The DOD has locked out the fvap.gov website in an attempt to stop
military votes. However, you can get the same information mirrored
here:

http://www.overseasvote2004.com/

Looks like Rummy wants democracy everwhere but the USA. More info
here:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39167419,00.htm

Please spread the word.

) wrote:

>The DOD has locked out the fvap.gov website in an attempt to stop
>military votes. However, you can get the same information mirrored
>here:
>
>http://www.overseasvote2004.com/
>
>Looks like Rummy wants democracy everwhere but the USA. More info
>here:
>http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39167419,00.htm

Per the above article,
<quote>
Wanadoo and BT have both been hit by the blockade, according to sources
familiar with the situation, and early reports have claimed that Telefonica
and China Telecom are also hit.
</quote>

If you look the amount of spam, trojans, etc. coming from these domains is
legend. Look into the conversations at net.admin.net-abuse.email and the
notices in net.admin.net-abuse.bulletins for details. The domains listed
in the article and their associated address ranges are, IIRC, block on
sight.

In short, they're protecting their network.

| George Ruch
| "Just the facts, ma'am"

I can't interpret your gibberish. Hopefully English is a second
language for you. If not, please don't vote. You clearly are not are
not literate and thus can't be informed enough to vote wisely.

"ian maclure" > wrote in message >...
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 16:04:01 +0000, John?]
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Overseasvote 2004 says "Paid for by the Democratic National Committee *
> > 430 S. Capitol St. SE, Washington DC 20003.
> >
> > Meanwhile, http://fvap.gov/ works just fine for me.
> >
> > Whom did you say is trying to suppress the military vote...?
>
> Based on the recent past that would be errmmm, the Dhimmicraps!
>
> IBM
>
> __________________________________________________ _____________________________
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:11:42 -0700, wrote:

> I can't interpret your gibberish. Hopefully English is a second

Your lack of reading comprehension is not my problem.
Maybe the Laubach Literacy folks could help.

> language for you. If not, please don't vote. You clearly are not are
> not literate and thus can't be informed enough to vote wisely.

English is my native language.
I am very literate.
And ( you aren't going to like this at all ), I intend to vote:

1. early
2. often
3. Republican

In short:

1. Neener!
2. Neener!
3. Neener!

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

Protecting their website? Is this like cutting down all the trees to
prevent forest fires?

Sending spam is easy. Faking email addresses is easy. Hacking website
is an order of magnitude harder. Most hacks are done by "social
engineering" the DNS to a new address. One would thing for the
fvap.gov, this could be controlled.

George Ruch > wrote in message >...
> ) wrote:
>
> >The DOD has locked out the fvap.gov website in an attempt to stop
> >military votes. However, you can get the same information mirrored
> >here:
> >
> >http://www.overseasvote2004.com/
> >
> >Looks like Rummy wants democracy everwhere but the USA. More info
> >here:
> >http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39167419,00.htm
>
> Per the above article,
> <quote>
> Wanadoo and BT have both been hit by the blockade, according to sources
> familiar with the situation, and early reports have claimed that Telefonica
> and China Telecom are also hit.
> </quote>
>
> If you look the amount of spam, trojans, etc. coming from these domains is
> legend. Look into the conversations at net.admin.net-abuse.email and the
> notices in net.admin.net-abuse.bulletins for details. The domains listed
> in the article and their associated address ranges are, IIRC, block on
> sight.
>
> In short, they're protecting their network.
>
> | George Ruch
> | "Just the facts, ma'am"

Yes, I suppose Republicans do vote often in the same election.

"ian maclure" > wrote in message >...
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:11:42 -0700, wrote:
>
> > I can't interpret your gibberish. Hopefully English is a second
>
> Your lack of reading comprehension is not my problem.
> Maybe the Laubach Literacy folks could help.
>
> > language for you. If not, please don't vote. You clearly are not are
> > not literate and thus can't be informed enough to vote wisely.
>
> English is my native language.
> I am very literate.
> And ( you aren't going to like this at all ), I intend to vote:
>
> 1. early
> 2. often
> 3. Republican
>
> In short:
>
> 1. Neener!
> 2. Neener!
> 3. Neener!
>
> IBM
>
> __________________________________________________ _____________________________
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

) wrote:

>Protecting their website? Is this like cutting down all the trees to
>prevent forest fires?
>
>Sending spam is easy. Faking email addresses is easy. Hacking website
>is an order of magnitude harder. Most hacks are done by "social
>engineering" the DNS to a new address. One would thing for the
>fvap.gov, this could be controlled.

The point you seem to have missed is that the blocked networks referenced
in the article Are Not To Be Trusted. In most cases any mail and web
traffic hosted on them is Block On Sight.

Blocking these networks should _not_ prevent overseas military personnel
from using their on-base .mil addresses for both registration and voting.

| George Ruch
| "Is there life in Clovis after Clovis Man?"