Raytheon lobbyists find a safe space in NY Times foreign policy pages: https://thecolumn.substack.com/p/on-afghanistan-withdrawal-nyts-peter https://thecolumn.s

Raytheon lobbyists find a safe space in NY Times foreign policy pages: https://thecolumn.substack.com/p/on-afghanistan-withdrawal-nyts-peter https://thecolumn.substack.com/p/on-afghanistan-withdrawal-n... As for this article: His unfounded claim that electronic voting machines will be rigged Let's see how unfounded it is: the machines are made in Brazil by Procomp, a subsidiary of Diebold Nixdorf, an American firm [..] Hackers invited by the TSE to test the system concluded that, while an unscrupulous politician would find it nearly impossible to commit large-scale fraud because the machines are not connected to the internet, someone with access to the software, ie, someone connected with [Brazil's supreme electoral tribunal], could manipulate results without being detected. That is because Brazil lacks a “voter-verified paper audit trail”. Congress has voted twice to modify the system so that voters receive printed receipts, which could be checked in case of technical glitches or allegations of fraud. Mr Bolsonaro, in fact, sponsored such a proposal. But in June Brazil’s supreme court struck down a law that would have introduced paper receipts for 5% of ballot boxes. It said the measure would be too cumbersome and expensive to use on a large scale. -- https://www.economist.com/the-americas/2018/10/05/brazils-voters-worry-about-the-integrity-of-their-elections https://www.economist.com/the-americas/2018/10/05/brazils-vo... Known vulnerable machines, created by a foreign firm, whose machines were previously derided as insecure even in its home country [1], and actively resisting even a 5% paper trail? Can't imagine why Mr. Bolsonaro doesn't trust them. In fact I'm sure that if a Russian or Chinese firm, with a history of security issues, had made voting machines, and the judiciary overturned paper trail requirements, Americans would have no issues trusting the security and legitimacy of their elections! [1] Malicious software running on a single voting machine can steal votes with little if any risk of detection. The malicious software can modify all of the records, audit logs, and counters kept by the voting machine, so that even careful forensic examination of these records will find nothing amiss. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions#Security_and_concealment_issues https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions#Sec...