"The biggest scandal to ever hit American politics"

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Jas, Nov 7, 2004.

  1. Jas

    Jas Guest

    "Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes
    to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records
    show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct."

    http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65609,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html


    "...a problem with memory cards in North Carolina that caused machines
    made by UniLect to lose 4,500 votes cast on e-voting machines"

    "Software made by Election Systems & Software began subtracting votes
    when totals surpassed 32,000"

    "Reports from voters in Florida and Ohio also indicated that some of
    them had problems voting for the candidate of their choice. When they
    tried to vote for John Kerry, they said, the machine either wouldn't
    register the vote at all or would indicate on the review page that the
    vote was cast for Bush instead."

    http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65623,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html


    The Exit Polls might not have been so incorrect after all. Get ready
    for the biggest scandal to ever hit american politics, although you
    would have to expect something of this magnitude to be covered up
    pretty darn quickly.

    To Those Who Seek Information as a Basis For Action Regarding Bush's
    "Victory":

    I examined the discrepancies between the actual vote tabulations as
    reported and the Edison/Mitofsky exit poll results in 47 states, incl. D.C.
    (in 4 states-NJ,NY,NC,VA-I did not have early exit poll results available,
    and the later results had already been amended to reflect input of actual
    vote totals, which rendered them corrupt as exit polls and useless for the
    purpose of checking the veracity of actual vote totals).

    I noticed an overall red shift (to Bush) across the spectrum of states,
    but the shift was significantly nonuniform. Having divided the 47 states
    examined into two groups, 35 noncritical states and 12 critical or suspect
    states (Nebraska included because of ES&S control and prior anomalies even
    though not a battleground state), I calculated that the average discrepancy
    in the 35 safe states was a +1.4% red shift, that is the average of the vote
    totals in each state was 1.4% more favorable to Bush than what the exit
    polls predicted (= total movement of 2.8%). In the 12 critical states
    (CO,FL,MI,MN,NE,NV,NH,NM,OH,PA,WI,IA) the average discrepancy was a 2.5% red
    shift (= total movement of 5.0%), nearly twice that in the safe states. This
    in spite of the fact that the average sample size in the critical states was
    nearly twice that in the noncritical states and should have produced
    significantly more accurate results.

    Further, assuming a 3% margin of error and 95% confidence interval for each
    state poll (the standard Mitofksy
    protocol, but a conservative assumption here, since the sample sizes were
    significantly increased in critical states), the red shift exceeded the
    margin of error in 4 of the 12 critical states (and equalled it in a fifth).
    The chance of this occurring in 4 of the 12 states in the absence of
    "mistabulation" can be computed using a simple probability equation and is
    approximately 0.002 or one in five-hundred. It's a relatively crude
    analysis and better analysis would have to wait on more complete data, but
    basically what it's telling us is that we can say with 99.8% certainty that
    "mistabulation" played some significant role in this election.

    From the specific discrepancies in Florida, Ohio, and New Mexico; from
    the amazing voter turnout, which any analyst on truth serum will admit
    should have guaranteed a Kerry victory; from what we know, but the media has
    now chosen to forget, about how suspect and partisan the vote counting
    equipment is; and from pieces of circumstantial evidence, such as Bush not
    deigning to campaign in Ohio (crazy unless the fix was in): we can be all
    but certain that another election has been stolen and that the toilet has
    been flushed on our democracy.

    Kerry, inanely, has conceded. But the truth remains to be dug out to
    lie in the light and stink in the open air. If we can do no more, let's at
    least make sure we don't rest until we have done that.-Jonathan Simon
    (Alliance for Democracy)
    Remember exit polls are quite accurate. Kerry was significantly ahead in
    many areas (in which he lost) when voting machines were used

    As one said: "Exit polling is extremely accurate. The pollster is asking
    people that have actually voted. Unless they lie to the pollster, exit
    polling should have been very close."



    No Time for Liberal Self-Recrimination
    By Richard Heinberg

    November second was a dark day for the future of our world. Just how
    dark we are likely to find out soon enough.

    Like many other people I've since compared notes with, I wandered
    around in a depressed daze Tuesday evening and much of the next day.
    The two questions I asked myself are o­nes that millions were no doubt
    pondering: What can we learn from these events, and where do we go
    from here?

    Having spent a couple of days looking at and thinking about the actual
    election results, it seems to me that the answers to these questions
    are going to take a while to emerge. o­ne thing is clear already,
    though: We have to start with a realistic understanding of what
    happened

    In the days before the election I anticipated a Bush win, primarily
    because of the numbers of electronic voting machines in place in
    strategic states and counties. At least of a third of voters used
    these new "black box" paperless touch-screen machines; the problems
    with them-their vulnerability to tampering and their inability to
    provide the basis for a verifiable recount, as well as the political
    partisanship of their manufacturers-have been discussed extensively
    for the past two years. I predicted to friends that o­nly a landslide
    vote for Kerry could give him the White House.

    On the day of the election, as I learned of the high voter turnout, I
    became guardedly optimistic about a Kerry victory. People rarely vote
    in record numbers merely to endorse the status quo; usually a high
    turnout means that the electorate wants a change. Informal early exit
    polls showed strong numbers for Kerry. Was this the landslide that
    might overwhelm Bush's secret weapon?

    Then the official vote counting began, and the news was grim. By
    Wednesday morning everyone was agreed: Bush had won, Kerry had lost.
    The people had spoken.

    Within hours, leftist spokespeople were offering radio and newspaper
    commentaries that offered o­ne or both of two rather predictable
    responses. First: the Democrats blew it; they misread the electorate;
    they didn't get out the vote; they didn't put forward a sufficiently
    (fill in the blank) program. Second: We o­n the left need to regroup,
    organize, and hone our message so that it appeals to more voters next
    time around.

    It seems to me that both responses are pointless. Why? They miss the
    single most important aspect of the situation.

    This election, like the presidential election of 2000 and the
    senatorial elections of 2002, appears to have been stolen.

    The evidence of massive voting fraud in this instance is convincing
    but-due to the nature of the voting machines themselves-probably
    impossible to prove legally. That, of course, is the genius of the
    fraud strategy.

    In most states where there was a paper trail, exit polls matched the
    official tally closely. In states where there was no paper trail, exit
    polls diverged widely from official tallies, in Bush's favor in every
    instance. The odds against this occurring, absent fraud, are
    staggering.

    In Florida, exit polls favored Kerry by 0.7%, while Bush officially
    won by 5.1%. If the official results had been based o­n exit polls
    rather than official tallies from computer voting machines, Kerry
    would easily have won a minimum of six more states and the presidency.

    The details will no doubt emerge gradually, as the result of
    painstaking research. And they will be reported o­nly haphazardly and
    dismissively in the mainstream press. The outcome of the election is
    unlikely to be changed. However, the lessons we draw from it need to
    reflect the reality, not the illusion.

    If it is true that Bush won o­nly as a result of massive voting fraud,
    then telling people that "we need to work harder to get out the vote
    next time" or "we screwed up by not sending a message that resonated
    with the electorate" is an insulting misdirection and waste of
    everyone's time and attention.

    Meanwhile, o­ne party now controls all three branches of government
    and the machinery that decides who wins elections. There is every
    reason to assume that the Right will use the next months and years to
    attempt to destroy the entire infrastructure of environmental,
    consumer, and human rights nonprofit organizations in this country.
    Who is to stop them?

    Wake up folks: democracy in the US is virtually dead. If we want to
    revive it, much more will be involved than honing messages and getting
    out more voters. For the time being, we are living in a dictatorship.
    There is no point in denying the fact and deluding ourselves by
    thinking that we still live in a country where the will of the
    majority decides anything whatever. o­nly when we have thoroughly
    digested the reality of our situation can we hope to come up with an
    intelligent strategic response.

    For more information:http://www.blackboxvoting.org
    http://www.newstarget.com/002076.html
    http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=388
    http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR062104.htm
    http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2109053&
    http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000712.html
    http://www.journalscape.com/bboerner/2004-11-04-09:30/
    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm
    http://slate.msn.com/id/2109141/
    http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php
     
    Jas, Nov 7, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jas

    luminos Guest

    Uh huh. So now there is a right wing conspiracy across the country and
    across industry to take the election from Kerry. Stay in New Zealand. And
    get stuffed.
     
    luminos, Nov 7, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jas

    luminos Guest

    By the way, even though I don't care for Bush, he won by nearly 4 MILLION
    votes.

