Cobb: Ohio Recount Must Start Now!

Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals
if I'm found out.

The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both
states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the
national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale
of the fraud.

The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was snatched from him.

Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won
by about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program
(in both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite."
"KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual
name is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were
jumbled but I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the
letters of the alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the
alphabet.

So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the
total number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts
the third party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.

Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award
them to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still
awarded additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for
example) went to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on
the up and up. It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder
why the Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic
counties? You should wonder, and also know that this was no accident.
The Bush team had to make up the votes as the night went on.

In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes
and some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes
were absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.

Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour
long lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest
thing to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all
it takes. People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a
vote.

In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down.
Kerry only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead
was 6% for Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took
place to flip the state to Bush.

So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this
massive can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities" and the whisper will become a roar.

Hang in there!

The great English Statesman Benjamin Disaraeli commented: "For evil to fluorish it is enough that good men do nothing."


What is needed are a few courageous souls to stand up and start singing and a lot of work by dedicated Patriots to reclaim our country.


Being a Patriot is not a matter of either "Left" or "Right" those are mere labels. It is a matter of wanting the best for our country. At times we may disagree on what "the best" means but good people of good heart, whatever their differences in viewpoint, want the best for everyone. Wanting the best for our country does not include allowing a Psychopathic Mass Murdering Criminal to steal another election.


Only 1/3 of the American Colonists wanted to Break Away from British Tyranny, but they were smart, dedicated and TOUGH.


All we need to win is to be Smart, Dedicated, and TOUGH.


Criminals are basically stupid, do not let the trappings of power and wealth confuse you. Bush is still stoopid, and "the help" ain't too bright neither. The only thing they have going for them is the willingness to be brutal and ruthless. We just have to be tough enough to stand up to them, because in the end Criminals are Cowards as well.

I would like to praise "Brad Menfil" I have no reason to doubt his letter..we all know what took place...but to see the "formula" used to steal votes makes me think that he very well may have seen something that might help prove that 11/2/04 was planned and executed just as suspected. It appears to be a huge conspiracy to commit vote fraud. Hard to tell how many were involved..its obvious the news media was complicit, if not involved in the conspiracy..in which case, when (if) it all comes out....their credibility will also be "zilch" for many years, that is the least of what they deserve..it looks to me as though they were not happy just putting in "the fix" for Bush....looking back I am quite certain they put the "big fix" in for Congress and Senate races in 2000, 2002 and again in the last election...do you have any idea how many people would have to be involved to pull off something like this? Looks to be the entire Republican party! As well as corporate CEO's, also a few wealthy foriegn countries come to mind. It boogles the mind! I only hope there will be more honest citizens like "Brad" who understand the depth of what has happened. That does not let their choice of party affiliation override what all of us really are, first.... honest, freedom loving American citizens, patriots who love our country. We all, only really want what the constitution and our civil rights gaurantees us, such as our voting rights, a President elected by the majority of the people...not by theft, dirty tricks, voter intimidation and racsism.

Why isn't the media covering all of the known voter fraud that occured in Ohio and Florida? Where are the Democrats? The Republicans would fight for the vote and their supporters if this was reversed! Why aren't the Democrats doing anything for all of the support they got in this election? In the future it will not matter what changes the Democrats make, they are loosing their base right now and it will not return. Why should it? Where are Kerry/Edwards???? Why are they leaving it all to JesseJackson, he needs help, the Democrats need to help him out and FIGHT for this election, if they do not they can forget future votes and support.

If "Brad" is for real, I hope "he" is taking measures to protect the information "he" has. It would be a shame if something happened and the information died. Find a lawyer working with BBV or Green/Lib parties and get them to deposition you, so that the information is not subject to a "single point of failure". Contact Olbemann and see if he's willing to run the story with the source anonymous (I've been wondering how real Keith is, maybe this will tell?) Post all the hard data to offshore sites (post from a public terminal). Do whatever it takes to get the word out, if the information reaches critical mass, then it is no longer effective to silence the source, so it could be argued that spreading this information around is a matter of self defence/self preservation.

SORRY FOLKS BUT IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO.THE REPUBLICANS ARE REAL DEMOCRATES.
AND THE DEMOCRATES ARE THE SAME CRAP.WHY KICK BUSH OUT--HE IS DOING A GOOD JOB IN PLEASING ISRAEL.KERRY IS NO FOOL-HIS HANDLERS ARE THE SAME ONES WHO ARE FUNDING THE REPUBLICANS. AIPAC--THE JEWISH MAFIA!
WHY NOT LET BUSH FINISH THE JOB?---who would want the mess.
Americans are such fools,bank machines can account for every penny-maybe each bank location be a voting booth.
Saps--all of you-all talk and bullshit.

There is no BASIS for confidence in the legitimacy of US elections. Learn more about the No Confidence Movement.

...that there are still so many Kerry supporters out there who think that "Kerry would be different."

I can't believe that someone who works for the RNC would have the integrity to fess up about this issue. I also have problems with Wayne Madsen's exposes, published in the Onlinejournal website. After all, he used to work for the NSA and the Reagan administration. Could this be disinformation? It sounds credible enough to my ears, however. I am convinced that there was a Kerry landslide.

This doesn't read well. I doubt this is true.

However, if it were, there's a HUGE financial reward and enormous protections avaliable for a whistleblower. 200k, and we can raise more to reward a whistle blower. Go public, contact Kieth Olbermann, claim the reward, and do your patriotic duty. Otherwise, this is just a random message board post.

If you fear that above action, then give us some tangible leads to find clear evidence. Shouldn't be hard if you possess the facts and knowlege you claim. IF you are legit, I laud your coming forward and can explain to you exactly what shoudl be done next.

To the Kerry critic above, the debate about the stolen election is less about Kerry and the Democrats per se than the integrity of the electoral system.

This is interesting but needs more substantion, not of the fraud but whether or not Menfil is who he says he is, whether it happened quite that way, and also what his motivations are in writing this to us.

One point he makes though that can be easily verified is that the Republican-leaning counties in Florida were tabulated after the Democratic ones. Doesn't anyone find it a bit odd that Bush did so well in the Tampa/St. Petersburg area? The Tampa paper wouldn't even endorse Bush for President this year.

However, in order for all of this to be true, there would have had to be fraud in the Democratic counties (Miami, Palm Beach, Broward) as well. I suppose this could have been easily done with the touch screen machines. Specifically, look at how Bush's percentage of increase over his own totals in 2000in these Democratic strongholds is actually greater than Kerry's over Gore's!

Thoughts?

Nothing to trust here. This doesn't even meet the trust requirement.

This could be a 14 year old kid, or pissed off republican person, here to make fun of us and jerk us around. It's jsut a message board post. The more I think abotu this, the more certian I become that this is 100% pure B.S. on its face.

Let?s consider facts about how we need to be slaughtering Iraqis. And about how those Muslim fanatics did 911, and actually have unction to kill us, from their god. I wonder how many have read the Old Testament, and seen Moses was given the same unction to kill every man, woman, and child of those nations worshipping other gods? These same folks denounced Jesus as a blasphemer deserving death, so I wonder how Israel really views Christians? What is[i] really disturbing[/i], is so many seem perfectly willing to accept that it was Muslims who did 911, and other "official versions" of government. Henry Kissinger said that Democracy is too important to leave in the hands of the public. Despite his associates and all of their war crimes, I'm also inclined to agree. We are all in for a very exciting ride! It's too bad Kerry had the election so blatantly stolen from him, and you have to wonder how big a payoff he took to so demurely concede after blustering how he would fight for the last vote, but Kerry is really hardly better than Bush, anyhow. Both Dems and GOP support Ariel Sharon, the IMF, and other corporate parasitical philosophies such as globalization, which are the real problems. Even way back to Carter, bless his heart, and accelerating through Reagan, we find the roots of deregulation leading to bulldozers pushing mountains of money out of the US Treasury to the Elites' front doors at the expense of US debt, from which Bush Jr. has, from repaying, immunized those who benefited, through his tax cuts financed by theft from the Social Security Trust Fund and other government commonwealth resources. It is not really accurate to characterize Bush as having gone to the largest budget deficit ever, from Clinton's surplus. Clinton didn't really have a surplus, but cooked the books after his also illegally raiding Social Security. Kerry got the Protest Vote from those who mistakenly think there's a difference compared to Bush. Many of Bush's votes came from those who realize there is no substantial difference, and you might as well stay with the familiar. In case you're wondering, I vote Nader because he spent so much effort in Consumer Protection and preserving environment. There are truly overwhelming problems facing the world: Depletion of natural resources, primarily oil, but everything else as well, exacerbated by the Elitist Response, which is to loot as much of the wealth as possible, as though their money will save them. No matter who wins, they cannot dig the US out of the financial black hole into which it's fallen, created by the looting. The publicly-admitted $8.2 trillion debt ceiling passed by Congress after the election does not include what the US "owes to itself." In October the USA Today printed some facts and figures on the national debt which they stated totalled $7.2T, before the election. Personal debt representing credit cards and mortgages was another $9.5T. The other US Government debt obligations "owed to itself" include Social Security, Medicare and government pensions which are owed now and amount to another $53T. As more paper is printed to meet these debts, your labor is also devaluing. As the fiat money you earn becomes worth less - it then buys less. In other words you will have to work longer to earn the same purchasing power. The USA Today reports that personal debt owed per household amounts to $84,454 however with the $53 trillion for government obligations factored in this adds another $473,456 of debt per household. Then there's the mortgage and credit card debt. This means every household is in the hole by well over half a million dollars! The real debt is more like $70.7T; more than all the houses, businesses, any other private property, and all government property including all the military, wilderness reserves, and mineral rights, throughout all of the US. Can we rely on you to pay off your $0.5B, real soon now? Just two components of the US economy are the Trade Deficit of $1.8B per day, and the Budget Deficit somewhere around $1.5B per day. This ongoing debt is financed mostly through the US$'s being established as the medium of exchange for most of the world's oil, created in part by settlement of the 1973 oil embargo. The US$ is also most of the world's reserve currency, meaning that many nations stockpile US$s for a rainy day. Reserve currencies are like checks that never, or rarely, get cashed. This is clearly a game that can only continue as long as confidence is maintained, confidence in the dollar, and confidence in the US. Vast quantities of US debt and dollar financial assets have been created and ingeniously packaged and marketed to foreigners who are right now waking up to the harsh reality that they have been played for suckers and are about to get stuck with this atrophying junk. Thus, other nations are getting shaky about the increasing US debt, are already exchanging US$s for other currencies with China leading the way, and are considering official replacement for the US$, such as the Euro, or the Gold Dinar of the Arab and Muslim world. Saddam switched to the Euro for Iraq's oil in December 2000, and look where it got him. An invasion evoking the declaration of the United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan that the Iraq war was "illegal.? Where first there were no WMD, then there was no al-qa'ida connection, then there was no 911 connection, the number of mass graves of "Saddam?s" gas victims turned out to be 5,000 rather than 400,000 and appear to have actually been done by the Iranians during the Iraq/Iran war, and finally, they've "lost" all their evidence that Saddam was anything other than how he characterized himself as "Just but firm." Even when they captured Saddam, they said they would be spending the next two years gathering evidence, but the way they had been portraying him all this time made me think they already had the goods, so I had to go "huh" when they said "two years to gather the evidence." All this was after both US Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice bragged and boasted in early 2001 of how the US containment of Saddam had worked to disarm him, and he wasn't even a threat to his neighbours. Powell's and Rice's statements were videotaped and broadcast. The UN inspectors knew better, and they joined in with their voices too. But what could you really expect from the US Department of Fairy Tales, which came up with such a detailed laundry list including the lavish fictions of Saddam's 26,000 litres of anthrax, 38,000 litres of botulism toxin, 1.5 tons of VX nerve gas, 1,000 tons of mustard gas, 500 tons of sarin gas, mobile labs to generate the stuff, and plagiarised from a student essay, that Saddam was buying a kazillion tons of uranium yellow cake from Niger for nuclear bombs to drop on us and make Mushroom Clouds over our cities in 45 minutes. And of course the lies about Saddam's ties to al-Qa'ida, which itself is an imaginary Islamic terrorist group created by the US Administration to keep everyone scared and compliant, and is actually composed of US CIA and Israeli Mossad operatives. We need to examine who really benefits from this $200 billion invasion. Israel benefits in Ariel Sharon's obsession exterminate Arab nations. The bankers benefit because of all the money both sides borrow to finance a war, and they lend to both sides. The Military-Industrial complex also gets to rake in some more obscene profits from its $600 toilet seats, $400 ashtrays, and $300 hammers. This doesn't even touch the $1 million to $1.5 million they charge us every time they shoot off a missile that only costs $5,000. And of course, members of the Bush Administration, their families and friends benefit. All of it financed by the American taxpayer, increasingly those at the bottom, for the benefit of those at the top. That?s just the money. There?s the human cost of 100,000 Iraqi lives, with some 1,000,000 Iraqis? surviving being blown to bits, together with 2,500 US troops? being killed and some 25,000 wounded. Many US troops Killed In Action are being abandoned, and will eventually become Missing In Action. However, the US' going bankrupt with its $71T debt is really the least of the US' worries. First found all over the net, and now appearing even in tradition media, is the concept of Peak Oil. Briefly, the last giant oil fields were found in the 1950s, and the last big ones in the 1970s. Peak Oil means we no longer find enough new stuff to supply demand, so we end up digging into the oil supply reserves we've already found. Consider how we have to go farther and farther into the ocean, and then deeper and deeper. It used to take exploration's consuming one barrel of oil (1 bbl) to find 50 bbls; now, it's about 1 to 4 or 5. Meanwhile, China's enjoying the US' trade imbalance, and its prosperity is not only leading to phenomenal industrialisation requiring more of a shift to energy import, but its teeming population of 1.5B is converting from bicycle to gasoline transportation. It is economically impossible to extract every bit of oil, but as the above ratio approaches 1 bbl consumed for exploration for every 1 bbl found by that same exploration, the price of oil will escalate hyper exponentially when reserves approach being depleted. The world consumes about 28B bbl per year, with the US at about 20B bbl per year. So, you can see the excitement when there was a find of 200B bbl in the Caspian Sea Basin just north of Afghanistan. Finally, another giant field! Of course, the US was right in there trying to make a deal with the Taliban to build a pipeline across Afghanistan, but in the summer of 2001, the deal fell through despite US threats to give the Taliban a carpet of gold, or a carpet of bombs. A couple of months later, 911 happens, the US blames a recluse hermit hiding in an Afghan cave as the mastermind, demands the Taliban produce him despite no evidence he did anything, and then when the Taliban demand evidence, bombs the stuffing out of Afghanistan with a carpet of bombs so that the Afghans will "know the generosity of the American People." Anybody realize we never got around to rebuilding Afghanistan? Later, the Caspian estimates fell to only 20B bbl, and have now fallen to somewhere around 9B bbl. It came time to shift focus because the Caspian just isn't the jewel it once was. Naturally, that focus fell to the Middle East. Peak Oil is so important because we have become a petro-everything, including petrofertilizer. The planet Earth lost its ability to naturally feed everyone around the year 1900, at which time a process to manufacture fertilizer from petroleum was invented. The Earth is overpopulated by 150%. That is, there are a total of two and a half times as many people as the Earth can support, not counting the petroleum advantage. Now, exactly where is that