No, it is when you say things just to get a rise out of people for argument's sake that you are a troll.
"bleeding heart liberal" nice one! --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hemeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you don't agree with the bleeding heart liberals you are a troll. I'll wear that badge proudly. > I think it is time for a ride on the trolley to the neighborhood of make believe. > > --- On Wed, 10/29/08, fancypaaantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: fancypaaantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [AsburyPark] Re: The Vote Grab: Voting Machines Are Unreliable and Inaccurate > To: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com > Date: Wednesday, October 29, 2008, 2:26 PM > > > > > > > What makes you a troll, unlike Oak, is that you say thinks like the > below that are just downright inflamatory. > > I know I should not even engage, but go to factcheck.org and read > about Acorn if you would like to educate yourself. > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com, "justifiedright" > <justifiedright@ ...> wrote: > > > > Or call Obama's Acorn, and they'll help you vote dozens and dozens > of > > times! > > > > Remember the good old days when the left just yelled voter fraud > even > > when there was none (that's right out of the DNC hand book - I can > > link it if you wish). > > > > Now they've graduated to performing illegal acts of voter fraud, > and > > the issue seems to be no big deal anymore. > > > > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com, "Michael W. Brim" <mwbnj@> > wrote: > > > > > > If you feel your vote will not be counted, as outlined below. > You > > can make > > > sure it is counted the way it should be! > > > > > > > > > > > > Take the 20 minute drive (+/-) and head over to the Monmouth > County > > Board of > > > Elections, 300 Halls Mill Road, Freehold. > > > > > > > > > > > > You may have to stand in lines to vote by absentee ballot, but it > > will be a > > > paper vote vs. the "bad" machine! > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael W. Brim, Municipal Chairman > > > > > > Asbury Park Democratic Executive Committee > > > > > > 321 Sunset Avenue, Unit 5F > > > > > > Asbury Park NJ 07712-5550 > > > > > > Cell: 732-996-8160 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On > > > Behalf Of Gabrielle Obre > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 12:32 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com > > > Subject: [AsburyPark] The Vote Grab: Voting Machines Are > Unreliable and > > > Inaccurate > > > > > > > > > > > > This is FREAKING me out. No intention to troll, just reach more > > > people. This is ONE of MANY articles. Call in the international > > > election monitors! > > > > > > http://www.commondr eams.org/ headline/ 2008/10/29- 0 > > > > > > Published on Wednesday, October 29, 2008 by The Independent/ UK > > > The Vote Grab: Voting Machines Are Unreliable and Inaccurate > > > > > > by Peter Tatchell > > > > > > As early voting in the US presidential elections gets underway, > ES&S > > > iVotronics touch-screen electronic voting machines have been > observed > > > in four separate states [1] flipping the votes - mostly from > Barack > > > Obama to John McCain but sometimes to third party candidates > too. This > > > has already occurred during early voting in the states of West > > > Virginia, Tennessee, Missouri and Texas. > > > > > > A county clerk in West Virginia invited a video crew to watch his > > > demonstration of the reliability of the disputed voting machines > but > > > instead he saw the machine flipping the votes, as critics > claimed. He > > > put this down to the faulty calibration of the voting machine. > > > However, even after he recalibrated the machine it continued to > flip > > > votes. Watch the video here: > > > > > > This is further evidence that the electronic voting machines > that will > > > be used in the 4 November election are not reliable and > accurate - > > > that they are prone to malfunction and may not record the actual > vote > > > winner. > > > > > > Democrats are not the only people who are worried. Stephen > Spoonamore, > > > a Republican security expert, explains why electronic voting is > > > inherently unsafe in an eight part series of interviews. You can > watch > > > Part 1, and access Parts 2 to 7, here [2]. > > > > > > Writing in the New Statesman way back in 2004, reflecting on > > > criticisms of the electronic voting systems used in the > presidential > > > election that year, Michael Meacher MP pointed out that > statisticians, > > > academics and political analysts had highlighted significant > voting > > > differences [3] between electoral districts that used paper > ballots > > > and those that used electronic systems. These cannot be > explained by > > > random variation. The investigators found a much larger variance > than > > > expected and in every case it favoured George W Bush over John > Kerry. > > > In Wisconsin and Ohio, the discrepancy favoured Bush by 4 per > cent, in > > > Pennsylvania by 5 per cent, in Florida and Minnesota by 7 per > cent, in > > > North Carolina by 9 per cent and in New Hampshire by a whopping > 15 per > > > cent. > > > > > > Research by the University of Berkeley, California, revealed > election > > > irregularities in 2004 in Florida. These irregularities, all of > which > > > were associated with electronic voting machines, appear to have > > > awarded between 130,000 to 260,000 additional votes to Bush. > > > > > > The discrepancies between paper and electronic voting could be > the > > > result of simple technological glitches. But some experts detect > > > something more sinister: outright vote fixing by interference > with > > > voting machine and tabulation software. > > > > > > Meacher [3] reported that Diebold company voting machines and > optical > > > scanners may not be tamper-proof from hacking, particularly via > remote > > > modems. Diebold machines were used in counting a substantial > > > proportion of the 2004 votes and will be used again in next > week's > > > presidential poll. > > > > > > Two US