Written on April 10, 2012 by Ann-Marie Murrell
Here’s another of those quiet, subtle, but very dangerous little stories that has somehow slipped past all the mainstream media outlets.
The United States of America has a brand new private VOTE COUNTING company that the Obama administration has personally handpicked.
The company is called Scytl and it is based in Michelle Obama’s most favorite vacation spot, Barcelona, Spain.
Forget the fact that Barack is once again providing jobs for people in another country; there are much bigger fish to fry in this story.
According to the “About Us” section of the Scytl website:
Scytl is a worldwide leader in the development of secure solutions for electoral modernization.
Scytl was formed as a spin-off from a leading research group at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. This group, funded by the Spanish Government’s Ministry of Science and Technology, has pioneered the research on e-voting security in Europe since 1994 and has produced significant scientific results, including 25 scientific papers published in international journals and the first two European Ph.D. theses on electronic voting security, by Prof. Joan Borrell and Scytl’s founder Dr. Andreu Riera (in 1996 and 1999, respectively). This research group also participated in the first Internet binding election in Europe (i.e., the 1997 election to the Presidency of the IEEE IT Spanish chapter).
Scytl has customers both in the private and public sectors. Some of these customers represent leading references in the electoral modernization market (e.g., governments in Spain, the USA, France, Austria, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Philippines, Argentina, Mexico, Finland and Australia) and are pioneering new electronic voting applications. Scytl’s solutions have been successfully used in multiple projects worldwide, some of which represent breakthrough projects for the electoral modernization industry.
So what does this mean for all us non-European voters here in America?
According to Michael Savage, “[T]his critical component to a free election, the transparent tabulation of votes, will not be handled by individual precincts but by a company over which we will have little control…The problem is that once the votes are merged, it will be impossible to go back and check their integrity at the local level. It is very likely that this is the final step in Barack Obama’s corruption of the voting process. It has the promise of enabling him and his cohorts to control the outcomes of federal elections with no accountability. On top of that it’s one more step toward a global government.”
There are no Americans on the Board of Directors of Scytl—but CEO Pere Valles once lived and worked in Barack’s old stomping grounds, Chicago. From the Scytl website:
Mr. Valles joined Scytl in March 2004 after spending most of his professional career in the United States. Prior to joining Scytl, Mr. Valles was Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of GlobalNet, a NASDAQ publicly-traded telecommunications company headquartered in Chicago. Mr. Valles assisted GlobalNet in becoming one of the leading providers of Voice-over-IP in the world and was instrumental in the successful sale of the company to the Titan Corporation, a NYSE defense company. At GlobalNet, Mr. Valles was responsible for designing and executing the strategic plan that led to an increase in revenues from US$ 25 million to over US$ 100 million and brought the company to profitability. Previously, Mr. Valles had worked as Senior Manager for KPMG
‘s Mergers & Acquisitions group in Los Angeles and Miami providing financial and strategic consulting services to private equity groups and corporations involved in acquisitions in the United States, Latin America and Europe. During his career at KPMG, Mr. Valles actively participated in more than 20 transactions in the telecommunications and technology areas. Mr. Valles has a bachelor degree in Economics and a bachelor degree in Law from the University of Barcelona and a MBA (summa cum laude) from Indiana University.
but turned it down. Their reasons:
Our findings identified vulnerabilities that, in the worst case, could result in (i) voters being unable to cast votes, (ii) an election result that does not accurately reflect the will of the voters, or (iii) disclosure of confidential information, such as the votes cast by a voter. The extent to which these vulnerabilities could actually be exploited in the ODBP is beyond the scope of this report given our lack of system context. Secure handling and audit of the Voter Choice Records may defend against some or all of these vulnerabilities, but these procedures were not available for review.
We identify three findings of particular significance:
- The use of supervised polling stations provides significantly better protection against voter coercion or vote- selling than is present in some other absentee voting systems, such as voting by mail.
- Two copies of each vote are stored: one electronically, and another on paper as a Voter Choice Record. This pro- vides redundancy that is not present in existing vote-by-mail systems. If the electronic votes are well-protected, then they can enable audit of the paper records in ways that are not currently possible.
- After casting their ballot, each voter is given a receipt that is intended to give voters confidence that their votes were “Counted as Cast”. These receipts do not achieve their stated goal of allowing voters to “independently verify that their ballots have been correctly accounted for.” These receipts might indicate that a vote was received and decrypted by the county (a property not typically provided by current postal voting systems), but they do not provide assurance that the voter’s vote was correctly recorded.
Also interesting to note, one of the organizations on “Scytl Partners” tab is Oracle
, a major supporter to all-things-Democrat
. And another Scytl Partner is a spooky “global governance” organization called Gov2u.org.
Check them out. Yikes.
There are many, many reasons for all of us to be concerned about Obama’s choice in vote-counting this November—yet no one seems to be up-in-arms about this other than Michael Savage and a handful of Internet bloggers.
Goodbye ACORN, hello Scytl…
Please be email friendly.
If you forward this correspondence, PLEASE delete the forwarding history, which includes my email address! It is a courtesy to me and others who may not wish to have their email addresses sent all over the world! Erasing the history helps prevent spammers from mining addresses and viruses from being propagated. Thank you!!
The slightest bit of foreign influence is a SHOW STOPPER in my view and I don’t trust anyone that I’m in the trenches with. I would even consider this a risk if it were one of our closest allies like England.
Just as non-US-citizens can NOT legally vote in any US election (or become President (wink)), nor should any company/corporation outside the US continent be eligible to participate, in any way, shape or form, or have anything to do with the concepts, design or creation of any voting system used in any US election..... PERIOD!!!... not even dog catcher. Any business that has foreign interest, should be ineligible from gaining, or disqualified from continuing with any government contracts of this nature… as “national security risk” is written all over this one.
Any software based system could be far more secure then our current system, as long as there were checks and balances to verify that once a vote is entered and confirmed, it can not be changed, not even by the voter. I would even refrain here about implying what the security measures would be.
Actually, I would worry about any private sector company playing even a minor part in this development, unless there were security measures taken from the get-go. One security measure is that all software development be done at a government controlled location. NO CODE leaves the building … NO CODE enters the building. Code is entered by an onsite programmer’s keystrokes. In my view this group should be an extended branch of the service dedicated to government technology development and it be made up of only born Americans, as anyone with even the slightest allegiance to another nation should be considered a national security risk and managing risk is job one.
One BIG problem that I see is that these computerized voting machine DO NOT HAVE paper ballots for back up counting. (Not that they would ever use them). The other problem is informing the PUBLIC how they are being counted precinct ( I know they get the voting numbers from the machine and match total with the sign in books. They do a zero count to make sure no votes are on the machine b-4 elections start), but I don't know what happens when they are sent to the LOCAL court house for county count, don't know how the state counts county, don't know how the states are counted nationally.
This system removes humans from counting and matching the sign in books. As much as we'd like to trust those folks at the precinct level to be honest, ethics doesn't seem to be a strong suit anymore as corruption has infiltrated every part of our system.
For any highly secure system, you're talking finger-print and body-temperature ID and even possibly eye-pupil recognition or maybe voice recognition. or a combination of some or all. The computer voting for the recent primary had touch screens, so it's already possible for some of the above mentioned security measures. The paper ballot would have to go bye-bye.
Last, the electoral college is an antiquated and corrupt system as well. It's less work to shift delegates in one direction or another then it would be to change popular vote. When you have so many people involved in the count, you have room for error; or is that error, instead, really corruption? The potential for corruption has to be weeded out somehow.
We talk about honest and accurate elections, and about the security of votes and ballots. We talk a lot about the corruption in our system such as this SCYTL buy out, and our system being taken over by foreign companies. SO your next move is to abolish the one thing that could possibly provide that very same article and object that was designed to prevent corruption and anyone stealing the elections, (The Electoral Collage system). When you work to abolish the EC system, you work towards achieving the same goal that the left wing communists want to do. The Electoral Collage system was originally designed and instituted specifically to prevent just this kind of voter election corruption that we see right now. A straightforward one-man-one-vote system is exactly what is being corrupted right now. There is no way to insure an accurate vote count, these electronic voting machines are too easily manipulated, the votes are pre-determined and the machines are pre-programmed to pick who ever the programmers want. This is why most of our absentee ballots will be re-directed towards Obama, but the Electoral Collage system is not so easily infiltrated, it is not so easily corrupted, and we-the-people have far more control over this part of our election system. It is precisely why the Democrats hate it. Anyone who advocates the abolishment of the Electoral Collage system simply does not understand how it works and why it was designed in the first place. I urge everyone to educate your selves, accurate knowledge and understanding this system is crucial. A free people cannot long exist if the people lose the knowledge to preserve that freedom.
@Ronald I'm with u on the electoral college, I TOTALLY SUPPORT that and have defended it for years. I agree the Democrats want to go to the popular vote, where BIG CITIES will dominate!!!! I still would like paper ballots for all machine and I would like them checked with that particular machine.(one on one count- with public voting) I also would like more OPEN information on who is counting our votes/tallies through-out the process (precinct,county,stateand national level) and don't like back door of this process BUT a moreopen to the PUBLIC. Yes I agree about the electoral college and to keep it BUT those delegates are pre-picked and sent to vote apond our votes. ALSO they want to DESTROY our constitution I LOVE that we have a process to amended, even if it's hard to do. ALWAYS stick to that and NEVER have a Constitution AMENDMENT CONVENTION. That would be the Democrats DREAM to change our Constitution at the convention to wear we would not reckonize it. NEVER-NEVER DO A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION and fall for their tricks. That's how I feel on the popular vote it's a democratic trick!!!
My thoughts are first always in the best interest of the people. My bringing up the electoral college was off subject and threw focus in the wrong direction. But the Gallop poles on the subject does show many Americans have a negative view of the “electoral college”.
In any case, Scytl is the focus and allowing any foreign influence to be involved in our voting system is NOT in the country’s best interest.
And I agree that the current voting machines were developed with simplicity in mind and with little concern for security. When you leave a door open for corruption, you’re asking for it to happen.