    "luminos" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Uh huh. So now there is a right wing conspiracy across the country and
    > across industry to take the election from Kerry. Stay in New Zealand.
    > And get stuffed.
    >
    >
     
    luminos, Nov 7, 2004
    #3
  4. Jas

    HarryS Guest

    Hey, YOU STUPID ****, this is a Harley news group take your politics else
    ware and DON'T COME FUCKING BACK. It is obvious that these political morons
    do not have any respect and both the right/left need some manners. Also,
    you are a CROSS POSTING **** STICK!!!

    HarryS

    "Jas" <> wrote in message
    news:cmkiqd$dkj$...
    >
    > "Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes
    > to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records
    > show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct."
    >
    > http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65609,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html
    >
    >
    > "...a problem with memory cards in North Carolina that caused machines
    > made by UniLect to lose 4,500 votes cast on e-voting machines"
    >
    > "Software made by Election Systems & Software began subtracting votes
    > when totals surpassed 32,000"
    >
    > "Reports from voters in Florida and Ohio also indicated that some of
    > them had problems voting for the candidate of their choice. When they
    > tried to vote for John Kerry, they said, the machine either wouldn't
    > register the vote at all or would indicate on the review page that the
    > vote was cast for Bush instead."
    >
    > http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65623,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html
    >
    >
    > The Exit Polls might not have been so incorrect after all. Get ready
    > for the biggest scandal to ever hit american politics, although you
    > would have to expect something of this magnitude to be covered up
    > pretty darn quickly.
    >
    > To Those Who Seek Information as a Basis For Action Regarding Bush's
    > "Victory":
    >
    > I examined the discrepancies between the actual vote tabulations as
    > reported and the Edison/Mitofsky exit poll results in 47 states, incl.
    > D.C.
    > (in 4 states-NJ,NY,NC,VA-I did not have early exit poll results available,
    > and the later results had already been amended to reflect input of actual
    > vote totals, which rendered them corrupt as exit polls and useless for the
    > purpose of checking the veracity of actual vote totals).
    >
    > I noticed an overall red shift (to Bush) across the spectrum of
    > states,
    > but the shift was significantly nonuniform. Having divided the 47 states
    > examined into two groups, 35 noncritical states and 12 critical or suspect
    > states (Nebraska included because of ES&S control and prior anomalies even
    > though not a battleground state), I calculated that the average
    > discrepancy
    > in the 35 safe states was a +1.4% red shift, that is the average of the
    > vote
    > totals in each state was 1.4% more favorable to Bush than what the exit
    > polls predicted (= total movement of 2.8%). In the 12 critical states
    > (CO,FL,MI,MN,NE,NV,NH,NM,OH,PA,WI,IA) the average discrepancy was a 2.5%
    > red
    > shift (= total movement of 5.0%), nearly twice that in the safe states.
    > This
    > in spite of the fact that the average sample size in the critical states
    > was
    > nearly twice that in the noncritical states and should have produced
    > significantly more accurate results.
    >
    > Further, assuming a 3% margin of error and 95% confidence interval for
    > each
    > state poll (the standard Mitofksy
    > protocol, but a conservative assumption here, since the sample sizes were
    > significantly increased in critical states), the red shift exceeded the
    > margin of error in 4 of the 12 critical states (and equalled it in a
    > fifth).
    > The chance of this occurring in 4 of the 12 states in the absence of
    > "mistabulation" can be computed using a simple probability equation and is
    > approximately 0.002 or one in five-hundred. It's a relatively crude
    > analysis and better analysis would have to wait on more complete data, but
    > basically what it's telling us is that we can say with 99.8% certainty
    > that
    > "mistabulation" played some significant role in this election.
    >
    > From the specific discrepancies in Florida, Ohio, and New Mexico; from
    > the amazing voter turnout, which any analyst on truth serum will admit
    > should have guaranteed a Kerry victory; from what we know, but the media
    > has
    > now chosen to forget, about how suspect and partisan the vote counting
    > equipment is; and from pieces of circumstantial evidence, such as Bush not
    > deigning to campaign in Ohio (crazy unless the fix was in): we can be all
    > but certain that another election has been stolen and that the toilet has
    > been flushed on our democracy.
    >
    > Kerry, inanely, has conceded. But the truth remains to be dug out to
    > lie in the light and stink in the open air. If we can do no more, let's
    > at
    > least make sure we don't rest until we have done that.-Jonathan Simon
    > (Alliance for Democracy)
    > Remember exit polls are quite accurate. Kerry was significantly ahead in
    > many areas (in which he lost) when voting machines were used
    >
    > As one said: "Exit polling is extremely accurate. The pollster is asking
    > people that have actually voted. Unless they lie to the pollster, exit
    > polling should have been very close."
    >
    >
    >
    > No Time for Liberal Self-Recrimination
    > By Richard Heinberg
    >
    > November second was a dark day for the future of our world. Just how
    > dark we are likely to find out soon enough.
    >
    > Like many other people I've since compared notes with, I wandered
    > around in a depressed daze Tuesday evening and much of the next day.
    > The two questions I asked myself are o­nes that millions were no doubt
    > pondering: What can we learn from these events, and where do we go
    > from here?
    >
    > Having spent a couple of days looking at and thinking about the actual
    > election results, it seems to me that the answers to these questions
    > are going to take a while to emerge. o­ne thing is clear already,
    > though: We have to start with a realistic understanding of what
    > happened
    >
    > In the days before the election I anticipated a Bush win, primarily
    > because of the numbers of electronic voting machines in place in
    > strategic states and counties. At least of a third of voters used
    > these new "black box" paperless touch-screen machines; the problems
    > with them-their vulnerability to tampering and their inability to
    > provide the basis for a verifiable recount, as well as the political
    > partisanship of their manufacturers-have been discussed extensively
    > for the past two years. I predicted to friends that o­nly a landslide
    > vote for Kerry could give him the White House.
    >
    > On the day of the election, as I learned of the high voter turnout, I
    > became guardedly optimistic about a Kerry victory. People rarely vote
    > in record numbers merely to endorse the status quo; usually a high
    > turnout means that the electorate wants a change. Informal early exit
    > polls showed strong numbers for Kerry. Was this the landslide that
    > might overwhelm Bush's secret weapon?
    >
    > Then the official vote counting began, and the news was grim. By
    > Wednesday morning everyone was agreed: Bush had won, Kerry had lost.
    > The people had spoken.
    >
    > Within hours, leftist spokespeople were offering radio and newspaper
    > commentaries that offered o­ne or both of two rather predictable
    > responses. First: the Democrats blew it; they misread the electorate;
    > they didn't get out the vote; they didn't put forward a sufficiently
    > (fill in the blank) program. Second: We o­n the left need to regroup,
    > organize, and hone our message so that it appeals to more voters next
    > time around.
    >
    > It seems to me that both responses are pointless. Why? They miss the
    > single most important aspect of the situation.
    >
    > This election, like the presidential election of 2000 and the
    > senatorial elections of 2002, appears to have been stolen.
    >
    > The evidence of massive voting fraud in this instance is convincing
    > but-due to the nature of the voting machines themselves-probably
    > impossible to prove legally. That, of course, is the genius of the
    > fraud strategy.
    >
    > In most states where there was a paper trail, exit polls matched the
    > official tally closely. In states where there was no paper trail, exit
    > polls diverged widely from official tallies, in Bush's favor in every
    > instance. The odds against this occurring, absent fraud, are
    > staggering.
    >
    > In Florida, exit polls favored Kerry by 0.7%, while Bush officially
    > won by 5.1%. If the official results had been based o­n exit polls
    > rather than official tallies from computer voting machines, Kerry
    > would easily have won a minimum of six more states and the presidency.
    >
    > The details will no doubt emerge gradually, as the result of
    > painstaking research. And they will be reported o­nly haphazardly and
    > dismissively in the mainstream press. The outcome of the election is
    > unlikely to be changed. However, the lessons we draw from it need to
    > reflect the reality, not the illusion.
    >
    > If it is true that Bush won o­nly as a result of massive voting fraud,
    > then telling people that "we need to work harder to get out the vote
    > next time" or "we screwed up by not sending a message that resonated
    > with the electorate" is an insulting misdirection and waste of
    > everyone's time and attention.
    >
    > Meanwhile, o­ne party now controls all three branches of government
    > and the machinery that decides who wins elections. There is every
    > reason to assume that the Right will use the next months and years to
    > attempt to destroy the entire infrastructure of environmental,
    > consumer, and human rights nonprofit organizations in this country.
    > Who is to stop them?
    >
    > Wake up folks: democracy in the US is virtually dead. If we want to
    > revive it, much more will be involved than honing messages and getting
    > out more voters. For the time being, we are living in a dictatorship.
    > There is no point in denying the fact and deluding ourselves by
    > thinking that we still live in a country where the will of the
    > majority decides anything whatever. o­nly when we have thoroughly
    > digested the reality of our situation can we hope to come up with an
    > intelligent strategic response.
    >
    > For more information:http://www.blackboxvoting.org
    > http://www.newstarget.com/002076.html
    > http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=388
    > http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR062104.htm
    > http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2109053&
    > http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000712.html
    > http://www.journalscape.com/bboerner/2004-11-04-09:30/
    > http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm
    > http://slate.msn.com/id/2109141/
    > http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
    HarryS, Nov 7, 2004
    #4
  5. and now YOU, me and he are top-posting, cross posting **** STICKS

    "HarryS" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hey, YOU STUPID ****, this is a Harley news group take your politics else
    > ware and DON'T COME FUCKING BACK. It is obvious that these political

    morons
    > do not have any respect and both the right/left need some manners. Also,
    > you are a CROSS POSTING **** STICK!!!
    >
    > HarryS
    >
    > "Jas" <> wrote in message
    > news:cmkiqd$dkj$...
    > >
    > > "Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes
    > > to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records
    > > show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct."
    > >
    > >

    http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65609,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html
    > >
    > >
    > > "...a problem with memory cards in North Carolina that caused machines
    > > made by UniLect to lose 4,500 votes cast on e-voting machines"
    > >
    > > "Software made by Election Systems & Software began subtracting votes
    > > when totals surpassed 32,000"
    > >
    > > "Reports from voters in Florida and Ohio also indicated that some of
    > > them had problems voting for the candidate of their choice. When they
    > > tried to vote for John Kerry, they said, the machine either wouldn't
    > > register the vote at all or would indicate on the review page that the
    > > vote was cast for Bush instead."
    > >
    > >

    http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65623,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html
    > >
    > >
    > > The Exit Polls might not have been so incorrect after all. Get ready
    > > for the biggest scandal to ever hit american politics, although you
    > > would have to expect something of this magnitude to be covered up
    > > pretty darn quickly.
    > >
    > > To Those Who Seek Information as a Basis For Action Regarding Bush's
    > > "Victory":
    > >
    > > I examined the discrepancies between the actual vote tabulations as
    > > reported and the Edison/Mitofsky exit poll results in 47 states, incl.
    > > D.C.
    > > (in 4 states-NJ,NY,NC,VA-I did not have early exit poll results

    available,
    > > and the later results had already been amended to reflect input of

    actual
    > > vote totals, which rendered them corrupt as exit polls and useless for

    the
    > > purpose of checking the veracity of actual vote totals).
    > >
    > > I noticed an overall red shift (to Bush) across the spectrum of
    > > states,
    > > but the shift was significantly nonuniform. Having divided the 47

    states
    > > examined into two groups, 35 noncritical states and 12 critical or

    suspect
    > > states (Nebraska included because of ES&S control and prior anomalies

    even
    > > though not a battleground state), I calculated that the average
    > > discrepancy
    > > in the 35 safe states was a +1.4% red shift, that is the average of the
    > > vote
    > > totals in each state was 1.4% more favorable to Bush than what the exit
    > > polls predicted (= total movement of 2.8%). In the 12 critical states
    > > (CO,FL,MI,MN,NE,NV,NH,NM,OH,PA,WI,IA) the average discrepancy was a 2.5%
    > > red
    > > shift (= total movement of 5.0%), nearly twice that in the safe states.
    > > This
    > > in spite of the fact that the average sample size in the critical states
    > > was
    > > nearly twice that in the noncritical states and should have produced
    > > significantly more accurate results.
    > >
    > > Further, assuming a 3% margin of error and 95% confidence interval for
    > > each
    > > state poll (the standard Mitofksy
    > > protocol, but a conservative assumption here, since the sample sizes

    were
    > > significantly increased in critical states), the red shift exceeded the
    > > margin of error in 4 of the 12 critical states (and equalled it in a
    > > fifth).
    > > The chance of this occurring in 4 of the 12 states in the absence of
    > > "mistabulation" can be computed using a simple probability equation and

    is
    > > approximately 0.002 or one in five-hundred. It's a relatively crude
    > > analysis and better analysis would have to wait on more complete data,

    but
    > > basically what it's telling us is that we can say with 99.8% certainty
    > > that
    > > "mistabulation" played some significant role in this election.
    > >
    > > From the specific discrepancies in Florida, Ohio, and New Mexico;

    from
    > > the amazing voter turnout, which any analyst on truth serum will admit
    > > should have guaranteed a Kerry victory; from what we know, but the media
    > > has
    > > now chosen to forget, about how suspect and partisan the vote counting
    > > equipment is; and from pieces of circumstantial evidence, such as Bush

    not
    > > deigning to campaign in Ohio (crazy unless the fix was in): we can be

    all
    > > but certain that another election has been stolen and that the toilet

    has
    > > been flushed on our democracy.
    > >
    > > Kerry, inanely, has conceded. But the truth remains to be dug out

    to
    > > lie in the light and stink in the open air. If we can do no more, let's
    > > at
    > > least make sure we don't rest until we have done that.-Jonathan Simon
    > > (Alliance for Democracy)
    > > Remember exit polls are quite accurate. Kerry was significantly ahead in
    > > many areas (in which he lost) when voting machines were used
    > >
    > > As one said: "Exit polling is extremely accurate. The pollster is

