Is * LEGITIMATE?: HELL NO! Help the Press Get off their Asses!

[autorank]

Is * LEGITIMATE?: HELL NO! Help the Press Get off their Asses!

…and the press is ready, if you’ve watched recent coverage.

Is Bush Legitimate? Hell no?

The following attachment went to nearly 400 national press folks recently.

It’s the story of why this administration is NOT legitimate.

Help LOCALLY! Just copy the attached release and email it to:

--your local newspapers

--your local TV stations

--your friends.

We’ve made it simple but with very good evidence.

Let’s help the press get a quick study on a bogus election and give them reason to question legitimacy!!!

DU Users: kster & autorank

Cut & Paste the following. The links should be preserved but check.
===============================================================

September 19, 2005
For Immediate Release
From: Concerned Americans
IT’S NOW A QUESTION OF LEGITIMACY: WHO REALLY WON IN 2004.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2005 Federal government gives Louisiana $27 million for Help America Vote Act to purchase machines for the entire state.
http://170.94.58.9/data/agency_budgets/0063.htm
In 2004 the Bush administration cut Army Corps of Engineers budget for levee maintenance in the New Orleans area by $26 million dollars. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is the Bush administration so intent on spreading voting machines and software?

Could the reason be that Bush almost always does better in electronic voting precincts?
Could another reason be that almost all the electronic voting companies are owned by right wing Republicans?

1) In early 2004, the BBC reported on serious questions about American electronic voting. David Dill, a computer expert at Stanford, questioned the reliability of voting systems, owned and operated by private companies who keep all data and operations information private. BBC pointed out that in Brazil, a separate organization exists to look at electronic voting machines during and after an election in order to keep vendors honest. In America, Diebold, etc. will not allow anyone to examine their machines since the software is “proprietary.” We are voting blind with no way to check the process or even do a recount....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3489877.stm

2) About 80% of the votes in this country are now tabulated—totaled—by just three companies, two controlled by right wing Republicans and the third by a British company. These and other voting machine and system companies have a checkered record, some employing ex felons. This article by reporter LynnLandes details the sorry situation in detail with references.
http://www.ecotalk.org/VotingMachineCompanies.htm
Professor Avi Rubin of Johns Hopkins University did a study on one of the most popular voting machines, Diebold, in 2003 and found numerous security problems. This was not a partisan effort but a look by a computer security expert. The results are depressing.
http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf

VotersUnite.Org has a powerful, extremely well documented book on voting machines, tabulators and the Federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA). It’s called
MythBreakers http://votersunite.org/ and is available as a PDF File
There is no argument “… to counter the loud and vociferous assertions of numerous computer experts who insist that electronic voting machines can be rigged. And that if they can be rigged, they are… because if you leave the bank vault open, sooner or later someone is going to rob it.” Lynn Landes http://www.ecotalk.org/Sequoia.htm
3) Mark Crispin Miller wrote an excellent article in Harper’s Magazine called "None Dare Call it Stolen" which lays out the case for a stolen election. This is new and excellent; they like Harpers. This details the voter suppression are documented, the fake “terrorist alert” to stop vote counting when no alert was issued, the extra Bush votes which magically appeared.
http://www.harpers.org/ExcerptNoneDare.html

4) Exit Polls have been used all over the world to catch election fraud. They are used by the center run by President Carter, other international voting rights groups, and most recently in the Ukraine. In the Ukraine, the difference between the vote count and the exit polls was so different, a new election was held. The United States government was the main force behind getting a new election because of problems uncovered by exit polls. Yet US exit polls in presidential elections, highly accurate in 1996 and 2000, showed a clear victory for John Kerry but these were completely ignored. In fact, the final exit poll released election night, after 1:00am had to be adjusted with actual results to show a Bush win (which made it something other than a poll, at that point).
Professor Steve Freeman of the University of Pennsylvania outlined a simple set of arguments in February 2005. How could the exit polls be so far off?
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/1970/
A group of leading statisticians produced an academic study of exit poll – actual vote discrepancies in April 2005 showing strong evidence of election fraud.

http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/Exit_Polls_2004_Edison-Mitofsky.pdf
The following article shows the incredible case made for a stolen election through a careful analysis of the exit polls we were never supposed to see. The final poll released contradicted the three previous polls of 13,600 respondents. The “virgin” exit polls demonstrate clearly a Kerry victory. The exit polls are the only voting on Election Day with a 100% paper trail. The voting on machines has no such back up. It’s a fascinating article.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0507/S00238.htm

IT’S TIME TO SERIOUSLY INVESTIGATE THE QUESTION:
WHO REALLY WON IN 2004.