fertilizer going to come from without petroleum? No petrol - no food. So, we won't have to worry about how there is no fuel for trucks to transport food from the farms to the market. Because we won't have any food growing in the first place. Estimates are that 5.5 billion of the current 6 billion population will perish. A few lucky people with farms will discover crop rotation, but today's farms are driven by efficiency to produce a single crop on mass scale, requiring only a single type of farm machinery suited to a single crop. And fertilizer. No, crop rotation cannot feed everybody alive today. It is because of this desperation that someone planned and orchestrated 911, to create a blank check so that, as VP Cheney said when he was Secretary of State under Bush Sr., the US could get "control over Middle East oil, then we'll have a stranglehold over the economies of the rest of the nations in the world." You can see that even if, as mountains of evidence show, that 911 was the US' own inside operation, it was in the national interest, in the big picture. In the big picture of 5.5 billion (5,500 million) deaths, even the entire 27 million people in the nation of Iraq are an expendable drop in the bucket to serve as an effective distraction against most folks seeing the Really Big Show behind the curtain. So the government can carry out its primary function. Not to protect the people, but to control the people by any means necessary, including pretending to protect them against phantom bogeymen the government itself creates to scare people in the first place. I mean, won't you welcome suspending the Constitution in favour of a Police State to guarantee your safety? Don't you welcome the 600 or so concentration camps that have been quietly constructed all over the US to contain those who disrupt order, such as with dissent by petitioning their government for grievances? And of course, don't you welcome draconian gun laws to protect you against criminals? Like the crooks are going to line up turning theirs in? But which really takes away any possibility of revolution. And then there's the Bill for next year?s draft (military conscription) that drafts everybody up to 44 years of age. Fit for Halliburton's and Bechtel's Middle East and wherever else wars? Great! Go right into the battlefield. Not fit? No problem. In that case you will be forced into involuntary servitude in a domestic capacity, possibly your very own former regular employment. This will, of course do away with the retirement problem, because there ain't gonna be none. What am I saying - there isn't any already. Look at how businesses are going bankrupt, no longer paying their pensions, and the government Pension Insurance agency is $ billions and billions in the red. You need to vote on yourself. Get your passport in order, and while you can still quietly slip across the border, keep checking flight schedules in Canada and Mexico for distant lands. When you get there, buy yourself a farm 50 miles (80km) from the nearest big city, and 10 miles (16km) from the nearest big road. And a bunch of guns. If you don't take the law into your own hands on your farm, there won't be any law. Especially when those Elites find out they can't eat their rooms chock full of money, and so they want to come and confiscate your farm, for "National Security" of course. I'm in Australia, but watching Prime Minister Howard's adoption of Bush's policies, Europe might be better. The UN rates the top nations in which to live as Norway, Sweden, Australia, and Canada. But Canada's throwing people into jail for Political Incorrectness. Unless, you think Historical Truth needs legal action to protect it. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20041103/ZUNDEL03/TPNational/Canada And Norway and Sweden are really too cold and grey for this southern US expat of 20 years. But maybe I ought to reach way deep down and pull out my northern US persona and adapt that way. Australia's Constitution is very weak, and the people have no protection since June 2002, for example, when the new ASIO (Australia Security Information Organisation, spy agency) Law authorised police powers for a spy agency, and we thereby created our very own secret police who may legally indefinitely detain incommunicado anyone over the age of 15 years without even having to notify their family. You have no right to refuse to answer a question on the grounds your answer may tend to incriminate you, under penalty of five years if you do refuse. The entire nation is Gitmo. Notice I'm not talking any abuse of rights here, because the only constitutional rights are four: 1) the right to be paid if they take your property, 2) the right to a jury if they charge you with a crime, 3) protection against a state religion, and 4) protection against discrimination because of which state you live in. All other rights are from court decisions about what is just and fair, but court decisions have no protection themselves against being reversed by enacting a law. By contrast in the US, Bush may round up protestors, but the courts have ruled "The peaceful exercise of a constitutional right cannot be made into a crime," so at least they go home the next day, and with respect to Gitmo, that a detainee has the right to appear in court and explain why the government made a mistake in arresting them. At least until they suspend the Constitution. They?ve already taken over the ability of the American people to ever vote them out of office by rigging e-voting machines. Terror is an indispensable element of controlling the public. Together with propaganda. Consider how the French, fighting the illegal invasion by the Nazis, were patriots, freedom fighters, resistance, and ultimately, heroes. But the Iraqis, doing the same as the French, are insurgents and terrorists. Most every war has been rigged under false pretences. Let?s just look at a few during the past 100 years. The usual procedure is a "false flag" operation to incite ordinary folks to war, because ordinary folks really, really don't like war. You've got all these military-industrial complexes stuffed with itching fingers to build war armaments, and then the same guys profit all over again to rebuild the countries they destroyed. They stick their hands deeply into the pockets of the conquerors' people extracting payments through taxes, and to boot, also get to steal all the conquereds' resources. So think of Iraq as kind of a US public-funded armed robbery of Iraq. Or they even kill innocent folks just to sell more newspapers. [b]1898[/b] The Spanish-American War of 1898 has been called the first "media war." In summary, Cuba lies at the foot of Florida and is definitely within the purview of the Monroe Doctrine. In the late 19th century rebellion was rife in Cuba against Spanish rule and the US saw this as the opportunity to exploit the situation. In 1898, the US battleship Maine was dispatched to Havana to protect American interests. While in harbour the Maine was rocked by a loud explosion and sank. An investigation revealed that the explosion was internal but the press ignored this. After a relentless barrage of reports denouncing the Spanish, the US government declared war. The US booty this time was Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. US imperialism crushed Filipinos next. A few more details, Cubans fought several wars to free themselves from Spanish colonial rule, including 1868-1878, 1879-1880 and 1895-1898. In 1898, Cubans were on the brink of finally winning their independence. The U.S. government agreed to respect Cuba?s sovereignty and promised they would not step in. On January 24, [1898] on the pretext of protecting the life and safety of Mr. Lee, who was US consul in Havana, and other U.S. citizens in the face of street disturbances provoked by Spanish extremists, the Maine battleship entered the bay of Havana. On February 15, 1898, a huge explosion sank the U.S.S Maine killing 266 of its crew. In 1975, U.S. Admiral Hyman Rickover?s investigation agreed with the earlier investigation's conclusion that there was no evidence of any external explosion. The explosion was internal, probably caused by a coal dust explosion. The ship?s weapons and explosives were dangerously stored right next to its coal bunker. The Maine?s captain cautioned against assumptions of an enemy attack. Yet, the press denounced him for ?refusing to see the obvious.? The Atlantic Monthly said anyone thinking this was not a premeditated, Spanish act of war was ?completely at defiance of the laws of probability.? Newspapers ran wild headlines: ?Spanish Cannibalism,? ?Inhuman Torture,? ?Amazon Warriors Fight for Rebels.? Guillermo Jimpnez Soler notes: ?U.S. intervention in the war was preceded by intensive press campaigns which incited jingoism, pandering to the most shameless tales and sensationalism and exacerbated cheap sentimentality. Joseph Pulitzer of The World and William Randolph Hearst, then the upstart editor of The New York Journal, the two largest U.S. papers, carried their rivalry to a paroxysm of inflaming public opinion with scandalous, provocative and imaginary stories designed to win acceptance of U.S. participation in the first of its holy wars beyond its maritime borders.? Hearst understood that a war with Spain over Cuba would not only sell newspapers, but also move him into a position of national prominence. Hearst's propaganda offensive, the first in modern media history, demonised Spain for its brutal suppression of the Cuban rebellion and fueled pro-war feeling. With the sinking of the U.S.S. Maine in Havana harbour in 1898, Hearst had the perfect pretext for war. The Hearst press saw to it that Spain shouldered the blame and a reluctant President McKinley capitulated. Hearst strongarmed the President into a wrongful war in order to sell newspapers at the expense of innocent lives. [b]1915[/b] - WWI During WWI the British sought to bring the US into the war. It sent an armament-laden merchant ship, Lusitania, with a complement of passengers ? among them Americans - unescorted through waters known to be patrolled by German U-boats. The resultant sinking of the Lusitania presaged the American entry into the war. The American passengers were used as [b]live bait[/b], and Americans were roused to war to avenge this wrongful attack on innocents. [b]1933[/b] It is instructive to examine an incident in Nazi Germany, especially because Grandaddy Prescott Bush colluded with Hitler, and now Bush seems to have adopted several of Hitler?s tactics. Goebbels came up with the idea of setting fire to the Reichstag, which the Nazis did February 27, 1933. Shortly after the fire began, the Dutch left-wing radical Marinus van der Lubbe was arrested at the scene of the crime, apparently as the sole culprit. For the Nazis, who had been in power less than a month, since January 30, 1933, the Reichstag fire was the excuse for a hitherto unparalleled persecution of Communist and Social Democratic workers, intellectuals and party leaders. On February 28, 1933 alone, just one day after the fire, thousands of persons active in, or allied with, the workers movement were arrested. The first to be arrested also included writers Egon Erwin Kisch, Ludwig Renn and Carl von Ossietzky, later murdered by the Nazis in a concentration camp. On March 23, 1933, the newly elected members of the Reichstag met in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin to consider passing Hitler's Enabling Act. It was officially called the "Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich." This bill would end democracy in Germany and establish the legal dictatorship of Adolf Hitler. ?If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator," Bush joked. -- CNN.com, December 18, 2000. The Nazis had secretly caused confusion in order to create an atmosphere in which the law seemed necessary to restore order. Hitler was TIME Magazine's Man Of The Year in 1938. The German people assumed they were safe from a tyrant. They lived in a Republic, after all, with strict laws regarding what the government could and more importantly could not do. Their leader was a devoutly religious man, and had even sung with the boy's choir of a monastery in his youth. They successfully expanded blame for the fire to encompass the Communists, and claimed it marked the beginning of a widespread rebellion. ?We are under attack!? On the day of the vote, Nazi storm troopers gathered around the opera house chanting, "Full powers - or else!" In the end, the last War on Terrorism didn't go so well for Germany. They not only lost their War on Terrorism, but their regime was ultimately defeated, not by the "terrorists," but by a foreign alliance because of their response to terrorism. The foreign alliance felt justified in removing a hysterical empire from existence, which apparently could not deal with terrorism in a rational manner. If history is to repeat itself, Russia and China will feel the same moral justification when they attempt to do the same. [b]1941[/b] It was clear in 1935 that the international order was crumbling. But the US was still suffering with the Great Depression. Hitler had conscripted 500,000 into the German Army by 1935, in direct violation of the Versailles Treaty. The Italians under Mussolini invaded Ethiopia in 1935 and the US did little or nothing to stop them. Mussolini and Hitler took the non-response by the US and the other Europeans as a sign that their aggression would not be blunted. It emboldened them. By 1937 there was all out war in China with the Japanese. Japan had begun war throughout east Asia, to "liberate" the people from Western Imperialism. Sound familiar? In response to all of this, FDR gave his famous "Quarantine Speech" in 1937. It was broadcast nationwide and in it he spoke of the unraveling of world peace and said that the international crisis was like an epidemic. He suggested that we needed to quarantine the aggressors. Newspapers condemned his speech and isolationists were very disturbed. The key to FDRs leadership early in the war, before we entered, is that he could not get too far ahead of public opinion. You cannot lead where no one will follow. FDR sent boats into German waters hoping for a repeat of the Lusitania, but Germany declined to sink anything after they reread the history of WWI. Germany declared war upon the US only after Pearl, when the US declared war upon Germany's ally, Japan. In his quest to incite the US people into war to avenge a "wrongful" act, FDR had committed acts of war upon Japan including an embargo cutting off their oil and steel, provoking them into attacking the US. In order for Japan to fuel its war in Asia, they figured to get oil from Malaysia, but would have to knock out the US navy at Pearl. Now, just think about a Japanese armada, a big bunch of boats slowly steaming across the Pacific for days, and try to imagine that the US, with the most advanced intelligence in the world, didn't know anything about it. In wartime in Asia and in Europe. After FDR's provoking Japan with acts of war. It's just ludicrous to think the US was really taken by surprise. In fact, the US had to close down and disperse a naval exercise because it was in the path of the oncoming Japanese. And two groups of a total of 21 new boats were moved out of Pearl, leaving behind only rusting hulks that were soon to be retired, as targets for the Japanese. Along with thousands of innocent people, again used as [b]live bait[/b] by the US Government. 2,300 innocent people are killed, almost exactly the same number as WTC. [b]February 1945[/b] Dresden Dresden was widely considered by Germans to be a city of little war-related industrial or strategic importance. Dresden itself was most noted as a cultural centre, with noted architecture in the Zwinger Palace, the Dresden State Opera House and its historic cathedral (the Frauenkirche) and other churches. It was also called "Elbflorenz", i.e. Florence of the Elbe, due to its stunning beauty. By February, the city was crammed full of refugees fleeing from the advancing Red Army. Dresden, having been spared from previous RAF night attacks, was considered to be relatively safe. The Dresden bombing is a strongly debated decision, and the action is still widely perceived as lacking military justification, even within the context of the controversial area-bombing policy pursued against Germany by Britain's Bomber Command in 1942-1945. Some have suggested that the bombing of Dresden may have been a war crime or a crime against humanity and that those allied commanders who ordered the action and the airmen who carried it out should be tried as war criminals. Neither Axis or Allied participants in the decision or execution of assault by aerial bombardments were tried. The London Charter for the post-war Nuremberg Trials defined that only only crimes of the Nazis could be tried. 100,000 innocent people burned to death in the Allied bombing. [b]July 1945[/b] Dropping the A-bomb on Japan By 1945, Japan's economy had been reduced to rubble to the point where they were building Kamikaze planes without landing gear or even weaponry to save a few pennies. Japan was actually suing all over Russia and Europe for surrender. But the US kept delaying meetings in order to allow more time to build, and drop the bombs. It is utter nonsense that the bombs were dropped "to save millions of lives." The US vaporized 137,000 innocent people. [b]1962[/b] Google "operation northwoods." I just tried this and got 17,000 results. Basically, it was a plan originated under Ike's presidency, and then under JFK's presidency, but which he refused to endorse, named Operation Northwoods. The plan, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war. The idea may actually have originated with President Eisenhower in the last days of his administration. With the Cold War hotter than ever and the recent U-2 scandal fresh in the public's memory, the old general wanted to go out with a win. He wanted desperately to invade Cuba in the weeks leading up to Kennedy's inauguration; indeed, on January 3 he told Lemnitzer and other aides in his Cabinet Room that he would move against Castro before the inauguration if only the Cubans gave him a really good excuse. Then, with time growing short, Eisenhower floated an idea. If Castro failed to provide that excuse, perhaps, he said, the United States "could think of manufacturing something that would be generally acceptable." What he was suggesting was a pretext a bombing, an attack, an act of sabotage carried out secretly against the United States by the United States. Its purpose would be to justify the launching of a war. It was a dangerous suggestion by a desperate president. [b]1964[/b] The 'nam The Bay of Tonkin incident where a North Vietnamese PT boat allegedly attacked a USA warship was the excuse the government of USA used to go full throttle into Vietnam. By that time JFK had conveniently met with an unfortunate accident and wouldn't be coming back anymore and so they could do whatever they wanted. It's what they'd wanted to do in Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. When JFK was alive only 42 Americans had died in Vietnam and he was planning to bring all the troops home. But after his death his plans were reversed and nearly 60,000 troops died over there and thousands were captured and held prisoner. In 1964, it all seemed very clear. American Planes Hit North Vietnam After Second Attack on Our Destroyers; Move Taken to Halt New Aggression, announced a Washington Post headline on August 5, 1964. That same day, the front page of the New York Times reported: President Johnson has ordered retaliatory action against gunboats and certain supporting facilities in North Vietnam after renewed attacks against American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin. But there was no second attack by North Vietnam, no renewed attacks against American destroyers. By reporting official claims as absolute truths, American journalism opened the floodgates for the bloody Vietnam War. A pattern took hold: continuous government lies passed on by pliant mass media...leading to over 50,000 American deaths and millions of Vietnamese casualties. The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an unprovoked attack against a U.S. destroyer on routine patrol in the Tonkin Gulf on August 2 and that North Vietnamese PT boats followed up with a deliberate attack on a pair of U.S. ships two days later. The truth was very different. Rather than being on a routine patrol on August 2, the U.S. destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive intelligence-gathering maneuvers in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and Laotian air force. The day before, two attacks on North Vietnam... had taken place, writes scholar Daniel C. Hallin. Those assaults were part of a campaign of increasing military pressure on the North that the United States had been pursuing since early 1964. On the night of August 4, the Pentagon proclaimed that a second attack by North Vietnamese PT boats had occurred earlier that day in the Tonkin Gulf a report cited by President Johnson as he went on national TV that evening to announce a momentous escalation in the war: air strikes against North Vietnam. Johnson ordered U.S. bombers to retaliate for a North Vietnamese torpedo attack that never happened. Prior to the U.S. air strikes, top officials in Washington had reason to doubt that any August 4 attack by North Vietnam had occurred. Cables from the U.S. task force commander in the Tonkin Gulf, Captain John J. Herrick, referred to freak weather effects, almost total darkness and an overeager sonarman who was hearing ship's own propeller beat. One of the Navy pilots flying that night was James Stockdale, who gained fame later as a prisoner of war and then as Ross Perot's vice presidential candidate. I had the best seat in the house to watch that event, recalled Stockdale a few years ago, our destroyers were just shooting at phantom targets there were no PT boats there.... There was nothing there but black water and American fire power. In 1965, Lyndon Johnson commented: For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there. But Johnson's deceitful speech of August 4, 1964, won accolades from editorial writers. The president, proclaimed the New York Times, went to the American people last night with the somber facts. The Los Angeles Times urged Americans to face the fact that the Communists, by their attack on American vessels in international waters, have themselves escalated the hostilities. An exhaustive book, The War Within: America's Battle Over Vietnam, begins with a dramatic account of the Tonkin Gulf incidents. In an interview, author Tom Wells told us that American media described the air strikes that Johnson launched in response as merely tit for tat when in reality they reflected plans the administration had already drawn up for gradually increasing its overt military pressure against the North. Why such inaccurate news coverage? Wells points to the media's almost exclusive reliance on U.S. government officials as sources of information as well as reluctance to question official pronouncements on national security issues. Daniel Hallin's classic book The Uncensored War observes that journalists had a great deal of information available which contradicted the official account [of Tonkin Gulf events]; it simply wasn't used. The day before the first incident, Hanoi had protested the attacks on its territory by Laotian aircraft and South Vietnamese gunboats. What's more, It was generally known... that covert operations against North Vietnam, carried out by South Vietnamese forces with U.S. support and direction, had been going on for some time. In the absence of independent journalism, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution the closest thing to a declaration of war against North Vietnam sailed through Congress on August 7. (Two courageous senators, Wayne Morse and Ernest Gruening, provided the only no votes.) The resolution authorized Johnson to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the U.S. and to prevent further aggression. Johnson escalated the Vietnam war by signing the Gulf of Tonkin resolution on August 10, 1964. By 1975, about four million people had been killed by the U.S. war in Southeast Asia. Real Reasons As during the Spanish-American war, the American business elite sought to acquire colonies from a failing imperial power, in this case, France. U.S. corporations wanted access to region's markets and resources, like tin, tungsten and rubber. The war also gave a huge boost to the military-industrial complex in the U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower propounded the Domino Theory in 1954. If South Vietnam fell, then other countries would too, like a set of dominos. The Vietnam War was a threat to all revolutionaries and their supporters. [b]1967[/b] 1967 USS Liberty This was the Sinai war where the Liberty was monitoring communications offshore in the Mediterranium during Israel's war with Egypt. The Liberty was basically unarmed. I have seen a documentary of home movies taken by the sailors on the boat, on the day Israel attacked it. Israel had been flying past the boat all morning. Suddenly it attacked the Liberty ferociously, including the lifeboats. The Liberty sent out distress, and other US boats came to its aid. What's really interesting, is that Robert McNamara had ordered Cairo to be nuked "in retaliation for Egypt's attacking the Liberty!" I am not kidding you. But the Liberty was rescued by another boat before it was sunk, and all eyewitnesses killed. So, McNamara had to call off the nuke attack, and have the planes return to their carrier, seeing as how there were a whole lot of witnesses that the attack had been done by Israel, not Egypt. The attack was officially classified as a mistake. [b]Late '60s[/b] Many in the Bush administration attend the University of Chicago, in the Hyde Park neighborhood of Chicago. Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and numerous other pro-Ariel Sharon Neo-cons in the Bush Jr. administration had been schooled in the Machiavellian/Nietzschean theories of Professor Leo Strauss, who taught political philosophy at the University of Chicago in their Department of Political Science. The best expose of Strauss's pernicious theories on law, politics, government, for elitism, and against democracy can be found in two scholarly books by the Canadian Professor Shadia B. Drury: The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (1988); Leo Strauss and the American Right (1999). The University of Chicago became the "brains" behind the Bush Jr. Empire and his Ashcroft Police State. Attorney General John Ashcroft received his law degree from the University of Chicago in 1967. Just recently the University of Chicago officially celebrated its Bush Jr. Straussian cabal, highlighting Wolfowitz Ph.D. '72, Ahmad Chalabi, Ph.D. '69, Abram Shulsky, A.M. '68, Ph.D. '72, and Zalmay Khalilzad, Ph.D. '79. [b]1990[/b] As the American academic Michael T. Klare (author of the book Resource Wars) points out in a recent article [See Foreign Policy in Focus at http://www.fpif.org], one of the key objectives of the present US administration flows from the analysis made by Vice President Dick Cheney when he was Secretary of Defense under Bush Sr. in 1990. ?[W]hoever controls the flow of Persian Gulf oil has a ?stranglehold? not only on our economy but also ?on that of most of that of the other nations of the world as well.? This is a powerful image, and perfectly describes the administration?s thinking about the Gulf area, except in reverse: by serving as the dominant power in the Gulf, WE maintain a ?stranglehold? over the economies of other nations.? [b]1991[/b] Iraq War I (Kuwait) Saddam was angry with Kuwait for stealing Iraqi oil at their common boundary, by using slant drilling. Saddam actually asked permission from US ambassador to Baghdad, April Gillespie, who told Saddam that the US had no position on Arab affairs, effectively giving Saddam a green light, as far as the US was concerned. After Saddam took the bait, the US created a lot of false intelligence, including doctored satellite photos showing a buildup of Iraqi forces along the border with Saudi, and the outrageous claim by the daughter of the Saudi ambassador living in Washington DC, where she pretended to be a nurse in a Kuwait hospital witnessing Iraqi troops throwing premies out of incubators onto the floor. Eventually, Iraq was given an ultimatum to evacuate Kuwait, but even as they were complying by fleeing back to Iraq, US warplanes blasted them in the back along the "highway of death." [b]1997[/b] 1997 dates a plan to inject an American military presence into the Persian Gulf. The "Project for a New American Century" is the admitted brainchild of Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, and Paul Wolfowitz. Seizing control of geographical advantage and resource of the Persian Gulf under the pretext of spreading liberty, but in reality to capture the stranglehold over the economies of the world's other nations as espoused by Cheney in 1990. Then it gets more nauseating: the PNAC blueprint says, "the process of transformation is likely to be a long one. Absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor." These guys would have known that the old Pearl Harbor was an inside job, so that's what they were talking about: another inside job. [b]2000[/b] Bush stole Florida through his governor brother, Jeb, and Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, who was responsible for certifying the vote count (and whose final tally was 2,912,790 votes for Bush; 2,912,253 for Gore, a difference of 537), while she chaired Bush's Florida campaign, and she was directly involved with the notorious "scrub list." As you may recall, George Bush was governor of Texas at the time, and Texas sent Florida a list of "felons." Florida promptly deregistered any voter whose name, age, or other information not only matched the list, but even came anywhere near matching the list, especially if the wrongful targets lived in Democrat strongholds. As a result, it was determined later that of some 97,000 disenfranchised voters, only more than about 3,000 were actually not entitled to vote, leaving more than 93,000 legitimate voters who, if they showed up to vote, they would only suddenly learn they couldn't because they were a "felon," and thereby have insufficient time to correct the "mistake." Of course, the whole idea was to disenfranchise voters who would be inclined to vote Democratic according to demographics, such as whether their address was located in a Democrat stronghold. Earlier, Harris rejected a request for an extension by Palm Beach County, where the canvassing board said it had less than 1,000 ballots left in a manual recount. The outcomes in Palm Beach, Miami-Dade and Nassau counties formed the core of Gore's contest. Lieberman said Harris' decision ignored hundreds of votes and thousands of hours of labor by election workers. "This evening, the secretary of state of Florida has decided to certify what by any reasonable standard is an incomplete and inaccurate count of the votes cast by the state of Florida," Lieberman said at the time. Such arguments convinced the Florida Supreme Court that a vote recount was needed, which was reversed by the US Supremes. Nonetheless, there was so much controversy, that a consortium of media banded together to do the recount anyway, despite that any outcome that they might reach had already been rendered officially moot. See http://www.gorewonflorida.org. There are different standards by which a vote is counted, depending upon only how clearly the voter has made his intention. Gore won by any standard, and by varying standards, won Florida by anywhere from some 1,600 to 46,600 votes. And that doesn't even count the 93,000 mostly Democratic votes trashed by the scrub list. [b]2001[/b] 911 On 10 September 2001, Bush's September 11th visit to Booker Elementary is publicised, and Condoleeza Rice warns San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown to cancel his flight scheduled for the next day. A number (it hasn't been reported exactly how many but it was called 'a small group of business leaders) of CEOs from New York, including at least one from the WTC, were attending a breakfast