Keith Oberman on possible Voter Fraud
Find a Conversation
|Wed, 11-10-2004 - 2:05pm|
(Go to this site for a video link of the MSNBC Keith Oberman broadcast from last night… the Ohio findings are nothing compared to the Florida piece, which comes half way through this segment: http://www.dfnyc.org/cms/node/view/1087 )
From the office of Florida’s Secretary of State:
29 Democratic counties with decided Democratic margins (majority of registered voters are Democrat) suddenly voted overwhelmingly in favor of Bush.
All 29 of these counties had paper ballots that were optically scanned by Diebold (et al).
Baker County - 69% Democrat registered voters
Bush 7738 votes
Kerry 2180 votes
Holmes County – 7:2 ratio of Dems to Repubs
Dixie County – 77.5 % Democrat registered voters
Lafayette County – 83% Democrat registered voters
Liberty County – 88% Democrat registered voters (8% Republican)
In the counties that did NOT use OPTICAL SCANNING, there were no violent swings reported.
Counties with heavy Democratic registration voted for Kerry.
Counties with heavy Republican registration voted for Bush.
Newsweek reporting on major Diebold problems and bias: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3339650/
Walden O'Dell, chief executive of Diebold Inc., told Republicans in an Aug. 14 fund-raising letter that he is ``committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.'' http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/business/6646063.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp&1c
"In the past few months, the computer- security community has been increasingly vocal on the problems of DRE terminals. “I think the risk is extremely high,” says David Dill, a Stanford computer scientist."
"... Avi Rubin, a computer-security expert and professor at Johns Hopkins University who was slipped a copy of Diebold’s source code earlier this year. After he and his students examined it, he concluded that the protections against fraud and tampering were strictly amateur hour. “Anyone in my basic security classes would have done better,” he says. The cryptography was weak and poorly implemented, and the smart-card system that supposedly increased security actually created new vulnerabilities. Rubin’s paper concluded that the Diebold system was “far below even the most minimal security standards.” Naturally, Diebold disagrees with Rubin. “We’re very confident of accuracy and security in our system,” says director of Diebold Election Systems Mark Radke.
After Rubin’s paper appeared, Maryland officials—who were about to drop $57 million on Diebold devices—commissioned an outside firm to look at the problem. The resulting report confirmed many of Rubin’s findings and found that the machines did not meet the state’s security standards. However, the study also said that in practice some problems were mitigated, and others could be fixed, an attitude Rubin considers overly optimistic. “You’d have to start with a fresh design to make the devices secure,” he says."