[knowbody0]

1. thanks autorank, kicked and recommended

[autorank]

41. Thanks to you knowbody0, you're always there!

Let's help lay it out for he press. This is a complex issue but we know a great deal. Give them the pathways and they can take an interesting walk down the "boulevard of lost dreams."

[Nothing Without Hope]

2. Recommended, of course! The 2nd annd the next-to-last links are too long

and are cut off by the DU posting process - they will be broken if cut and pasted. I suggest using TinyURLs for those two. I'll post again after this with Tiny URLs substituted in those two positions - the others should all be OK as they were not cut off.

[Nothing Without Hope]

12. Here is the opening post cut-and-paste section with the TWO TinyURLs:

===============================================================

September 19, 2005
For Immediate Release
From: Concerned Americans
IT’S NOW A QUESTION OF LEGITIMACY: WHO REALLY WON IN 2004.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2005 Federal government gives Louisiana $27 million for Help America Vote Act to purchase machines for the entire state.
http://170.94.58.9/data/agency_budgets/0063.htm
In 2004 the Bush administration cut Army Corps of Engineers budget for levee maintenance in the New Orleans area by $26 million dollars. http://tinyurl.com/bsttp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is the Bush administration so intent on spreading voting machines and software?

Could the reason be that Bush almost always does better in electronic voting precincts?
Could another reason be that almost all the electronic voting companies are owned by right wing Republicans?

1) In early 2004, the BBC reported on serious questions about American electronic voting. David Dill, a computer expert at Stanford, questioned the reliability of voting systems, owned and operated by private companies who keep all data and operations information private. BBC pointed out that in Brazil, a separate organization exists to look at electronic voting machines during and after an election in order to keep vendors honest. In America, Diebold, etc. will not allow anyone to examine their machines since the software is “proprietary.” We are voting blind with no way to check the process or even do a recount....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3489877.stm

2) About 80% of the votes in this country are now tabulated—totaled—by just three companies, two controlled by right wing Republicans and the third by a British company. These and other voting machine and system companies have a checkered record, some employing ex felons. This article by reporter LynnLandes details the sorry situation in detail with references.
http://www.ecotalk.org/VotingMachineCompanies.htm
Professor Avi Rubin of Johns Hopkins University did a study on one of the most popular voting machines, Diebold, in 2003 and found numerous security problems. This was not a partisan effort but a look by a computer security expert. The results are depressing.
http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf

VotersUnite.Org has a powerful, extremely well documented book on voting machines, tabulators and the Federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA). It’s called
MythBreakers http://votersunite.org / and is available as a PDF File
There is no argument “… to counter the loud and vociferous assertions of numerous computer experts who insist that electronic voting machines can be rigged. And that if they can be rigged, they are… because if you leave the bank vault open, sooner or later someone is going to rob it.” Lynn Landes http://www.ecotalk.org/Sequoia.htm
3) Mark Crispin Miller wrote an excellent article in Harper’s Magazine called "None Dare Call it Stolen" which lays out the case for a stolen election. This is new and excellent; they like Harpers. This details the voter suppression are documented, the fake “terrorist alert” to stop vote counting when no alert was issued, the extra Bush votes which magically appeared.
http://www.harpers.org/ExcerptNoneDare.html

4) Exit Polls have been used all over the world to catch election fraud. They are used by the center run by President Carter, other international voting rights groups, and most recently in the Ukraine. In the Ukraine, the difference between the vote count and the exit polls was so different, a new election was held. The United States government was the main force behind getting a new election because of problems uncovered by exit polls. Yet US exit polls in presidential elections, highly accurate in 1996 and 2000, showed a clear victory for John Kerry but these were completely ignored. In fact, the final exit poll released election night, after 1:00am had to be adjusted with actual results to show a Bush win (which made it something other than a poll, at that point).
Professor Steve Freeman of the University of Pennsylvania outlined a simple set of arguments in February 2005. How could the exit polls be so far off?
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/1970 /
A group of leading statisticians produced an academic study of exit poll – actual vote discrepancies in April 2005 showing strong evidence of election fraud.

