The Hidden Truth Behind 2000 and 2004 Elections

Monday, March 21, 2005

Hidden engagements. Deals continued.

As promised, we are going to explore more evidence now in part two of this two part update.

Since I don't want to be dealing with assumptions, I have made sure the evidence obtained is hard evidence. Screenshots, and verifiable interactions between these people.

There certainly has been alot of contention about different subjects here, and rather than trying to go over them all at once I am going to proceed to clear up confusion as I go along while working on this.

First let's examine Alan Gutierrez and his actual projects. Lets take a hard look at what he was involved in.

The coding of XML-related applications, the coding for a voter aggregator called Publius, the coding of multiple ID related authorization software for cities and for Michigan itself.

Each aggregator is not called just a simple aggregator. I'm not sure where people are getting this idea, and I am clearing it up right now. Each aggregator normally has a name associated with software. Its nickname, as in what ChoicePoint uses or Accenture uses could be a data-miner aggregator. But that does not represent what it is actually called.

This has to be addressed in a finite way so that programmers, and certainly anyone else will get it finally. It's something that aggregates. Each one has a specific name and also-a specific function.

Knowing that let's examine this key line of the screenshots.

"Authorization Filter

Created an ISAPI filter to implement an authorization system that uses ODBC to map a Windows NT user account to a list of users in an SQL database."

O.k now we're getting somewhere. This is the type of aggregation we are truly talking about. A mapped user system which can be pre-set to define what kind of users are allowed to go through.

We're not talking about an RSS aggregator, we're not talking about a web aggregator, and based on the kind of confusing reports I have heard we are certainly never talking about a News aggregator. Such misconceptions lead to a dangerous amount of mis-understanding of the whole issue.

Aggregators like I mentioned above, are nothing else but examples of the kind of parsing possible by an aggregator and what it actually does. RSS feeds, or more importantly, RDF models can be used for interconnecting a large amount of data together and actually moving it. That was all the analysis was to demonstrate.

Now, it could certainly be used in a social-wide networking device or something related to collecting identities. That is what I have been explaining the whole time. It could be completely harmless also, if the intention of those who had orchestrated it was not to harm.

But based on the amount of things that are being uncovered, it has become increasingly clear that it was only created with one purpose. A simple "authorization aggregator" combined with PeopleAggregator's data-mining ability, could pose the largest threat among elections that can be conceived.

So data-mining aggregators are a problem, no doubt. But if one was customized to the point that it could strip and mine complete and total social network arrays of people and then transport them for the U.S. government on behalf of elections then we have the biggest problem.

Lets stop being tabboo and let us study the evidence.

Clearly, we have an interesting group of people here. Number one, they have close contact and work with the government. Number 2, they claim to be making a new re-vitalization in aggregation and networking people's identities. Number three, every last one of them, except for Tom, has extreme prejudice against John Kerry for the vietnam war.

He claims in one paragraph "I would much rather go take out Sodom myself." as if he, himself is tired of the beurocrats and would like to end the war and over-run Iraq. It is these kind of mindsets and ideals which got us into Iraq in the first place, and massacred it. He follows a core set of principles, one that all of them follow.

Now, don't you think if we put two and two together, the contracts they carry with the government, the desire to see Sodom killed, the desire to see Kerry indicted, and Naval Officer intelligence creating wide-spread social datamining software that we might have a motive right here before our eyes?

Another subject. I'm going to take some comments from a viewer.

"Are you suggesting that there may be a straight-ticket bias?"

I'm not suggesting anything, I'm demonstrating it by showing indisputable evidence from the EIRS voting database. Now, let's start with what we can conclusively prove.

We can basically prove that straight-ticket bias in aggregators has been in effect in more than 4 states based on actual code coming out of a state tabulator.

That and on evidence showing undervotes consistant across the EIRS database. Now, to prove it irrefutably someone would need to remove the control code for the state tabulator. First step is testing it for straight ticket, on every single party ID line. Second step is removing the control code from the audit file and locking it down permanently.

