defense Department has tested an Internet voting pilot program for overseas personnel.

<Snip>

Over the last sixteen years, the rate of residual votes in presidential elections was slightly over 2 percent. This means that in a typical presidential election over 2 million voters did not successfully record a vote for president. But remember that the presidential race is the "top of the ticket," and thus generates relatively few residual votes. Other contests further down the ballot produce an even higher rate of residual votes—5 percent for senatorial and gubernatorial elections.

To be sure, the residual vote is not a pure measure of machine error or voter mistakes. A ballot may show no vote because the machine failed to record the voter's selections, because the voter made a mistake or was confused, or because the voter did not wish to vote at all in that contest. Whereas the first two scenarios would produce lost votes, the third would produce an accurate record of the voter's preferences. It is difficult to quantify voter intentions, but exit polls suggest approximately 25 percent of residual votes are intentional. This leaves 1.5 million presidential votes that are actually lost each election, and 3.5 million votes for governor and senator that are lost each cycle.2

Still, the residual vote provides an appropriate yardstick for the comparison of machine types: whatever the cause and however strong voters' intentions, the residual vote rate should not depend on what equipment is used. But it does. Table 1 presents the residual votes in presidential elections and in senate and gubernatorial elections as a percentage of all ballots cast over the last decade.3

Some technologies consistently perform well on average, and some technologies have excessively high rates of residual votes. Optically-scanned paper and hand-counted paper ballots have consistently shown the best average performance. Scanners have the lowest rate of uncounted, unmarked, and spoiled ballots in presidential, senatorial, and gubernatorial races. Counties using optical scanning have averaged a residual vote rate of 1.5 percent in presidential elections and 3.5 percent in elections for senators and governors over the last twelve years. Hand-counted paper has shown similarly low rates of vote loss.

<MORE>

http://bostonreview.net/BR26.5/images/table1.pdf

Machine Type---President---Governor & Senator
Paper Ballot--------1.8%-----------3.3 %
Punch Card--------2.5------------4.7
Optical Scan-------1.5------------3.5
Lever Machine-----1.5------------7.6
Electronic (DRE)----2.3------------5.9

Table 1: Residual Votes as a Percentage of All Ballots Cast, 1988-2000

[ParanoidPat]

11. ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEMS IN PENNSYLVANIA

http://www.dos.state.pa.us/bcel/cwp/view.asp?a=1099&Q=441388&PM=1

Funny that there are NO version numbers for the software or firmware listed. :wtf:

How do they know if its been changed? :shrug:

[Hobo]

13. Reading is the Largest "City"

Its pronounced "redding" as in the color Red, Not "reading" as in read a book. Berks in mostly rural farming area. The pop of Berks County is a just shy of 400,000, Reading is about a third of that.


Peace

Hobo

[DubyaSux]

18. BRAVO!!!

...Mr. Bellman!

You've stated what I would have liked to say lest I run the risk of not only being an anonymous internet poster, but one without a home after being banned from DU.

While there are valid issues in ALL forms of voting, this evoting paranoia is nothing more than people needing a monster to believe in. When Avi Rubin wrote his report for Johns Hopkins (and coincidentally, sat on the advisory board of a Diebold competitor), the SAIC said he could not possibly know what really goes on in an election. And after serving as a volunteer poll worker in Baltimore, the SAIC was proven right.

Bev Harris is just another modern day Don Quixote, except she makes more money off of chasing her windmills via lawsuits. Nobody takes her seriously anymore because of her crackpot scenarios that assume republicans are smart enough to pull off her stunts and democrats are too stupid to put a stop to it.

If you want to believe the worst in people and want to believe her incredulous scenarios could work in real life (the reason more and more people turn on her), you should go to work for Bev Harris and her ilk because she has the pessimism and negativity to support you.

If you want to believe in the best of people and be optimistic, hold evoting to a better standard and become part of the solution. Evoting has been here for a while and WILL be here for a while.

Hanging pregnant dimpled chads are going OUT. Having people stand in 2 hour lines to vote while they wait on printouts or write their votes in longhand is not going to happen. People just won't vote.

And the bottom line is, anything as abstract as Bev Harris believes could happen with evoting could happen with ANY type of voting.

Mr. Bellman is my new hero. He actually has a clue.

[TahitiNut]

20. Rarely have I ever read a post on DU that was more ...

... disconnected from the (technical) realities of the subject and lacking in any factual underpinnings. It's almost cartoonish in its superficiality and mischaracterizations. Bravo, indeed! :eyes:

As someone with over 35 years of professional experience in Information Technology, Audit and Control, and Operational Analysis, I'm just one of a large majority of those with similar professional experience who appreciate the vulnerability of these systems to fraud and abuse -- far greater and more widespread than any before.

[RedEagle]

21. Thank you ThaitiNut

Never mind that if the thermal printers that most voter verified paper ballot systems would use are also used in major departmentstores, groceries, etc. across the country, were that slow, there would be another means by now of producing a receipt (ballot for voting).

Geeshhhh....a little old HP consumer laser jet can print out two pages of text in seconds.

Confirmation of the paper ballot only takes seconds.

I wonder if DubyaSux has the same lack of patience when the disabled vote?

I've witnessed a blind individual trying to vote on one of the DRE's
in a demo and at 20 minutes and counting, they were not done and getting very frustrated.

Everyone's vote should be counted as cast and every voting system should have the ability to be audited with an independent, verified source.

Everyone's vote should be able to be recounted- which, across the country it is now admitted, you cannot do with DRE's that do not produce a voter verified paper ballot.

Most states have recount laws, don't they? Or is DubyaSux in favor of doing away with those, too?

[DubyaSux]

24. Big deal...

35 years in the industry means very little because most of the fraud aspects of this paranoia have less to do with technical abilities than process control.

Bev Harris shows a monkey running a VBA script but fails to show how a monkey could have access to do it. THAT is the problem and why she is ridiculed while you people vouch for her. Most of this hysteria is far-fetched because people as a whole - republican AND democrat - would not let this happen. If these crackpot ideas were this easy, we'd have an army of 8 year olds stuffing ballot boxes all across the country because it's easier, requires no special skill, and it'd be tough to put an 8 year old in jail.

As far as recounts, if you are still believing you can't do recounts on an evoting machine, I have some oceanfront property hear in Ohio to sell you. Most of that type of crap is exactly that - crap.

As far as printers, two problems.
1. They break and run out of paper.
2. People could sell votes with "proof of purchase". Plus, I don't want my freeper boss wanting to see proof of how I voted. Obviously, he legally can't do that. But in a hire-at-will state, he can legally fire me for sport.

All this paranoia does is get in the way of getting MORE votes counted. And as much as I hate Bush and want him out, we can only do that with more votes - not less. I want all votes counted, so undervotes and overvotes would be almost non-existent (.7% versus 7%) with evoting.

With paper ballots, I don't want some PARTIAL hack looking at my vote and counting my votes as republican regardless of what I vote. What do we do? Have 3 people count it and the best of three wins? The purpose of current voting technology is to keep the counting impartial and nuetral. And you people are fighting to have partiality put back into it. Hell, with paper ballots, a roomful of people could count everything perfectly only to have the person calling it in or whatever give a bogus number. Sorry, but that is just a nutty idea.

Anyhow, I'm a lot more optimistic about my fellow democrats technical ability to prevent and stop election fraud.

But mostly, I don't need some monster to believe in to make myself feel better.

[tom_paine]

25. You "don't need some monster to believe in" to make yourself feel better?

Why, that simply has to be the biggest non sequitur and disingenuous nonsense I have ever heard!

:wtf: :wtf: :freak:

You think that's what this is about, people trying to make themselves feel better.

While it's quite clear you have a high opinion of yourself, that comment alone raises the question of whether such lofty self-opinions are warranted.

I suppose the American Revolution was the same. Those idiot Founding Fathers, believing that "Divine Monarchy" was a monster destroying the potentialities of human beings simply as an ego-boost.

And the Colonists that followed them... fools following self-aggrandizing blowhards who were attacking the King (their Divinely Appointed King, at that!) for no other reason than to make themselves feel good.

Now, I have answered non-sequitur with non-sequitur.

But of course, I am probably trying to give you a taste of your own nonsense simply to make myself feel better.

[Andy_Stephenson]

33. Strawmen

1. They break and run out of paper.
2. People could sell votes with "proof of purchase". Plus, I don't want my freeper boss wanting to see proof of how I voted. Obviously, he legally can't do that. But in a hire-at-will state, he can legally fire me for sport.

[BevHarris]

42. Dubya suks:

We get such a :kick: out of you!

(And the chimp didn't implant a virus, he deleted an audit log; it was an internationally-known computer security expert who showed how to implant a virus that could be written by any highschooler.)

By the way, as for how to get access:

Does it strike you as interesting that so far not a single elections official has a written record of who has keys to the tabulator room? Here is my favorite answer: "we don't keep a list" (of who has keys).

I do a followup public records requests, asking for the documents pertaining to the last time the locks were changed and a staff roster. One county official, who believes a key log isn't necessary because she keeps that information in her head, admitted that the keys hadn't been changed since 1997, which was "before her time."

I believe that even Diebold, a company that specializes in security systems, would agree that you should control who has keys.

Bev

[DubyaSux]

44. So what?

These same conditions exist in any type of voting system and I don't see anyone invalidating our entire electoral process.

Why aren't you worried about the machines that count ballots with chads punched out being rigged?

Why aren't you worried about machines that count ballots using optical technology being rigged?

Why aren't you worried about the reporting system of ANYTHING in existence being rigged?

Why not just move to a deserted island in the south pacific so you won't be overcome from fraud-fright?

Nobody - except for the few diehard conspiracy theorists here - takes this fraud concept seriously. It insults every poll worker and election official -both republican AND democratic - across the entire United States. If that could happen, it's be happening with any system we use. The premise is simply absurd. Our entire democracy would have been bogus from July 4th, 1776 until now because according to you, our democracy is controlled by felonious criminals waiting for better systems to perpetrate their crimes.

Are there problems that should be addressed? Obviously. Any system can be improved. I don't want a pregnant dimpled hanging chad keeping the asshat we have in office now because of a 7% dropout rate due to under and over voting. When voting becomes easier and faster, more people vote. And the more people that vote and get ALL our votes counted, the more likely Bush will be bounced out on his lying ass.

And that's the problem I have with you. If you want to chase windmills and file Qui Tam lawsuits, do it at someone else's expense. You INCREASE the risk of putting freepers in office because of having votes counted using non-impartial methods (hand counting, hanging chads, etc) in areas nutty enough to listen to you. Or afraid you'll sue them.

Hey, why don't you tell these people what you intend to do with the $15 million dollars you're after? For that amount of money, I'd put the fear of God into people too.

[BevHarris]

46. While we're asking questions, why don't you learn a few facts?

1. It is other groups who limit their concerns solely to touch screens. We have always maintained that the problem is lack of transparency and lack of auditing, and that the problems need to be addressed with optical scans, touch screens, central tabulators, and punch cards, all of which use computers (with secret software) to count.

2. You have your facts wrong on the Qui Tam, also. The taxpayers stand to gain from 9 to 12 million, and if an award occurs for the work, the range, after taxes, is around 150k, which I have already committed to the nonprofit Black Box Voting group. By the way, I shut down a lucrative business to bring the problems with voting machines into public awareness, went without a paycheck for a year and a half. I would have made more than $150k simply by ignoring the problem, and, again, the money is committed elsewhere anyway.

By the way, there is a very, very large lawsuit in play, and it involves some voting activists everyone here has heard of, not Black Box Voting. I obtained documents to this effect yesterday. We'll wait for it to play out. I will tell you what I have found out: It isn't against Diebold, and doesn't address the problems with GEMS or WinEds. It seems to be based solely on DRE machines.

There are three possible explanations for the documents I now have:

1) The old standby, Qui Tam, but the cash cow version on this one involves the major payouts, probably totalling 250 million to 750 million.

2) A big knockout punch of a consumer lawsuit based on a meltdown of the 2004 election. The problem I have, as with possibility #1, is that I believe it is not appropriate to withhold information until the election melts down. If someone is preparing a lawsuit based on a pile of undisclosed evidence, they crossed an ethical line. Should have made that evidence public to AVOID the election meltdown, and litigation frenzy, that is looming.

3) A knockout punch for the current system, with the big winner: Cryptography. Several of the players behind the documentation I obtained are crypto people. There are two companies that might benefit: VoteHere, or Votegrity. Neither offers a transparent solution; in lieu of a paper ballot, they want cryptography.

Supporting #1: Some of the same players have interfered with litigation designed to block touch screen purchase, saying touch screens are better than punch cards. Yet, they are clearly preparing a case against touch screens. The reason for that would be to encourage a purchase, more money to claim in a whistleblower. You can't claim a bounty for machines that were never purchased.

Supporting #3: Some of the players in this have indicated they want Diebold to survive. The election system sold by Diebold involves as much fraud as Enron, and the company has no business in elections at all. One reason to advocate Diebold's continuation in elections would be to profit by selling the crypto solution to Diebold. You can't sell a crypto solution to a company that jettisoned its election division.

Also got documents today that seem to indicate collusion on the part of Ciber labs, the ITA who certified the Diebold GEMS central tabulator.

I notice that DU loves gossip and loves a good argument. I do suggest ya'll stay tuned. The next 6 months may be just as interesting as the last.

Bev

[RedEagle]

49. Please Reference Where You Get Your Information

"I don't want a pregnant dimpled hanging chad keeping the asshat we have in office now because of a 7% dropout rate due to under and over voting."


Yes, the cry of the vendors who want DRE's everywhere. Those darn chads. Well, I'm not advocating keeping punch cards but I do know some election officials who wouldn't part with them if: 1. They could still get parts for them and 2. Didn't have to because officials misinterpret HAVA.

But where do you get a 7% residual rate (over and under voting) for punch cards? Please reference this source.

The study most quoted is the CalTech/MIT study. They used two races, one with a presidential race and another race with Governor and Senators on the ticket. If you average those two, here's what you get for residual votes:

Optical Scan - 2.50%
Paper Ballot - 2.55%
Punch Card - 3.60%
Electronic (DRE) - 4.10%
Lever Machine - 4.55%

Funny how the paper systems, even punch cards, do better.
The two systems on the bottom, DRE's and Lever machines, are only different versions of the same thing- just a technological difference. Neither produce a voter verified paper ballot.

What I'd like an answer to, and maybe you can provide one, is why a DRE would allow ANY residual vote.

But really, I've asked you this before, please source where you get your information on residual votes because I'd like to take a look at it and compare it to the CalTech/MIT study.


"Why aren't you worried about the machines that count ballots with chads punched out being rigged?"

