Re: [SP(I)] “Paper Ballots Are The Only Option”[!!!]
Sukla Sen
Scrap EVMs
and make voting, counting, and sealing of the ballot boxes more robust
On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 12:08 AM Devasahayam MG <deva...@gmail.com> wrote:https://www.thecitizen.in/india/paper-ballots-are-the-only-option-993823A comprehensive report on the media conference held by me and Sam Pitorda on the National Voters Day (25 January, 2024) and the critical issues involved in the run up to Parliament Election - 2024..MGD
Sukla Sen
Deare Sati ji,You are free to go on "supposing". On and on. No bar on that.But, India is still no China.Complaints, if any, will have to be filled with the Election Commission of India. And, if not satisfied with its decision, the complainant is free to approach the law courts.Please do cite a single case.Evidently, one claiming that not a single case has been filled and pursued cannot be asked to cite that case.SuklaOn Fri, Feb 2, 2024, 01:59 Satinath Choudhary <sati...@gmail.com> wrote:<< “Till today, despite all the din, there's not a single specific complaint that has formally been filed and pursued.” >>>
First of all, we do not know of all the complaints that have been made. That being the case, we need to be careful in stating that “there's not a single specific complaint that has formally been filed and pursued.”
Suppose the EVMs’ internal bins, where they store various candidates’ vote counts, are not manipulated until after a random sample of EVMs have been verified by counting the corresponding VVPAT slips, but are manipulated before a significant number of the EVMs have been read. Moreover, suppose the EVMs have been so programmed as to restore the original counts in the bins right after their vote counts have been read. In such a case the EVMs would not be detected for the mischief they did after the initial random checks are finished.
Thus, no matter when you verify the electronic count, in the beginning of the counting process, or at the end of the counting process, one cannot detect rogue behavior of the rigged EVM software will not be detected. Sure, if all of the VVPAT slips as well as the electronic count are counted, then counts will turn out to be different, and the mischief will be caught. But the ECI has been al along resisting manual count of all VVPST slips.
If you assume that large scale brazenly absurd manipulation of counting just 35 votes (in Chandigarh) are likely to happen in the general election, you have to allow for large scale brazen replacement of the genuine EVMs by those that contain cooked up results. Then the opposition can go from courts to courts until the case reaches the Supreme Court after five years when the question will be moot.
Sukla jee, you can’t imagine brazen scenarios only for manual counting of paper ballots and not so brazen process while the electronic count is in vogue. After all what is happening to the more than 19 lakhs of EVMs that are supposed to have vanished?
-Satinath
Sukla Sen
Sati ji,What you are talking of!!!?The point is that if a complaint is filed with the ECI, it'd be in the public domain.If a case is filed with the (constitutional) courts, it'd be in the public domain.Nothing to do with "partiality" or "impartiality". Moreover, nothing stops -- at least as yet -- the complainant shout from the rooftop. If nothing else is available and even the alternative media -- there are so many channels today, one can still tweet, post on the FB or send e-mails. At least as yet.India is still no China, not even Putin's Russia. Though fast approaching that latter state.As far as I'm concerned, the job of the current ECI is to ensure a repeat Modi victory -- even more massive.The courts are also largely compliant by now.We must entertain no illustrations on that score.That's precisely why "Back to Ballots!" is stupendously stupid -- of course -- and, more importantly, suicidal too.Here's an interesting account of what had happened in the Chandigarh Mayoral poll: <https://youtu.be/i-jGll_rYhU>.As against that, not a single specific complaint filed and pursued in respect of the EVM.SuklaOn Fri, Feb 2, 2024, 07:34 Satinath Choudhary <sati...@gmail.com> wrote:Sukla jee,We all know how impartial the ECI and the courts are in India.There was a bit of hope initially when CJI Chandrachud ji was sworn in as CJI, because of his gold-plated words and a couple of initial decisions.All of the desperate moves that Modi seems to be making, as well as deliberately losing a couple of state elections, can be seen as distractions from the key issue of EVMs. One may wonder why would Modi be so keen on toppling various state governments when he knows he can win all elections.Well, we all know how meticulous Modi and his team are. They don't want any of the tracks leading to the next PM/government after the 2024 parliamentary elections. Just in case the EVM has to be scrapped, they don't want to appear to be napping without the support of state governments anywhere. They have to keep the faith of super-analytic people in EVMs because their faith counts a lot.-Satinath=======
Sukla Sen
From: Sukla Sen <sukl...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Feb 4, 2024, 09:23
Subject: Re: [SP(I)] “Paper Ballots Are The Only Option”[!!!]
To: Satinath Choudhary <sati...@gmail.com>
Cc: Socialist Party <socialist-...@googlegroups.com>, Sandeep Pandey <ashaa...@yahoo.com>
I have just noticed that some of the communications between me and Sukla jee (with regard to EVMs) did not get shared in the SP(I) Googlegroup. So, I am going to forward those communications to SP(I). I hope no one would object to it.-Satinath=======On Sat, Feb 3, 2024 at 3:08 PM Satinath Choudhary <sati...@gmail.com> wrote:A correction in my article:apprehensive of any repercussion against the official who made the EVM to them for their research, they did not want to divulge the name of the official who had made the EVM available to them for research purposes.
The words "to them" got omitted.
On Sat, Feb 3, 2024 at 2:55 PM Satinath Choudhary <sati...@gmail.com> wrote:Dear Sukla jee,
Often the “technocrats” <https://youtu.be/z5Y6z29El3I> get so enmeshed in the trees, that they forget to take a view of the whole forest. This gentleman seems to be mostly concerned regarding the rigging of the EVMs during the process of voting. He forgets that they can be manipulated during counting as well, via secret codes transmitted to them at suitable times.
Manipulations during the counting process have been amply illustrated by “real experts” from India, the USA, and Holland, in the video and texts on the website: https://indiaevm.org/, entitled “India's EVMs are Vulnerable to Fraud Hari K. Prasad, J. Alex Halderman, Rop Gonggrijp,” way back in 2010. I suggest you kindly take a look at the website.
They clearly showed how the votes for various candidates can be manipulated during the counting process.
I am going to copy a part of my article relevant to answering your trust in that “expert” who was hired as an adviser to Obama (who fooled liberal Americans into thinking that he is a liberal black man).
Here is the excerpt from my article:
Very capable technical Expert, Mr. Hari Prasad, Prof. Halderman from Michigan University, USA, and Dr. Gonggrijp from Holland had undertaken thorough research to meet the challenge of the ECI to hack their EVM, which the ECI had claimed to be hack-proof. Realizing the importance of their research, an ECI or government official had made one of the EVMs, used in elections in India, available to them.
These experts showed that by replacing or adding some of the chips in the EVM it can be hacked to change the outcome of the election. In their demonstration, as documented in the video and associated texts at the above website, they conclusively proved that EVM software can be rigged to change the results of an election, make a losing party winner, and vice-versa.
The ECI was so perturbed by the excellent research and demonstration of the above-mentioned group of experts on EVM, that the ECI charged them with theft of the EVM, even though the experts openly claimed that the EVM they were demonstrating had been used in Indian elections, but, apprehensive of any repercussion against the official who made the EVM for their research, they did not want to divulge the name of the official who had made the EVM available to them for research purpose.
The ECI got Mr. Prasad arrested, and jailed, and they hounded the two professors to make a quick exit from India, lest they too would be arrested. Instead of charging them for the theft, they should have been decorated and rewarded for their research to save democracy in India. This was proudly announced by the ECI way back in 2010 and it continues to be the stand of the then Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), even today even after he has retired from government service. (Watch "Ex CEC S.Y. Quraishi ने Election commission पर क्यों खड़े किए सवाल ?" on YouTube https://youtu.be/o41fAPbFmY4?si=bdJrZy0xPNacFw31)
I wish the interviewer had asked of Dr. Quraishi: What is more important? Is it the supposed theft of a decrepit EVM (to research it to prove that EVMs are not safe machines to be used for elections), or saving democracy in India and around the world, by proving that EVMs are not trustworthy machines? I wish the interviewer had pointed out to Dr. Quraishi other things like the possibility of delay in manipulation of the vote counts (with the help of secret signals to be sent to EVMs) until after vote counts on randomly selected EVMs have been verified by counting corresponding VVPAT slip counts, to evade detection of possible manipulations. I wish the interviewer had asked some other technical questions showing the vulnerability of EVMs.
Further, I have heard some people suggesting that the ECI should allow the EVM software to be examined by independent “experts”. First of all, it is the so-called experts who have brought in the EVM. In the voting device, we need something that ordinary people can understand without the intervention of the so-called “experts”. Nobody should be asked to rely on the trustworthiness of anyone, expert or otherwise. Most importantly, even if we do have trustworthy software, is it going to be very difficult for a person with unfathomable moneybags to bribe the company that prints the software onto chips to print a rigged software on the chips and throw away the original software that they were approved by the experts?
Once a program/software is imprinted on a chip, no one can read it. The only way to test it is by giving it different kinds of input and looking at the output. If the output happens to be as expected, the machine has to be certified as good. But, as has been pointed out earlier, rigged software can be made to work in (1) normal mode, and (2) rigged mode. The modes can be switched from one to the other with the help of secret codes sent to the machine via radio waves like the ones used by mobiles. In the normal mode, the machine is supposed to work as a normal unrigged good machine would, and no amount of testing would reveal that it has been rigged. Only the people who know the secret codes can show the tricky things that the rigged EVMs can do.
So, people should not fall into the trap of getting the software examined by “independent experts”. We must stay away from electronic counting of the votes, period. And that the VVPAT system should be made more robust.
In the following, we will show that (1) the use of VVPAT can be continued, (2) the counting of the paper slips can be improved as outlined below. And, (3) the paper-tape sealing of the ballot boxes can be improved.
Sukla jee,I do not think you have read my article. Please read it. It has a lot of things that will clear your thoughts about EVMs and paper ballots.
-Satinath
=======