Saturday, September 27, 2003
::: Diebold Box Scandal :::
More info at Your Vote is Not Safe
Read about this a couple of months ago. Surely the moron mainstream press
did as well! To be "fair and balanced" I did hear one mention of it.
Bev Harris, who coincidentally is being sued by Diebold, continues to be vindicated for her investigative work into the flaws of that company's voting technology and software.
Additional background on this very important issue is available via unknown news.
This is especially FUN ~~ How Bush Is NOT Going To Steal The 2004 Election
Appendix A: Legalities (read: why Diebold isn't going to sue me)
First, let me explain that I fully "confess" that I am distributing Diebold copyrighted product on my website. And I was (and am) involved in the effort to strip the encryption from some of the ZIP archives downloaded from Diebold's FTP site.
So why am I not worried?
a) I believe all this falls under "fair use". I have a history of using the Public Records Act to expose government-related misconduct, corruption and general stupidity. See also:
http://www.equalccw.com/commiemommies.html (the first time my reporting made Matt Drudge's site)
http://www.equalccw.com/donperata.gif (the second time Drudge picked my stuff up - note that Perata is a well-known rabidly anti-gun politician)
...and other examples.
b) Voting is a highly "public" function, and public scrutiny over the election process is a VERY well established area of law. There have been two lower court decisions in favor of the secrecy of electronic voting systems but first, I believe those decisions were wrong and second, in those cases no specific allegations of misconduct were presented - only theoretical issues.
c) In Diebold's case, misconduct is very, VERY well established. Good God, where do we start?
By Clicking this link! FUN ~~ How Bush Is NOT Going To Steal The 2004 Election
Wonder What Russia Thinks