- Yep, any machine that counts by computer. Or did you not note that we are calling for robust auditing? That would be of all voting systems.

"Why aren't you worried about machines that count ballots using optical technology being rigged?"

- Um, I think it's been made clear one of the biggest problems is with the central vote tabulators. In fact, one of the things research highlighted is that there are problems with the optical scan counting. You'll note, don't you, that GEMS and WinEDs have been brought up time and again. Whether the system is optical scan or DRE, GEMS is going to do the totals. And there is that little thing about the 16,022 negative votes in Florida for Gore that was the product of an optical scan tally upload. Yeh, I think we've been working on the optical scan.


"Why aren't you worried about the reporting system of ANYTHING in existence being rigged?"

- Well, right now the elections are paramount. And if you're talking about reporting, there is the concern over the honesty of the polls, honesty in news, whether we see the real figures on all sorts of things from the stock market to the national debt. But the fundamental key to begin fixing all that is making sure our vote is counted as cast.

As for the people working on the issue, seems to have people like Wexler and others on board, Graham, Holt, etc. And Holt was on this issue way back, realtively speaking.

Are all of these people in the same boat with us?

But really, just tell me where you got the 7% residual vote rate figure, because even if you take just one figure out of the CalTech/MIT study, for one type of race, the only system that ranks a 7 on residual votes is the lever machine at 7.6% in the Governor & Senator race.

[ParanoidPat]

28. Speaking of "clues".......

......."He who votes decides nothing; he who counts the votes decides everything." Joseph Stalin :evilgrin:

Such a short post and so wrong in so many ways!

"While there are valid issues in ALL forms of voting, this evoting paranoia is nothing more than people needing a monster to believe in.

While you're correct that there are "issues" in all forms of voting, (Almost always caused by the human factor!) you seem to be clueless as to the ease and scale of the fraud or errors that e-voting can and indeed have caused to our elections.

I won't waste my time listing all of the hundreds of problems that have been reported and well documented that have occurred from DRE's 'freezing up', not booting up on election day, miscounting votes resulting in overturned elections, dropping votes, etc. It's not a 'theory' that the machines malfunction on a frighteningly regular basis, it's a fact!

You go on to claim,

"When Avi Rubin wrote his report for Johns Hopkins (and coincidentally, sat on the advisory board of a Diebold competitor), the SAIC said he could not possibly know what really goes on in an election. And after serving as a volunteer poll worker in Baltimore, the SAIC was proven right."

And again you have one part right, Avi Rubin "sat" on the board of a Diebold competitor when he wrote that report. He never 'acted' as an adviser. He was approached by that competitor to be on the advisory board due to his impressive credentials. He was, as we say in the business, a 'trophy' board member, there only to lend credibility to their business without ever being asked to do anything. He willingly disclosed his relationship and made no monetary gains from it and properly terminated it.

You attempt to portray the SAIC report as having somehow 'cleared' the Diebold system as safe for use. Nothing can be further from the truth! A very large portion of that report remains redacted for good reason.

The report found, among other things,

2.1.1. AccuVote-TS voting system is not compliant with State of Maryland Information Security Policy & Standards

2.1.2. SBE has not ensured the integrity of the AccuVote-TS voting system

2.1.3. SBE has not created a System Security Plan

2.1.4. SBE does not require the secure transmission of election vote totals

2.1.5. SBE does not require the review of the computer audit trails

2.1.6. The AccuVote-TS voting system training does not include an information security component

2.1.7. SBE does not require a review of security controls after significant modifications are made to the AccuVote-TS voting system

2.1.9. No documentation currently exists regarding appropriate access controls to the AccuVote-TS voting system

2.2.1. SBE relies upon Diebold (the AccuVote-TS vendor) to load the version of software certified by the Independent Test Authority (ITA)

2.2.2. SBE GEMS server is connected to the SBE intranet

2.3.1. Audit logs are not configured properly, and are not reviewed

2.3.2. GEMS server configuration is not compliant with State of Maryland Information Security Policy & Standards for identification and authentication

I could tell you much more about what is in the redacted portions of the report but that would be foolish in light of the fact that they are going to be used in this election. I'll just point out the overall risk rating that SAIC gave the machines.

2.5. Overall Risk Rating
The system, as implemented in policy, procedure, and technology, is at high risk of compromise. Application of the listed mitigations will reduce the risk to the system. Any computerized voting system implemented using the present set of policies and procedures would require these same mitigations.

That looks to me like a confirmation of Rubins overall claims, albeit with a slightly different set of specific concerns.

You mention Avi's experience as an election judge but fail to mention that the experience did not change his overall view of the dangers involving use of this equipment as noted in his report about it.

"I continue to believe that the Diebold voting machines represent a huge threat to our democracy. I fundamentally believe that we have thrown our trust in the outcome of our elections in the hands of a handful of companies (Diebold, Sequoia, ES&S) who are in a position to control the final outcomes of our elections. I also believe that the outcomes can be changed without any knowledge by election judges or anyone else. Furthermore, meaningful recounts are impossible with these machines."