There is also evidence it may be affecting provisional ballots. See the latest mainstream media article about provisional ballots in the wrong precincts, mostly "glitched out" and not counted.

Another question I have heard reach my ears.

"Based on the fact that the bias would need to connect to the voters....How can it be done if voting is private?"

An excellent and well debated question deserves a well formulated answer that explains what I am saying.

In order to connect to the voters themselves, caging lists do not require anything but personal information that is numerical. Social Security numbers, drivers liscence, I.D. When any voter goes to polls they are forced to show it as a governmental rule. Based on these facts, the persons in charge now have the information needed to cage virtually anybody. If they do not even know the aggregator bias is there, they probably will not ever know. It is simply fed through and the social security number for instance for said voter is purged directly out.

Enough background information is logged in almost every ID file to create general profile exemption. That means that the voter may not even know it, but the aggregators say that he doesn't live in the right city or doesn't have the right background. Thus after a whole entire hive of voters take to the polls their identity can be purged forcing the vote to not register. Because it will purge every user who fits that bias, they generally would have to know the area and the city so that it does it automatically.

Since this affects mainly precincts where registrations are over-run and where there are sometimes too many voters, it has basically gone against the democratic party line the entire time. If it was done in lesser known districts, it would have gone against the republic party line. Likewise if it was done in say ammish country, there probably would be no independant votes and no ralph naders logged.

Again let's examine a physical news story of this in action.

"Firm in Florida election fiasco earns millions
from files on foreigners

Oliver Burkeman in Washington and Jo Tuckman
in Mexico City Monday May 5, 2003 The Guardian

A data-gathering company that was embroiled in the
Florida 2000 election fiasco is being paid millions of
dollars by the Bush administration to collect
detailed personal information on the populations
of foreign countries, enraging several governments
who say the records may have been illegally obtained.

US government purchasing documents show that the company,
ChoicePoint, received at least $11m (£6.86m)
from the department of justice last year to supply
data - mainly on Latin Americans - that included names
and addresses, occupations, dates of birth, passport
numbers and "physical description".

Even tax records and blood groups are reportedly included.

Nicaraguan police have raided two offices suspected of providing
the information.

The revelations threaten to shatter public trust in electoral
institutions, especially in Mexico, where the government
has begun an investigation.

The controversy is not the first to engulf ChoicePoint.

The company's subsidiary, Database Technologies, was
responsible for bungling an overhaul of Florida's voter
registration records, with the result that thousands of
people, disproportionately black, were
disenfranchised in the 2000 election.

Had they been able to vote,
they might have swung the state, and thus the presidency,
for Al Gore, who lost in Florida by a few hundred votes.

Legal experts in the US and Mexico said ChoicePoint
could be liable for prosecution if those who supplied
it with the personal information could be proven
to have broken local laws.

That raises the possibility that any person whose data
was accessible to American officials could take legal
action against the US government.

"Anybody who felt they were affected by this could take the US
government to court," said Julio Tellez, an expert in Mexican
information legislation at the Tec de Monterrey University.
"We could all do it ... We are not prepared to sell our
intimacies for a fistful of dollars."

How the US is using the information remains mysterious,
although its focus on Latin America suggests obvious
applications in targeting illegal immigrants. Whatever
the reasons, its commitment to ChoicePoint is long-term:
last year's $11m payment was part of a contract
worth $67m that runs until 2005.

ChoicePoint denied breaking any laws.
"All information collected by
ChoicePoint on foreign citizens is obtained
legally from public agencies or private
vendors," it said. It also denied
purchasing "election registry information
" from Mexico.",12271,949709,00.html

O.k so they were illegally datamined. So what. There are many voters illegally datamined. However, many of these mexican identities and we could even say Saudi, some of them could not even be real, some of them could be dead, and all of them will be fed into the tabulator.

