T Nation

Republican Whistleblower

Well, well… one of their own speaks out against them.
Damn! If this stuff sticks, we could theoretically witness the entire crooked ship go down!

http://www.alternet.org/democracy/94895/republican_computer_security_expert_explains_why_electronic_voting_can_never_be_trusted/

“AlterNet, a project of the non-profit Independent Media Institute, is a progressive/liberal news and opinion website that was launched in 1998 and claims a readership of over 1.7 million visitors per month.[1]. It has been described by NPR as a “left-liberal news and opinion site”.[2]”

What’s next, quotes from the “Communist Manifesto”?

Don’t shoot the reporter. He didn’t fiddle with the votes. It was YOUR beloved party.

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Don’t shoot the reporter. He didn’t fiddle with the votes. It was YOUR beloved party.[/quote]

I am not a republican.

[quote]pat wrote:
Iron Dwarf wrote:
Don’t shoot the reporter. He didn’t fiddle with the votes. It was YOUR beloved party.

I am not a republican. [/quote]

I am a Democrat and I voted for Hillary.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
pat wrote:
Iron Dwarf wrote:
Don’t shoot the reporter. He didn’t fiddle with the votes. It was YOUR beloved party.

I am not a republican.

I am a Democrat and I voted for Hillary.[/quote]

operation chaos? :slight_smile:

[quote]pat wrote:
“AlterNet, a project of the non-profit Independent Media Institute, is a progressive/liberal news and opinion website that was launched in 1998 and claims a readership of over 1.7 million visitors per month.[1]. It has been described by NPR as a “left-liberal news and opinion site”.[2]”

What’s next, quotes from the “Communist Manifesto”?[/quote]

x2

I demand a recount

[quote]tg2hbk4488 wrote:
pat wrote:
“AlterNet, a project of the non-profit Independent Media Institute, is a progressive/liberal news and opinion website that was launched in 1998 and claims a readership of over 1.7 million visitors per month.[1]. It has been described by NPR as a “left-liberal news and opinion site”.[2]”

What’s next, quotes from the “Communist Manifesto”?

x2[/quote]

Just watch the damn video.

And read the Manifesto while you´re at it.

“My experience with them (diebold machines) is purely as an outsider asking to look at them”

How much more does one need to listen to beyond the first sentence of the first answer to the first question?

I don’t why the lefties are throwing a titty fit. They are in power, and if the machines are crooked, they benefited more from them the the right did.

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
pat wrote:
Iron Dwarf wrote:
Don’t shoot the reporter. He didn’t fiddle with the votes. It was YOUR beloved party.

I am not a republican.

I am a Democrat and I voted for Hillary.

operation chaos? :)[/quote]

I never heard of operation chaos until I started thinking about doing it. I don’t listen to Rush more than a couple times a year.

I had a thread about it.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
“My experience with them (diebold machines) is purely as an outsider asking to look at them”

[/quote]

This guy sounds like a real expert on the subject.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
“My experience with them (diebold machines) is purely as an outsider asking to look at them”

This guy sounds like a real expert on the subject.

[/quote]

He is.

If one were to look at ALL the videos and not just tuned out the moment ones prejudices seemed to have been validated.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
“My experience with them (diebold machines) is purely as an outsider asking to look at them”

How much more does one need to listen to beyond the first sentence of the first answer to the first question?

I don’t why the lefties are throwing a titty fit. They are in power, and if the machines are crooked, they benefited more from them the the right did.

[/quote]

You make Baby Jesus cry.

And now watch the damned videos.

[quote]orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
“My experience with them (diebold machines) is purely as an outsider asking to look at them”

How much more does one need to listen to beyond the first sentence of the first answer to the first question?

I don’t why the lefties are throwing a titty fit. They are in power, and if the machines are crooked, they benefited more from them the the right did.

You make Baby Jesus cry.

And now watch the damned videos.
[/quote]

Waste of time.

If you agree with what he says, I can pretty much tell you the guy is full of shit.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
“My experience with them (diebold machines) is purely as an outsider asking to look at them”

How much more does one need to listen to beyond the first sentence of the first answer to the first question?

I don’t why the lefties are throwing a titty fit. They are in power, and if the machines are crooked, they benefited more from them the the right did.

You make Baby Jesus cry.

And now watch the damned videos.

Waste of time.

If you agree with what he says, I can pretty much tell you the guy is full of shit.
[/quote]

Without watching the videos?

Damn, you´re psychic!

Who knew!

And just because he specializes in CC fraud detection via statistical analysis he obviously has no idea how to detect voting irregularities because the math is completely different.

Not.

And just because two kids hacked your Diepold machines in 3 hours you should not be concerned at all.

I went to DefCon.

The diebold machines and all other E-voting machines are RIDICULOUSLY unsafe. I met people there, kids really, who could pop shell on a diebold in less than 120 seconds. No tools necessary.

For all you old folks, popping shell means the hacker behind the wheel can do whatever the hell he wants to the machine, including altering votes, numbers, hell even candidates!

For gods sakes, people bring these things home and put them in garages and call that security! Pay attention people… if Iran’s President did such a thing and called his elections valid we’d laugh in his face!

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
I went to DefCon.

The diebold machines and all other E-voting machines are RIDICULOUSLY unsafe. I met people there, kids really, who could pop shell on a diebold in less than 120 seconds. No tools necessary.

For all you old folks, popping shell means the hacker behind the wheel can do whatever the hell he wants to the machine, including altering votes, numbers, hell even candidates!

For gods sakes, people bring these things home and put them in garages and call that security! Pay attention people… if Iran’s President did such a thing and called his elections valid we’d laugh in his face![/quote]

Plus, the very make-up of the programming ALLOWS those machines to be alterable even though there is no reason for that if all they do is count votes.

Counting votes is simple:

1+1+1+1+…+1=n

How come they can start at -100?

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
I went to DefCon.

The diebold machines and all other E-voting machines are RIDICULOUSLY unsafe. I met people there, kids really, who could pop shell on a diebold in less than 120 seconds. No tools necessary.

For all you old folks, popping shell means the hacker behind the wheel can do whatever the hell he wants to the machine, including altering votes, numbers, hell even candidates! [/quote]

La-la-la. Can’t hear you.

Put all those damn kids in jail. Problem solved.

[quote]orion wrote:
How come they can start at -100?
[/quote]

Built in skew functionality?