Sequoia Systems doesn't want an independent test made of their e-voting machines.
This is the same company that made machines that failed to accurately tally election results in recent New Jersey elections, and whose machines have recently been decertified by the California Secretary of State, Debra Bowen.
They are SO afraid of testing that they have threatened legal action against those who would participate in these tests, specifically two Princeton University professors, Ed Felten and Andrew Appel.
Why is Sequoia Systems so afraid of having their machines tested?
What are they afraid will be revealed?
Is it possible that the machines contains flaws that compromise the security and/or accuracy of the election results that provide the basic foundation for popular participation in determining the leaders of our Democratic Republic?
If there would be flaws, isn't it imperative that they be discovered, and the machines upgraded to provide rock-solid, verifiable, and ACCURATE election results, so as to return TRUST to the American election process?
Isn't it mandatory for Sequoia to allow their systems to be verified? If not, who approved a contract that allowed this serious loophole to exist? In what other area of endeavor do we allow "trade secrets" to trump the national security?
Of course, this is just MY opinion - no, wait - it's not...
P.S. Did you notice that Diebold, another maker of e-voting machines whose name was permanently sullied after the many alleged misfires of its voting machines handed the 2004 Presidential election to the non-winner, George W Bush, is now called Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election Systems)? Makes you wonder if they think they can fool you by changing their name - and the answer if, YES - they do :-)
Also check out www.blackboxvoting.org
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment