This is Who Sequoia Voting Systems Has Chosen to Test Their Machines Instead of Princeton

[BradBlog]

Cross-posted in GD at:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3063369




This is Who Sequoia Voting Systems Has Chosen to Test Their Machines Instead of Princeton
Meet Mike Gibbons of 'Kwaidan Consulting': Seeking 'Well Endowed Blonde Nymphomaniacs'...Or 'Jesus Christ, Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein,' Depending on Whose Paying...

Last week, in the wake of their AVC Advantage touch-screen voting systems having been found to have failed in at least six counties following New Jersey's Super Tuesday Primary, and on the heels of much-deserved ridicule for having threatened Princeton computer scientists with legal action should they go forward with an independent technical review of their voting systems, as requested by NJ election officials, Sequoia Voting systems issued a laughable press release headlined "Sequoia Voting Systems supports third party reviews and testing of its election equipment," which John Gideon appropriately eviscerated for all of the (putting it nicely) "misleading half-truths" therein from the dishonest, desperate folks at Sequoia.

The company, which claims their oft-hacked votings systems (accidental hack here, on purpose hack here) are secure and "tamperproof", subsequently saw their own website ignominiously hacked thereafter late last week.

But, as if the constant predilections of Sequoia VPs Michelle Shafer and Edwin Smith to slap "kick me" signs on their own backs wasn't enough, they then went on to release another statement last Thursday announcing they were commissioning their own "external review" of their own voting systems "that includes review by an independent company," which nobody has ever heard of.

So who is this "Kwaidan Consulting of Houston, Texas," whom the geniuses at Sequoia have selected to carry out their independent, third-party review? You're not gonna be believe this one...

MEET MIKE GIBBONS OF "KWAIDAN CONSULTING":
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5839

[mac2]

1. Criminal action for voting fraud is what is needed here.

[BradBlog]

2. ELECTION fraud is the concern...

"Voting" fraud isn't the worry. The voters are doing fine. Leave 'em alone.

It's the administration of elections we need to worry about. Just to be clear.

:-)

[kster]

3. If I can't see the ballots/votes being counted

with my own eyes and I have to depend on other people to secure my election for me then the election is not a real election it is a JOKE..

Keep pushing Brad... K&R

[Bonn1997]

4. We don't have "elections"; we have "events"

Someone else said that. I can't take credit. But it's a brilliant, sad, frustrating statement.