http://tinyurl.com/5cf6h
The following article shows the incredible case made for a stolen election through a careful analysis of the exit polls we were never supposed to see. The final poll released contradicted the three previous polls of 13,600 respondents. The “virgin” exit polls demonstrate clearly a Kerry victory. The exit polls are the only voting on Election Day with a 100% paper trail. The voting on machines has no such back up. It’s a fascinating article.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0507/S00238.htm

IT’S TIME TO SERIOUSLY INVESTIGATE THE QUESTION:
WHO REALLY WON IN 2004.

[Nothing Without Hope]

14. Two more good links, at least for us to bookmark if we haven't already:

"No Paper Trail Left Behind: The Theft of the 2004 Presidential Election"
By Dennis Loo, Ph.D., Cal Poly Pomona
http://projectcensored.org/newsflash/voter_fraud.html

“Unacceptable”: The Federal Response to Katrina
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Brasch0912.htm
The author {Walter Brasch} is an award-winning syndicated columnist, professor of journalism, and a former emergency management official. This{34-page} article is an in-depth look at the Bush policies that created the atmosphere not only for an ineffective FEMA response during the Katrina catastrophe, but which may have contributed to additional property destruction and deaths than should have occurred.

[autorank]

47. Thanks for your help ... Hope

...if I may be informal. You attention to the details & big picture are much appreciated.

[GuvWurld]

3. #5 HERE > More Later

[autorank]

5. Think globally...ACT LOCALLY...

(and spell carefully;) You're a prince!

[snot]

4. I was JUST now replying to you in another thread saying pls POST THIS!!!--

THANK YOU! and of course nom'd.

[autorank]

6. Let's help the local press do their job. Toledo Blade, best on fraud,

even without mega bucks or huge corporate funding.

There are other local press out there who would love to go over this!

Thanks!

[snot]

15. I'll blast 'em now. -nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. sent to my pals too

[Bill Bored]

8. I'm nominating it, but Sequoia is owned by Venezuela now. nt

[autorank]

30. Wrong, Sequoia is a sub of De La Rue Cash Systems, England

From the corporate web site of Sequoia Voting Systems

About Sequoia Voting Systems
http://www.sequoiavote.com/article.php?id=51
Sequoia Voting Systems is the Oakland, Calif.-based subsidiary of De La Rue, PLC the world's leading provider of tamperproof products and services designed to ensure the highest levels of accuracy and security in everything from ATM transactions and electronic voting to the production of national currencies, travelers checks, passports, driver's licenses and other government identification documents. De La Rue's client base includes more than 125 national governments. Additionally, more than 1,200 financial institutions in more than 60 countries rely on De La Rue's cash counting mechanisms to secure their customers' transactions, much like Sequoia's electronic voting equipment accurately and securely record people's votes. The companies invite you to visit their respective websites at http://www.delarue.com and http://www.sequoiavote.com/.

They may have a Venezuela subsidiary or maybe Carter is taking them down there to make sure "the best person wins" but they're Oakland, CA based and English (as in foreign) owned.

Thanks for the Recommendation.

[Bill Bored]

44. Not Anymore.

http://www.sequoiavote.com/article.php?id=58

About the Sequoia-Smartmatic Combination

Sequoia was previously held by U.K.-based De La Rue, PLC. De La Rue has decided to exit the voting system market to focus on its core competencies in producing bank notes, travelers' checks and cash handling equipment. Eureka Capital Markets, LLC served as De La Rue's exclusive financial advisor on the transaction. Smartmatic, a privately-held firm, acquired Sequoia in order to form a new global leader in providing a full range of electronic voting and election services solutions.

About Sequoia

Sequoia Voting Systems has provided election services and support to state and local government for more than 100 years - dating back to the nation's first lever-based mechanical voting equipment in the 1890s. Sequoia products and services include election management software, voter registration database management systems, precinct-based optical scan ballot readers, high-speed central count optical scan ballot readers and ballot layout and printing services.