Your next line is a real beaut!

"Bev Harris is just another modern day Don Quixote, except she makes more money off of chasing her windmills via lawsuits. Nobody takes her seriously anymore because of her crackpot scenarios that assume republicans are smart enough to pull off her stunts and democrats are too stupid to put a stop to it."

You are woefully uninformed if you think Bev has made dime one on any lawsuit or that "Nobody takes her seriously"! LOL! I sat in a meeting with her and members of the California Voting Systems Panel as well as representatives of the State's Attorney's office. They took her seriously enough on the weight of the evidence she presented to join her suite against Diebold.

You continue to throw in that straw man argument about 'Republicans being smart enough and Democrats being too stupid to...' whatever.

The real argument is that there are always some people that are corrupt enough to try to subvert the system for personal gain. That is a fact that has been repeatedly demonstrated over the years in every election by members of every party and with every system ever invented.

The problem is that with this technology, the lack of transparency of the vote count and inability to perform an adequate audit, we have given those who would attempt to corrupt our elections a very efficient tool to do so, while at the same time we have eliminated the physical proof that could prove fraud has occurred.

My favorite part of your post is this!

If you want to believe the worst in people and want to believe her incredulous scenarios could work in real life (the reason more and more people turn on her), you should go to work for Bev Harris and her ilk because she has the pessimism and negativity to support you.

ROFL MAO! I have NO CHOICE to believe the "worst". I see it EVERY F*CKIN' DAY in the press especially when it comes to elections!

Are you really that naive to believe that no one would try to use these machines to hack an election? The self same elections officials who are at this very minute illegally trashing voter registration forms by the thousands based on 'technicalities' such as a 'citizenship' box not being checked or the weight of the paper that the form is printed on not being heavy enough, are the very people you expect me to 'trust' to keep the system honest! :crazy:

The Federal Voting Rights Act makes it a crime to deny a registration that contains enough factual information to ascertain a persons right to vote based on non material reasons such as the weight of the paper, color of the ink or things like that 'citizenship' box not being filled in.

I have spent months citing the relevant State and Federal statutes to elections officials while respectfully requesting justification of their actions only to be repeatedly told by many of them to "fuck off" and "if you don't like it, sue me!" (A quick note of thanks to J. Kenneth Blackwell of Ohio for relenting on the paper 'weight' issue in light of the VRA.)

You expect me to trust elected officials who dishonor their office and knowingly violate the law by working to disenfranchise citizens based on party preference. You can trust them if you want but they are the reason that I work with Bev, Andy and literally hundreds of other activists across the country to secure our elections from them!

It's also the reason that I work with my local elections officials to keep my elections safe. It's not an either/or situation.

If you wish to believe in the best and be optimistic while ignoring the reality of the situation, be my guest! Console yourself with visions of bitterly partisan people sitting around at the end of the day holding hands and singing kumbya, but do so at your own peril.

Oh, and please spare us all your bullshit arguments about 'chads', (We don't want them any more than you do!) your whining about people standing in line for hours "waiting for printouts", (where are the two hour lines at ATM machines?) and your ignorant screeds about filling out ballots in "longhand"! The Democrats here are apparently a lot smarter than you are.

Mr. Bellman is a ZERO for attempting to disenfranchise voters by trashing their registrations and attempting to hide the vote count from the public. He's clueless.

:kick:PAPER BALLOTS ARE THE CURRENCY OF DEMOCRACY,:kick:
DON'T LET ANYONE SHORT CHANGE YOU!

[donsu]

19. kick

nt

[tom_paine]

22. kick

[KellyPaDem]

23. Mainly rural

I live in Montgomery County a suburb of Philly and Berks County is our neighbor to our north. I also went to college in Berks county. Its a lot of farms, little towns, and don't forget Amish. Buggies and horses are a common sight in some areas of this area. When I joined the Democratic Club in college I was on of THREE members I don't really think that this is a big problem. I believe what was already posted that Reading is the biggest town.

[tom_paine]

27. kick

[Merlin]

29. Andy, please call Sen. Mike O'Pake. He rules Reading.

Mike's been in office since forever, and knows where all the bodies are buried.

Capitol Address
Senator Michael O'Pake
11 EAST WING CAPITOL BUILDING
Harrisburg, PA 17120-0001
Phone: [phone]


District Office
Rockland Professional Center
1940 N. 13th St., Suite 232
Reading, PA 19604
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]


Email: [e-mail]

Web Site:

http://www.senator-opake.com /

or

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/senate_bio.cfm?districtnumber=11

[Merlin]

30. Just sent this to O'Pake

Date: 10/14/04 17:51:39
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Problem with Bellman

Mike,

You and I used to talk when I was on the State Committee. I live down here in Lancaster.

Mike, I'm involved in the effort to require Voter Verified Paper Ballots wherever DRE voting machines are used. There's a guy in your court house who is absolutely frightening, Kurt Bellman.

