TVNL Note: On July 4th, 2012, attendees of the first Occupy National Gathering in Philadelphia announced their "Vision For A Democratic Future."  The following is a challenge to that vision and a warning about its message originally stated in an email to Mike Malloy's radio show.

by Tara "dacktyl" Devlin, founder of RepublicanDirtyTricks.com

Hi, Mike.

I wanted to share my feelings with you about the Occupy statement you read last night.   

Frankly, the statement pissed me off because it sounded to me, not like a beautiful vision for the world in stark contrast to the CON vision of greed, hierarchy and intellectual incuriosity - but the death knell of a once promising movement.

"Our process is our message?!"  WHAT?  Really?  I know that was probably meant to be a radical, bold, daring attempt at a fundamental shift in consciousness about how we organize our society, but it sounded more like a gift to the elites who are giggling with delight by the way Occupy just solidified itself as a fringe movement.

Crafting a "vision statement" that is SO incredibly broad and all encompassing is nothing but wasted time and energy.   The struggling working classes need champions to fight for them in the HERE AND NOW - not paint a "peace and love" picture of an airy-fairy utopia that is SO FAR from fruition to make it frustratingly laughable.

By Bev Harris, Founder of BlackBoxVoting.org

Don't be confused, and don't let anyone tell you that you shouldn't talk about this.

TO BE CLEAR: THE PUBLIC HAS BOTH THE RIGHT TO INSPECT BALLOTS AND THE RIGHT TO A SECRET BALLOT

We have a right to BOTH. Some election officials have been conflating these two issues, claiming that if we examine ballots we can see how people voted. Now, this raises a stunning question: If this is so, that means that election officials and vendors can also figure out how you voted.

We all need to grab a cleaver and chop these two rights into the two distinct rights that they are. The right to inspect; the right to privacy.

by Bev Harris, founder of BlackBoxVoting.org

The Colorado Supreme Court's decision has reaffirmed that election ballots are open public records. As a result, the public will be able to verify that untraceable votes are accurately interpreted and counted. This decision comes as election officials are preparing for the 2012 presidential election.

In September, 2011, the Colorado Appeals Court ruled that ballots are indeed open public records. The City filed requested that the Colorado Supreme Court reverse the decision. The Supreme Court has now decided not to hear the Koch v. Marks case. The Court chose to end the controversy in favor of election transparency.

"This is a welcome decision that reconfirms the vitality of the Colorado Open Records Act as a powerful tool that permits ordinary Coloradans to hold their state and local governments accountable," said Marks's attorney Robert A. McGuire of Denver.

By Bev Harris, founder of BlackBoxVoting.org

I have found and posted the actual voter list software used widely throughout the USA (TN, WI, PA, CO, KS...) for Accenture voter registration and voter histories. I located the files on a magnetic backup tape of the hard drive of a county elections IT employee, part of a 120-gig set of discovery files.

The Accenture voter registration / voter history software is highly problematic, and has been reported switching voter parties in Colorado, and losing voter histories in Tennessee.