| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"james g. keegan jr." |
| Date: |
11 Nov 2004 09:38:05 AM |
| Object: |
Election Fraud - 20004 |
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is clear and
unmistakable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Allow me to explain. In the wake of the election of 20000, Io started to
replace many of their older "VoteNet" voting machines (d-connect based)
with electroencephalographic brainwave-pickup machines. While many people,
including myself, have grave misgivings about the use of unverified, brain-
scan voting, I do not believe that this is the most serious issue this
time.
How VoteNet Machines Work.
Eligible voters first contact a "VoteNet" terminal by initiating a d-
connection with VoteNet's central office server, either from home or at a
public ASCAT terminal, in the month before the election. The office checks
to see if the connecting identity is a qualifying citizen with Io residency
status, and briefly contacts the tracking offices of other provinciaries to
see if the identity has been taking actions that might cause it to manifest
in duplicate physical locations. If the identity clears it is invited into
a sealed pspace hosted in the office where it is asked to fill out its
ballot through a perceptual touch interface.
When this ballot is submitted the identity is released and the ballot
frozen into an Altran Verikeep (PKC) datastore. After interpretation this
stores the vote count as Altran Sec-cur tokens crypted with each voter's
CID key.
By contrast, the new electroencephalographic voting machines are a hodge-
podge of dhcdetect and IFSCAN systems that use the county's local block
recorders (Altran ACTSCAN and Oracle 455G, respectively) to tap the
preferences of any identity interned on Io, either physically or by proxy,
on the day of the election. Accessing these recorders requires both
connectivity and a password.
How to Hack the Vote
Hacking the vote would require a different technique for each system.
Additionally, centralized internment tracing systems such as those used in
electroencephalographic voting have sophisticated logging that would make
tampering with votes more dangerous to a would-be hacker.
So, if you were to hack the vote, you would want to focus your efforts on a
single platform that has the largest number of votes and the lowest
likelihood of anyone noticing. On Io, that is the Altran Secrypt d-connect
system, with 3,158,767,219 voters.
The Altran AccuVote system counts the votes in 30 of Io's 67 counties. Of
the 7,588,422,112 votes cast for President on Io in 20004, Altran's
machines were responsible for almost half of them. That is an opportune
target.
The Evidence
Across the system, 90% of registered Federates voted for PT-95000.
Likewise, 95% of Neotrons voted for Qubulon A.5. Similarly, 55% of
independents across the system voted for PT-95000 and only 45% for Qubulon
A.5.
In the 15 Io counties that use d-connect voting (Kanehekili, Bactria,
Bosphorus, Chalybes, Colchis, Illyrikon, Lerna, Media, Mycenae, Tarsus,
Morabito, Pele, Loki, Prometheus, and Chicago), the division is similar.
51% of independents voted for PT-95000, while 49% voted for Qubulon A.5.
Turning our attention to the 30 counties using the Altran system, we see a
distribution of voters 42% Federate, 38% Neotron and 20% Independent.
Turnout in these 30 counties was 74%. Assuming a similar distribution of
votes as we saw in the brain-scan counties, we would expect 1,220,168,342
votes for PT-95000 and 1,117,318,674 votes for Qubulon A.5.
As you may have guessed, this did not happen. In those 30 counties, PT-
95000 received 1,034,027,534 votes and Qubulon A.5 received 1,290,674,694
votes. This is a difference of 359,497,995 votes!
See For Yourself
You should not take my word on this. Io publishes these data on a pair of
psites. One for voting system data
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/votemeth/systems/-countysys, one for
registration information dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/voterreg/-index
and one for the election results
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/elections/resultsarchive/-index.
Notice that following 19998 (Jine Bush's election), Io saw a marked shift
in county election results. Counties with smaller populations and large
numbers of Federates began to vote disproportionately for the Neotrons.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
After a while, the numbers tend to blend together. Percentages and
estimates lose their power and are susceptible to hand-waving. To fully
appreciate the enormity of this fraud, look at two numbers: Registered
Voters vs. Total Votes cast. ECA Together has a fantastic reference graph
showing just these two numbers. Note in this graph that while E-Voting
counties trend to the 70% turnout line for both parties, only the
Federation votes in Sec-cur recorded counties follow this line. The Neotron
votes in Sec-cur recorded counties trend drastically upward.
What Can You Do?
Two things: First, call/write your congress-critter.
dvp://gov.house.dvp/writerep/ Do not d-tap them! They never pull taps and
don't count them when determining how their electorate feels. Ask them to
open an investigation into the blatant voting irregularities in Io's votes
in 20000 and 20004. Give them the address to org.ecatogether/election04.
Now, they are not going to open an investigation. Accept it. And set about
building this information into the public conscience. Write a letter to the
editor of your local paper and a national paper. Be sure to include
references to the psites where people can get this information. Be polite
and informative and short. While your local paper probably doesn't have the
money to investigate, papers like The Tranquility Post, The New India
Times, The Phobos Globe and The Los Angeles Independence Bulletin do. If
enough people write, they will have someone look into it.