How can this guy get away with saying nobody has a right to know what technology he is using? In an election year like this, a public servant acting like a tyrant--who controls voting results--is a menace to the community.

Mike, please contact whatever prosecutorial forces you have access to and get this guy fired asap before serious damage and embarrassment occur to the good folks of Reading in the form of an election scandal

Below is a message Bellman wrote to an associate of mine. It is profoundly undecorous and obnoxious.

God knows, this is no year to have a loose canon counting ballots.

Thanks for your attention to this, Mike.

(signed)

[MallRat]

31. It would appear that Andy has struck a nerve.

:-)

[Junkdrawer]

32. Translation: "I've been stealing elections for 15 years...

and no one suspected a thing until you came along".

You just have to learn to speak Republicanese.

[ParanoidPat]

34. LOL!

Cheers! :evilgrin: :thumbsup: :toast:

:kick:

[friesianrider]

35. I live in Berks County...

And Mr. Bellman will be hearing from me.

I don't think he should be using such unprofessional language in an email to someone legitimately concerned about what is going on. HE may think it's a big joke and we're a bunch of idiots, but we'll see how much he's laughing when these are sent to the Reading Eagle.

This is a huge Republican area, so yes, they are idiots and I have no doubt Mr. Bellman falls into that category.

[ParanoidPat]

37. Please be courteous in any communications with him.....

.....he's already using the excuse that they're not getting the registrations processed because everyone is tied up on the phone. :(

Right now getting those registrations done is the number one priority for this election. You'll have plenty of time to take him to task for the job he's doing after the election, and probably more reason to do so.

Since you live in the county perhaps you can offer to volunteer to help with the processing in some way. Just your being there helps by having another set of concerned eyes keeping the process open to public scrutiny.

Just a thought. :evilgrin:

Democracy is not a spectator sport. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem! :)

[friesianrider]

38. Bellman's response...

These interest groups like blackboxvoting.org are a bunch of
politically extreme ideologues hoping to upset people unnecessarily
about electronic voting, which we have been using to the satisfaction
of all parties for 15 years in this county. They are extremely
irresponsible and are doing
much to harm the electoral system. They are dangerous nutty people.

I sincerely believe these people are either evil or insane.

They are speaking out and frightening people over a system that recent
federal law actually requires us to move toward as we approach 2006.

The "citizen" you reference is a citizen of Washington state hoping to
stick his
nose into an internal Pennsylvania decision, one authorized and
certified
by the
relevant Pennsylvania state authorities. He is a trouble maker, as is
his
mentor,
Bev Harris. You should be ashamed of yourself for falling prey to their
hysterical
drivel. Remember, every elected official in Pennsylvania AND Berks
County
was elected (both D and R as well as the occasional other) with this
allegedly evil
system. Don't you see the idiocy in their position?

They are electoral terrorists of the highest order, and you have fallen
prey to their
hysteria. You need to rethink that.

V. Kurt Bellman
Director of Elections
County of Berks, PA
610-478-6495
reply to: [e-mail]




cc
10/14/2004 09:20
PM
Subject
Recent Email about Voter
Registration





Dear Mr. Bellman,

I am a resident of Berks County, PA. I was extremely
troubled
to see the emails you sent to a concerned citizen on the internet
tonight.
I do not think it is appropriate or professional to call those of us
concerned about the election "a flock of idiots" and "fruitcakes".

Your emails are all over the internet, as well as your intentions to
discard over 25,000 out of 35,000 voter registration forms. I will be
forwarding your rude and inappropriate emails to every Berks County
resident I know, as well as calling Senator O'Pake's office and
alerting
the local media to you calling Berks County residents"fruitcakes" and
"a
flock of idiots". You have no right to be so obnoxious to those of us
who
pay your salary, and you should be more careful about sending such
inappropriate and unprofessional emails from your office.

Sincerely,
A Berks County Resident

[DubyaSux]

41. Well...

....I'd disagree with his "electoral terrorists" claim. That's a little strong mostly because he gives too much relevance to these crackpots.

Even my new hero here uses my argument - both republicans AND democrats have been elected using this equipment. Amazing how the system is so bad and full of fraud, that democrats have been elected.

[BevHarris]

43. And you repeat the urban legend --

Black Box Voting (.ORG) does not believe this is a Republican plot. We believe vote fraud happens by both parties. The machines are absolutely a problem with both parties -- in Texas, it is the Dems who are pushing for more controls, whereas in Georgia, it is the Republicans.

The most important lawsuit so far was by Republican Linda Soubirous in Riverside County.

The most likely targets for election fraud start with that good old fashioned county supervisor, or county commissioner position. That is the position where the cash flows, because they approve land use and zoning decisions, and lucrative construction contracts. Traditionally, these positions are the ones most often caught in bribery schemes, and it is they who appoint the election officials in many cases.

This is an old, time-worn attack point in election corruption; electronic voting machines just make the fraud easier, the scale larger, and the crime harder to spot.