    asking
    > > people that have actually voted. Unless they lie to the pollster, exit
    > > polling should have been very close."
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > No Time for Liberal Self-Recrimination
    > > By Richard Heinberg
    > >
    > > November second was a dark day for the future of our world. Just how
    > > dark we are likely to find out soon enough.
    > >
    > > Like many other people I've since compared notes with, I wandered
    > > around in a depressed daze Tuesday evening and much of the next day.
    > > The two questions I asked myself are o­nes that millions were no doubt
    > > pondering: What can we learn from these events, and where do we go
    > > from here?
    > >
    > > Having spent a couple of days looking at and thinking about the actual
    > > election results, it seems to me that the answers to these questions
    > > are going to take a while to emerge. o­ne thing is clear already,
    > > though: We have to start with a realistic understanding of what
    > > happened
    > >
    > > In the days before the election I anticipated a Bush win, primarily
    > > because of the numbers of electronic voting machines in place in
    > > strategic states and counties. At least of a third of voters used
    > > these new "black box" paperless touch-screen machines; the problems
    > > with them-their vulnerability to tampering and their inability to
    > > provide the basis for a verifiable recount, as well as the political
    > > partisanship of their manufacturers-have been discussed extensively
    > > for the past two years. I predicted to friends that o­nly a landslide
    > > vote for Kerry could give him the White House.
    > >
    > > On the day of the election, as I learned of the high voter turnout, I
    > > became guardedly optimistic about a Kerry victory. People rarely vote
    > > in record numbers merely to endorse the status quo; usually a high
    > > turnout means that the electorate wants a change. Informal early exit
    > > polls showed strong numbers for Kerry. Was this the landslide that
    > > might overwhelm Bush's secret weapon?
    > >
    > > Then the official vote counting began, and the news was grim. By
    > > Wednesday morning everyone was agreed: Bush had won, Kerry had lost.
    > > The people had spoken.
    > >
    > > Within hours, leftist spokespeople were offering radio and newspaper
    > > commentaries that offered o­ne or both of two rather predictable
    > > responses. First: the Democrats blew it; they misread the electorate;
    > > they didn't get out the vote; they didn't put forward a sufficiently
    > > (fill in the blank) program. Second: We o­n the left need to regroup,
    > > organize, and hone our message so that it appeals to more voters next
    > > time around.
    > >
    > > It seems to me that both responses are pointless. Why? They miss the
    > > single most important aspect of the situation.
    > >
    > > This election, like the presidential election of 2000 and the
    > > senatorial elections of 2002, appears to have been stolen.
    > >
    > > The evidence of massive voting fraud in this instance is convincing
    > > but-due to the nature of the voting machines themselves-probably
    > > impossible to prove legally. That, of course, is the genius of the
    > > fraud strategy.
    > >
    > > In most states where there was a paper trail, exit polls matched the
    > > official tally closely. In states where there was no paper trail, exit
    > > polls diverged widely from official tallies, in Bush's favor in every
    > > instance. The odds against this occurring, absent fraud, are
    > > staggering.
    > >
    > > In Florida, exit polls favored Kerry by 0.7%, while Bush officially
    > > won by 5.1%. If the official results had been based o­n exit polls
    > > rather than official tallies from computer voting machines, Kerry
    > > would easily have won a minimum of six more states and the presidency.
    > >
    > > The details will no doubt emerge gradually, as the result of
    > > painstaking research. And they will be reported o­nly haphazardly and
    > > dismissively in the mainstream press. The outcome of the election is
    > > unlikely to be changed. However, the lessons we draw from it need to
    > > reflect the reality, not the illusion.
    > >
    > > If it is true that Bush won o­nly as a result of massive voting fraud,
    > > then telling people that "we need to work harder to get out the vote
    > > next time" or "we screwed up by not sending a message that resonated
    > > with the electorate" is an insulting misdirection and waste of
    > > everyone's time and attention.
    > >
    > > Meanwhile, o­ne party now controls all three branches of government
    > > and the machinery that decides who wins elections. There is every
    > > reason to assume that the Right will use the next months and years to
    > > attempt to destroy the entire infrastructure of environmental,
    > > consumer, and human rights nonprofit organizations in this country.
    > > Who is to stop them?
    > >
    > > Wake up folks: democracy in the US is virtually dead. If we want to
    > > revive it, much more will be involved than honing messages and getting
    > > out more voters. For the time being, we are living in a dictatorship.
    > > There is no point in denying the fact and deluding ourselves by
    > > thinking that we still live in a country where the will of the
    > > majority decides anything whatever. o­nly when we have thoroughly
    > > digested the reality of our situation can we hope to come up with an
    > > intelligent strategic response.
    > >
    > > For more information:http://www.blackboxvoting.org
    > > http://www.newstarget.com/002076.html
    > > http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=388
    > > http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR062104.htm
    > > http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2109053&
    > > http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000712.html
    > > http://www.journalscape.com/bboerner/2004-11-04-09:30/
    > > http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm
    > > http://slate.msn.com/id/2109141/
    > > http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Pan-o-rama-tard, Nov 7, 2004
    #5
  6. Jas

    Richard C. Guest

    X-No-archive: yes

    "Jas" <> wrote in message
    news:cmkiqd$dkj$...
    >

    ====================
    Just make sure to put lots of aluminum foil on all your windows!
     
    Richard C., Nov 7, 2004
    #6
  7. Jas

    Jas Guest

    "Pan-o-rama-tard" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > and now YOU, me and he are top-posting, cross posting **** STICKS
    >
    > "HarryS" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Hey, YOU STUPID ****, this is a Harley news group take your politics

    else
    > > ware and DON'T COME FUCKING BACK. It is obvious that these political

    > morons
    > > do not have any respect and both the right/left need some manners.

    Also,
    > > you are a CROSS POSTING **** STICK!!!


    I'm back big boy...what are you going to do about it ?

    Hey..you know this is egging me on!

    "Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes
    to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records
    show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct."

    http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65609,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html


    "...a problem with memory cards in North Carolina that caused machines
    made by UniLect to lose 4,500 votes cast on e-voting machines"

    "Software made by Election Systems & Software began subtracting votes
    when totals surpassed 32,000"

    "Reports from voters in Florida and Ohio also indicated that some of
    them had problems voting for the candidate of their choice. When they
    tried to vote for John Kerry, they said, the machine either wouldn't
    register the vote at all or would indicate on the review page that the
    vote was cast for Bush instead."

    http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65623,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html


    The Exit Polls might not have been so incorrect after all. Get ready
    for the biggest scandal to ever hit american politics, although you
    would have to expect something of this magnitude to be covered up
    pretty darn quickly.

    To Those Who Seek Information as a Basis For Action Regarding Bush's
    "Victory":

    I examined the discrepancies between the actual vote tabulations as
    reported and the Edison/Mitofsky exit poll results in 47 states, incl. D.C.
    (in 4 states-NJ,NY,NC,VA-I did not have early exit poll results available,
    and the later results had already been amended to reflect input of actual
    vote totals, which rendered them corrupt as exit polls and useless for the
    purpose of checking the veracity of actual vote totals).

    I noticed an overall red shift (to Bush) across the spectrum of states,
    but the shift was significantly nonuniform. Having divided the 47 states
    examined into two groups, 35 noncritical states and 12 critical or suspect
    states (Nebraska included because of ES&S control and prior anomalies even
    though not a battleground state), I calculated that the average discrepancy
    in the 35 safe states was a +1.4% red shift, that is the average of the vote
    totals in each state was 1.4% more favorable to Bush than what the exit
    polls predicted (= total movement of 2.8%). In the 12 critical states
    (CO,FL,MI,MN,NE,NV,NH,NM,OH,PA,WI,IA) the average discrepancy was a 2.5% red
    shift (= total movement of 5.0%), nearly twice that in the safe states. This
    in spite of the fact that the average sample size in the critical states was
    nearly twice that in the noncritical states and should have produced
    significantly more accurate results.

    Further, assuming a 3% margin of error and 95% confidence interval for each
    state poll (the standard Mitofksy
    protocol, but a conservative assumption here, since the sample sizes were
    significantly increased in critical states), the red shift exceeded the
    margin of error in 4 of the 12 critical states (and equalled it in a fifth).
    The chance of this occurring in 4 of the 12 states in the absence of
    "mistabulation" can be computed using a simple probability equation and is
    approximately 0.002 or one in five-hundred. It's a relatively crude
    analysis and better analysis would have to wait on more complete data, but
    basically what it's telling us is that we can say with 99.8% certainty that
    "mistabulation" played some significant role in this election.

    From the specific discrepancies in Florida, Ohio, and New Mexico; from
    the amazing voter turnout, which any analyst on truth serum will admit
    should have guaranteed a Kerry victory; from what we know, but the media has
    now chosen to forget, about how suspect and partisan the vote counting
    equipment is; and from pieces of circumstantial evidence, such as Bush not
    deigning to campaign in Ohio (crazy unless the fix was in): we can be all
    but certain that another election has been stolen and that the toilet has
    been flushed on our democracy.

    Kerry, inanely, has conceded. But the truth remains to be dug out to
    lie in the light and stink in the open air. If we can do no more, let's at
    least make sure we don't rest until we have done that.-Jonathan Simon
    (Alliance for Democracy)
    Remember exit polls are quite accurate. Kerry was significantly ahead in
    many areas (in which he lost) when voting machines were used

    As one said: "Exit polling is extremely accurate. The pollster is asking
    people that have actually voted. Unless they lie to the pollster, exit
    polling should have been very close."



    No Time for Liberal Self-Recrimination
    By Richard Heinberg

    November second was a dark day for the future of our world. Just how
    dark we are likely to find out soon enough.

    Like many other people I've since compared notes with, I wandered
    around in a depressed daze Tuesday evening and much of the next day.
    The two questions I asked myself are o­nes that millions were no doubt
    pondering: What can we learn from these events, and where do we go
    from here?

    Having spent a couple of days looking at and thinking about the actual
    election results, it seems to me that the answers to these questions
    are going to take a while to emerge. o­ne thing is clear already,
    though: We have to start with a realistic understanding of what
    happened

    In the days before the election I anticipated a Bush win, primarily
    because of the numbers of electronic voting machines in place in
    strategic states and counties. At least of a third of voters used
    these new "black box" paperless touch-screen machines; the problems
    with them-their vulnerability to tampering and their inability to
    provide the basis for a verifiable recount, as well as the political
    partisanship of their manufacturers-have been discussed extensively
    for the past two years. I predicted to friends that o­nly a landslide
    vote for Kerry could give him the White House.

