U.S. Supreme Court Rules~Bush Overstepped His Power

Legal Affairs
Supreme Court Blocks Guantanamo Tribunals
by Nina Totenberg

NPR.org, June 29, 2006 · In a major rebuke to the Bush administration, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the president overstepped his power
in ordering war-crimes trials for Guantanamo detainees without specific authority from Congress.

By a 5-to-3 vote, the court said that the procedures set up by the president violate both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the laws of war set out in the Geneva Conventions.

DOES DUBYA REALLY SUPPORT BORDER SECURITY & IMMIGRATION REFORM?

President Bush Discusses Border Security and Immigration Reform in Arizona

May 2006

I'm down here to talk about the immigration issue. And this is an important issue. It really is. It's an important debate our country is having. We need to have -- we need to secure our border, and we need fair and effective immigration laws. The other night I spoke to the country about the way I see it, and I'm looking forward to working with the United States Congress to get something done.

Well...As usual the Bush Cabal is talking about the immigration issue, while in reality their busy working on a plan which involves all of North America. Bush is quietly putting things in place to open the borders of Canada and Mexico, and with the tri-lateral plan allready in place create a new border that surrounds all three countries...Unbelievable?...I guess so. It sure puts a knot in my stomach...Take a look at some of what is allready in place though, and all this without any oversite by Congress.

North American Union to Replace USA?

by Jerome R. Corsi
Posted May 19, 2006


President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy.

Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA politically, setting the stage for a North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada

At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.

What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:

In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security." The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.


March 2002 United States Mexico Border Partnership Agreement

Smart Border: 22 point agreement U.S. - Mexico Border Partnership Action Plan

In December 2001, Governor Tom Ridge and Deputy Prime Minister John Manley Signed the Smart Border Declaration and Associated 30-Point Action Plan to Enhance the Security of Our Shared Border While Facilitating the Legitimate Flow of People and Goods. the Action Plan Has Four Pillars the Secure Flow of People, the Secure Flow Of Goods, Secure Infrastructure, and Information Sharing and coordination in the enforcement of these objectives.

U.S. - Canada Smart Border/30 Point Action Plan Update

Another thing that Dubya has in place is the developement of a Transcontinental Highway connecting Mexico and Canada. Yeah!...Right? You probably think that I've flipped my cookies, and you're probably right. My hard drive is full...I need to dump the trash and defragment. Here's what I read though, and this is on a conservative web site...

Quietly but systematically, the Bush Administration is advancing the plan to build a huge NAFTA Super Highway, four football-fields-wide, through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth, Minn.

ALSO:

Texas Segment of NAFTA Super Highway Nears Construction

Awesome Video About The World Trade Center

I have visited a lot of web sites, and seen plenty of information about what really happened on 911, but nothing as comprehensive as this video by Loose Change. A lot of people including me have a lot of questions about this, and have petitioned for an investigation. Was there an investigation, I don't really know? There was talk about one, but if there was, what information did they come up with and what can be done about it. This independent investigation by private parties came up with a lot of information, but it wasn't trumpeted on Fox News, or even PBS for that matter. I didn't really find it on the internet, but it was sent to me by a friend over a month ago. I just recently hooked up to a fast connection, so I can now view it. This is the best video coverage on the subject that I've ever seen.

Full length documentary (80 minutes) on 9-11.

MORE THAN WE NEED

Buffett to Give Billions to Gates Charity and Others

By CHRISTINE HAUSER
Published: June 25, 2006
Warren E. Buffett, considered the world's second richest person, is to start in July giving away 85 percent of his stock in his company, Berkshire Hathaway, to five foundations, with most of it to The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation , according to transcripts and an article published on Fortune magazine's Web site today

At last year's World Economic Forum in Davos, Mr Gates told world leaders that he had a duty to ensure his wealth "goes back to global society in the most impactful way".