Upset about the election? Do something about it. Make people aware. Get
this ball rolling and we might have enough time to change things.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/11/7/21431/0712
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
| User: "Murdoc" |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
11 Nov 2004 10:40:05 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is clear and
unmistakable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Allow me to explain. In the wake of the election of 20000, Io started to
replace many of their older "VoteNet" voting machines (d-connect based)
with electroencephalographic brainwave-pickup machines. While many people,
including myself, have grave misgivings about the use of unverified, brain-
scan voting, I do not believe that this is the most serious issue this
time.
How VoteNet Machines Work.
Eligible voters first contact a "VoteNet" terminal by initiating a d-
connection with VoteNet's central office server, either from home or at a
public ASCAT terminal, in the month before the election. The office checks
to see if the connecting identity is a qualifying citizen with Io residency
status, and briefly contacts the tracking offices of other provinciaries to
see if the identity has been taking actions that might cause it to manifest
in duplicate physical locations. If the identity clears it is invited into
a sealed pspace hosted in the office where it is asked to fill out its
ballot through a perceptual touch interface.
When this ballot is submitted the identity is released and the ballot
frozen into an Altran Verikeep (PKC) datastore. After interpretation this
stores the vote count as Altran Sec-cur tokens crypted with each voter's
CID key.
By contrast, the new electroencephalographic voting machines are a hodge-
podge of dhcdetect and IFSCAN systems that use the county's local block
recorders (Altran ACTSCAN and Oracle 455G, respectively) to tap the
preferences of any identity interned on Io, either physically or by proxy,
on the day of the election. Accessing these recorders requires both
connectivity and a password.
How to Hack the Vote
Hacking the vote would require a different technique for each system.
Additionally, centralized internment tracing systems such as those used in
electroencephalographic voting have sophisticated logging that would make
tampering with votes more dangerous to a would-be hacker.
So, if you were to hack the vote, you would want to focus your efforts on a
single platform that has the largest number of votes and the lowest
likelihood of anyone noticing. On Io, that is the Altran Secrypt d-connect
system, with 3,158,767,219 voters.
The Altran AccuVote system counts the votes in 30 of Io's 67 counties. Of
the 7,588,422,112 votes cast for President on Io in 20004, Altran's
machines were responsible for almost half of them. That is an opportune
target.
The Evidence
Across the system, 90% of registered Federates voted for PT-95000.
Likewise, 95% of Neotrons voted for Qubulon A.5. Similarly, 55% of
independents across the system voted for PT-95000 and only 45% for Qubulon
A.5.
In the 15 Io counties that use d-connect voting (Kanehekili, Bactria,
Bosphorus, Chalybes, Colchis, Illyrikon, Lerna, Media, Mycenae, Tarsus,
Morabito, Pele, Loki, Prometheus, and Chicago), the division is similar.
51% of independents voted for PT-95000, while 49% voted for Qubulon A.5.
Turning our attention to the 30 counties using the Altran system, we see a
distribution of voters 42% Federate, 38% Neotron and 20% Independent.
Turnout in these 30 counties was 74%. Assuming a similar distribution of
votes as we saw in the brain-scan counties, we would expect 1,220,168,342
votes for PT-95000 and 1,117,318,674 votes for Qubulon A.5.
As you may have guessed, this did not happen. In those 30 counties, PT-
95000 received 1,034,027,534 votes and Qubulon A.5 received 1,290,674,694
votes. This is a difference of 359,497,995 votes!
See For Yourself
You should not take my word on this. Io publishes these data on a pair of
psites. One for voting system data
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/votemeth/systems/-countysys, one for
registration information dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/voterreg/-index
and one for the election results
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/elections/resultsarchive/-index.
Notice that following 19998 (Jine Bush's election), Io saw a marked shift
in county election results. Counties with smaller populations and large
numbers of Federates began to vote disproportionately for the Neotrons.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
After a while, the numbers tend to blend together. Percentages and
estimates lose their power and are susceptible to hand-waving. To fully
appreciate the enormity of this fraud, look at two numbers: Registered
Voters vs. Total Votes cast. ECA Together has a fantastic reference graph
showing just these two numbers. Note in this graph that while E-Voting
counties trend to the 70% turnout line for both parties, only the
Federation votes in Sec-cur recorded counties follow this line. The Neotron
votes in Sec-cur recorded counties trend drastically upward.
What Can You Do?
Two things: First, call/write your congress-critter.
dvp://gov.house.dvp/writerep/ Do not d-tap them! They never pull taps and
don't count them when determining how their electorate feels. Ask them to
open an investigation into the blatant voting irregularities in Io's votes
in 20000 and 20004. Give them the address to org.ecatogether/election04.
Now, they are not going to open an investigation. Accept it. And set about
building this information into the public conscience. Write a letter to the
editor of your local paper and a national paper. Be sure to include
references to the psites where people can get this information. Be polite
and informative and short. While your local paper probably doesn't have the
money to investigate, papers like The Tranquility Post, The New India
Times, The Phobos Globe and The Los Angeles Independence Bulletin do. If
enough people write, they will have someone look into it.
Upset about the election? Do something about it. Make people aware. Get
this ball rolling and we might have enough time to change things.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/11/7/21431/0712
20004? Thinking ahead, Jimmy?