    On the day of the election, as I learned of the high voter turnout, I
    became guardedly optimistic about a Kerry victory. People rarely vote
    in record numbers merely to endorse the status quo; usually a high
    turnout means that the electorate wants a change. Informal early exit
    polls showed strong numbers for Kerry. Was this the landslide that
    might overwhelm Bush's secret weapon?

    Then the official vote counting began, and the news was grim. By
    Wednesday morning everyone was agreed: Bush had won, Kerry had lost.
    The people had spoken.

    Within hours, leftist spokespeople were offering radio and newspaper
    commentaries that offered o­ne or both of two rather predictable
    responses. First: the Democrats blew it; they misread the electorate;
    they didn't get out the vote; they didn't put forward a sufficiently
    (fill in the blank) program. Second: We o­n the left need to regroup,
    organize, and hone our message so that it appeals to more voters next
    time around.

    It seems to me that both responses are pointless. Why? They miss the
    single most important aspect of the situation.

    This election, like the presidential election of 2000 and the
    senatorial elections of 2002, appears to have been stolen.

    The evidence of massive voting fraud in this instance is convincing
    but-due to the nature of the voting machines themselves-probably
    impossible to prove legally. That, of course, is the genius of the
    fraud strategy.

    In most states where there was a paper trail, exit polls matched the
    official tally closely. In states where there was no paper trail, exit
    polls diverged widely from official tallies, in Bush's favor in every
    instance. The odds against this occurring, absent fraud, are
    staggering.

    In Florida, exit polls favored Kerry by 0.7%, while Bush officially
    won by 5.1%. If the official results had been based o­n exit polls
    rather than official tallies from computer voting machines, Kerry
    would easily have won a minimum of six more states and the presidency.

    The details will no doubt emerge gradually, as the result of
    painstaking research. And they will be reported o­nly haphazardly and
    dismissively in the mainstream press. The outcome of the election is
    unlikely to be changed. However, the lessons we draw from it need to
    reflect the reality, not the illusion.

    If it is true that Bush won o­nly as a result of massive voting fraud,
    then telling people that "we need to work harder to get out the vote
    next time" or "we screwed up by not sending a message that resonated
    with the electorate" is an insulting misdirection and waste of
    everyone's time and attention.

    Meanwhile, o­ne party now controls all three branches of government
    and the machinery that decides who wins elections. There is every
    reason to assume that the Right will use the next months and years to
    attempt to destroy the entire infrastructure of environmental,
    consumer, and human rights nonprofit organizations in this country.
    Who is to stop them?

    Wake up folks: democracy in the US is virtually dead. If we want to
    revive it, much more will be involved than honing messages and getting
    out more voters. For the time being, we are living in a dictatorship.
    There is no point in denying the fact and deluding ourselves by
    thinking that we still live in a country where the will of the
    majority decides anything whatever. o­nly when we have thoroughly
    digested the reality of our situation can we hope to come up with an
    intelligent strategic response.

    For more information:http://www.blackboxvoting.org
    http://www.newstarget.com/002076.html
    http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=388
    http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR062104.htm
    http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2109053&
    http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000712.html
    http://www.journalscape.com/bboerner/2004-11-04-09:30/
    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm
    http://slate.msn.com/id/2109141/
    http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php








    > > HarryS
    > >
    > > "Jas" <> wrote in message
    > > news:cmkiqd$dkj$...
    > > >
    > > > "Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes
    > > > to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records
    > > > show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct."
    > > >
    > > >

    >

    http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65609,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > "...a problem with memory cards in North Carolina that caused machines
    > > > made by UniLect to lose 4,500 votes cast on e-voting machines"
    > > >
    > > > "Software made by Election Systems & Software began subtracting votes
    > > > when totals surpassed 32,000"
    > > >
    > > > "Reports from voters in Florida and Ohio also indicated that some of
    > > > them had problems voting for the candidate of their choice. When they
    > > > tried to vote for John Kerry, they said, the machine either wouldn't
    > > > register the vote at all or would indicate on the review page that the
    > > > vote was cast for Bush instead."
    > > >
    > > >

    >

    http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65623,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > The Exit Polls might not have been so incorrect after all. Get ready
    > > > for the biggest scandal to ever hit american politics, although you
    > > > would have to expect something of this magnitude to be covered up
    > > > pretty darn quickly.
    > > >
    > > > To Those Who Seek Information as a Basis For Action Regarding Bush's
    > > > "Victory":
    > > >
    > > > I examined the discrepancies between the actual vote tabulations

    as
    > > > reported and the Edison/Mitofsky exit poll results in 47 states, incl.
    > > > D.C.
    > > > (in 4 states-NJ,NY,NC,VA-I did not have early exit poll results

    > available,
    > > > and the later results had already been amended to reflect input of

    > actual
    > > > vote totals, which rendered them corrupt as exit polls and useless for

    > the
    > > > purpose of checking the veracity of actual vote totals).
    > > >
    > > > I noticed an overall red shift (to Bush) across the spectrum of
    > > > states,
    > > > but the shift was significantly nonuniform. Having divided the 47

    > states
    > > > examined into two groups, 35 noncritical states and 12 critical or

    > suspect
    > > > states (Nebraska included because of ES&S control and prior anomalies

    > even
    > > > though not a battleground state), I calculated that the average
    > > > discrepancy
    > > > in the 35 safe states was a +1.4% red shift, that is the average of

    the
    > > > vote
    > > > totals in each state was 1.4% more favorable to Bush than what the

    exit
    > > > polls predicted (= total movement of 2.8%). In the 12 critical states
    > > > (CO,FL,MI,MN,NE,NV,NH,NM,OH,PA,WI,IA) the average discrepancy was a

    2.5%
    > > > red
    > > > shift (= total movement of 5.0%), nearly twice that in the safe

    states.
    > > > This
    > > > in spite of the fact that the average sample size in the critical

    states
    > > > was
    > > > nearly twice that in the noncritical states and should have produced
    > > > significantly more accurate results.
    > > >
    > > > Further, assuming a 3% margin of error and 95% confidence interval for
    > > > each
    > > > state poll (the standard Mitofksy
    > > > protocol, but a conservative assumption here, since the sample sizes

    > were
    > > > significantly increased in critical states), the red shift exceeded

    the
    > > > margin of error in 4 of the 12 critical states (and equalled it in a
    > > > fifth).
    > > > The chance of this occurring in 4 of the 12 states in the absence of
    > > > "mistabulation" can be computed using a simple probability equation

    and
    > is
    > > > approximately 0.002 or one in five-hundred. It's a relatively crude
    > > > analysis and better analysis would have to wait on more complete data,

    > but
    > > > basically what it's telling us is that we can say with 99.8% certainty
    > > > that
    > > > "mistabulation" played some significant role in this election.
    > > >
    > > > From the specific discrepancies in Florida, Ohio, and New Mexico;

    > from
    > > > the amazing voter turnout, which any analyst on truth serum will admit
    > > > should have guaranteed a Kerry victory; from what we know, but the

    media
    > > > has
    > > > now chosen to forget, about how suspect and partisan the vote counting
    > > > equipment is; and from pieces of circumstantial evidence, such as Bush

    > not
    > > > deigning to campaign in Ohio (crazy unless the fix was in): we can be

    > all
    > > > but certain that another election has been stolen and that the toilet

    > has
    > > > been flushed on our democracy.
    > > >
    > > > Kerry, inanely, has conceded. But the truth remains to be dug out

    > to
    > > > lie in the light and stink in the open air. If we can do no more,

    let's
    > > > at
    > > > least make sure we don't rest until we have done that.-Jonathan Simon
    > > > (Alliance for Democracy)
    > > > Remember exit polls are quite accurate. Kerry was significantly ahead

    in
    > > > many areas (in which he lost) when voting machines were used
    > > >
    > > > As one said: "Exit polling is extremely accurate. The pollster is