computer security experts, in their book Black Box Voting > [4], > > > state that "by entering a two-digit code in a hidden location, a > > > second set of votes is created; and this set of votes can be > changed > > > in a matter of seconds, so that it no longer matches the correct > votes". > > > > > > This is entirely possible, according to Clinton Curtis, a Florida > > > computer programmer. He has confirmed that in 2000 he designed an > > > undetectable programme for Republican congressman Tom Feeney. It > was > > > created to rig elections by covertly switching votes from one > > > candidate to another to ensure a predetermined ballot outcome. > See a > > > video of his sworn testimony here [5]. > > > > > > As Robert F Kennedy Jr, nephew of JFK, has exposed [6], the US > is one > > > of the few democracies that allow private, partisan companies to > > > secretly count votes using their own proprietary software. > > > > > > Moreover, the vast majority of western democracies have > independent > > > Election Commissions to oversee voting methods and corroborate > the > > > results. The US does not. > > > > > > Most election ballots next week will be tallied or scanned by > four > > > private companies - Diebold, Election Systems & Software (ES&S), > > > Sequoia Voting Systems and Hart InterCivic. > > > > > > According to Kennedy: > > > > > > Three of the four companies have close ties to the Republican > > > Party. ES&S, in an earlier corporate incarnation, was chaired by > Chuck > > > Hagel, who in 1996 became the first Republican elected to the > U.S. > > > Senate from Nebraska in twenty-four years - winning a close race > in > > > which eighty-five percent of the votes were tallied by his former > > > company. Hart InterCivic ranks among its investors GOP loyalist > Tom > > > Hicks, who bought the Texas Rangers from George W. Bush in 1998, > > > making Bush a millionaire fifteen times over. And according to > > > campaign-finance records, Diebold, along with its employees and > their > > > families, has contributed at least $300,000 to GOP candidates and > > > party funds since 1998 - including more than $200,000 to the > > > Republican National Committee. In a 2003 fund-raising e-mail, the > > > company's then-CEO Walden O'Dell promised to deliver Ohio's > electoral > > > votes to Bush in 2004." > > > > > > Is it right and proper for partisan pro-Republican companies to > count > > > the votes? It is certainly not objective and impartial. > > > > > > Kennedy recounts how computer scientists at Johns Hopkins and > Rice > > > universities conducted an analysis of the Diebold voting machine > > > software source code in July 2003. "This voting system is far > below > > > even the most minimal security standards applicable in other > > > contexts... (it is) unsuitable for use in a general election," > the > > > scientists concluded. > > > > > > "With electronic machines, you can commit wholesale fraud with a > > > single alteration of software," Avi Rubin told Kennedy. He is a > > > computer science professor at Johns Hopkins who received $US7.5 > > > million from the National Science Foundation to study electronic > > > voting. "There are a million little tricks when you build > software > > > that allow you to do whatever you want. If you know the precinct > > > demographics, the machine can be programmed to recognize its > precinct > > > and strategically flip votes in elections that are several years > in > > > the future. No one will ever know it happened." > > > > > > Electronic voting machines not only break down frequently, their > > > security and integrity is also easily compromised, says Kennedy: > > > > > > "In October 2005, the US Government Accountability Office issued > a > > > damning report on electronic voting machines. Citing widespread > > > irregularities and malfunctions, the government's top watchdog > agency > > > concluded that a host of weaknesses with touch-screen and > optical-scan > > > technology 'could damage the integrity of ballots, votes and > > > voting-system software by allowing unauthorized > modifications' ...Locks > > > protecting computer hardware were easy to pick. Unsecured memory > cards > > > could enable individuals to 'vote multiple times, change vote > totals > > > and produce false election reports.' > > > > > > An even more comprehensive report released in June by the Brennan > > > Center for Justice, a nonpartisan think tank at the New York > > > University School of Law, echoed the GAO's findings. The report - > > > conducted by a task force of computer scientists and security > experts > > > from the government, universities and the private sector - was > > > peer-reviewed by the National Institute of Standards and > Technology. > > > Electronic voting machines widely adopted since 2000, the report > > > concluded, "pose a real danger to the integrity of national, > state and > > > local elections." While no instances of hacking have yet been > > > documented, the report identified 120 security threats to three > widely > > > used machines - the easiest method of attack being to utilize > corrupt > > > software that shifts votes from one candidate to another. > > > > > > There is no evidence that the voting machine malfunctions, flaws > and > > > security risks identified in the 2004 ballot have been fully > corrected > > > in time for the 2008 vote. This calls into question whether the 4 > > > November ballot will reflect the will of the American people. As > > > Kennedy concludes: > > > > > > "You do not have to believe in conspiracy theories to fear for > the > > > integrity of our electoral system: The right to vote is simply > too > > > important - and too hard won - to be surrendered without a > fight. It > > > is time for Americans to reclaim our democracy from private > interests." > > > > > > To contact Peter Tatchell and for more information about his > human > > > rights campaigns visit www.petertatchell. net [7] > > > C 2008 The Independent > > > > > > Article printed from www.CommonDreams. org > > > URL to article: http://www.commondr eams.org/ headline/ 2008/10/29- 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
