It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
......Last time I visited a voting booth, there was nowhere to enter a write-in... only the two unseemly choices were available on that digital abomination.
But getting involved in the community... now that's a good thing!
Perhaps I could help educate those who need it... those who think there's only this way or that.....
Researchers find (more) severe flaws in Diebold voting machines
By Ryan Paul | Last updated: 4 years ago
A group of Princeton computer scientists has published a study that examines flaws and vulnerabilities in Diebold's AccuVote-TS voting machines. Complete with a video that demonstrates the ease with which the electronic voting machine can be compromised, the study provides chilling insight into the serious risk of election tampering and fraud created by modern voting technology. The vote-stealing demonstration software developed by the computer scientists "can modify all of the records, audit logs, and counters kept by the voting machine, so that even careful forensic examination of these records will find nothing amiss."
The study reveals that "[m]alicious software running on a single voting machine can steal votes with little if any risk of detection," and that the software can be installed on a voting machine in only a minute by anyone that has physical access. The study also discovered that Diebold's AccuVote-TS systems can be targeted by self-propagating viruses "that can spread malicious software automatically and invisibly from machine to machine during normal pre- and post-election activity." The computer scientists conclude that defects are present in the hardware of the AccuVote-TS as well as the software. Although some issues can be mitigated by software updates, the machines themselves will have to be replaced in order to eliminate some of the problems identified by the study.... arstechnica.com...
....when you become a shill for a political party that, ultimately, is controlled by the same people behind the "other" party, you've become part of the problem.
Welcome to Naisinfocentral and Animal Disease Traceability
The Delphi Technique is the method being used to squeeze citizens out of the process. This is a must read if you feel being controlled in any meetings. The Delphi Technique is a pre-determined outcome.
How many of these 17 statements fits what the USDA is doing to the NAIS Opponents????
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the “How dare you?” gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as “rumors” or, better yet, “wild rumors.” If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through “rumors.” (If they tend to believe the “rumors” it must be because they are simply “paranoid” or “hysterical.”)
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
5. Call the skeptics names like “conspiracy theorist,” “nutcase,” “ranter,” “kook,” “crackpot,” and, of course, “rumor monger.” Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the “more reasonable” government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own “skeptics” to shoot down.
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as “old news.”
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as “confession and avoidance” or “taking the limited hangout route.” This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal “mistakes.” This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster “suicide” note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as “bump and run” reporting.
15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the “facts” furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5 (e and f), have your own stooges “expose” scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, “What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?” Don't the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.
....I know how tempting (seductive) it is to take sides and defend our 'chosen' team. I fight it in myself all the time and not as successfully as I'd like.....
Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
What I am suggesting is taking the emotion out of it, and instead replacing it with honest to goodness questions.
If you find someone with an alternative theory has a theory that offends you, the first question you might want to ask is why does it offend you, because the truth is we live on a planet plagued by war, starvation, theft, murder, disease and fraud, so these things shouldn't be strangers to you.
I just turned 18 and can vote now, But I never will. Waste of time and I don't even have faith that they count them.
Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by TerryMcGuire
I sure can appreciate how you feel.
Politics for many Americans is really no different than the NBA, or NFL, as long as their team is dominating the board they are happy.
They will make excuses for it's failures, often by assigning the blame in the form of a conspiracy by the 'other' party, and even dance in the streets to celebrate it's successes, and gloat too.
Our politicians might as well be gladiators in a Roman Colleseum the way too many Americans view and participate in the process.
Thanks for posting.
The fact that George Bush Senior personally groomed Bill Clinton for presidency seems to fly over most ppls heads. Their relationship was about as sordid as it gets in politics and they both represented different parties.
....Some would say it long ago became evident the government has no interest in informing us, but rather programing us.....
...Some of the report's authors would go on to work in government to implement CED's policy recommendations....
...CED members were influential in business, government, and agricultural colleges, and their outlook shaped both governmental policies and what farmers were taught. Farmers found themselves encouraged to give up on a farming system that employed minimal outsourced inputs and capital and get "efficient" by adopting instead a system that required they go into debt in order to purchase ever more costly inputs, like fossil-fuel based fertilizers, chemicals, seeds, feed grain, and machinery.....
the Keystone Center, an establishment think tank with representatives on its board from Monsanto, DuPont, Shell, Coca-Cola, Dow, General Electric and the Rockefeller Foundation, to name a few. The organization's 2001 report "The Keystone National Policy Dialogue on Trends in Agriculture" observes that "Agricultural policy in many respects supported the concentration of farming into larger and fewer units. Some would say agricultural policy is biased toward bigness." 
Echoing the plans laid out in CED reports, the Keystone report states that "Agricultural research programs have supported farm consolidation by focusing on substituting capital for labor, rather than developing knowledge and production systems that enable operators of modest-sized farms to enhance their incomes by using management and skills to minimize capital expenditures."  It was no accident that research programs at agricultural colleges favored one group at the expense of another.
The Keystone Report also clearly indicates that a focus on a less capital-intensive system would have been financially beneficial for smaller farmers, stating
"Hundreds of millions of public dollars have been invested in research to improve the efficiency of capital-intensive systems, while virtually nothing has been invested in low-cost systems. If this research imbalance were to be addressed, management-intensive systems might in many cases exceed the efficiency of capital-intensive systems. That would improve the competitiveness and income of moderately scaled, owner-operated farms, and counter the trend toward concentration. But this and other research approaches currently get relatively little attention in publicly funded research programs. Changing the research focus is a prerequisite to revitalizing small and medium-sized farms."
The current level of economic concentration we see today is the result of careful strategic planning....
Originally posted by LexMustReturn
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
I have to agree. Conspiracy Theorists have gotten a black eye BECAUSE they are claiming too many/too much CONSPIRING is going on. You cannot claim every thing that happens is a conspiracy, or it's like yelling 'Wolf", So quit it with the fake Conspiracy stories so we can maintain some measure of credibility amongst The Real cospiracies.