About Smartmatic

Smartmatic, a technology company, has developed a suite of products and solutions based on the ultra-safe interconnection of all types of devices through any type of network - known as device networking. Specifically, Smartmatic has developed a complete software and hardware infrastructure, offering solutions for banking, physical security, fleet control, and automated elections, among others.

Media Contacts

Alfie Charles
Public Affairs Director
Office:[phone]
Cell: [phone]
[e-mail]

Mitch Stoller (International)
Office: [phone]
Cell: [phone]
[e-mail]

[bliss_eternal]

9. So, who are we sending this to?

Kicked and nominated!

:hi:

I will be happy to forward to as many places as possible tomorrow!

[autorank]

17. Local newspaper(s), Local TV outlets, Friends w/big lists;)

It's gone national, now for the real thing. It's amazing what the locals can do when they're motivated.

Thanks

[bliss_eternal]

21. No problem--it will be my pleasure.

It feels good to DO SOMETHING, after something pisses you off or frustrates you--I've been irritated with the media for too long.

[foo_bar]

24. please send #1-3, #4 is disinformation

This article by reporter LynnLandes (sic) details the sorry situation in detail with references.

The same Lynn Landes cited in #2 wrote:

I called Professor Freeman to inquire. I was polite and businesslike, but the conversation lasted less than a minute. "Don't talk to me. Don't contact me. Don't speak to me again," he said. I was a bit stunned. I had obviously hit a nerve. Apparently, the professor is not accustomed to having his research methods questioned. It's an interesting attitude for a scientist. Or, is it his corporate background that kicked in? Anyway, he hit a nerve with me as well. I gave him a day to get back to me with an explanation for why he has so much faith in the networks' exit polls. He didn't bother.

Freeman gives his readers a set of false choices: either believe the polls or believe the election results. He doesn't offer the third alternative--don't believe either. Sure, I think that Bush lost the election. But, I'm not going to be intellectually dishonest in order to prove it. I'm not going to give total credibility to exit poll data from the networks' completely non-transparent National Election Pool and then turn around and give no credibility to election results from our equally non-transparent election system. Both should be treated with equal scrutiny, if not complete contempt.

But, Freeman isn't alone. There's a virtual cottage industry of analysts gorging themselves on exit poll data as if it were real. What's going on here? Is it just a bunch of well-intentioned but sensitive scientists trying to prove a point based on unverifiable data? Or, is it something else? Are we being set up to have total faith in a completely bogus system of exit polls around the world? I have learned that in this business a person can't be too suspicious.

One thing is certain, if these so-called analysts think they can protect our right to vote through the use of unverifiable exit polls, they're delusional. Even if they get a third party to conduct a more transparent exit poll than what Mitofsky conducts (which even I've thought about), it still cannot take the place of free and fair elections.

http://www.counterpunch.org/landes03032005.html

[Febble]

33. What s/he said

Why spoil a good case?

Any decent journalist who checks the sources for the exit poll stuff may find that at least some of the authors cited have come to a somewhat nuanced position since those pieces were written.

Or not. But I wouldn't risk it. The rest (points 1-3) are far stronger and number 4 is demonstrably weak. Exit polls are not, for example, accurate in the UK

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x394113#394205

and your own US exit polls were off by a wide margin in 1992 (they weren't great in 1988 either).

And exit polls in Ohio were not correlated with increase in Bush's share of the official vote,

http://www.votewatch.us/Members/stevenhertzberg/report.2005-07-19.2452304843/view?searchterm=None

although the ESI study authors who found this also recommended that

"We need to develop better tools to monitor our elections. The fact that there is debate over this at all shows that we need elections to be more transparent, more accountable, more auditable,” he said. “To increase public confidence in the system ESI has begun working with election officials in Ohio to help publish more timely election data so the public may verify for themselves that the voting and the counting is done accurately."

http://www.votewatch.us/media/press_releases/aapor_2005

Let those who oppose electoral reform make their own straw men.

[understandinglife]

10. Recommended and will be distributed to all my contacts. Thank you.

Peace.

