From RonPaulBookBomb.com:
“Dr. Paul’s first original book in over 20 years covers all the ideas of the Ron Paul Revolution: on war, sound money, terrorism, the economy, the IRS, civil liberties, the Constitution, and everything in between.  Read the preface, and get a taste of just how important and explosive this book will be.”

(The site includes what appears to be the preface from the actual book.)

CLEARWATER, Florida - Anonymous announced their intention to combat the activities of the Church of Scientology on Monday. A spokesperson said that the group’s goals include bringing an end to the financial exploitation of Church members and protecting the right to free speech, a right which they claim was consistently violated by the Church of Scientology in pursuit of its opponents.

This announcement came as a response to attempts by the Church to keep secret an internal video meant to be viewed only by Scientologists, featuring actor Tom Cruise. Despite their efforts, the movie was leaked and rapidly spread across the Internet. The video caused much controversy, and members of Anonymous posted a message to several of their websites proclaiming war against Scientology. Soon after, Anonymous struck at the church; they blocked access to its website, made prank calls, organized protests, distributed anti-Church pamphlets and information, and extracted secret files from the Church of Scientology and its parent company, the Religious Technology Center.

Anonymous’ members cited several reasons for their actions against the Church of Scientology: many have stressed the alleged human rights violations under the auspices of the Church.^[1] Others accused the Church of fraud due to its costly ceremonies, while some merely sought the entertainment they refer to as “lulz,” a corruption of the Internet slang “LOL,” or “laugh out loud.”

Most members, however, were concerned with the threat to free speech that the Church posed. This was most evident in the recent attacks on websites such as Digg and YouTube, where the Church filtered anti-Scientology comments and replaced their content with the text “[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of Scientology International].”

“The so-called Church of Scientology actively misused copyright and trademark law in pursuit of its own agenda,” one Anonymous commented. “They attempted not only to subvert free speech, but to recklessly pervert justice to silence those who spoke out against them.”

The Church of Scientology’s legal struggle with its online detractors began in 1994 with the Usenet group “alt.religion.scientology”, a community which spoke out against the Church. Legal representatives from the Church confronted them specifically over the use of Scientology in their name, citing trademark infringement and misrepresentation. This led to numerous lawsuits,^[2] and the group was shut down.^[3] The Church of Scientology later found itself in several further conflicts on the Internet,^[4] including some with popular websites such as Google and Slashdot,^[5] as well as an alleged “war” with users of the website YTMND.com.^[6]

The members of Anonymous do not plan to end their attacks on the Church of Scientology. Instead, they will continue until the Church of Scientology reacts, at which point they will change strategy. Their main goal is to render the church powerless, and so the war could be one of attrition.

Science fiction author L. Ron Hubbard founded the Church in 1953. In the 55 years since its inception, the Church has faced allegations of being a commercial enterprise that harasses its critics, exploits its members, and neglects adults in its care. Scientology has also faced criticism over the cost required to progress through its “auditing” system, with the total bill for completing the course estimated at $365,000 - $380,000.^[7]

[1] http://www.whyaretheydead.net/Universal_Declaration_of_H …
[2] http://www.discord.org/%7Elippard/skeptic/03.3.jl-jj-sci …
[3] http://www.nyupress.org/netwars/textonly/pages/chapter06 …
[4] http://www.news.com/2100-1023-959236.html
[5] http://slashdot.org/yro/01/03/16/1256226.shtml
[6] http://www.ytmnd.com/news/?news_id=40
[7] http://www.xenu.net/archive/prices.html

The press release is rapidly making its way into the internet via such models as StumbleUpon, Digg, Reddit, BoingBoing, and MetaFilter. Stay tuned!

When it comes to operating systems, the choice between open and closed source software is often a matter of security. That is, in the closed-source world, security largely depends on the secrecy of the source code. Since the source code can only be reviewed by a finite number of experts within the firm that created the software, there are inevitably mistakes that slip through the cracks. Mistakes that are found after the software is released can only be fixed by the software vendor, and the whole world has to wait until a fix is available. Having access to source code makes it much, much easier to find mistakes. That’s why closed-source vendors keep it a secret.  So, when source code of closed-source software gets leaked to the public, it’s considered a disaster, especially when most of the world depends on the software in question.

In contrast, source code in the Open Source community is available for the whole world to see. Mistakes that would otherwise go unnoticed are caught early in the development process, and mistakes that are found after the initial release can be quickly fixed by anyone.  That fix (usually in the form of a software “patch”) can then be made available to the rest of the community.  It is not necessary to wait for a fix from the software vendor.

Source Code and Voting Machines
I could drone on about how the closed-source development model is responsible for almost all of the most damaging computer worms, but instead let’s look at how these two development models apply to voting machines.  This is actually very simple.  Every computerized voting machine I have ever seen implemented operates using closed-source software that runs on closed-source operating systems.  As long as that’s the case, worrying about physical security and chain-of-custody is almost pointless.  As soon as someone finds a way to exploit a mistake in the software, he could exploit the mistake to manipulate the voting machine.

Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election Systems, Inc or DESI) has the lion’s share of the computerized voting machine market. Their source code, which was written using the closed-source development model, has been leaked more than once.  A book could be written about the security flaws in their code, but suffice to say that anyone with access to a voting terminal (read: tech-savvy voters) could completely change the ballot file.

Closed-source software has no place on public voting machines!  The very notion is ridiculous, but it’s a growing trend in the United States.

Hacking Democracy
If you’re still not convinced that America is facing a serious problem, please watch this video in entirety.  The last half hour is the most important part:

Here are the uncensored results from the Nevada Republican presidential caucus:

Candidate		Votes	%	National delegates
Mitt Romney		22,649	51.10%	18
Ron Paul		6,087	13.73%	4
John McCain		5,651	12.75%	4
Mike Huckabee		3,616	8.16%	2
Fred Thompson		3,521	7.94%	2
Rudy Giuliani		1,910	4.31%	1
Duncan Hunter		890	2.01%	0
Total		44,324	100.0%	31

Here are the results that Fox News reported:

Thanks to Stephen Gordon at Third Party Watch.

The anchor at the end of the clip is apparently not aware that Ron Paul raised more money in a single day than any candidate in American history, or that he raised far more money from real people this quarter than any of the other candidates raised last quarter. (Romney gave himself $8.5 million in Q3) Of course, he also trounces all the other candidates in online polls, forums, searches, and overruns other candidates in number of supporters who show up at events.

• The Spectrum Should Be Private Property: The Economics, History, and Future of Wireless Technology by B.K Marcus
• The Spectrum Swindle by Tim Swanson

Every American has been screwed by the FCC.  A vast, vast majority of them will never know just how much they’ve been affected, but sadly they all have and will pay the price.

The old media is still used to being able to get away with this sort of thing, but each time they try they inch closer to grocery-store-tabloid status.  Gone are the days when publications like this could publish whatever they want without any accountability, thanks to the internet.

UPDATE: The New York Times has retracted their smear piece.

Since the ruling, the DOJ has refused to answer any questions regarding their stance on citizens being forced to reveal encryption keys. Click here to read the story on News.com