    > asking
    > > > people that have actually voted. Unless they lie to the pollster,

    exit
    > > > polling should have been very close."
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > No Time for Liberal Self-Recrimination
    > > > By Richard Heinberg
    > > >
    > > > November second was a dark day for the future of our world. Just how
    > > > dark we are likely to find out soon enough.
    > > >
    > > > Like many other people I've since compared notes with, I wandered
    > > > around in a depressed daze Tuesday evening and much of the next day.
    > > > The two questions I asked myself are o­nes that millions were no doubt
    > > > pondering: What can we learn from these events, and where do we go
    > > > from here?
    > > >
    > > > Having spent a couple of days looking at and thinking about the actual
    > > > election results, it seems to me that the answers to these questions
    > > > are going to take a while to emerge. o­ne thing is clear already,
    > > > though: We have to start with a realistic understanding of what
    > > > happened
    > > >
    > > > In the days before the election I anticipated a Bush win, primarily
    > > > because of the numbers of electronic voting machines in place in
    > > > strategic states and counties. At least of a third of voters used
    > > > these new "black box" paperless touch-screen machines; the problems
    > > > with them-their vulnerability to tampering and their inability to
    > > > provide the basis for a verifiable recount, as well as the political
    > > > partisanship of their manufacturers-have been discussed extensively
    > > > for the past two years. I predicted to friends that o­nly a landslide
    > > > vote for Kerry could give him the White House.
    > > >
    > > > On the day of the election, as I learned of the high voter turnout, I
    > > > became guardedly optimistic about a Kerry victory. People rarely vote
    > > > in record numbers merely to endorse the status quo; usually a high
    > > > turnout means that the electorate wants a change. Informal early exit
    > > > polls showed strong numbers for Kerry. Was this the landslide that
    > > > might overwhelm Bush's secret weapon?
    > > >
    > > > Then the official vote counting began, and the news was grim. By
    > > > Wednesday morning everyone was agreed: Bush had won, Kerry had lost.
    > > > The people had spoken.
    > > >
    > > > Within hours, leftist spokespeople were offering radio and newspaper
    > > > commentaries that offered o­ne or both of two rather predictable
    > > > responses. First: the Democrats blew it; they misread the electorate;
    > > > they didn't get out the vote; they didn't put forward a sufficiently
    > > > (fill in the blank) program. Second: We o­n the left need to regroup,
    > > > organize, and hone our message so that it appeals to more voters next
    > > > time around.
    > > >
    > > > It seems to me that both responses are pointless. Why? They miss the
    > > > single most important aspect of the situation.
    > > >
    > > > This election, like the presidential election of 2000 and the
    > > > senatorial elections of 2002, appears to have been stolen.
    > > >
    > > > The evidence of massive voting fraud in this instance is convincing
    > > > but-due to the nature of the voting machines themselves-probably
    > > > impossible to prove legally. That, of course, is the genius of the
    > > > fraud strategy.
    > > >
    > > > In most states where there was a paper trail, exit polls matched the
    > > > official tally closely. In states where there was no paper trail, exit
    > > > polls diverged widely from official tallies, in Bush's favor in every
    > > > instance. The odds against this occurring, absent fraud, are
    > > > staggering.
    > > >
    > > > In Florida, exit polls favored Kerry by 0.7%, while Bush officially
    > > > won by 5.1%. If the official results had been based o­n exit polls
    > > > rather than official tallies from computer voting machines, Kerry
    > > > would easily have won a minimum of six more states and the presidency.
    > > >
    > > > The details will no doubt emerge gradually, as the result of
    > > > painstaking research. And they will be reported o­nly haphazardly and
    > > > dismissively in the mainstream press. The outcome of the election is
    > > > unlikely to be changed. However, the lessons we draw from it need to
    > > > reflect the reality, not the illusion.
    > > >
    > > > If it is true that Bush won o­nly as a result of massive voting fraud,
    > > > then telling people that "we need to work harder to get out the vote
    > > > next time" or "we screwed up by not sending a message that resonated
    > > > with the electorate" is an insulting misdirection and waste of
    > > > everyone's time and attention.
    > > >
    > > > Meanwhile, o­ne party now controls all three branches of government
    > > > and the machinery that decides who wins elections. There is every
    > > > reason to assume that the Right will use the next months and years to
    > > > attempt to destroy the entire infrastructure of environmental,
    > > > consumer, and human rights nonprofit organizations in this country.
    > > > Who is to stop them?
    > > >
    > > > Wake up folks: democracy in the US is virtually dead. If we want to
    > > > revive it, much more will be involved than honing messages and getting
    > > > out more voters. For the time being, we are living in a dictatorship.
    > > > There is no point in denying the fact and deluding ourselves by
    > > > thinking that we still live in a country where the will of the
    > > > majority decides anything whatever. o­nly when we have thoroughly
    > > > digested the reality of our situation can we hope to come up with an
    > > > intelligent strategic response.
    > > >
    > > > For more information:http://www.blackboxvoting.org
    > > > http://www.newstarget.com/002076.html
    > > > http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=388
    > > > http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR062104.htm
    > > > http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2109053&
    > > > http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000712.html
    > > > http://www.journalscape.com/bboerner/2004-11-04-09:30/
    > > > http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm
    > > > http://slate.msn.com/id/2109141/
    > > > http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Jas, Nov 7, 2004
    #7
  8. Jas

    Jas Guest

    "luminos" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > By the way, even though I don't care for Bush, he won by nearly 4 MILLION
    > votes.



    Possibly... IF the fixing of the voting machines is untrue - he did win by
    about 3%! Then again 40% of the poulation did not vote with a 60% turn-out
    ....about 30% less than many democracies.

    By the way I'm returning to the US soon.


    >
    > "luminos" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Uh huh. So now there is a right wing conspiracy across the country and
    > > across industry to take the election from Kerry. Stay in New Zealand.
    > > And get stuffed.
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Jas, Nov 7, 2004
    #8
  9. Jas

    Jas Guest

    Re: "The biggest scandal to ever hit American politics" Watergate 2?

    "luminos" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Uh huh. So now there is a right wing conspiracy across the country and
    > across industry to take the election from Kerry. Stay in New Zealand.

    And
    > get stuffed.


    No there are

    Election fraud happens... on both sides. This is a given.


    Either there was wholesale lying in the exit polls (polls taken from those
    leaving the poling booths) in the elctronic voting many preceints which
    showed Kerry signficantly ahead, or the "black box" electronic voting
    (without a paper trail) was tainted, not working correctly...or, yes there
    was a conspiracy. Conspiracies do happen. Sometimes, as in Watergate, "they"
    get caught.

    This one might turn into a Watergate...or may not.

    "Reports of extra votes for Bush from electronic voting machines continued
    to mount. An error with an electronic voting system gave President George W.
    Bush 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus, elections officials said.[+]
    Voters in Florida and elsewhere reported on Election Day that machines would
    not register votes for Kerry, according to CNN.[+] TomPaine.com speculated
    that a majority of voters in Ohio and New Mexico chose Kerry, but many
    Democratic votes were not counted by Republican elections officials in those
    states.[+] Slate provided a guide for U.S. citizens planning a move to
    Canada.[+] The electoral-vote.com Votemaster revealed that he is Andrew
    Tanenbaum, a professor of computer science at the Vrije Universiteit in
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands.[+] Eminem urged those opposed to Bush to
    vote.[+] The New York Times posted an excellent interactive on-line map of
    election results."

    http://www.usabroad.org/2004/11/the_electoralvo.html

    BlackboxVoting.org Claims Election Fraud
    From BlackBoxVoting.org

    If you are concerned about what happened Tuesday, Nov. 2, you have found a
    home with our organization. Help America Audit.

    Black Box Voting has taken the position that fraud took place in the 2004
    election through electronic voting machines. We base this on hard evidence,
    documents obtained in public records requests, inside information, and other
    data indicative of manipulation of electronic voting systems. What we do not
    know is the specific scope of the fraud. We are working now to compile the
    proof, based not on soft evidence -- red flags, exit polls -- but core
    documents obtained by Black Box Voting in the most massive Freedom of
    Information action in history.

    We need: Lawyers to enforce public records laws. Some counties have already
    notified us that they plan to stonewall by delaying delivery of the records.
    We need citizen volunteers for a number of specific actions. We need
    computer security professionals willing to GO PUBLIC with formal opinions on
    the evidence we provide, whether or not it involves DMCA complications. We
    need funds to pay for copies of the evidence.


    >
    >
     
    Jas, Nov 7, 2004
    #9
  10. Jas

    bill Guest

    hey, bush sucks and so do harleys! get a real bike!