Since his involvement with the foundation, Mr Gates has become something of a "walking encyclopaedia of medical knowledge", according to Warren E Buffett, the chief executive of financial services firm Berkshire Hathaway.

"I have heard him speak many times on this subject and each time I have been amazed by the breadth of his knowledge," Mr Buffett told Time magazine.

Mr Gates' wife also keeps a close eye on the effectiveness of the foundation's activities, Mr Buffett said.

"Melinda, for her part, travels the world so that she can understand what a cheque from Seattle is actually accomplishing 10,000 miles away."

In terms of assets, the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation dwarfs that of other well-known names in US philanthropy, such as the Rockefeller Foundation or the Ford Foundation.

The Gates' Foundation
Endowment of $27bn.
$7.1bn in grants since 1994.
Largest grant: $1bn to the United Negro College Fund.
Average grant: $903,711.
Supports work in more than 100 countries.


Warren Buffet and Bill Gates Jr. appeared on the Charlie Rose Show last night,6/27/06 @12:00 midnight. It was a great interview that gave insight to the philosophy of both men, who believe that a large share of their wealth should be returned to the people. Bill again stated that he is going to put all of his energies into the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, and that getting the money to the places where it will do the most good will be a primary consideration. Buffet and Gates, who see eye to eye on this and many other aspects of charity, look forward to seeing more healthcare for more people throughout the world. If Bill Gates is half as successful at this as he was with Microsoft, we may be seeing some meaningful change.

There is an example being shown here that applies to all of us. We don't have to be rich to help the needy and underpriveliged. It is up to each and every one of us to make the best of what we have and to make the best use of our energies and influence, to produce change in our ecological, environmental, and humanitarian policies. Warren Buffet never took a salary of over $100,000 per year, and still lived in the home that he bought in the 1930's. I'm sure that he would tell you that he has more than he needs, just as many of us, who are in the lower income brackets, can tell you that we have way too much stuff.

Boehners script for Bush's photo-op in Iraq

Confidential Messaging Memo – Floor Debate on Iraq and the Global War on Terror

To: House Republican Members

From: House Majority Leader John A. Boehner

Date: June 13, 2006

It is imperative during this debate that we re-examine the conditions that required the United States to take military action in Afghanistan and Iraq in the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001.

The attacks we witnessed that day serve as a reminder of the dangers we face as a nation in a post-9/11 world. We can no longer expect oceans between us and our enemies to keep us safe.
Blah blah blah...


After all of their lying, coniving, and pre-emptive behaviour about weapons of mass destruction, and the axis of evil, the "Neorepublicans" have this to say.

"So, during this debate we must make clear to the American people that the United States had to take action in the best interests of the security of our nation and the world community. As Republicans who supported military action against Saddam Hussein and terrorists around the globe, the United States had to show our resolve as the world’s premier defender of freedom and liberty before such ideals were preyed upon, rather than after standing witness to their demise at the hands of our enemies. "

Then had the the unpremeditated gall to quote John F. Kennedy, completely out of context, to rationalise the pre-emptive attack on an unarmed country.

"As President John F. Kennedy once stated so eloquently:"

“The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission.”


Well...That was only part of the quote. Why in the world these war mongers would quote someone who was known as a liberal Democrat is beyond me. It only reaffirms what I allready know...

Here is the complete quote from Kennedy's Cuban Missile Crises speech. Thank God that the Neoconservatives didn't own our government in those days...

"The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are; but it is one of the most consistent with our character and our courage as a nation and our commitments around the world. The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission. Our goal is not victory of might but the vindication of right — not peace at the expense of freedom, but both peace and freedom, here in this hemisphere and, we hope, around the world. God willing, that goal will be achieved. Thank you, and good night."
Cuban Missile Crisis speech (22 October 1962)

And here are a few more quotes from Jack Kennedy that they didn't bother to mention.