meeting at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, Nebraska on the morning of September 11, guests of Warren Buffett (isn't he the same guy who has guaranteed that the United States will suffer a nuclear attack by terrorists?). Offutt Air Force Base is the base that Bush flew to on September 11, supposedly because it is the headquarters of the E-4B, the aircraft which is the "command, control and communications center to direct U.S. forces, execute emergency war orders and coordinate actions by civil authorities". He wanted to be on the scene in person, particularly as there was fear that the terrorists were in possession of the secret codes by which they could electronically impersonate Bush in giving military commands (interesting how we have heard nothing more of that story). So how much of a coincidence is it that this meeting with Warren Buffett was on 911, at the same air force base that Bush flew to (apparently Bush intended to fly directly to Offutt, but had to stop for refuelling in Louisiana)? Is it possible that Buffett's invitation to a bunch of 'important' New York City executives for a breakfast meeting at an air force base in Nebraska (just think about how weird that is!) was an attempt to save the lives of the invitees? While Bush is reading to the class, Andy Card comes up and whispers that the second plane hit the tower, and that we are under attack. However, instead of waiting for Bush's commands, like ?Scramble the fighters!,? Andy immediately turns and leaves the room. If genuine terrorists were launching an attack, Bush would have been a bona fide target. Especially with his just sitting there in a school classroom. So, why didn't the Secret Service, whose job is to whisk the president out of danger, do so? Unless they knew he was really safe because 911 was an inside job? Normally, fighter jets scramble within six minutes of an errant airplane. Why did it take one hour and forty minutes for the fighters to scramble? Why did US authorities arrest Israeli art students who had set up filming the whole 911 scenario across the river, danced atop their van when it occurred, and then release them and classify the information? An Israeli WTC company, Odigo, on 27 September 2001 confirmed that two employees received text messages warning of an attack on WTC two hours before terrorists crashed planes. So why would Arabs warn their sworn enemies, Israelis? Neil Bush, the president's other brother, was security chief for the WTC. Regular WTC security patrols suddenly ceased days before 911. Why did the buildings fall straight down instead of teetering over on the side weakened by where the plane hit? The explanation has been that the jet fuel melted the steel frame. But jet fuel is like kerosene. Kerosene lamps are made out of cheap, thin, sheet metal steel. Go get yourself a kerosene lamp and light it, and see how long it takes to melt. Compared to steel skyscraper girders. Read this UL report at http://www.rense.com/general59/ul.htm which basically says the fuel burned around 250C (450F), the WTC steel was tested at 2000F, and wouldn't start melting until around 3000F. How did molten steel end up in the WTC basement? Why did the WTC rubble smoulder for 100 days? The hijackers' names don't appear on any of the planes' passenger lists. Or any surveillance tapes, except the one that came from the US Department of Fairy Tale Tapes, who brought us fake Osama tapes a couple of times. Remember they found Atta's suitcase full of incriminating stuff, accidentally rerouted so that it wasn't on the destroyed plane he was on? Well now, why would he pack a suitcase? Did he think the plane would land in Nirvana so he could unpack? And Atta's supercatastrophe-repellant passport that floated to earth. Now, supposedly, all, every single one of the airplane black boxes were completely destroyed, yet his passport is barely singed. You know, they ought to make black boxes out of passport paper. WTC7 also came straight down, even though it was two blocks away. Why did the Bush administration rush through disposing of all the evidence, instead of keeping the evidence of such a great crime? Why did Bush so hinder the formation and operation of a 911 investigatory commission? Recall how the PNAC said it would take a new Pearl Harbor to get things going to take over the Middle East? Well, that's exactly what Bush called it: "A new Pearl Harbor." [b]2004[/b] After Bush became president in 2000, his advisors decided to do away with "hanging chad" election controversy by introducing electronic voting (e-voting) machines. The major player manufacturers in order of importance to Bush are Diebold, ES&S, and to a much less extent, Sequoia. Interestingly, Diebold also manufactures ATM machines, which have no problem keeping track of thousands upon thousands of bank accounts down to the penny, and issuing comprehensive paper receipts after an ATM transaction. But they seem to do real poorly keeping track of votes. The backdrop includes In a fall 2003 fundraising letter sent to Republicans, from Diebold CEO Walden O'Dell: "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president." Bob Urosevich is currently president of Diebold. His brother, Todd Urosevich, is vice president of ES&S. Diebold and ES&S also manufacture electronic ballot scanners, which have their own long and sordid past. Altogether, Diebold and ES&S counted about 80% of all the votes in the 2004 election. So, Bush signed into law the Help America Vote Act, committed to replacing all the paper ballots with e-voting machines. By the time of the 2004 election, there were 50,000 such machines that were used in 37 states. The machines had problems from the start, where they had to first be approved by each voting district. One Approval Board included a professional programmer. The first problem he ran into was that the program used by the machine to count the votes would not be disclosed because it was the intellectual property of, in this case, Diebold. Second, the demonstrator ran into a problem right before lunch, and everyone was told to break for lunch and they would resume after lunch. After lunch, they came back to discover that the demonstrator had completed the demonstration while they were away at lunch, which of course, was out of their sight. And so they were immediately asked to sign off on the approval, which the programmer refused to do. I don't know what the further outcome was. It was discovered that the machines had "backdoors" which allowed manipulation of the vote count. A backdoor is accessed by an unusual key press combination, like maybe pressing the Control and "B" keys together. In this case, 10,000 votes could be immediately added to the count. Also, see Bev Harris' http://www.blackboxvoting.org/ where to demonstrate how easy it is to delete audit log entries, they taught a chimpanzee to delete audit records using an illicit "back door" to get into the program. There were numerous problems during the election. The e-voting machines have limited storage, like a digital camera can only take so many pictures until you make room by deleting some of the pictures. Many e-voting machines in Democratic districts had small capacities, reached their limit, and thereafter began counting backwards, irretrievably losing votes. Some machines had a "Presubmission" viewing option, whereby a voter could give a final approval before submitting his vote, similar to computer programs' Print Preview. You can either just go ahead and print, or you can use Print Preview to kind of doublecheck. When voters did a Presubmission doublecheck, they discovered that their vote for Kerry had been changed to a vote for Bush. Okay, so those who checked, presumably corrected their vote for Kerry, but how many didn't know about a Presubmission check, or didn't bother because they were satisfied that they had properly voted for Kerry? A lot has been said criticising how the machines don't give out a paper voting receipt, but as this shows, the receipt could still simply say who you really voted for, while the machine still reports someone else in its tally. A lot of these problems have been revealed by Bev Harris of who is really dedicated to the cause. Bev made a number of outstanding discoveries. One example was something called the Central Tabulator (CT). After the voting booths close, all the machines then relay their count to the CT. But the CT is nothing but a Microsoft Excel program, and the vote can be easily changed in any way one wishes. On the MSNBC/CNBC TV show "Topic A With Tina Brown," several months ago, Howard Dean had filled in for Tina Brown as guest host. Bev Harris demonstrated CT hacking to Howard Dean, in just 90 seconds of time, and in a way that no one monitoring the system could tell. See http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/showthread/t-220634.html In the final count, there are hundreds of thousands of votes more than the number of registered voters, together with more than 31,000 registered complaints. What seems to be suggested is that the vote for Bush was not counted, but rather calculated, by taking whatever turned out to be Kerry's vote, adding a percentage to it, and reporting it as Bush's vote. This theory is borne out by how some districts reported Bush winning by some percentage, say 3.57% after say 40% of the votes were counted, and later Bush won the final count after 100% of the votes were counted by exactly the same 3.57% percentage. As you can see, a vote for Nader is not in the calculation, and was completely irrelevant. Bush's Help America Vote Act basically flooded the nation with machines that will forever return Republicans wherever they want to be. A few Democrats will be allowed to win in unimportant districts, merely to preserve the illusion of the integrity of the voting system of democracy. The bottom line of all this is that we are now fighting almost the entire population of Iraq, while eyeballing Iran, Syria, Saudi, etc. Instead of their studying political science, we might be better off had the neocons studied history, where they might have learned this tidbit from another site, "By invading, occupying and imposing a new regime on Iraq, the Coalition may be following, intentionally or not, in the footsteps of the old Western colonial powers-and doing so in a region that within living memory ended a lengthy struggle to expel colonial occupations. They fought from 1830 to 1962 to kick out the French from Algeria. From 1882 to 1956 they fought to get the British out of Egypt. That's within the lifetime of every person over 45 in the Middle East. Foreign troops on their soil against their will is deeply familiar." These people are ready to fight wars of more than 100 years to expel invaders. Whatever it takes to win, however long it takes to win. Uh oh.