    "HarryS" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hey, YOU STUPID ****, this is a Harley news group take your politics else
    > ware and DON'T COME FUCKING BACK. It is obvious that these political
    > morons do not have any respect and both the right/left need some manners.
    > Also, you are a CROSS POSTING **** STICK!!!
    >
    > HarryS
    >
    > "Jas" <> wrote in message
    > news:cmkiqd$dkj$...
    >>
    >> "Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes
    >> to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records
    >> show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct."
    >>
    >> http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65609,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html
    >>
    >>
    >> "...a problem with memory cards in North Carolina that caused machines
    >> made by UniLect to lose 4,500 votes cast on e-voting machines"
    >>
    >> "Software made by Election Systems & Software began subtracting votes
    >> when totals surpassed 32,000"
    >>
    >> "Reports from voters in Florida and Ohio also indicated that some of
    >> them had problems voting for the candidate of their choice. When they
    >> tried to vote for John Kerry, they said, the machine either wouldn't
    >> register the vote at all or would indicate on the review page that the
    >> vote was cast for Bush instead."
    >>
    >> http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65623,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html
    >>
    >>
    >> The Exit Polls might not have been so incorrect after all. Get ready
    >> for the biggest scandal to ever hit american politics, although you
    >> would have to expect something of this magnitude to be covered up
    >> pretty darn quickly.
    >>
    >> To Those Who Seek Information as a Basis For Action Regarding Bush's
    >> "Victory":
    >>
    >> I examined the discrepancies between the actual vote tabulations as
    >> reported and the Edison/Mitofsky exit poll results in 47 states, incl.
    >> D.C.
    >> (in 4 states-NJ,NY,NC,VA-I did not have early exit poll results
    >> available,
    >> and the later results had already been amended to reflect input of actual
    >> vote totals, which rendered them corrupt as exit polls and useless for
    >> the
    >> purpose of checking the veracity of actual vote totals).
    >>
    >> I noticed an overall red shift (to Bush) across the spectrum of
    >> states,
    >> but the shift was significantly nonuniform. Having divided the 47 states
    >> examined into two groups, 35 noncritical states and 12 critical or
    >> suspect
    >> states (Nebraska included because of ES&S control and prior anomalies
    >> even
    >> though not a battleground state), I calculated that the average
    >> discrepancy
    >> in the 35 safe states was a +1.4% red shift, that is the average of the
    >> vote
    >> totals in each state was 1.4% more favorable to Bush than what the exit
    >> polls predicted (= total movement of 2.8%). In the 12 critical states
    >> (CO,FL,MI,MN,NE,NV,NH,NM,OH,PA,WI,IA) the average discrepancy was a 2.5%
    >> red
    >> shift (= total movement of 5.0%), nearly twice that in the safe states.
    >> This
    >> in spite of the fact that the average sample size in the critical states
    >> was
    >> nearly twice that in the noncritical states and should have produced
    >> significantly more accurate results.
    >>
    >> Further, assuming a 3% margin of error and 95% confidence interval for
    >> each
    >> state poll (the standard Mitofksy
    >> protocol, but a conservative assumption here, since the sample sizes were
    >> significantly increased in critical states), the red shift exceeded the
    >> margin of error in 4 of the 12 critical states (and equalled it in a
    >> fifth).
    >> The chance of this occurring in 4 of the 12 states in the absence of
    >> "mistabulation" can be computed using a simple probability equation and
    >> is
    >> approximately 0.002 or one in five-hundred. It's a relatively crude
    >> analysis and better analysis would have to wait on more complete data,
    >> but
    >> basically what it's telling us is that we can say with 99.8% certainty
    >> that
    >> "mistabulation" played some significant role in this election.
    >>
    >> From the specific discrepancies in Florida, Ohio, and New Mexico;
    >> from
    >> the amazing voter turnout, which any analyst on truth serum will admit
    >> should have guaranteed a Kerry victory; from what we know, but the media
    >> has
    >> now chosen to forget, about how suspect and partisan the vote counting
    >> equipment is; and from pieces of circumstantial evidence, such as Bush
    >> not
    >> deigning to campaign in Ohio (crazy unless the fix was in): we can be all
    >> but certain that another election has been stolen and that the toilet has
    >> been flushed on our democracy.
    >>
    >> Kerry, inanely, has conceded. But the truth remains to be dug out to
    >> lie in the light and stink in the open air. If we can do no more, let's
    >> at
    >> least make sure we don't rest until we have done that.-Jonathan Simon
    >> (Alliance for Democracy)
    >> Remember exit polls are quite accurate. Kerry was significantly ahead in
    >> many areas (in which he lost) when voting machines were used
    >>
    >> As one said: "Exit polling is extremely accurate. The pollster is asking
    >> people that have actually voted. Unless they lie to the pollster, exit
    >> polling should have been very close."
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> No Time for Liberal Self-Recrimination
    >> By Richard Heinberg
    >>
    >> November second was a dark day for the future of our world. Just how
    >> dark we are likely to find out soon enough.
    >>
    >> Like many other people I've since compared notes with, I wandered
    >> around in a depressed daze Tuesday evening and much of the next day.
    >> The two questions I asked myself are o­nes that millions were no doubt
    >> pondering: What can we learn from these events, and where do we go
    >> from here?
    >>
    >> Having spent a couple of days looking at and thinking about the actual
    >> election results, it seems to me that the answers to these questions
    >> are going to take a while to emerge. o­ne thing is clear already,
    >> though: We have to start with a realistic understanding of what
    >> happened
    >>
    >> In the days before the election I anticipated a Bush win, primarily
    >> because of the numbers of electronic voting machines in place in
    >> strategic states and counties. At least of a third of voters used
    >> these new "black box" paperless touch-screen machines; the problems
    >> with them-their vulnerability to tampering and their inability to
    >> provide the basis for a verifiable recount, as well as the political
    >> partisanship of their manufacturers-have been discussed extensively
    >> for the past two years. I predicted to friends that o­nly a landslide
    >> vote for Kerry could give him the White House.
    >>
    >> On the day of the election, as I learned of the high voter turnout, I
    >> became guardedly optimistic about a Kerry victory. People rarely vote
    >> in record numbers merely to endorse the status quo; usually a high
    >> turnout means that the electorate wants a change. Informal early exit
    >> polls showed strong numbers for Kerry. Was this the landslide that
    >> might overwhelm Bush's secret weapon?
    >>
    >> Then the official vote counting began, and the news was grim. By
    >> Wednesday morning everyone was agreed: Bush had won, Kerry had lost.
    >> The people had spoken.
    >>
    >> Within hours, leftist spokespeople were offering radio and newspaper
    >> commentaries that offered o­ne or both of two rather predictable
    >> responses. First: the Democrats blew it; they misread the electorate;
    >> they didn't get out the vote; they didn't put forward a sufficiently
    >> (fill in the blank) program. Second: We o­n the left need to regroup,
    >> organize, and hone our message so that it appeals to more voters next
    >> time around.
    >>
    >> It seems to me that both responses are pointless. Why? They miss the
    >> single most important aspect of the situation.
    >>
    >> This election, like the presidential election of 2000 and the
    >> senatorial elections of 2002, appears to have been stolen.
    >>
    >> The evidence of massive voting fraud in this instance is convincing
    >> but-due to the nature of the voting machines themselves-probably
    >> impossible to prove legally. That, of course, is the genius of the
    >> fraud strategy.
    >>
    >> In most states where there was a paper trail, exit polls matched the
    >> official tally closely. In states where there was no paper trail, exit
    >> polls diverged widely from official tallies, in Bush's favor in every
    >> instance. The odds against this occurring, absent fraud, are
    >> staggering.
    >>
    >> In Florida, exit polls favored Kerry by 0.7%, while Bush officially
    >> won by 5.1%. If the official results had been based o­n exit polls
    >> rather than official tallies from computer voting machines, Kerry
    >> would easily have won a minimum of six more states and the presidency.
    >>
    >> The details will no doubt emerge gradually, as the result of
    >> painstaking research. And they will be reported o­nly haphazardly and
    >> dismissively in the mainstream press. The outcome of the election is
    >> unlikely to be changed. However, the lessons we draw from it need to
    >> reflect the reality, not the illusion.
    >>
    >> If it is true that Bush won o­nly as a result of massive voting fraud,
    >> then telling people that "we need to work harder to get out the vote
    >> next time" or "we screwed up by not sending a message that resonated
    >> with the electorate" is an insulting misdirection and waste of
    >> everyone's time and attention.
    >>
    >> Meanwhile, o­ne party now controls all three branches of government
    >> and the machinery that decides who wins elections. There is every
    >> reason to assume that the Right will use the next months and years to
    >> attempt to destroy the entire infrastructure of environmental,
    >> consumer, and human rights nonprofit organizations in this country.
    >> Who is to stop them?
    >>
    >> Wake up folks: democracy in the US is virtually dead. If we want to
    >> revive it, much more will be involved than honing messages and getting
    >> out more voters. For the time being, we are living in a dictatorship.
    >> There is no point in denying the fact and deluding ourselves by
    >> thinking that we still live in a country where the will of the
    >> majority decides anything whatever. o­nly when we have thoroughly
    >> digested the reality of our situation can we hope to come up with an
    >> intelligent strategic response.
    >>
    >> For more information:http://www.blackboxvoting.org
    >> http://www.newstarget.com/002076.html
    >> http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=388
    >> http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR062104.htm
    >> http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2109053&
    >> http://www.washingtondispatch.com/spectrum/archives/000712.html
    >> http://www.journalscape.com/bboerner/2004-11-04-09:30/
    >> http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm
    >> http://slate.msn.com/id/2109141/
    >> http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    bill, Nov 8, 2004
    #10
  11. Jas