Bev Harris

[Andy_Stephenson]

45. Hmm I am not sure but could Mr Bellman be guilty of slander?

"He is a trouble maker"

"They are electoral terrorists of the highest order"

"I sincerely believe these people are either evil or insane."

Those 3 are troubling.

[Andy_Stephenson]

57. What I sent Mr Bellman after his email

Mr Bellman,

I recieved an email from a Berks County resident wherein you called me a "troublemaker" and an " electoral terrorists of the highest order ". You also stated that I was either "evil or insane". These statements border on libel, slander at best. Unless you have concrete information to base your assertions on, I would warn you not to make such statements again. I have forwarded your email to my attorney for review and for advice on further action.

Sincerely,
Andy Stephenson

He responded

My comments refer to the whole "movement" of VVPAT, not to any individual.

You sir, while I applaud you for your passion, are severely mis- or
under-informed.

I do believe there are MANY in the VVPAT movement whose motives are
EXTREMELY unpure. I have no reason to, AT THIS POINT, include you among
them.

I stand ready to be proven otherwise.

As for the "movement" you seem to be part of, I stand by my previous
statement.

The VVPAT will confuse and disenfranchise millions because it violates the
prime
directive of elections aimed at universal suffrage - keep everything as
simple as it
can be. Do DRE's also risk such a thing? Arguably so. The answer is
certainly not
to further complicate them with printers.

V. Kurt Bellman
Director of Elections
County of Berks, PA
610-478-6495
reply to: [e-mail]

And with this as well.

Mr. Stephenson,

I would add parenthetically that it has not escaped my attention that
the bulk of the interest in VVPAT is coming from the west coast. Would
you be so kind as to opine on why that seems to be so?

I'll give you my opinion. It is because there is a deeply entrenched
"expectation" or "history" of voting on systems that produce a "document".

Conversely, here in the Northeast region, there is no such history or
expectation. In our major (and even minor) population centers, no one
has EVER had a document to look at when casting their vote. The only thing
most Northeasterners have ever seen is a lever machine or a DRE.

I assure you that having spoken with my voters extensively, we are quite
smug with the superiority of our "paperless" systems. Paper based systems
are viewed with derision in this region, with good historical reason.
Dozens
of people have gone to jail over many decades with document based systems.
Traditional paper ballots, which many in your movement (admittedly not all)
seem to love so much are the single most often miscounted and altered
systems in the history of elections. This is simple historical fact. The
county
to my north uses optical scan. The former Election Director went to jail
for
(let's use a euphemism, shall we?) "correcting undervotes" thus altering
electoral outcomes. This is why the northeast will NEVER agree to VVPAT.
It is evil, pure and simple. It leads to alteration of elections at worst,
or to
the loss of the secrecy of the ballot, at least. Why do I say that? Because
I've been to vendor fairs and have seen several VVPAT solutions that
have no ability to randomize the ballots at all, because they roll up on a
spool.
Or is that the idea - to compromise the secrecy of the ballot? More evil.

Incidentally, most urban centers in the Northeast elect what party's
politicians
in most cases? Hmm. Kind of defeats the whole conspiracy angle, doesn't it.
I use the very same system as Philadelphia and Dauphin counties. One is
staunchly Democrat, one equally Republican. Both election directors agree
with my viewpoint. My county is nearly equal in registration. My city is
overwhelmingly
Democrat, and the burbs are overwhelmingly Republican. Everyone here
simply LOVES the Danahers. You're stirring up trouble where none previously
exists. Work with me here. That makes your people TROUBLE - MAKERS.
See? It's a compound word. Off the cuff definition? People who make
trouble.

If the shoe fits....

V. Kurt Bellman
Director of Elections
County of Berks, PA
610-478-6495
reply to: [e-mail]

[Andy_Stephenson]

39. Here here

You could adopt your county at:

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=read_count&om=72&forum=DCForumID159

Join BBV and give a hand if you so please. :hi:

[BevHarris]

40. LATEST FALLOUT FROM SUNLIGHT ON PEOPLE LIKE BELLMAN

Heh. We are getting some rude and "curt" responses (like "we believe elections offices are exempt from public records requests) and "we keep no lists of anything" -- but now, the official answers to these PUBLIC records requests often include a warning at the bottom that the communication is private and may not be shared with anyone.

A public records request that is a private communication?

We're posting all replies publicly, so sue us. Election officials: instead of saying your public reply is private, why not think twice about voter-unfriendly and secretive elections administration?

You can see all the responses so far at the forum at http://www.blackboxvoting.org. Many elections officials are forthcoming and very responsive

It is the problem children we have chosen to highlight, along with some who are responsive but in need of education on security measures.

Bev

[69KV]

47. An elected official wrote *that*?

This person sounds like a grade-a first class fruitcake.

That's one reason we have elections in this country, so that ranters like that who are incapable of decent rational discourse don't wind up in public office. Of course, occasionally one slips past the voters.

I'm guessing this is an appointed seat, not an elected one. Either way, *some*body needs to resign and go check in at the nearest mental ward. Director of elections, indeed.