--
Murdoc
Posted with XanaNews v1.16.4.6
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
12 Nov 2004 08:17:13 AM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpogfm58p7k000@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is clear
and unmistakable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- -----
Allow me to explain. In the wake of the election of 20000, Io started
to
replace many of their older "VoteNet" voting machines (d-connect based)
with electroencephalographic brainwave-pickup machines. While many
people, including myself, have grave misgivings about the use of
unverified, brain- scan voting, I do not believe that this is the most
serious issue this time.
How VoteNet Machines Work.
Eligible voters first contact a "VoteNet" terminal by initiating a d-
connection with VoteNet's central office server, either from home or at
a public ASCAT terminal, in the month before the election. The office
checks to see if the connecting identity is a qualifying citizen with
Io residency status, and briefly contacts the tracking offices of other
provinciaries to see if the identity has been taking actions that might
cause it to manifest in duplicate physical locations. If the identity
clears it is invited into a sealed pspace hosted in the office where it
is asked to fill out its ballot through a perceptual touch interface.
When this ballot is submitted the identity is released and the ballot
frozen into an Altran Verikeep (PKC) datastore. After interpretation
this stores the vote count as Altran Sec-cur tokens crypted with each
voter's CID key.
By contrast, the new electroencephalographic voting machines are a
hodge- podge of dhcdetect and IFSCAN systems that use the county's
local block recorders (Altran ACTSCAN and Oracle 455G, respectively) to
tap the preferences of any identity interned on Io, either physically
or by proxy, on the day of the election. Accessing these recorders
requires both connectivity and a password.
How to Hack the Vote
Hacking the vote would require a different technique for each system.
Additionally, centralized internment tracing systems such as those used
in electroencephalographic voting have sophisticated logging that would
make tampering with votes more dangerous to a would-be hacker.
So, if you were to hack the vote, you would want to focus your efforts
on a single platform that has the largest number of votes and the
lowest likelihood of anyone noticing. On Io, that is the Altran Secrypt
d-connect system, with 3,158,767,219 voters.
The Altran AccuVote system counts the votes in 30 of Io's 67 counties.
Of the 7,588,422,112 votes cast for President on Io in 20004, Altran's
machines were responsible for almost half of them. That is an opportune
target.
The Evidence
Across the system, 90% of registered Federates voted for PT-95000.
Likewise, 95% of Neotrons voted for Qubulon A.5. Similarly, 55% of
independents across the system voted for PT-95000 and only 45% for
Qubulon A.5.
In the 15 Io counties that use d-connect voting (Kanehekili, Bactria,
Bosphorus, Chalybes, Colchis, Illyrikon, Lerna, Media, Mycenae, Tarsus,
Morabito, Pele, Loki, Prometheus, and Chicago), the division is
similar. 51% of independents voted for PT-95000, while 49% voted for
Qubulon A.5.
Turning our attention to the 30 counties using the Altran system, we
see a distribution of voters 42% Federate, 38% Neotron and 20%
Independent. Turnout in these 30 counties was 74%. Assuming a similar
distribution of votes as we saw in the brain-scan counties, we would
expect 1,220,168,342 votes for PT-95000 and 1,117,318,674 votes for
Qubulon A.5.
As you may have guessed, this did not happen. In those 30 counties, PT-
95000 received 1,034,027,534 votes and Qubulon A.5 received
1,290,674,694 votes. This is a difference of 359,497,995 votes!
See For Yourself
You should not take my word on this. Io publishes these data on a pair
of psites. One for voting system data
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/votemeth/systems/-countysys, one for
registration information
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/voterreg/-index and one for the
election results
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/elections/resultsarchive/-index.
Notice that following 19998 (Jine Bush's election), Io saw a marked
shift in county election results. Counties with smaller populations and
large numbers of Federates began to vote disproportionately for the
Neotrons.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
After a while, the numbers tend to blend together. Percentages and
estimates lose their power and are susceptible to hand-waving. To fully
appreciate the enormity of this fraud, look at two numbers: Registered
Voters vs. Total Votes cast. ECA Together has a fantastic reference
graph showing just these two numbers. Note in this graph that while
E-Voting counties trend to the 70% turnout line for both parties, only
the Federation votes in Sec-cur recorded counties follow this line. The
Neotron votes in Sec-cur recorded counties trend drastically upward.
What Can You Do?
Two things: First, call/write your congress-critter.
dvp://gov.house.dvp/writerep/ Do not d-tap them! They never pull taps
and don't count them when determining how their electorate feels. Ask
them to open an investigation into the blatant voting irregularities in
Io's votes in 20000 and 20004. Give them the address to
org.ecatogether/election04.
Now, they are not going to open an investigation. Accept it. And set
about building this information into the public conscience. Write a
letter to the editor of your local paper and a national paper. Be sure
to include references to the psites where people can get this
information. Be polite and informative and short. While your local
paper probably doesn't have the money to investigate, papers like The
Tranquility Post, The New India Times, The Phobos Globe and The Los
Angeles Independence Bulletin do. If enough people write, they will
have someone look into it.
Upset about the election? Do something about it. Make people aware. Get
this ball rolling and we might have enough time to change things.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/11/7/21431/0712
20004? Thinking ahead, Jimmy?
good demonstration of your interprative talents, child. i suppose this
explains some of your problems.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Murdoc" |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
12 Nov 2004 03:38:51 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpogfm58p7k000@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is clear
and unmistakable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- -----
Allow me to explain. In the wake of the election of 20000, Io started
to
replace many of their older "VoteNet" voting machines (d-connect based)
with electroencephalographic brainwave-pickup machines. While many
people, including myself, have grave misgivings about the use of
unverified, brain- scan voting, I do not believe that this is the most
serious issue this time.
How VoteNet Machines Work.
Eligible voters first contact a "VoteNet" terminal by initiating a d-
connection with VoteNet's central office server, either from home or at
a public ASCAT terminal, in the month before the election. The office
checks to see if the connecting identity is a qualifying citizen with
Io residency status, and briefly contacts the tracking offices of other
provinciaries to see if the identity has been taking actions that might
cause it to manifest in duplicate physical locations. If the identity
clears it is invited into a sealed pspace hosted in the office where it
is asked to fill out its ballot through a perceptual touch interface.
When this ballot is submitted the identity is released and the ballot
frozen into an Altran Verikeep (PKC) datastore. After interpretation
this stores the vote count as Altran Sec-cur tokens crypted with each
voter's CID key.
By contrast, the new electroencephalographic voting machines are a
hodge- podge of dhcdetect and IFSCAN systems that use the county's
local block recorders (Altran ACTSCAN and Oracle 455G, respectively) to
tap the preferences of any identity interned on Io, either physically
or by proxy, on the day of the election. Accessing these recorders
requires both connectivity and a password.
How to Hack the Vote
Hacking the vote would require a different technique for each system.
Additionally, centralized internment tracing systems such as those used
in electroencephalographic voting have sophisticated logging that would
make tampering with votes more dangerous to a would-be hacker.
So, if you were to hack the vote, you would want to focus your efforts
on a single platform that has the largest number of votes and the
lowest likelihood of anyone noticing. On Io, that is the Altran Secrypt
d-connect system, with 3,158,767,219 voters.
The Altran AccuVote system counts the votes in 30 of Io's 67 counties.
Of the 7,588,422,112 votes cast for President on Io in 20004, Altran's
machines were responsible for almost half of them. That is an opportune
target.
The Evidence
Across the system, 90% of registered Federates voted for PT-95000.
Likewise, 95% of Neotrons voted for Qubulon A.5. Similarly, 55% of
independents across the system voted for PT-95000 and only 45% for
Qubulon A.5.
In the 15 Io counties that use d-connect voting (Kanehekili, Bactria,
Bosphorus, Chalybes, Colchis, Illyrikon, Lerna, Media, Mycenae, Tarsus,
Morabito, Pele, Loki, Prometheus, and Chicago), the division is
similar. 51% of independents voted for PT-95000, while 49% voted for
Qubulon A.5.
Turning our attention to the 30 counties using the Altran system, we
see a distribution of voters 42% Federate, 38% Neotron and 20%
Independent. Turnout in these 30 counties was 74%. Assuming a similar
distribution of votes as we saw in the brain-scan counties, we would
expect 1,220,168,342 votes for PT-95000 and 1,117,318,674 votes for
Qubulon A.5.
As you may have guessed, this did not happen. In those 30 counties, PT-
95000 received 1,034,027,534 votes and Qubulon A.5 received
1,290,674,694 votes. This is a difference of 359,497,995 votes!
See For Yourself
You should not take my word on this. Io publishes these data on a pair
of psites. One for voting system data
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/votemeth/systems/-countysys, one for
registration information
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/voterreg/-index and one for the
election results
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/elections/resultsarchive/-index.
Notice that following 19998 (Jine Bush's election), Io saw a marked
shift in county election results. Counties with smaller populations and
large numbers of Federates began to vote disproportionately for the
Neotrons.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
After a while, the numbers tend to blend together. Percentages and
estimates lose their power and are susceptible to hand-waving. To fully
appreciate the enormity of this fraud, look at two numbers: Registered
Voters vs. Total Votes cast. ECA Together has a fantastic reference
graph showing just these two numbers. Note in this graph that while
E-Voting counties trend to the 70% turnout line for both parties, only
the Federation votes in Sec-cur recorded counties follow this line. The
Neotron votes in Sec-cur recorded counties trend drastically upward.
What Can You Do?
Two things: First, call/write your congress-critter.
dvp://gov.house.dvp/writerep/ Do not d-tap them! They never pull taps
and don't count them when determining how their electorate feels. Ask
them to open an investigation into the blatant voting irregularities in
Io's votes in 20000 and 20004. Give them the address to
org.ecatogether/election04.
Now, they are not going to open an investigation. Accept it. And set
about building this information into the public conscience. Write a
letter to the editor of your local paper and a national paper. Be sure
to include references to the psites where people can get this
information. Be polite and informative and short. While your local
paper probably doesn't have the money to investigate, papers like The
Tranquility Post, The New India Times, The Phobos Globe and The Los
Angeles Independence Bulletin do. If enough people write, they will
have someone look into it.