Unfortunately they are no where to be found; especially Kerry. Remember, he voted FOR the war and would have continued perhaps as badly as Bush. The most sickening thing to me is wondering whether or not this fraud even matters, or if it is just another diversion to keep us distracted from what these greedy lizards are really up to.

I mean, neither he nor anyone else in the Bush family has ever cheated or lied before. Right? And don't bring up the "intelligence" that led us into Iraq. That's in the past. And don't bring up Prescott's business dealing with the nazis. That's in the past. And don't bring up Kneel's savings and loan stuff. That's in the past. OK?

I don't know if your story is true or not, but if it is, I urge you to do the right thing by your country and speak out. There are organizations out there who can help you.

www.blackboxvoting.org

 http://www.jtmp.org/

You wont hear anything from the Dems.
believe it or not, it's not "Dems" against Reps", if it were, then why do we all know more abotu this election that the Dems apparently do?
We hear nothing from them because that is exactly what they plan to do, nothing. If they DONT know abotu the vote fraud regarding this election, they are incompetent, if they do and do nothing, they are accomplishes.
Seeing with eyes un-clouded by the emotion of assigning a political identity to your minds eye is a step in the right direction.
What does a millionaire in political power have in common with a guy that makes 40 k and lives in Kansas? Nothing. I hope that as a collective, we the people wake up and see that the last 2 elections were pre-ordained, the next election (2006 and all elections there after) will seat majority of Reps in power of all 3 branches. Then the real face, (what ever it may be) will show its self.
I hope to god I'm wrong and the Reps, when they gain total control of the US will declare "national fudge day" and it will be free fudge for everyone, or actually address any of the problems that plague this (once) great nation; preferably the problems addressed don't involve corporations "solving" them for us with privatization.
But I doubt it.
be mindful of the past, live in the present, prepare for the future. If you think the Reps are "on your side" your wrong, if you thing the Dems are, your wrong too. They have no interest in helping their fellow man, or making this country a better place for any of us. I know this because of the results I see all around me. Intentions are based on results. It's not Dems against the Reps, its us against both of them, they are on the same side, the side against you. Agree or disagree, its just an opinion, its not illegal yet to have one. Time will tell, and as long as they own the media, we will be sure to find out the real truth as they want us to see it.