[friesianrider]

48. He is indeed ELECTED...

And you guessed it: he's a Repuke (you would have never guessed, eh?) But yes, elected. Don't blame me - we just moved here a few months ago.

I plan on launching a massive smear campaign when this douchebag comes up for re-election.

[tom_paine]

50. Well, of course he is a Bushevik

Could a Free American write that bullshit? Could a Free American invalidate 27,000 Voter Registrations (Democratic Voter Registrations, naturally) on nothing more than generalized suspicions (which naturally do not extend to Nazi, err, Bushevik applications)?

Of course not. This guy is a bootlicking Totalitarian Worm who would be much more comfortable in the Soviet Union, as long as he could continue fixing elections for someone named Bush.

[friesianrider]

53. You can bet when his sorry ass is up for re-election...

He's gonna get his ass handed to him unless he can get his shit together and stop trying to rig the election, which is exactly what he's doing.

There's a Commissioner's meeting on Tuesday and you can bet I'll be there to...um..."voice" my displeasure.

[ParanoidPat]

51. Kick

:kick:

[tom_paine]

52. kick

[Andy_Stephenson]

54. One last

:kick: for the weekend folk.

[annabanana]

56. kick

[Trajan]

55. Unfuckingbelievable ....

This PUTZ acts more like a courtesan than a public servant ...

The fucking NERVE ! ....

KICK for Bev, Andy and the rest : ... T H A N K Y O U ! ! !

[claudiajean]

58. Kick, and if you haven't read...

....the highlights of this long thread, please don't miss:

All of Mr. Bellman's replies, particularly the one in which he calls election integrity activists "terrorists", and then later says not all, just "some" election activists are terrorists, evil or insane.

I trust that the "evil, insane terrorist" label would also be applied to Mr. Bellman's colleagues who have embraced the Voter Verified Paper Ballot movement -- election administrators with substantially more experience than Mr. Bellman (this is his first term by his own admission, and first Presidential election) who have determined through their own extensive observation of the operation of electronic voting devices, that paperless models are inherently dangerous to the integrity of elections, and that electronic tabulation software should be used only with robust auditing procedures.

As an historical note, the women suffragists of the late 19th Century were also called evil and insane as they tried to break up the traditional marriage and destroy the fabric of the family with their outrageous demands for votes for women. (Dr. Clark, a noted physician of the time, wrote an extensive treatise on how the suffragettes' condition could be treated with radical hysterectomies and institutionalization.) Congratulations, Mr. Bellman. Your strong entry into the the Misguided Election Official of the Year Competition is noted.

If speaking out about inequitable situations, causing discomfort, and thus, change, makes one either a conspiracy theorist or a terrorist, allow me to note some other great American terrorists o' history for you: Paul Revere, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Abigail Adams, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Sojourner Truth, Crazy Horse, Harriet Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, Upton Sinclair, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert Kennedy.

Also, for your entertainment pleasure, don't miss the replies by "DubyaSux". These replies are instructive in that they are excellent examples of how a one level of a modern disinformation campaign can be waged through infiltration of activist groups and the spread of false and misleading information. Recently, we saw another example of this method of disrupting activist groups in the FBI infiltration of a peace organization that met bi-weekly in Berkeley (The infiltrator's real identity was learned when he was killed in a traffic accident and his obituary noted that he was an FBI agent working on domestic terrorism by infiltrating local terrorist cells. The peace activists were unaware that they were a terrorist cell. They thought that they had been meeting to share ideas for letters to the editor and chocolate chip cookies.)

"DubyaSux" is the screen persona of a public relations operative who works for Diebold, Inc. As detailed in attorney-client documents obtained from Diebold's law firm, some of his responsibilities consist of monitoring and posting to "key" internet message boards in an effort to assure representation of Diebold's PR position (in other words, their spin) and the attempt to fragment and cause dissension among the ranks of clean voting and election activists.

Cheers! And please keep this kicked...

[Andy_Stephenson]

59. OK

:kick:

[BevHarris]

60. Heh. And another message board infiltrator works for Riverside

He has been posting, including during work hours and even on election days, at BlackBoxvoting.org and other sites, spouting disturbing ideas like one post in which he mentions that he hopes paper ballots will melt down an election.

We got an alert from a Riverside clean voting advocate that one message on our board duplicated the supposedly original thoughts of a Riverside employee at a Logic & Accuracy test. He posted anonymously on our board, but an IP trace showed that, it turns out, his real name is Bobby Allen and he works for the Riverside County Elections Division.

Riverside clean voting advocates are preparing a letter requesting that Bobby Allen be put on a leave of absence while his written statements about hoping elections with paper ballots crash are examined, and public records requests can determine how much Riverside tax money was spent paying this guy to post on public message boards over a period of, apparently, years.

Yours is my favorite post of all. Thanks, ClaudiaJean.

Bev Harris

[Andy_Stephenson]

61. I wonder just how many counties

have FT employees scanning DU and BBV.org? It would almost be worth the night of IP searches.

Andy