Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Your thoughts on today's big ass votergate developments

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Marnieworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 04:10 PM
Original message
Poll question: Your thoughts on today's big ass votergate developments
I'm starting to get really excited about the Madsen articles and the affidavit from Clint Curtis detailing programming voteswitching in touch screen machines. Yet I'm not sure what to believe since some very credible posters have serious doubts. So whatcha think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Marnieworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Any experts please reply with a reason why we should doubt
I'd hate to get my hopes up for something inaccurate so enlighten us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueDog2u Donating Member (692 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. See the other thread
The experts have posed two major objections:

1) The affidavit scans are not identical and the name Clint is crossed off on p. 4 and the name "Clinton" is written in. The first objection is just bogus. The scan difference is the result of the fact that the scanning software automatically defaulted to a color mode for the final page to pick up the colors on the signature;

2) The proposed code would not have worked on the software platforms used in voting machines (this is layperson's explanation of a complex point). This argument is also inconclusive. The affidavit states only that the the code in question was a prototype; Curtis did not design it to operate in any given real life environment. To do that would have required an additional phase of development which, if it was done, was done by someone other than Curtis.

In other words, there is no direct connection between the affidavit and election 2004; but the affidavit does prove, if it is true, that Republican operatives like Feeney were trying to find out if the election could be stolen. That is its significance. So far, none of the experts has debunked the contents of the affidavit. They need to do a better job if they expect to prevail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewulf Donating Member (156 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. exactly. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zan_of_Texas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. Here's the best by Madsen so far, posted today....
Edited on Mon Dec-06-04 04:24 PM by Zan_of_Texas
Excerpt: A common theme from all the intelligence and ex-intelligence officials with whom I have communicated is that George W. Bush made a major mistake in attacking and purging the clandestine service of the CIA. The "agency," which extends far beyond the confines of Langley, Virginia, is having its revenge. It has willingly exposed a portion of a traditional clandestine CIA money route to expose the vote scam that was used to ensure Bush's election.


Special Report
Texas to Florida: White House-linked clandestine operation paid for "vote switching" software

By Wayne Madsen
Online Journal Contributing Writer

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/120604Madsen/120604madsen.html

Note: website has photos of two documents posted

December 6, 2004-The manipulation of computer voting machines in the recent presidential election and the funding of programmers who were involved in the operation are tied to an intricate web of shady off-shore financial trusts and companies, shady espionage operatives, Republican Party politicians close to the Bush family, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) contract vehicles. An exhaustive investigation has turned up a link between current Florida Republican Representative Tom Feeney, a customized Windows-based program to suppress Democratic votes on touch screen voting machines, a Florida computer services company with whom Feeney worked as a general counsel and registered lobbyist while he was Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, and top level officials of the Bush administration.

According to a notarized affidavit signed by Clint Curtis, while he was employed by the NASA Kennedy Space Center contractor, Yang Enterprises, Inc., during 2000, Feeney solicited him to write a program to "control the vote." At the time, Curtis was of the opinion that the program was to be used for preventing fraud in the in the 2002 election in Palm Beach County, Florida. His mind was changed, however, when the true intentions of Feeney became clear: the computer program was going to be used to suppress the Democratic vote in counties with large Democratic registrations.

According to Curtis, Feeney and other top brass at Yang Enterprises, a company located in a three-story building in Oviedo, Florida, wanted the program, written in Visual Basic 5 (VB.5) and designed to operate in Windows and be portable to Unix-based vote tabulation systems, to be "undetectable" to voters and election supervisors.

Yang, an engineering and computer services company subcontracted to NASA prime contractors like Lockheed Martin, was founded in 1986 by Dr. Tyng-Lin (Tim) Yang. Granted minority-owned "Section 8A" and woman-owned preferential status by the U.S. government, Yang's clients also include the Florida Department of Transportation (DOT). Yang's President, Li-Woan (Lee) Yang, is Tim Yang's wife. Feeney was the registered agent for another Yang company, Y & H Greens, Inc., a company that was dissolved in 1988 and operated from the Yangs' residence on Merritt Island. The Yangs also serve as co-trustees for an entity called Yang of Merritt Island, Ltd., founded on January 31, 2000, and also run from their residence.


MORE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libmeayer Donating Member (80 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Do you think that this is it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SmokingJacket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
6. No matter what...
it's a juicy nugget that's worth discussing.

Maybe it'll put the issue on more lips.

Maybe, MAYBE it's even true!!!

yeehaw!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC