Will the Major Media Finally Cover the Electronic Election Fraud Issue?

[Guest guest]

S

Fri, 19 May 2006 23:37:17 -0000

Will the Major Media Finally Cover the Electronic Election

Fraud Issue?

 

 

 

 

ElectionFraud2004 , Dan Stafford

Go to Original

<http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2006/1964>

 

Will the Major Media Finally Cover the Electronic Election Fraud

Issue?

By Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman

The Free Press Monday 15 May 2006

 

That the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004 were stolen has

become an article of faith for millions of mainstream Americans. But

there has been barely a whiff of coverage in the major media about

any problems with the electronic voting machines that made those

thefts possible - until now.

 

A recent OpEdNews/Zogby People's poll <http://tinyurl.com/hgkgl>

of Pennsylvania residents, found that " 39% said that the 2004 election

was stolen. 54% said it was legitimate. But let's look at the

demographics on this question. Of the people who watch Fox news as

their primary source of TV news, one half of one percent believe it

was stolen and 99% believe it was legitimate. Among people who watched

ANY other news source but FOX, more felt the election was stolen than

legitimate.

The numbers varied dramatically. "

 

Here, from that poll, are the stations listed as first choice by

respondents and the percentage of respondents who thought the

election was stolen: CNN 70%; MSNBC 65%; CBS 64%; ABC 56%; Other 56%;

NBC 49%; FOX 0.5%.

 

With 99% of Fox viewers believing that the election was

" legitimate, " only the constant propaganda of Rupert Murdoch's

disinformation campaign stands in the way of a majority of Americans

coming to grips with the reality of two consecutive stolen elections.

 

That the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post

finally ran coverage of problems with electronic voting machines

this week is itself big news. It says the scandals surrounding

computer fraud and financial illegalities at Diebold and other

electronic voting machine companies have become simply too big and

blatant for even the bought, docile mainstream media (MSM) to ignore.

 

The gaping holes in the security of electronic voting machines

are pretty old news. Bev Harris's blackboxvoting.com has been issuing

definitive research since Florida 2000. Freepress.org warned of the

impending electronic theft of Ohio 2004 with Diebold machines eight

months before it happened.

 

After that election, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) issued a report

confirming that security flaws could allow a single hacker with a wi-

fi to shift the vote counts at entire precincts just by driving by.

Then the Government Accountability Office reported that security flaws

were vast and unacceptable throughout the national network of

electronic machines.

 

Despite overwhelming evidence that George W. Bush has occupied

the White House due to the fraudulent manipulations of the GOP

Secretaries of State in Florida and Ohio, none of this has seeped into

" journals of record " like the Times and Post.

 

Until this week. The Times was sparked out of its stupor on May

11, after officials in California and Pennsylvania warned that Diebold

touch-screen machines, slated to be used in upcoming primaries, were

hopelessly compromised. Michael Shamos, a professor of computer

science and Pittsburgh's high-tech Carnegie-Mellon University, called

it " the most severe security flaw ever discovered in a voting system. "

 

Douglas W. Jones, a computer science professor at the University

of Iowa, says " this is a barn door being wide open, while people were

arguing over the lock on the front door. "

 

The Times refers to the uproar as " the latest concern about

touch-screen machines " while having completely ignored dozens of

complaints in Ohio 2004 that voters who selected John Kerry's name

saw

George W. Bush's light up, or saw the light on Kerry's repeatedly go

out

before they could complete the voting process.

 

The Wall Street Journal ran the following kicker: " Some former

backers of technology seek return to paper ballots, citing glitches,

fraud fears. "

 

The WSJ could have ran that story last year after the bipartisan

commission on federal election reform co-chaired by President Jimmy

Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker noted in no

uncertain terms that: " Software can be modified maliciously before

beinginstalled into individual voting machines. There is no reason to trust

insiders in the election industry any more than in other industries. "

 

Indeed. There's every reason because of the unprecedented power

and money involved in U.S. politics to trust them less than anybody else.

 

In its March 2006 primary, it took a week to tally Chicago's

votes because of technical problems in Sequoia Voting Systems equipment.

In Maryland, electronic voting scandals prompted a unanimous vote by

the State House of Delegate demanding that touch-screen machines be

scrapped. The Maryland Senate effectively killed that bill, which is

certain to come back.

 

Citizen law suits are being filed in Arizona, California, New

York and New Mexico by the nonprofit Voter Action organization.

 

The new concerns about Diebold's equipment were discovered by

Harri Hursti, a Finnish computer expert who was working at the request of Black

Box Voting Inc. The new report forced Diebold to warn of a

" theoretical security vulnerability " that " could potentially allow

unauthorized software to be loaded onto the system. "

 

In other words, one of the prime manufacturers of the machines

on which America casts its votes has admitted those machines can be

hacked.

 

But as the Times has finally reported, the company, in one of

the new century's most truly laughable letters, has claimed that " the

probability for exploiting this vulnerability to install

unauthorized software that could affect an election is considered low. "

 

A company spokesman has admitted the flaw was actually built

into the system to allow election officials to upgrade their software.

But Diebold is apparently confident that those officials would never,

ever cheat. " For there to be a problem here, you're basically assuming a premise

where you have some evil and nefarious election officials

who would sneak in and introduce a piece of software, " says Diebold's

David Bear. " I don't believe these evil elections people exist. "

 

The Times has thus far chosen not to report on the staggering

history that frames such statements. As freepress.org reported in

2003, Diebold CEO Walden O'Dell promised in a GOP fundraising letter to " deliver

Ohio's electoral votes to George W. Bush. " The election

chief in Florida 2000 was Katherine Harris. In Ohio 2004 it was J. Kenneth

Blackwell. Both controlled access to their state's electronic voting machines,

and are widely believed to have exploited their now

obvious flaws. Both served simultaneously as Secretary of State and as state

co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign. As of today, the electronic access cards

for Ohio's electronic voting machines have been ordered into Blackwell's

personal office, despite the fact that he is the GOP nominee for governor in the

upcoming November election.

 

Recently passed House Bill 3 in Ohio does not mandate post-

election audits of electronic voting machines, nor does the Help American Vote

Act (HAVA) of 2002. The rush to electronic voting machines was fueled by the

passing of the HAVA Act, which authorized more than $3 billion in federal funds

to purchase new voting equipment. HAVA's principal architect was Rep. Bob Ney

(R-OH), whose financial ties to Diebold, through disgraced lobbyist Jack

Abramoff, have yet to be fully exposed.

 

Blackwell personally negotiated a no-bid contract for Diebold

touchscreen Direct Recording Electronic machines (DREs) while

holding stock in the company. Under HB3 Blackwell will decide whether the

machine will be audited or not in an election where he is running

for governor.

 

" We're prepared for those types of problems, " said Deborah

Hench, the registrar of voters in San Joaquin County, California, according to

The Times. " There are always activists that are anti-electronic voting, and

they're constantly trying to put pressure on us to change our system. "

 

Aviel Rubin, a professor of computer science at Johns Hopkins

University, did the first in-depth analysis of the security flaws in

the source code for Diebold touch-screen machines in 2003. After

studying the latest problem, The Times reported Rubin said: " I almost had a

heart attack. The implications of this are pretty astounding. "

 

More coverage from the mainstream corporate media may surface as

the machines malfunction in the 22 primary elections scheduled in May

and June. The next major e-vote meltdown should occur during the May 16

primaries in Kentucky, Oregon and Pennsylvania.

 

There's still time to move to hand-counted paper ballots for the

November 2006 election. And if current trends continue, some of the

mainstream media may actually start reporting on the issue.

 

--------

 

Harvey Wasserman and Bob Fitrakis are co-authors of How the GOP

Stole America's 2004 Election & Is Rigging 2008, available at

www.freepress.org <http://www.freepress.org>. They are co-editors,

with Steve Rosenfeld, of What Happened in Ohio? forthcoming from The New Press.

 

Note: second paragraph altered 5/15/06.

 

--