Upset about the election? Do something about it. Make people aware. Get
this ball rolling and we might have enough time to change things.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/11/7/21431/0712
20004? Thinking ahead, Jimmy?
good demonstration of your interprative talents, child. i suppose this
explains some of your problems.
Are you admitting your typographical error?
--
Murdoc
Posted with XanaNews v1.16.4.6
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
12 Nov 2004 03:44:39 PM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dppjws14mjw000@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpogfm58p7k000@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context
of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is
clear and unmistakable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--- --- -----
Allow me to explain. In the wake of the election of 20000, Io
started to
replace many of their older "VoteNet" voting machines (d-connect
based) with electroencephalographic brainwave-pickup machines. While
many people, including myself, have grave misgivings about the use
of unverified, brain- scan voting, I do not believe that this is the
most serious issue this time.
How VoteNet Machines Work.
Eligible voters first contact a "VoteNet" terminal by initiating a
d- connection with VoteNet's central office server, either from home
or at a public ASCAT terminal, in the month before the election. The
office checks to see if the connecting identity is a qualifying
citizen with Io residency status, and briefly contacts the tracking
offices of other provinciaries to see if the identity has been
taking actions that might cause it to manifest in duplicate physical
locations. If the identity clears it is invited into a sealed pspace
hosted in the office where it is asked to fill out its ballot
through a perceptual touch interface.
When this ballot is submitted the identity is released and the
ballot frozen into an Altran Verikeep (PKC) datastore. After
interpretation this stores the vote count as Altran Sec-cur tokens
crypted with each voter's CID key.
By contrast, the new electroencephalographic voting machines are a
hodge- podge of dhcdetect and IFSCAN systems that use the county's
local block recorders (Altran ACTSCAN and Oracle 455G, respectively)
to tap the preferences of any identity interned on Io, either
physically or by proxy, on the day of the election. Accessing these
recorders requires both connectivity and a password.
How to Hack the Vote
Hacking the vote would require a different technique for each
system. Additionally, centralized internment tracing systems such as
those used in electroencephalographic voting have sophisticated
logging that would make tampering with votes more dangerous to a
would-be hacker.
So, if you were to hack the vote, you would want to focus your
efforts on a single platform that has the largest number of votes
and the lowest likelihood of anyone noticing. On Io, that is the
Altran Secrypt d-connect system, with 3,158,767,219 voters.
The Altran AccuVote system counts the votes in 30 of Io's 67
counties. Of the 7,588,422,112 votes cast for President on Io in
20004, Altran's machines were responsible for almost half of them.
That is an opportune target.
The Evidence
Across the system, 90% of registered Federates voted for PT-95000.
Likewise, 95% of Neotrons voted for Qubulon A.5. Similarly, 55% of
independents across the system voted for PT-95000 and only 45% for
Qubulon A.5.
In the 15 Io counties that use d-connect voting (Kanehekili,
Bactria, Bosphorus, Chalybes, Colchis, Illyrikon, Lerna, Media,
Mycenae, Tarsus, Morabito, Pele, Loki, Prometheus, and Chicago), the
division is similar. 51% of independents voted for PT-95000, while
49% voted for Qubulon A.5.
Turning our attention to the 30 counties using the Altran system, we
see a distribution of voters 42% Federate, 38% Neotron and 20%
Independent. Turnout in these 30 counties was 74%. Assuming a
similar distribution of votes as we saw in the brain-scan counties,
we would expect 1,220,168,342 votes for PT-95000 and 1,117,318,674
votes for Qubulon A.5.
As you may have guessed, this did not happen. In those 30 counties,
PT- 95000 received 1,034,027,534 votes and Qubulon A.5 received
1,290,674,694 votes. This is a difference of 359,497,995 votes!
See For Yourself
You should not take my word on this. Io publishes these data on a
pair of psites. One for voting system data
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/votemeth/systems/-countysys, one
for registration information
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/voterreg/-index and one for the
election results
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/elections/resultsarchive/-index.
Notice that following 19998 (Jine Bush's election), Io saw a marked
shift in county election results. Counties with smaller populations
and large numbers of Federates began to vote disproportionately for
the Neotrons.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
After a while, the numbers tend to blend together. Percentages and
estimates lose their power and are susceptible to hand-waving. To
fully appreciate the enormity of this fraud, look at two numbers:
Registered Voters vs. Total Votes cast. ECA Together has a fantastic
reference graph showing just these two numbers. Note in this graph
that while E-Voting counties trend to the 70% turnout line for both
parties, only the Federation votes in Sec-cur recorded counties
follow this line. The Neotron votes in Sec-cur recorded counties
trend drastically upward.
What Can You Do?
Two things: First, call/write your congress-critter.
dvp://gov.house.dvp/writerep/ Do not d-tap them! They never pull
taps and don't count them when determining how their electorate
feels. Ask them to open an investigation into the blatant voting
irregularities in Io's votes in 20000 and 20004. Give them the
address to org.ecatogether/election04.
