Look who says the 2002 election was tampered with

evince

evince

Truthmatters
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Cybersecurity_expert_raises_allegations_of_2004_0717.html


GOP cyber-security expert suggests Diebold tampered with 2002 election
Larisa Alexandrovna and Muriel Kane
Published: Friday July 18, 2008





A leading cyber-security expert and former adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) says he has fresh evidence regarding election fraud on Diebold electronic voting machines during the 2002 Georgia gubernatorial and senatorial elections.

Stephen Spoonamore is the founder and until recently the CEO of Cybrinth LLC, an information technology policy and security firm that serves Fortune 100 companies. At a little noticed press conference in Columbus, Ohio Thursday, he discussed his investigation of a computer patch that was applied to Diebold Election Systems voting machines in Georgia right before that state's November 2002 election.

Spoonamore is one of the most prominent cyber-security experts in the country. He has appeared on CNN's Lou Dobbs and ABC's World News Tonight, and has security clearances from his work with the intelligence community and other government agencies, as well as the Department of Defense, and is one of the world’s leading authorities on hacking and cyber-espionage.

In 1995, Spoonamore received a civilian citation for his work with the Department of Defense. He was again recognized for his contributions in 2004 by the Department of Homeland Security. Spoonamore is also a registered Republican and until recently was advising the McCain campaign.
 
It's pretty hard to argue against this when one of the most prominent figures comes forward in this manner, especially when his political sentiments alone would not favor such action. He deserves tremendous respect.
 
Spoonamore received the Diebold patch from a whistleblower close to the office of Cathy Cox, Georgia’s then-Secretary of State. In discussions with RAW STORY, the whistleblower -- who wishes to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation -- said that he became suspicious of Diebold's actions in Georgia for two reasons. The first red flag went up when the computer patch was installed in person by Diebold CEO Bob Urosevich, who flew in from Texas and applied it in just two counties, DeKalb and Fulton, both Democratic strongholds. The source states that Cox was not privy to these changes until after the election and that she became particularly concerned over the patch being installed in just those two counties.

The whistleblower said another flag went up when it became apparent that the patch installed by Urosevich had failed to fix a problem with the computer clock, which employees from Diebold and the Georgia Secretary of State’s office had been told the patch was designed specifically to address.

Some critics of electronic voting raised questions about the 2002 Georgia race even at the time. Incumbent Democratic Sen. Max Cleland, who was five percentage points ahead of Republican challenger Saxby Chambliss in polls taken a week before the vote, lost 53% to 46%. Incumbent Democratic Governor Roy Barnes, who led challenger Sonny Perdue in the polls by eleven points, lost 51% to 46%. However, because the Diebold machines used throughout the state provided no paper trail, it was impossible to ask for a recount in either case.

Concerned by the electoral outcome, the whistleblower approached Spoonamore because of his qualifications and asked him to examine the Diebold patch.

McCain adviser reported patch to Justice Department
The Ohio press conference was organized by Cliff Arnebeck and three other attorneys, who had filed a challenge to the results of that the 2004 presidential election in Ohio in December, 2004. That challenge was withdrawn, but in August 2006 Arnebeck filed a new case, King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Association v. Blackwell, alleging civil rights violations in the 2004 voting. The case was stayed in 2007. On Thursday, Arnebeck filed a motion to remove the stay and allow fresh investigation.

Individuals close to Arnebeck's office said Spoonamore confirmed that the patch included nothing to repair a clock problem. Instead, he identified two parallel programs, both having the full software code and even the same audio instructions for the deaf. Spoonamore said he could not understand the need for a second copy of the exact same program -- and without access to the machine for which the patch was designed, he could not learn more. Instead, he took the evidence to the Cyber-Security Division of the Department of Justice and reported the series of events to authorities. The Justice Department has not yet acted on his report.
 
Last edited:
Desh said:
Spoonamore received the Diebold patch from a whistleblower close to the office of Cathy Cox, Georgia’s then-Secretary of State. In discussions with RAW STORY, the whistleblower -- who wishes to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation -- said that he became suspicious of Diebold's actions in Georgia for two reasons. The first red flag went up when the computer patch was installed in person by Diebold CEO Bob Urosevich, who flew in from Texas and applied it in just two counties, DeKalb and Fulton, both Democratic strongholds. The source states that Cox was not privy to these changes until after the election and that she became particularly concerned over the patch being installed in just those two counties.

The whistleblower said another flag went up when it became apparent that the patch installed by Urosevich had failed to fix a problem with the computer clock, which employees from Diebold and the Georgia Secretary of State’s office had been told the patch was designed specifically to address.

Some critics of electronic voting raised questions about the 2002 Georgia race even at the time. Incumbent Democratic Sen. Max Cleland, who was five percentage points ahead of Republican challenger Saxby Chambliss in polls taken a week before the vote, lost 53% to 46%. Incumbent Democratic Governor Roy Barnes, who led challenger Sonny Perdue in the polls by eleven points, lost 51% to 46%. However, because the Diebold machines used throughout the state provided no paper trail, it was impossible to ask for a recount in either case.

Concerned by the electoral outcome, the whistleblower approached Spoonamore because of his qualifications and asked him to examine the Diebold patch.

