Reply #68: I'll call Washington Post writer tomorrow: Need list [View All]

[BevHarris]

Make it funny and disgusting, as you have already, and point out what's wrong here!

Let's get started: A list of everything redacted that's absurd

- Redacted the version number, which is supposed to be listed by NASED
- Redacted the purpose of a vote-counting system
- Redacted the word before GEMS in the section about GEMS

(I think I may know, by the way: "High Speed Central Count" -- this is the new fancy system they've got, according to internal documents; they examined the new TSx and the new GEMS "high speed central count") -- SAIC looked at something that is not even certified yet and has never once been used. And even that brand new system had 26 critical flaws and over 300 other problems and guess what? The memos indicate they don't even use the same stuff the certifiers look at.

Redacted....list 'em all and why the hell can't we know what's certified and compare it with what they examined?

After the redaction list, how about the "hmmm" list: Like, hmmm, do they fix all these critical security flaws in the other installations, like all over Georgia, Alameda County, etc.

Hmmm, do we get to audit the election results run with 26 critical security flaws?

hmmmm, what about optical scan systems which they didn't examine?

need a hmmm list.

And then we need a "what the hell happened here?" list:

what the hell happened here? Ciber certified this stuff!
What the hell happened here? Wyle certified it too!
What the hell happened here? NASED certified it too!
What the hell happened here? Brit Williams certified it too!
What the hell happened here? They were using versions that weren't even certified.
What the hell happened here?....

I'll spread it if you'll prepare it. And maybe we can match this bullshit up to the memos and ask if that's why they needed to "redact" Blackboxvoting.org's web site.

Bev