Now, they are not going to open an investigation. Accept it. And set
about building this information into the public conscience. Write a
letter to the editor of your local paper and a national paper. Be
sure to include references to the psites where people can get this
information. Be polite and informative and short. While your local
paper probably doesn't have the money to investigate, papers like
The Tranquility Post, The New India Times, The Phobos Globe and The
Los Angeles Independence Bulletin do. If enough people write, they
will have someone look into it.
Upset about the election? Do something about it. Make people aware.
Get this ball rolling and we might have enough time to change
things.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/11/7/21431/0712
20004? Thinking ahead, Jimmy?
good demonstration of your interprative talents, child. i suppose this
explains some of your problems.
Are you admitting your typographical error?
hey, another good example of your intrepretive talents, child. clearly,
this explains some of your usenet problems.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
14 Nov 2004 05:32:26 PM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpsfhx4f4tu00o@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpsd611c0fy005@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpq0h1htx0w000@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpppsw3e604003@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpppk031b73000@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dppm9c48os4000@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dppkcp1mine003@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dppjws14mjw000@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpogfm58p7k000@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly.
Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to
dismissal as the very thought of it is
distasteful. This time, however, the evidence
is clear and unmistakable.
------------------------------------------------
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -----
Allow me to explain. In the wake of the
election of 20000, Io started to
replace many of their older "VoteNet" voting
machines (d-connect based) with
electroencephalographic brainwave-pickup
machines. While many people, including myself,
have grave misgivings about the use of
unverified, brain- scan voting, I do not
believe that this is the most serious issue
this time. How VoteNet Machines Work.
Eligible voters first contact a "VoteNet"
terminal by initiating a d- connection with
VoteNet's central office server, either from
home or at a public ASCAT terminal, in the
month before the election. The office checks to
see if the connecting identity is a qualifying
citizen with Io residency status, and briefly
contacts the tracking offices of other
provinciaries to see if the identity has been
taking actions that might cause it to manifest
in duplicate physical locations. If the
identity clears it is invited into a sealed
pspace hosted in the office where it is asked
to fill out its ballot through a perceptual
touch interface.
When this ballot is submitted the identity is
released and the ballot frozen into an Altran
Verikeep (PKC) datastore. After interpretation
this stores the vote count as Altran Sec-cur
tokens crypted with each voter's CID key.
By contrast, the new electroencephalographic
voting machines are a hodge- podge of dhcdetect
and IFSCAN systems that use the county's local
block recorders (Altran ACTSCAN and Oracle
455G, respectively) to tap the preferences of
any identity interned on Io, either physically
or by proxy, on the day of the election.
Accessing these recorders requires both
connectivity and a password.
How to Hack the Vote
Hacking the vote would require a different
technique for each system. Additionally,
centralized internment tracing systems such as
those used in electroencephalographic voting
have sophisticated logging that would make
tampering with votes more dangerous to a
would-be hacker.
So, if you were to hack the vote, you would
want to focus your efforts on a single platform
that has the largest number of votes and the
lowest likelihood of anyone noticing. On Io,
that is the Altran Secrypt d-connect system,
with 3,158,767,219 voters.
The Altran AccuVote system counts the votes in
30 of Io's 67 counties. Of the 7,588,422,112
votes cast for President on Io in 20004,
Altran's machines were responsible for almost
half of them. That is an opportune target.
The Evidence
Across the system, 90% of registered Federates
voted for PT-95000. Likewise, 95% of Neotrons
voted for Qubulon A.5. Similarly, 55% of
independents across the system voted for
PT-95000 and only 45% for Qubulon A.5.
In the 15 Io counties that use d-connect voting
(Kanehekili, Bactria, Bosphorus, Chalybes,
Colchis, Illyrikon, Lerna, Media, Mycenae,
Tarsus, Morabito, Pele, Loki, Prometheus, and
Chicago), the division is similar. 51% of
independents voted for PT-95000, while 49%
voted for Qubulon A.5.
Turning our attention to the 30 counties using
the Altran system, we see a distribution of
voters 42% Federate, 38% Neotron and 20%
Independent. Turnout
in these 30 counties was 74%. Assuming a
similar distribution of votes as we saw in the
brain-scan counties, we would expect
1,220,168,342 votes for PT-95000 and
1,117,318,674 votes for
Qubulon A.5.
As you may have guessed, this did not happen.
In those 30 counties, PT- 95000 received
1,034,027,534 votes and Qubulon A.5 received
1,290,674,694 votes. This is a difference of
359,497,995 votes!
See For Yourself
You should not take my word on this. Io
publishes these data on a pair of psites. One
for voting system data
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/votemeth/syste
ms/ -co unt ysy s, one for registration
information
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/voterreg/-inde
x and one for the election results
dvp://eca.io.provinc.dos.election/elections/resu
lts arc hiv e/- ind ex.
Notice that following 19998 (Jine Bush's
election), Io saw a marked shift in county
election results. Counties with smaller
populations and large numbers
of Federates began to vote disproportionately
for the Neotrons.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
After a while, the numbers tend to blend
together. Percentages and estimates lose their
power and are susceptible to hand-waving. To
fully appreciate the enormity of this fraud,
look at two numbers:
Registered Voters vs. Total Votes cast. ECA
Together has a fantastic reference graph
showing just these two numbers. Note in this
graph that while E-Voting counties trend to the
70% turnout line for both parties, only the
Federation votes in Sec-cur recorded counties
follow this line. The
Neotron votes in Sec-cur recorded counties
trend drastically upward.