Will they just automatically be fed in? No they will be parsed in. Just like any code works at transplanting data from one location to another. Is it replacing anything? No its replacing nothing. Caged and purged voters are first taken out. Most all of them are belonging to one set group. Afterward all the other voters are just fed directly in. Evening out the totals, smoothing out the suspicion.

The danger here is not in data-mining by itself anymore. The danger here is in complete, and abusive, data-mining at the level of specifics that the people aggregator produces. It now no longer is possible to list all your friends and find a whole bunch of buddies and network them all together, without at the same time having the ability to collect everyone's information and cage whoever you want out of your circle of friends.

Chalko and the men involved here are veterans. They own stock in the blogs which are produced here. There is evidence now of them working with the Department of Agriculture. To answer more questions on this I will be updating again soon.

Now lets take a stronger look at the new evidence and see what can be ascertained.

Chris Allen is clearly concerned with the issue of privacy in a passive way. He is active in GOP related politics, and doesn't believe that much of the disagreements deserves such attention. He sees the polarization of John Kerry and George Bush, as a overall social problem.

Here, Chris Allen is now going through the motions of how this type of code is actually set up and implemented. He shows us that you can store the virtual identity of anyone, inside the People's Aggregator. Allen believes this level of specification will be invaluable to Nick, Marc, and the rest of the team.

He also previously specifices that he already created SSL encrypted aggregators for Concensus Development or other governmental institutions.

He indicated in no uncertain terms that the following is true.

"For instance, one of the uses of the SSL encryption software that I designed and sold at Concensus Development was to preserve privacy; however, I never sold it with privacy as a feature."

"All of this has stewed in my head until I arrived at the Computers, Freedom and Privacy Conference this week here in Berkeley, where I met many of my friends in the cryptographic security business, as well as advocates on issues of privacy in organizations such as EFF and EPIC. My thoughts have now gelled sufficiently to make some observations about privacy."

Part of his oberservations about the aggregator, is that privacy is not really overall much of a consequence. It is not, as consequential, as building strong relationships and receiving strong information.

They have collected this program the People Aggregator and distributed it to departments like the Concencus, and developed it for strategic goals and interest in the US Department of Agriculture and multiple other partners which we are going to explore below this line.

Gifford Pinchot, the partner to Chris and involved with Alacrity Ventures oversees the board of his personal what they call "Intrapeneurial Government services".

Can we at all say Pinchot or harold shattock are involved with Nick? Yes we can, through the president of Alacrity Chris Allen.

It's important to make this distinction early on. Especially if a contract is viewed here.

Later on, Chris essentially changes his tune second guessing and saying that the government can and will abuse this information. Signifying that yes, perhaps this level of social interaction could become quite a problem.

Well we aren't done here, but we certainly have come a long ways in learning what was instituted in a very personal way. If such a network of people were interested in proving a point through the fundamental reduction of human civil rights and electing their own president, they certainly have the tools and means to do so.

Is there a fine line between overt exposure and over exposure? That's what we are going to get to the bottom line of, because frankly these rigged aggregators can change the course of our future.

As usual keep in mind that some people can get confused on what this blog is presenting, and you should know certain Rovian style operatives who we have exposed as liars would like nothing more than to mislead you and cause massive confusion in a deliberate manner.

So take time to learn the facts, digest it, and then from that decide your actions.

Rodney N. programming and blogging the days away.


  • Rodney, aka Andy Sornell, is a leader of a group of freak disinfo artists known as the Fablecrusaders. Since last November, they have been screwing with people’s minds, putting out disinfo at various sites, and disrupting real election fraud research.

    This Kos diary from last year is indicative of what these freaks do:

    And this yahoo group has been formed to capture the tons of evidence on these freaks:

    DO NOT TRUST THESE FREAKS – they only have one goal – disruption. At one point last year, they operated 24/7, 7 days a week, putting out shit all over the place.

    Election fraud did happen…but Rodney/Andy and his team of freaks do not have the answers.


    By Blogger Bozos Rnot4 Bush, at 7:31 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home