Conservative White Hat hacker convinced of election fraud!

[loupe-garou]

I hope this isn't a dupe, but my friend sent me this link, and the guy sounds very credible. And he's a conservative Republican......It would be great to have people like this consulting with BBV and/or Congress to lend some of the old bi-partisan legitimacy to the effort......Any ideas?

http://www.chuckherrin.com/hackthevote.htm

He thinks the way they did it was in the central tabulators....faster and easier.

[tll]

1. Credible enough to rate an article

in his local Business Journal:

http://www.bizjournals.com/triad/stories/2003/10/13/focus1.html

[stellanoir]

2. check out the rants link there

He's pretty funny.

[loupe-garou]

4. I'm not endorsing all his beliefs..............

I didn't read the whole site, but on the voting issue, he seems to know what he's talking about, and he was on it before the elections.

I think a econservative ally would be great at this point, as you know there aren't many!!! For some reason?????

[Arioch]

3. Damn good article...

I like how he brings up just how easy it is to get into a Window's PC.
He mentions my favorite access method of exploring the default drive shares.

Most people do not know about this at all.
I use this access all the time at work ( I'm a sysadmin ) to resolve user issues, etc.

This is EASY people.

The likelyhood of hacking is very very high...

[loupe-garou]

6. I am a computer semi-literate, but I think we have ot get together

a forum for all of you literates who are interested in the voting problem......Where the discussion is at a very high, even geekish level.........maybe this is already happening?

[spooked]

5. WOW!! This is the actual software Diebold uses!

"Republicans - Are our policies so weak that we have to resort to this? Is this really what we have become? I have tested this software myself, and posted the results at www.chuckherrin.com/hackthevote.htm. You can simply follow the steps and screenshots and modify thousands of votes yourself - this is not hearsay, rumor, or innuendo – try it! Look at the time stamped audit logs and the "Official Results" showing over 11,000 changed votes. This is fact. You don't have to believe me, either. Thanks to Diebold leaving a web server open to the public, the GEMS software and sample databases are all over the web. Download them and try it yourself. Seriously – you don’t have to believe a word I say, as long as you just try it yourself."


http://www.chuckherrin.com/rants.htm

[GraphicQueen]

7. WOW!!!!

This is interesting. I can only thank you for this info. What I want to know is why more real conservatives don't want to know the honest truth? Why are they so willing to accept a cheater and liar as the President?

[On the Road]

8. This is Why the Voter Books are So Important

and why I'm glad to see that they are part of the audit and recount effort in many places. The only missing piece here is local exit polls.

Hacking the vote this way may be easy, but adding or subtracting votes means that the official vote won't match the number of people who showed up at the polls. If votes are changed within the system, they will deviate from the exit polls. That's why that information is so important.

[electropop2]

9. making the numbers match

ribo, it's just as easy to ADD 111 votes for one candidate, and at the same time, SUBTRACT 111 votes from the other. Now it matches the poll books. You'd better hope there are some paper ballots to resort to, or hope the precinct machines weren't hacked.

[electropop2]

10. And why bother even hacking...

When you can simply order all the machines factory-configured for a Bush bias?

[On the Road]

11. Yes, But If That Happened Consistently

the evoting districts would look like outliers. The numbers that I've seen from Ohio and Florida don't show that.

Or maybe not in Florida. It's possible that in small Florida counties Bush got some votes switched, but all the arguments from people who don't believe in Dixiecrats are muddying the waters. The Berkeley study is the best, but even they can't draw absolute conclusions.

[electropop2]

12. evoting goes beyond the precinct machines

Regardless of the physical machine you use at the polling place, the count always becomes a stream of electrons at some point. This happens either when precincts send reports to the counties, or when counties send reports to the states. The electrons are flowing through a series of computers, phone lines, and software, all of which are easily hackable. In other words, do you want to waste a lot of time "retail" hacking thousands of voting machines, or would it be easier to hack "wholesale" at the precinct, county or state level?

From this perspective, there's no particular reason the voting machine types will correlate with the amount of fraud.

[On the Road]

13. Yes, But The Evoting Machines with No Paper Trail

are the only ones in which swiched votes would be undetectable by fraud.

I'm starting to think it's unlikely that the central tabulator was hacked in this election. If it was, any sort of recount or audit that compared the official vote to what the precinct reported would show systmatic discrepancies.

The place to commit fraud is at the polling place or somewhere before the votes actually get counted.

[bmoney07]

14. BBV

HAS BEEN SAYING CENTRAL TABS ALL ALONG ANF THIS TIES IN WITH THE JEFF FISHER/FBI STORY - I THINK

:D

[FreeCajun]

15. Here's a new meme:

Oops, posted twice some kind of error sorry folks!

*EDIT*

[FreeCajun]

16. You want conservative people on our side?

Try out this new positioning of the story:

DID TERRORISTS HACK OUR ELECTION?

"Terrorists hacked the vote to put people in power that were less effective against terrorism." A Rand Corporation report (the thinktank of strategists and economists that "won the Cold War") showed that terrorists wanted Bush and Republicans in power (this is real, I'll post a link if I can find it...). Whether we use that angle or not, we could show people how Diebold and optiscan machines were insecure, show how it is destabilizing the electral proocess and following a fundamentalist agenda which makes us more like "them", etc. We compile it all and use the fear of "terrorists" that Bush and co. have promoted to get this a serious inquiry.

The MSM don't want to attack the RW political machine without definite proof, same with the FBI and CIA, but they couldn't ignore this as easily, and I'm sure they're eager to let loose the hounds. There's a lot of resentment over the pressures they're under....

The terrorism meme is already part of the dominant mindset. This positioning of the story could give us the chink in the armor we need to slip the story into the spotlight. If the voting system was insecure enough to let terrorists in, that could provide us with the means to get conservatives over to our side, as well, especially the more moderate ones.

[BlueCaliDem]

17. I Think This is Legit...Been Reading this via Link...

...from Buzzflash.com.

I'm NO computer expert, so I don't know if what he's asserting is true, but it looks true enough; what with all those screen shots to guide you.

What I'm trying to look for is the link to the statistics expert who is also co-producer for Air America, and wherein he asserts that even without a papertrail, fraud can be detected, although it's time-consuming (always works to the advantage of corrupt Republicans), and expensive.

But he says it's not that hard to prove, even without the advantage of papertrails.

OFF TOPIC: loupe-garou is French for "werewolf", isn't it? Cool name. ;)

[loupe-garou]

19. My familly is French Canadian, and my grandmother

used to sing us a song about the loup-garou (I made it feminine)

OOH-OO-OOH C'etait la voix de le Loup-Garou......

It was the voice of the Loup-Garou

[wlubin]

18. If it is done this way at the central tabulator, then doesn't that mean

that the black boxes would have the actual true results?

[Straight Shooter]

20. Printing this for my "geek" friends

It's the 2004 Election Whodunnit.

We know why, we think we know when, where and how, now we need to know ... WHO?

[Carolab]

21. Yes this is CORRECT

It is DEFINITELY the central tabulators. The way the data is entered in Minnesota (see my post on their "system") proves how easy this would be.

It is MAINLY in the precinct total manipulations with optically scanned ballots.