    Rich Lockyer Guest

    Re: "The biggest scandal to ever hit American politics" Watergate 2?

    On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 12:50:20 +1300, "Jas" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"luminos" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Uh huh. So now there is a right wing conspiracy across the country and
    >> across industry to take the election from Kerry. Stay in New Zealand.

    >And
    >> get stuffed.

    >
    >No there are
    >
    >Election fraud happens... on both sides. This is a given.
    >
    >
    >Either there was wholesale lying in the exit polls (polls taken from those
    >leaving the poling booths) in the elctronic voting many preceints which
    >showed Kerry signficantly ahead, or the "black box" electronic voting
    >(without a paper trail) was tainted, not working correctly...or, yes there
    >was a conspiracy. Conspiracies do happen. Sometimes, as in Watergate, "they"
    >get caught.
    >
    >This one might turn into a Watergate...or may not.


    Of course it won't turn into a Watergate, because, unlike Watergate,
    the Republicans had no access to those machines. Those were
    Democrat-controlled precincts run by Democrat operatives.

    At the very worst, it indicates problems with the software.
    At the very best, it indicates that the Democrats are hiring
    incompetent people to handle their machines and run the polling
    places.

    Combining the above with people claiming to have to wait 10 hours to
    vote in Democratic precincts, it looks like the latter is probably the
    case.

    Perhaps the same tricks that were caught in Philadelphia (hundreds of
    votes found on 7 machines prior to the polls opening, but it was oh-so
    quiet in the press) were attempted in Ohio but they backfired and
    ended up going to Bush instead of Kerry as intended.



    --- Rich
    http://richlockyer.tripod.com/
     
    Rich Lockyer, Nov 8, 2004
    #11
  12. Jas

    Guest Guest

    IT'S OVER.
    MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

    --
    polecat
    Again, Sorry about the top post but Jas's post seem to be bottomless, literally.

    "Jas" <> wrote in message news:cmkiqd$dkj$...
    >
    > "Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes
     
    Guest, Nov 8, 2004
    #12
  13. Jas

    Guest Guest

    Re: "The biggest scandal to ever hit American politics" Watergate 2?


    > Democrats are hiring
    > incompetent people


    Now that's redundant.

    --
    polecat
     
    Guest, Nov 8, 2004
    #13
  14. Jas

    'Key Guest

    "Jas" <> wrote in message
    ---snip the off-topic message---
     
    'Key, Nov 8, 2004
    #14
  15. Jas

    'Key Guest

    Re: "The biggest scandal to ever hit American politics" Watergate 2?

    "Jas" <> wrote in message
    ---snip the OT message---
     
    'Key, Nov 8, 2004
    #15
  16. Jas

    'Key Guest

    Re: "The biggest scandal to ever hit American politics" Watergate 2?

    "Rich Lockyer" <> wrote in
    message ---snip the OT message---
     
    'Key, Nov 8, 2004
    #16
  17. Jas

    'Key Guest

    Re: "The biggest scandal to ever hit American politics" Watergate 2?

    <> wrote in message
    ---snip the cross-posted OT message
     
    'Key, Nov 8, 2004
    #17
  18. Jas

    'Key Guest

    "bill" <> trolled in message
    ---snip the cross-posted, OT message---

    grow up you clueless jerk !!
     
    'Key, Nov 8, 2004
    #18
  19. Jas

    Gimble Shank Guest

    "Richard C." <> wrote in message
    news:418e667d$0$31248$...
    >
    > "Jas" <> wrote in message
    > news:cmkiqd$dkj$...
    >>

    > ====================
    > Just make sure to put lots of aluminum foil on all your windows!



    I can't because they're covered with duct tape to protect me against
    terrorists.
     
    Gimble Shank, Nov 8, 2004
    #19
  20. Jas

    Jas Guest

    A VERY AMERICAN COUP: 2002 - 2004

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/features/?s=usacoup


    "Rich Lockyer" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 12:50:20 +1300, "Jas" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >"luminos" <> wrote in message
    > >news:...
    > >> Uh huh. So now there is a right wing conspiracy across the country and
    > >> across industry to take the election from Kerry. Stay in New Zealand.

    > >And
    > >> get stuffed.

    > >
    > >No there are
    > >
    > >Election fraud happens... on both sides. This is a given.
    > >
    > >
    > >Either there was wholesale lying in the exit polls (polls taken from

    those
    > >leaving the poling booths) in the elctronic voting many preceints which
    > >showed Kerry signficantly ahead, or the "black box" electronic voting
    > >(without a paper trail) was tainted, not working correctly...or, yes

    there
    > >was a conspiracy. Conspiracies do happen. Sometimes, as in Watergate,

    "they"
    > >get caught.
    > >
    > >This one might turn into a Watergate...or may not.

    >
    > Of course it won't turn into a Watergate, because, unlike Watergate,
    > the Republicans had no access to those machines. Those were
    > Democrat-controlled precincts run by Democrat operatives.


    Actually the machines were not.
    "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President
    next year."
    - Wally O'Dell, CEO Diebold who supplied the machines.

    as one recently posted:

    "I was more or less resigned to the fact that Bush won this one legit, but
    I've been seeing more and more evidence of some seriously suspect and
    implausible election results. Like what's being discovered about many
    Florida counties.

    Take a good hard look at these numbers in smaller counties where they used
    "Op-Scan" machines.

    http://ustogether.org/election04/FloridaDataStats.htm

    The first one is a big county and seems fairly consistent between
    registration and outcome. Broward, another big country is fairly consistent
    between registration and outcome.

    But look at the second one, Baker County, a small county using Op-Scan. It
    had 9,000 registered Democrats, and 3,000 registered Republicans on Oct 4.
    Yet the outcome of their vote on Nov 2. was about 2,000D to 8,000R. Almost
    the exact opposite, and a virtually impossible 100 point shift in voting
    pattern since 2000. The outcome simply appears to be the mirror image, a
    complete reversal of any reasonable expectation.

    It goes down the line like this in most of the small counties that had
    Op-Scan. Bradford County, 9,000 registered D, and 4,000 registered R,
    produces an outcome of 7,500 R and 3,200 D votes! It goes on and on.

    Dixie County had 7,500D and 1,500R registered, producing the outcome of
    2,000D and 4,500R!

    Hamilton/Op-Scan, 6,000D-1,200R registered produces 2,200D-2,800R outcome.

    Hardee/Op-Scan, 6,600D-2,800R registered produces 2,100D-5,000R outcome.

    on and on.

    Sorry, something is fishy here. It just doesn't add up. I've been seeing
    things almost as suspect about other places like OH and NM too, but this
    one's got to take the cake so far.

    It shouldn't be too hard for a good team of investigators to simply target
    even just one of these small counties and track down, out of just 8 or 9
    thousand people, who voted for whom and if the odd-ball outcome can't be
    reproduced, show easily that there was either serious fraud going on or a
    serious breakdown in the voting system that, in either case, critically
    altered the outcome of this election.


    >
    > --- Rich
    > http://richlockyer.tripod.com/
     
    Jas, Nov 8, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page