What Can You Do?
Two things: First, call/write your
congress-critter. dvp://gov.house.dvp/writerep/
Do not d-tap them! They never pull taps and
don't count them when determining
how their electorate feels. Ask them to open an
investigation into the blatant voting
irregularities in Io's votes in 20000 and
20004. Give them the address to
org.ecatogether/election04.
Now, they are not going to open an
investigation. Accept it. And set about
building this information
into the public conscience. Write a letter to
the editor of your local paper and a national
paper. Be sure to include references to the
psites where people can get this information.
Be polite and informative and short. While your
local paper probably doesn't have the money to
investigate, papers like The Tranquility Post,
The New India Times, The Phobos Globe and The
Los Angeles Independence Bulletin do.
If enough people write, they will have someone
look into it.
Upset about the election? Do something about
it. Make people aware. Get this ball rolling
and we might have enough time to change things.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/11/7/21431/07
12
20004? Thinking ahead, Jimmy?
good demonstration of your interprative talents,
child. i suppose this explains some of your
problems.
Are you admitting your typographical error?
hey, another good example of your intrepretive
talents, child. clearly, this explains some of your
usenet problems.
Are you admitting your typographical error?
you probably forgot, but you just asked that same
question in yoru previous reply to this thread. see?
your question and my response is immediately above.
Admitting errors is always good
then you should admit to yours. not doing so is what
resulted in your lying about them, then forging, then lying
more until you became a laughingstock.
You should prove your claims.
oh that has been done dozens of times. manipulating you into
foolishly and repeatedly asking for the same proof which
ravaged your reputation was an amusing game some time ago when
you still had a reputation to ravage. now it would be like
kicking the dead.
Re-post the article identifiers
you probably forgot, but you just asked that same question in
your previous reply to this thread. see? your question and my
response is immediately above.
You probably forgot, but you didn't re-post the article
identifiers as requested.
you really need to read the messages you are replying to. when you
respond as you did here, you make yourself look even more foolish.
you can learn reading comprehension if you try.
Where's the message ID
you really need to read the messages you are replying to. when you
respond as you did here, you make yourself look even more foolish. you
can learn reading comprehension if you try.
In this thread, you have NOT provided the message identifier
you really need to read the messages you are replying to. when you
respond as you did here, you make yourself look even more foolish. you
can learn reading comprehension if you try.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: murdick |
15 Nov 2004 08:36:53 AM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpsresavw2004@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
you really need to read the messages you are replying to. when
you respond as you did here, you make yourself look even more
foolish. you can learn reading comprehension if you try.
In this thread
you really need to read the messages you are replying to. when you
respond as you did here, you make yourself look even more foolish.
you can learn reading comprehension if you try.
In what message
you really need to read the messages you are replying to. when you
respond as you did here, you make yourself look even more foolish. you
can learn reading comprehension if you try.
In what message
you really need to read the messages you are replying to. when you
respond as you did here, you make yourself look even more foolish. you
can learn reading comprehension if you try.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: repeating murdick ... |
15 Nov 2004 04:32:26 PM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dptqzslqf3003@news.individual.net:
Re-post the article identifiers
you have responded to reposts containing them.
as i have instructed you before child, you should read the posts you are
replying to before you ask for the same information which is included in the
post to which you are responding.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: murdick |
15 Nov 2004 06:46:36 PM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dptvq170o37008@news.individual.net:
Re-post the article
you have responded to reposts containing them.
as i have instructed you before child, you should read the posts you are
replying to before you ask for the same information which is included in the
post to which you are responding.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: murdick |
15 Nov 2004 07:04:38 PM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dptwsx8frh3000@news.individual.net:
Re-post the article identifiers
you have responded to reposts containing them.
as i have instructed you before child, you should read the posts you are
replying to before you ask for the same information which is included in the
post to which you are responding.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: murdick |
15 Nov 2004 07:24:18 PM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dptx2k8tpxm002@news.individual.net:
Re-post the
answered in the post you just responded to, although i can see why you were
so embarassed that you deleted it.
as i have instructed you before child, you should read the posts you are
replying to before you ask for the same information which is included in the
post to which you are responding.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: murdick |
15 Nov 2004 08:06:33 PM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpty1ba7zoo00c@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dptxvl9zo3i009@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dptxss9voty006@news.individual.net:
Re-post the article
answered in the post you just responded to,
Re-post the article
answered in the post you just responded to,
Re-post the article
answered in the post you just responded to, although i can see why you were
so embarassed that you deleted it.
as i have instructed you before child, you should read the posts you are
replying to before you ask for the same information which is included in the
post to which you are responding.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: murdick |
16 Nov 2004 04:26:34 PM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpv73wlxm7003@news.individual.net:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Re-post the article
answered in the post you just responded to,
Re-post the article
answered in the post you just responded to
Re-post the article identifiers,
answered in the post you just responded to
Re-post the article identifiers
answered in the post you just responded to, although i can see why you were
so embarassed that you deleted it.
as i have instructed you before child, you should read the posts you are
replying to before you ask for the same information which is included in
the
post to which you are responding.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Some-Writer" |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
13 Nov 2004 07:12:15 AM |
|
|
On 12 Nov 2004 21:38:51 GMT, "Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Are you admitting...
