Fraud in New Hampshire? S.C. to use voting machines banned in other states,

Fraud in New Hampshire? S.C. to use voting machines banned in other states,
  says Election Commission spokesman Chris Whitmire.
  Chris Whitmire may be reached at
  803 734-9060 CWhitmire@...
  If contact with Chris Whitmire results in no action, Gov. Mark Sandford may be contacted at 803 734-2100 mark@...
  "Those Who Cast the Votes Decide Nothing-
  Those who Count the Votes decide everything"
  Joseph Stalin
  Electronic voting machines in Florida showed one candidate with negative votes.
    Fraud in the central tabulator in New Hampshire?
  This youtube shows the votes, when they were first released, as a town by town tabulation. This early release shows Ron Paul won.
  01-09-2008 4:00 AM
  If you visit this site now, you will find that the results have been flipped to match the central tabulator:
  Ron Paul - Now The Boston Globe Changed Their Story

    Here is actual recorded testimony, given under oath,
  by Clinton Curtis who admits that he wrote the program for vote fraud:
  Rigged USA Elections Exposed
  Nothing is an honest count unless it is in full view of the people. NO electronic vote counting machine does that.
    Associated Press
  Monday, January 7, 2008

  GREENVILLE � South Carolina election officials say they still plan to use touch-screen voting machines despite the fact that other states have banned the use of similar systems made by the same company.
  Last month, top election officials in Ohio and Colorado declared that Election Systems and Software's iVotronic is unfit for elections.
  The ban was prompted by a study done for the state of Ohio in which researchers found electronic voting systems could be corrupted with magnets or handheld electronic devices such as Palm Treos.
  "We've reviewed the report and we remain confident in the security and accuracy of South Carolina's voting system," state Election Commission spokesman Chris Whitmire said.
  But the South Carolina League of Women Voters has renewed its call for the state to record votes on paper as well as electronically to allow for accuracy checks, though there have been no documented cases of actual election tampering.
  "It's very difficult to get evidence that somebody tampered with the vote if you have no way of knowing what the vote was before they tampered," said Eleanor Hare, a computer scientist who participated in a study of the machines by the South Carolina League of Women Voters.
  The machines have been used statewide since 2006.
  The Ohio study found the machines "lack the fundamental technical controls necessary to guarantee a trustworthy election under operational conditions."
  "Exploitable vulnerabilities allow even persons with limited access � voters and precinct poll workers � to compromise voting machines and precinct results, and, in some cases, to inject and spread software viruses into the central election management system," the report says.
  However, the company that makes the machines says on its Web site that it disagrees with the Ohio report's technical findings.
  "All of our voting systems have been thoroughly tested and examined under realistic election conditions before those systems are ever made available to states for additional testing and consideration," the company's statement says. "The testing and certification processes already in place are extremely rigorous, ensuring that voting systems meet well-established standards for performance under realistic election conditions."