If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

If this nation is to be wise as well as strong, if we are to achieve our destiny, then we need more new ideas for more wise men reading more good books in more public libraries. These libraries should be open to all — except the censor. We must know all the facts and hear all the alternatives and listen to all the criticisms. Let us welcome controversial books and controversial authors. For the Bill of Rights is the guardian of our security as well as our liberty.
Saturday Review (29 October 1960)

The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control.
Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association (April 27, 1961)

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
Address to Latin American diplomats at the White House (12 March 1962)

And is not peace, in the last analysis, basically a matter of human rights — the right to live out our lives without fear of devastation — the right to breathe air as nature provided it — the right of future generations to a healthy existence?
Address at The American University, Washington D. C. (10 June 1963)

The supreme reality of our time is ...the vulnerability of our planet.
Speech (28 June 1963)

In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility — I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it — and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.
And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.
My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

Embassy warns of danger and hardship in Iraq

Amid Iraq Debate, a Document Mystery

By LIZ MARLANTES June 15, 2006'

Wash Post' Obtains a shocking memo from U.S. Embassy in Baghdad

Published: June 19, 2006 6:20 PM ET

NEW YORK The Washington Post has obtained a cable, marked "sensitive," that it says shows that just before President Bush left on a surprise trip last Monday to the Green Zone in Baghdad for an upbeat assessment of the situation there, "the U.S. Embassy in Iraq painted a starkly different portrait of increasing danger and hardship faced by its Iraqi employees."


Political Talking Points, From Pentagon Office may have been illegal.

RAW STORY

Pentagon talking points on Iraq, war on terror

Why were two 500lb. bombs used to kill Zarqawi?

There are things that don't make sense about the killing of Zarqawi. If they knew he was in there with only five people, why didn't they go in with a swat team and take him out? Instead of using two 500 lb. bombs to demolish the building and everybody in it, a woman and an 8 year old girl included.

Counterpunch June 12, 2006

This Unguarded Man Was Iraq's Most Potent Terrorist?

The US Already Misses Zarqawi
By PATRICK COCKBURN

In the days before he was tracked down and killed by US lazer-guided bombs Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was living with almost no guards and only five companions, two of whom were women and one an eight year old girl. This hardly seems like a heroic action, but brings shame to the US, a country that was once known for honer and valor. These bombs use a DU (depleted uranium) war head, which turns in to a fine radioactive dust, that has been detected from as far away as England. If the blas hadn't killed them, they would have probably died from the weird effects of inhaling radioactive material.


Middle East Asia Times May 22, 2004

Berg beheading: No way, say medical experts
By Ritt Goldstein

American businessman Nicholas Berg's body was found on May 8 near a Baghdad overpass; a video of his supposed decapitation death by knife appeared on an alleged al-Qaeda-linked website (www.al-ansar.biz) on May 11. But according to what both a leading surgical authority and a noted forensic death expert separately told Asia Times Online, the video depicting the decapitation appears to have been staged.


CNN did an interview with Nicholis Berg's father, that was not what they really expected to hear...

Beheaded man's father: Revenge breeds revenge

Michael Berg talks about the death of his son and al-Zarqawi

Thursday, June 8, 2006; Posted: 11:19 p.m. EDT (03:19 GMT)

The Republicans are weak, but still have delusions of grandier.

The Republicans are indeed weak, and trying to play the "War President" game again. Rather than admit their mistakes and their deceit, they are trying to say that the Bush Administration is the only one capable of winning the war in Iraq...Well, war has never been declared in Iraq. We are fighting a so called "War On Terror", but pre-emptively invaded a country that had nothing to do with 911, yet our "One Voice" leaders continue to link 911 with Saddam Hussein with Iraq.
The war in Iraq was being planned long before 911, and the information is available on the PNAC web site.

The "Project For The New Century" wrote Bill Clinton a letter, suggesting that Saddam Hussein be removed from power in 1998.

January 26, 1998

The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.