McCain adviser reported patch to Justice Department
The Ohio press conference was organized by Cliff Arnebeck and three other attorneys, who had filed a challenge to the results of that the 2004 presidential election in Ohio in December, 2004. That challenge was withdrawn, but in August 2006 Arnebeck filed a new case, King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Association v. Blackwell, alleging civil rights violations in the 2004 voting. The case was stayed in 2007. On Thursday, Arnebeck filed a motion to remove the stay and allow fresh investigation.

Individuals close to Arnebeck's office said Spoonamore confirmed that the patch included nothing to repair a clock problem. Instead, he identified two parallel programs, both having the full software code and even the same audio instructions for the deaf. Spoonamore said he could not understand the need for a second copy of the exact same program -- and without access to the machine for which the patch was designed, he could not learn more. Instead, he took the evidence to the Cyber-Security Division of the Department of Justice and reported the series of events to authorities. The Justice Department has not yet acted on his report.
Click to expand...



Desh let me tell you something... The American people dont care if elections are stolen... They are stupid and pathetic and dont have the motivation to get their fat asses off their oversized LazyBoys to investigate it...

So who cares if elections are stolen? its what Americans deserve. In fact stolen elections seems to be the American Way....

CK
 
ib1yysguy said:
The problem is what do you do about it after the fact? Revolution?
Click to expand...

The high school photographer finally has an intelligent thing to say... Hooray!

Desh you can bitch all you want but you aint doing shit to change the system....

Americans shouldnt complain about obesity if all they eating is fast food!

CK
 
So Desh, what happens if Obama wins in Novemeber?

Will you also question the results; or will you conclude the will of the people somehow magically thwarted fraud?
 
Thor said:
So Desh, what happens if Obama wins in Novemeber?

Will you also question the results; or will you conclude the will of the people somehow magically thwarted fraud?
Click to expand...

Not to speak for desh, but one would have to consider the circumstances under which he won the election, wouldn't they?

Robert Kennedy Jr filled an entire book explaining how 2004 was in all likelihood an invalid election.
 
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Ohio-Attorney-Files-Motion-by-steveheller-080718-804.html



Ohio Attorney Files Motion to Lift Stay in Ohio Case of King Lincoln Bronzeville v Blackwell

At a press conference this morning in Columbus, Ohio, Cliff Arnebeck, lead attorney for the plaintiffs in the case of King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell, announced that he is filing a motion to "lift the stay in the case [and] proceed with targeted discovery in order to help protect the integrity of the 2008 election."



Arnebeck will also "be providing copies of document hold notices to the U.S .Chamber Institute for Legal Reform and the U.S. Justice Department for Karl Rove emails from the White House."


This case has the potential to put some of the most powerful people in the country in jail, according to Arnebeck, as he was joined by a well-respected, life-long Republican computer security expert who charged that the red flags seen during Ohio's 2004 Presidential Election would have been cause for "a fraud investigation in a bank, but it doesn't when it comes to our vote."


"This entire system is being programmed in secret by programmers who have no oversight by anybody," the expert charged, as Arnebeck detailed allegations of complicity by a number of powerful GOP operatives and companies who had unique access both to the election results as reported in 2004, as well as to U.S. House and Senate computer networks even today.




One of the more delightful and interesting quotes comes from Arnebeck, concerning what he expects to discover as the stay is lifted: "[W]e anticipate Mr. Rove will be identified as having engaged in a corrupt, ongoing pattern of corrupt activities specifically affecting the situation here in Ohio."
 
uscitizen said:
Trials for treason or some high crime against the country. And very strong punishments.
Make a statement.
Click to expand...

when we get a REAL Attorney General who believes in country over party then.... LET THE INVESTIGATIONS BEGIN!!

It will probably take a few yrs. to sort out the evidence, gather the proof, have trials then execute the traitors.
 
There needs to be a paper trail. That is all there is to it. Electronic voting machines are a good technology, but without a paper trail there is no way to verify a count when it comes out on the unexpected side. The result could be accurate, could be the result of a glitch, or could be the result of fraud. No way to tell without a non-electronic record.

A print out of a voter's selection would also allow them to verify they did not make an error.

I would suggest that the voter receive a clear and concise summary of their vote they can look at BEFORE they lock in the vote on the machine. If the printout verifies what they intended, they lock in the vote and hand the print out to a ballot attendant who puts it in a sealed box. If they find a mistake, they hand the printout to an attendant who destroys it on the spot (tears it at least twice) and tosses it in a burn bag. Then the voter corrects any mistakes and gets a second print out.

If a result is challenged, then the sealed box(es) from each voting place are opened and the voter-verified ballots are manually counted by a team consisting of officials from all parties involved.
 
Good Luck said:
There needs to be a paper trail. That is all there is to it. Electronic voting machines are a good technology, but without a paper trail there is no way to verify a count when it comes out on the unexpected side. The result could be accurate, could be the result of a glitch, or could be the result of fraud. No way to tell without a non-electronic record.

A print out of a voter's selection would also allow them to verify they did not make an error.

I would suggest that the voter receive a clear and concise summary of their vote they can look at BEFORE they lock in the vote on the machine. If the printout verifies what they intended, they lock in the vote and hand the print out to a ballot attendant who puts it in a sealed box. If they find a mistake, they hand the printout to an attendant who destroys it on the spot (tears it at least twice) and tosses it in a burn bag. Then the voter corrects any mistakes and gets a second print out.

If a result is challenged, then the sealed box(es) from each voting place are opened and the voter-verified ballots are manually counted by a team consisting of officials from all parties involved.
Click to expand...

exactly...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top