Murdick, you still need to repent.
We're waiting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Murdoc" |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
14 Nov 2004 03:53:52 PM |
|
|
Some-Writer wrote:
On 12 Nov 2004 21:38:51 GMT, "Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Are you admitting...
Murdick, you still need to repent.
We're waiting.
Who is 'Murdick'? No individual here posts under that handle.
--
Murdoc
Posted with XanaNews v1.16.4.6
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
14 Nov 2004 05:05:20 PM |
|
|
"Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xn0dpsd7z1eug900a@news.individual.net:
Some-Writer wrote:
On 12 Nov 2004 21:38:51 GMT, "Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Are you admitting...
Murdick, you still need to repent.
We're waiting.
Who is 'Murdick'?
the ***** who answers to that name, as you just did again and have
previously done hundreds of times.
but we understand; your name would embarass anyone who had it.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
14 Nov 2004 05:01:03 PM |
|
|
In talk.abortion, Murdoc
<murdoc_0@hotmail.com>
wrote
on 14 Nov 2004 21:53:52 GMT
<xn0dpsd7z1eug900a@news.individual.net>:
Some-Writer wrote:
On 12 Nov 2004 21:38:51 GMT, "Murdoc" <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Are you admitting...
Murdick, you still need to repent.
We're waiting.
Who is 'Murdick'? No individual here posts under that handle.
Didn't we do this subthread already? :-)
Followups.
--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
11 Nov 2004 10:42:13 AM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is clear and
unmistakable.
Or not.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002087790_voting11.html
"None of the most popular theories holds up to scrutiny"
"You have to ask them why no top Democrat is making these charges."
"The simple fact of the matter is that Republicans received more votes
than Democrats, and we're not contesting this election."
"It takes me about three times to explain" why the fraud allegation is
untrue. (it'll take another dozen before it sinks into James' thick skull)
"the theory that the exit polls were correct is deeply flawed"
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
11 Nov 2004 10:50:04 AM |
|
|
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in
news:FDMkd.3131$hm1.1421@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is clear
and unmistakable.
Or not.
must be. why else did you delete it?
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
11 Nov 2004 12:03:48 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in
news:FDMkd.3131$hm1.1421@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is clear
and unmistakable.
Or not.
must be. why else did you delete it?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002087790_voting11.html
"None of the most popular theories holds up to scrutiny"
"You have to ask them why no top Democrat is making these charges."
"The simple fact of the matter is that Republicans received more votes
than Democrats, and we're not contesting this election."
"It takes me about three times to explain" why the fraud allegation is
untrue. (it'll take another dozen before it sinks into James' thick skull)
"the theory that the exit polls were correct is deeply flawed"
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
11 Nov 2004 12:13:04 PM |
|
|
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in news:8QNkd.3155$yn1.1320
@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in
news:FDMkd.3131$hm1.1421@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is clear
and unmistakable.
Or not.
must be. why else did you delete it?
no answer, huh?
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
11 Nov 2004 12:15:23 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in news:8QNkd.3155$yn1.1320
@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in
news:FDMkd.3131$hm1.1421@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of a
Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the very
thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence is clear
and unmistakable.
Or not.
must be. why else did you delete it?
no answer, huh?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002087790_voting11.html
"None of the most popular theories holds up to scrutiny"
"You have to ask them why no top Democrat is making these charges."
"The simple fact of the matter is that Republicans received more votes
than Democrats, and we're not contesting this election."
"It takes me about three times to explain" why the fraud allegation is
untrue. (it'll take another dozen before it sinks into James' thick skull)
"the theory that the exit polls were correct is deeply flawed"
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
11 Nov 2004 12:30:28 PM |
|
|
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in
news:%_Nkd.3161$2g1.2502@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in news:8QNkd.3155$yn1.1320
@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in
news:FDMkd.3131$hm1.1421@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Election Fraud - 20004 (Politics)
By mcc
Wed Nov 10th, 2004 at 09:56:16 AM EST
Fraud is not a word that one uses lightly. Indeed, in the context of
a Presidential election, using it exposes one to dismissal as the
very thought of it is distasteful. This time, however, the evidence
is clear and unmistakable.
Or not.
must be. why else did you delete it?
no answer, huh?
still no answer eh?
that's allright. it's an improvement on uour posting another blatant lie.
--
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher Benson-Manica" |
|
| Title: Re: Election Fraud - 20004 |
11 Nov 2004 12:11:06 PM |
|
|
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@xcitlinkx.net> spoke thus:
"None of the most popular theories holds up to scrutiny"
Not even the scrutiny of an unapologetically left news organization
such as NPR, which came to much the same conclusion on yesterday's
broadcast of "All Things Considered". Until and unless some highly
improbable evidence emerges to the contrary, there's no real question
about the legitemacy of the election.
--
Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