[texpatriot2004]

11. Thanks Autorank and recommended.n/t

[autorank]

22. A TEX Patriot indeed. Give 'em Hightower!

[texpatriot2004]

29. I have sent it out too Autorank. I hope we get some serious

reporters on the other end.

[autorank]

40. It will just take a few. Lample, Koehler, KiethO...need about 10 more

to form a pack. Then we get investigations cooking.

Keep up your good work.

[hiley]

13. Thank you

recommend and sending out immediately.
hiley

[autorank]

18. Way to go, thanks!

[babylonsister]

16. WOW! That's a lot of info to absorb! Thanks,

and I know this is important; I'm not only bookmarking, but sending this thread to myself. It is time, but with Katrina and Rita bearing down, is it time?
Kerry spoke eloquently today; who heard him?
I'm freaking a bit about where Rita is going, here in Houston, NOLA, or anywhere could be devastating.

[autorank]

19. Hoping it goes away...altogether.

Information provided is designed to point the press to areas that are important, with some detail. If 5-10 reporters get serious or 20-30 and start with these links, we're golden because it multiplies. Remember that Associated Press picks up stuff from locals all the time. Who knows what they'll cover when * hits 65% disapprove, or even 60%;)

[Nothing Without Hope]

20. *** ATTENTION: two of the URLs are CUT OFF by the DU link shortener ***

I made a version that is identical except for these two links being replaced by TinyURLs. This version can be completely copied and pasted with no loss of live links. This modified version is posted upthread here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2101045#2101118

[NoBushSpokenHere]

23. EXCELLENT AUTORANK!! Now lets all DU the media with it n/t

[autorank]

39. Thnx NoBush! You rock. Keep up your good work.

[Helga Scow Stern]

25. Good work, autorank!

[autorank]

27. Thanks Ojai, keep the heat turned up where you are. It's gratifying!

:dem:

[Independent_Liberal]

26. Kick!

[Chi]

28. Kick...and recommended n/t

[DemReadingDU]

31. Kick...and recommended n/t

[autorank]

45. Reaaders Recommendations always welcome!

:)

[paineinthearse]

32. Central Massachusetts is covered.

Thanks!

[autorank]

46. My thanks! You truly are a paineinthearse!

[freedomfries]

34. Kick & Recommended

Great job auto! Let's get busy!

[Amonester]

35. So Ukraine is better than the United States? Recommended.

Thxs kster & autorank.

To Be Spread Widely, Near & Far!

Also this post from the DU Homepage Archive:

EXCLUSIVE! A DIEBOLD INSIDER SPEAKS!
DIEB-THROAT : 'Diebold System One of Greatest Threats Democracy Has Ever Known'

Identifies U.S. Homeland Security 'Cyber Alert' Prior to '04 Election Warning Votes Can be 'Modified Remotely' via 'Undocumented Backdoor' in Central Tabulator Software!

In exclusive stunning admissions to The BRAD BLOG some 11 months after the 2004 Presidential Election, a "Diebold Insider" is now finally speaking out for the first time about the alarming security flaws within Diebold, Inc's electronic voting systems, software and machinery. The source is acknowledging that the company's "upper management" -- as well as "top government officials" -- were keenly aware of the "undocumented backdoor" in Diebold's main "GEM Central Tabulator" software well prior to the 2004 election.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4782407

Help Restore True Democracy
In The Land Of The Free
And The Home Of The Brave!!

[autorank]

38. Isn't it amazing, you think the press would hit this---we'll help them

along. Great citation from BradBlog!

[smartvoter]

36. With all this corruption now visible for everyone to see, doesn't it

become reasonable to question the results and point the same behavior patterns everyone can see in FEMA, with fund raising and cronyism, etc.?

Doesn't the position that "they wouldn't go that far" lose credibility when we see our own citizens dying in the streets?

[autorank]

37. Extremely well said...the would go that far! :)

[Usrename]

42. You da man! Expose these crooks!

:kick:

[smartvoter]

43. Have a thread started up on it over in the other main forum:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4828944

This is so important and it's fallen so far back on the list...

[WeHoldTheseTruths]

49. Kick N/T

[Carla in Ca]

48. Hi, autorank

I sent it to the LAT and OC Weekly. Let's get it done!:hi:

[autorank]

50. Thank you Carla. You and your great state are terrific!

:hi: