[Voterescue] 1-20-08 Holt's emergency bill to assure secure elections is a FRAUD.

Tue Jan 22 11:22:20 CST 2008

Good riddance! I only wish it were possible to educate such people.

At 10:07 AM 1/22/2008, proteus at 2xtreme.net wrote:
>Hello Jerry, Brent, and  Karen,
>
>I'm not sure what streetcorner Mr. Azadpour blew in off of,
>
>but he's asked to be dropped from the argument he started. Let's comply.
>
>Nobody put him on any lists, and the only thing that keeps that 
>balloon of hot air aloft is your fueling his burner.
>
>I am NOT posting this to Aram because I don't want to encourage more of it.
>
>I am also not clearing his posts to the Analysis list, because the 
>Analysis list is meant for working on data forensics questions.
>
>
>Jerry, I do admire the passion and clarity of your statement 
>below.  But it is lost on Aram.
>
>
>--Dan
>
>
>
>Jerry Lobdill wrote:
>>
>>Let's see... Mr. Azadpour thinks we (those he quotes) are ugly,
>>irrelevant, and uninformed, but doesn't want to offend us. He says we
>>don't have "fact or solution".
>>
>>It seems to me that Mr. Azadpour is a newcomer to this subject, a
>>newcomer with no technical expertise at all, but one who believes he
>>doesn't need any and doesn't need to listen to those who do. This
>>sounds familiar. It's the same attitude that Michelle Mulder and Rush
>>Holt supported in Holt's previous medicine shows that masqueraded as
>>legislation writing committees.
>>
>>It is way past time to raise our voices to a level that the situation
>>deserves. Yet there are those here who apparently would have demanded
>>that the facts of Hitler's regime be discussed as if they carried no
>>horrifying qualities so that the decorum of a high tea could be preserved.
>>
>>I have been deeply concerned and involved in advocating for HCPB for
>>about two years while looking for ways to minimize the damage that
>>electronic voting systems have already shown the capability to
>>produce.  Anyone who says that HCPB have the same potential for
>>throwing elections as electronic voting systems is irrelevant and
>>uninformed, and I'm not going to let such nonsense stand unanswered.
>>
>>Jerry Lobdill
>>
>>***************************
>>At 11:00 PM 1/21/2008, M. Aram Azadpour wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Kindly "remove" my Email ID from the list; I wish you-all success.
>>>
>>>How does one tell someone else s/he is ugly w/o offending him/her?
>>>
>>>How does on tell someone else s/he is irrelevant and uninformed w/o
>>>offending him/her?
>>>
>>>Those are issues I'm struggling w/ in writing this Email here and now,
>>>w/ that said, forgive me for I "will" sin!
>>>
>>>
>>>I've read all the Emails on this subject matter since yesterday till Mon
>>>21st about 9:00p., unfortunately, the ones w/ the loudest cries were the
>>>one w/ the least amount of fact and solution.
>>>
>>>Let me divert for a moment here; we have had federal statutes in the
>>>books for some "100" years (that is a century) on matter of political
>>>funding "control and reform." Now, if you were dealing with fixing a
>>>"technical" issue for 100 years, it would have been solved (history
>>>of technology speaks for itself and one needs not to be an "expert" in
>>>anything to conclude that observation). So why is it that for over
>>>100-years Americans have been "trying" to "fix" political funding issues
>>>and still at it as if it is 100 years ago? Pls keep in mind, I'm talking
>>>about federal acts, the state(s) may have had their own law(s)
>>>shorter or longer in the book(s) on this matter.
>>>
>>>I'm not going to repeat each point in the past day or so of Emails on
>>>this matter, you-all got them, too and can re/read them. "Every" concern
>>>voiced about e-voting-machines is equally "applicable" to "any" vote
>>>counting means/method, that is any (including human-vote-counting).
>>>
>>>If one is concerned of software enigma, then one should be "equally"
>>>concerned of mechanical voting machines. After all, how do "you"
>>>guarantee that someone once a mechanical voting machine is in some
>>>polling place can "not" replace, say, a control pin that connects the lever
>>>to the card-puncher so that once a leaver for one-candidate is pulled,
>>>another candidate's name is not punched? Or, how do "you" guarantee
>>>that vote-counter will "not" be bribed (or influenced) to "miss-count the
>>>votes" by "hand?"
>>>
>>>Consider this scenario: any voting administrative body could choice its
>>>own e-voting-machine, then "another" e-voting auditor looks over the
>>>e-voting-machine, real-time, and alarms if there is any irregularity; or,
>>>the voting intake system, e.g., the keyboard of your PC, is designed
>>>and manufactured by one vender and its output goes to two (or more)
>>>e-voting-machines designed and manufactured by "another" vender, or,
>>>an independent auditor. Let us say that a "democratic party" approved
>>>vender makes one peace of the e-voting and then a "republican party"
>>>approved vender makes the e-auditing system. Will you be happy?
>>>
>>>What I'm trying to say: there is "nothing" inherently wrong w/ e-voting
>>>machine, human-being is problem.
>>>
>>>If w/in 100-years the human-kind has not been able to resolve issues of
>>>miss funding political races, I guarantee you that within 100-years "any"
>>>short coming any voting system may have will be resolved, from technical
>>>stand point.
>>>
>>>"Your" argument is misplaced.
>>>
>>>You fail to spend the time/effort to grasp the issue; while screaming aloud
>>>your perceived solution.
>>>
>>>If you were not made aware of a discrepancy in a vote-tally, then how would
>>>you know the voting process was broken? Foremost, the issue is to work
>>>on a method that "best" alerts "you" of a voting irregularly rather
>>>than how to
>>>re-count it. This is the 1st step in making "any" voting secure (or
>>>more secure).
>>>You got to be alerted that something is wrong, before you worry about how
>>>to fix it.
>>>
>>>Reading not just this thread, but others I have been "shocked" at 
>>>the lack of
>>>basic understanding folks show before jumping on others' throat on what is
>>>wrong or how to solve it. In another group, folks were writing that US is
>>>not a democracy cause we have a republic-form of government in US.
>>>
>>>Let's take another example, the Florida b/s of 2000 that went to US Supreme
>>>Court. While every "expert" (there was and is) was and is screaming to do
>>>away with the electoral college, the electoral college was the 
>>>very reason and
>>>mechanism put in place to deal with issues such as what we saw in Florida of
>>>2000 (rather than going to "any" court). According to the US 
>>>Constitution, the
>>>electoral college members of a state are the "ultimate" voters for
>>>presidential election
>>>that was so that "clear" injustice and wrong does not get
>>>propagated. The Florida
>>>electoral college members should "have" and "could" have voted to 
>>>have Florida
>>>votes go for Dems and not even the US Supreme Court had the power to change
>>>that (because that is the Constitutional power vested w/ the 
>>>electoral college
>>>members; the US SC can not take away a power vested by the letter of the
>>>Constitution itself, only an amendment to the Constitution may alter that).
>>>
>>>Folks, let us take a pause here and let us understand the issue and
>>>the mechanism;
>>>before running around like mad. Let us not to go into the deep end.
>>>
>>>There is "nothing" inherently wrong or false w/ e-voting machine.
>>>Your issue is with
>>>security (integrity) and not with the actual machine/method.
>>>Concentrate on the
>>>issue.
>>>
>>>If anyone has any reply, kindly just send it to me 
>>><mailto:arama at att.net><arama at att.net>
>>>directly. I wish
>>>not to be on the group-list and get 10s of Emails on this matter. I
>>>do not have
>>>time/interest on hitting my head against the wall; thank you. --Aram
>>>(Grapevine, TX).
>>>
>>>ps
>>>we are not here (at least I'm not) to arm wrestle w/ others as who got more,
>>>perceived, experience w/ computers; after all one need not (and 
>>>should not) be
>>>a mechanic to know that his/her car has a problem, the dash-board 
>>>indicator(s)
>>>should be alerting the driver w/o requiring him/her to take the 
>>>engine apart;
>>>w/ that said, I do have relevant experience w/ computer hardware 
>>>and software
>>><snip>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Analysis mailing list
>><mailto:Analysis at electiondefensealliance.org>Analysis at electiondefensealliance.org
>>http://mail.electiondefensealliance.org/mailman/listinfo/analysis_electiondefensealliance.org
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>Dan Ashby
>
>E-mail:   <mailto:proteus at 2xtreme.net>proteus at 2xtreme.net
>Phone:        510-233-2144
>Voicemail and Fax:   510-740-0572
>
>Press 1 to send voicemail
>Press 1 followed by 2 to send a numeric page
>Or stay on the line to send a fax
>All messages will be transmitted as e-mail attachments.
>
>The right of voting for representatives is the primary right by 
>which all other rights are protected.
>To take away this right is to reduce a man to slavery. . . Thomas Paine
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://voterescue.org/pipermail/voterescue_voterescue.org/attachments/20080122/0c04a043/attachment-0001.html 