War in Iraq was planned before 911

Wed, 27 Oct 2004 1
By Russ Baker

Two years before 9/11, candidate Bush was already talking privately about attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer

Bush Wanted To Invade Iraq If Elected in 2000





The" Project For The New Century", wrote a letter to George Bushonly 9 days after 911 calling for the removal Saddam Hussein from power, and sanctions on Iran and Syria.

September 20, 2001

The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President,

We write to endorse your admirable commitment to “lead the world to victory” in the war against terrorism. We fully support your call for “a broad and sustained campaign” against the “terrorist organizations and those who harbor and support them.” We agree with Secretary of State Powell that the United States must find and punish the perpetrators of the horrific attack of September 11, and we must, as he said, “go after terrorism wherever we find it in the world” and “get it by its branch and root.” We agree with the Secretary of State that U.S. policy must aim not only at finding the people responsible for this incident, but must also target those “other groups out there that mean us no good” and “that have conducted attacks previously against U.S. personnel, U.S. interests and our allies.”


Iraq

We agree with Secretary of State Powell’s recent statement that Saddam Hussein “is one of the leading terrorists on the face of the Earth….” It may be that the Iraqi government provided assistance in some form to the recent attack on the United States. But even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism. The United States must therefore provide full military and financial support to the Iraqi opposition. American military force should be used to provide a “safe zone” in Iraq from which the opposition can operate. And American forces must be prepared to back up our commitment to the Iraqi opposition by all necessary means.

BRIDGING THE GAP

If we want energy independence, clean air, pure water and responsible use of our resources, we are going to have to work from the grass roots. The bottom up, instead of the top down.
The can do spirit, and the abilities and imagination of the American people, are what is needed to bring about energy dependence. Not corporate government deliniating exactly how we're going to do it. That's why we're now the largest consumers of energy on the planet.

There is one thing lacking today, that wasn't really thought about in the early 20th, century, and that is free enterprise. Research, developement, and manufacture, are now all hitched to big business and the Corporate Government.

In the early days of automobile manufacture, we seen steam power, electric power, deisel power, kerosene power, gas power, and yes...a gas electric hybred. There were over 200 kinds of automobiles. If we could be the kind of free people that lived in that era, we would see advances in alternative energy, and solutions to our misuse of resources, including sewage and garbage.

We're entering a time when we will decide to give up many of the things that we consider necessities, and in doing so, I believe that we will have time to work on the myriad of issues that face us.

I don't think "We The People" will be able to shed our harnesses though...untill we completely replace this administration with leaders that care for more than $$$ and power.

The neoconservatives have been working hard for 10 years or so, and have replaced the majority of our representatives with Republicans. Not ordinary Republicans, but PNAC oriented money changers, that all echo the same arguments and excuses, for what they are about to do, and for the mistakes that they have allready made.

They have purposefully created a chasm between the two parties, and to build the bridge we need the majority on our side...The Democratic side...Vote a Democrat into every position, and we will bridge the gap.

~Supreme Court Justice has a Faux Blog Spot~

The Right Honorable Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

I was surprised to find that this is not Alito's blog, but belongs to a blogger who is doing a parody of him. It is almost believable untill you read the posts and realise that A supreme court justice would probably have a little more descretion...

This just in from Alito': Put a cork in it, senator!

Friday, January 13, 2006

By AMY KLEIN
STAFF WRITER

During his confirmation hearings, Judge Samuel Alito fielded questions on abortion, the right to privacy and Supreme Court precedent.

Over at "his" blog, meanwhile, he's been complaining about a disappointing black bean soup he had for lunch, lauding the softball questions from Republican senators and e-mailing from his BlackBerry about the "incredibly boring experience, made bearable only because of the sedative I had with breakfast."


Alito's online alter ego is Andrew Case, a New York City employee and playwright who snapped up the rights to Samuel Alito's name on Blogspot.com when the New Jersey judge was rumored to be up for nomination to the high court. With the confirmation process heading for a possible vote next week, Case has been posting pretentious, stream-of-consciousness insights several times a day, imagining the nerdy nominee mocking Democrats and secretly surfing the Web during long-winded speeches.

Bad Hair Day

Is it just me? Or am I having a bad hair day because I read the AP artical about the three suicides at Guantanamo? specificly; the part where Dubya said:

"We would like to end the Guantanamo -- we'd like it to be empty," Bush said. But he added: "There are some that, if put out on the streets, would create grave harm to American citizens and other citizens of the world. And, therefore, I believe they ought to be tried in courts here in the United States."

Bush said his administration was waiting for the Supreme Court to rule whether he overstepped his authority in ordering the detainees to be tried by U.S. military tribunals. "We're waiting on our Supreme Court to act," he said.

This kind of Neoconservative logic puts me a bit on edge...

Eavesdropping, Gagging, and the Constitution

Eavesdropping, Gagging, and the Constitution

by Ray McGovern May 25, 2006

Is the National Security Agency being "turned against the people," as the Congressional committee led by Sen. Frank Church warned might happen? We the people cannot know; it's classified.

Just In~Senate rejects gay marriage amendment~

Supporters Lose in Gay Marriage Ban Vote

Senate Supporters of Gay Marriage Ban Lose a Vote in Failed Effort for Constitutional Amendment

By LAURIE KELLMAN

WASHINGTON Jun 7, 2006 (AP)

The Senate on Wednesday rejected a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, dealing an embarrassing defeat to President Bush and Republicans who hoped to use the measure to energize conservative voters on Election Day.

Once more~Bush attempts to trash the Constitution~

In these times, when we face a myriad of important issues, our Corporate Government chooses to amend the constitution concerning the definition of marriage. This is a matter that has traditionally been handled by the States and religious institutions since the founding of our nation. The framers of our Constitution granted limited, enumerated powers to the Federal government, while reserving the remaining powers of government, including family law, to state governments.

Never before have we adopted a constitutional amendment to limit the States’ ability to control their own family law.” That is exactly what this proposed amendment would do. It would permanently restrict the ability of States to define and recognize marriage or any legally sanctioned unions as they see fit.




June 6, 2006

Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
On the Proposed Constitutional Amendment on Marriage
As Prepared for Delivery from the Floor of the U.S. Senate

The debate is about whether we should amend the Constitution of the United States to define marriage. The answer to that question has to be “no.” It is unnecessary and wrong for Congress to legislate for all States, for all time, on a matter that has been traditionally handled by the States and religious institutions since the founding of our Nation. For that reason alone, this amendment should be defeated.

There is no doubt that the proposed federal marriage amendment would alter the basic principles of federalism that have served our nation well for over 200 years. The framers of our Constitution granted limited, enumerated powers to the Federal government, while reserving the remaining powers of government, including family law, to state governments. Marriage has traditionally been regulated by the States. As Professor Dale Carpenter told the Constitution Subcommittee in its first hearing on this topic nearly three years ago, “never before have we adopted a constitutional amendment to limit the States’ ability to control their own family law.” That is exactly what this proposed amendment would do. It would permanently restrict the ability of States to define and recognize marriage or any legally sanctioned unions as they see fit.


Bush: Constitution 'just a goddamn piece of paper

By DOUG THOMPSON Dec 9, 2005, 05:51

"I don't give a goddamn," Bush retorted. "I'm the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way." "Mr. President," one aide in the meeting said. "There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution." "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face," Bush screamed back. "It's just a goddamned piece of paper!" I've talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution "a goddamned piece of paper." And, to the Bush Administration, the Constitution of the United States is little more than toilet paper stained from all the shit that this group of power-mad despots have dumped on the freedoms that "goddamned piece of paper" used to guarantee. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, while still White House counsel, wrote that the "Constitution is an outdated document."

The Worst President in History?
One of America's leading historians assesses George W. Bush

ROBERT F. KENNEDY~ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE

June 1, 2006

Was the 2004 Election Stolen?

Republicans prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted -- enough to have put John Kerry in the White House. BY ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR
~Rolling Stone News Story~

Editorial: A Call for Investigation

Electronic voting machines pose a grave threat to democracy

Diebold voting machines vulnerable to TEMPEST?

The Tempest over Leaking Computers

The Tempest (Transient ElectroMagnetic Pulse Emanation STandard) project is a joint research and development effort of the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) and the Department of Defense (DoD) and has been classified for about 20 years. Even the program's name was classified and unmentionable until only a few years ago. Tempest refers to the investigation and study of potentially compromising electronic signals emitted by computers and other electronic devices. It also involves the development of countermeasures, particularly the shielding of computers and related devices so that the emanations cannot be collected, analyzed, and understood.

September 24, 2005

Stanley A. Klein

Exploitation of Compromising Electromagnetic Emanations


Taxonomy

Retail, vote buying, or voter intimidation.

Applicability

DRE voting machines. Possible use against precinct­based optical scan tabulators.

Method

Perpetrator uses compromising electromagnetic emanations from voting machines toreproduce DRE screens in a vehicle near the polling place. Bought or intimidated votersare instructed to make certain combinations of selections and changes to enable theperpetrator to identify which voter is using which machine. Perpetrator watches themachine activity and ensures that voters vote as instructed. This attack effectivelyreturns voting activity to the conditions that existed prior to adoption in the late 1800's ofthe Australian Secret Ballot.Exploitation of emanations from an optical scan tabulator would require either (a) thevoter being instructed to vote in particular ways for offices/issues not of interest to theperpetrator, or (b) administrative records accessible to the perpetrator or an accompliceinside the polling place who can provide information on the sequence of voters whoseballots are being processed.Resource RequirementsThis attack requires development of software to monitor and process the compromisingelectromagnetic emanations. This development has economy of scope; once developed,the hardware and software can be reused in numerous elections. The cost of developingand producing the relevant equipment is likely to be in a multi­million­dollar range, butover time the relevant technology is likely to become ubiquitous.

The relevant technology may already exist and be in use within the intelligencecommunity. The feasibility of exploiting compromising electromagnetic emanationsfrom electronic equipment has been rumored since the 1970's. The Defense Departmenthas long had a program called “Tempest” for minimizing compromising electromagneticemanations from electronic equipment. Redacted Tempest documents were posted on theInternet a few years ago as a result of a FOIA request.The technology requirements for accomplishing the attack are likely to include thefollowing:●High capacity software defined radio●Digital signal processing and/or directive antenna technology (such as phasedarrays) sufficient to separate individual voting machine emanations. Forexample, this might be done by using small differences in clock speeds orother processing hardware characteristics of the various machines.●Digital signal processing to reconstruct the internal processing and screendisplays from the voting machine emanations.The software defined radio and high capacity digital signal processing technologies arecurrently available, although not necessarily at low cost and sufficiently small size toallow installation of the necessary facilities in a vehicle. These technologies atappropriate capacities, sizes, and costs are likely to become ubiquitous during the lifetimeof voting machines in current service or currently being designed and purchased.Perpetrators must also have access to a pool of subvertable voters willing to vote in returnfor payment or unable to complain if threatened. Employees, tenants, and those withsimilar dependency relationships are particularly vulnerable.Potential GainOne vote per subverted voter.Likelihood of DetectionThe likelihood of detection depends on the degree of dependency linking the perpetratorto the subverted voters. Countermeasures

Preventive MeasuresApply to voting machines and polling places the Tempest technology and other measuresused by the Defense Department for protecting against exploitation of compromisingelectromagnetic emanations.Use only optical scan machines, and take measures to block the collection of informationthat could identify the sequence of voters whose ballots are being scanned.Detection MeasuresThe attack can not be detected by technical or administrative means. The only possibilityof discovering that it has occurred is if one of the voters reveals the existence of the votebuying or voter intimidation to authorities who are not themselves involved in the scheme.