Brad Manfil, you will be a hero, praise by millions of Americans if you will reveal your source, yourself and let the truth be known. This kind of cheating is of colosal proportion. Too much suffering already at the very bottom of this society. Can you live with yourself if you wrote is really true and be burried forever. Please Brad Manfil, the state is too high to be kept in the dark.

I am reposting my comment correcting a couple of typographical errors: ... Brad Manfil, you will be a hero, praised by millions of Americans if you will reveal your source, yourself and let the truth be known. This kind of cheating is of colosal porportion. Too much suffering already at the bottom of this society. Can you live with yourself if what you wrote is really true and will be burried forever? Please Brad Manfil, the stake is too high to be kept in the dark. ..............

Where are all the people who are supposed to be caring about your latest 'election'? They are right there, holding thier breaths in anticipation, hoping against hope that no one will do anything about it. You Americans don't want it any other way. You don't care if your leaders are corrupt, immoral, stupid, thick, greedy, blood-thirsty, flesh eating heathens because they are creating the new Rome. And you are all gonna' be the new Romans.

Humans all want to be the Romans.

The only thing that might stop them is the real holocaust. The total and absolute collapse of the environment that is emminent. It's just a matter of time before we hit the avalanche point - the straw that breaks the camels back.

Adam and Eve wasn't about Adam and Eve - it was someone's way of trying to tell us that everyone on earth is greedy. That analogy was an attempt to put it in terms that simple intelligences could understand: If we all came from the same greedy parents then that would explain why we were all greedy.

By now - good luck.

There is no doubt that an election fix has been perpetrated. The depth of the fix is very hard to grasp. The mechanics of the fix has been tracked, but the perpetraitors hide behind a myriad of competing factors, all of which have been honed into the perfection of a system that is venal in its dynamic. The fix began with the grudging collapse of the system of slavery well into the 90's (Apartheid). In the US the precursor and father of Apartheid did not go away and the same urges fuel the current re-emergence of the western world as imperialist masters, wishing to control the resources and strategic benefits of others. It would seem that the practiced minority who lead their nation have coalesced with the rest of the electorate, who are by logic so consumed with consumerism and the drug of false propaganda that their brains have rebelled and produced this sodom and gomorra-ish society which subsequently accepts that 'maybe' there is no alternative modus operendi in pursuit of these aims. The opposite minority, who are conscious of the immorality of the aforementioned have a gigantic task to sieve the false from the true who profess their instinct to do away with this corrupted expression of democracy. This brings me to Kerry. It has been apparent that Kerry was to the reluctant candidate for the Democratic Party. The same reluctance that Senator Gore portrayed by not being able to sign just one of the plethora of protests by black congress men and women, that would have enabled a enquiry into the machinations that stole 'his' presidency. This stonewalling, when there is no further 'game' to play is apparent to those whom are the victims of this paradigm. TO BE CONTINUED

"Brad," read the following:

 http://www.jefffisherforcongress.com/Campaign2006/harrrisletter.htm

If you are for real, you and Bev Harris have a lot to talk about and then, a lot to do. If you are not for real, then your not contacting Bev will let us know, won't it? Good luck.

A conserned American.

The Democrats tried to pass legislation to make the elections more transparent, it didn't go through. I"m amazed by people who sit on their hands and complain, yet do nothing themselves. Do you read? Do you check the DEMS sights? Do you see what they're working on? I do. FOx news won't report on them. CNN won't hardly give them any time. C'mon get real. The DEMS have no power now! Do you understand that? The repugs fixed it that way. The power is with us. Look at what we've done. It's going to take more than one man to turn this country around. Wake up and smell the coffee. The DEMS have been supporting a recount for two weeks now. If you knew where to get your info you would know that. Bush is counting on you to stay uninformed and do nothing.

I hear a lot of people commenting about how the democrats gave up too fast on the Ohio vote and election in general, but let me put it in a different perspective. After the 2000 election, when the two parties squabbled over every last vote in Florida, went to court etc, people were dreading a repeat of this event, not only in the USA, but the rest of the world as well. I suspect if it had ended up a new legal battle lead by the parties alone, that people might have 'tuned out'. However, what we see now is a peoples' movement. We see the people taking the initiative, not the big parties, and this is a good thing. People felt helpless after the last election and to a large extent frustrated and confused from this one, but some people are at least doing what they can to reclaim power over the situation. Now the Democrats are making moves to rejoin this movement, cautiously, but they are letting the People lead.

Watching from outside the USA, I think this is a far more significant result than if the Democratic Party alone, with their high paid lawyers made their moves! I don't know if it will make a difference in the final outcome of this election or not, but it shows the people are tired of not knowing if they make a difference or not, and that is a very important change!

If your a democrat that just still can't "grasp" the level of deceit here, please read through this.

1)the CPD is the commission on presidential debates (still with with me?)

2)it was formed by the repdems and their corporate sponsors (got it?)

3)formerly the debates were managed by the league of women voters untill 1985(wow really?)

4)the repdems successfully managed to "regulate", "manage", "control", or "take them over". Whatever sits well with your sensible liberal ears.

5)If you recall, there were these two guys, Cobb/Badnarik that would like to participate.(yes nader too)

[ok, this might get tricky, so see if you can hang on]

5)Apparently the repdems say "no", so these two guys decided to serve a court order to show cause to the CPD. Given the fact that Badnarik teaches the constitution and Cobb is a pretty smart guy himself, this gives you the impression they are not just "spiteful" candidates who want to "make trouble". Have you read their platforms, BOTH are better then any republican or democrat. READ THEM.

6)In washington, the CPD turned them away...well actually security escorted out of the building. (hmmmm)

7)So what to do right? Well, let's go to the debates, surely AT the debates they will be able to serve somebody. In St. Louis they march to the doors of the debates, demanding to serve this court order, but guess what, they get arrested for trespassing instead.

8)Meanwhile, while "your getting your information somewhere else", the information your not getting is that both bush and kerry don't give a $hit. Let's see, we know bush lies when he says "freedom is on the march"(in fact he said that, that night, while two candidates were being arrested wanting to debate him, everyone knows he's a chicken, so this should be no surprise).

But what about Kerry? the war hero, the protestor, the guy that tells you "hope is on the way",(silly, admit it) Now here's a guy that can fight sensitive wars, understands liberty right? Don't forget, I'm sure you did your research, this is the master yale debater, leader of free men, champion of the middle class! I guess if it only serves HIS BEST INTEREST. He peeps not one word of this, he does not stand up for democracy, he does not say:

"hey, this isn't right, I can beat these guys, don't sweat it, let's debate!"

He can't beat "those guys" and he KNOWS it, or else he would debate them. Plus, maybe some democrats would pull their heads out of "the nation" for a moment and say, "wow, I like these other two guys"....that's a no-no. So Kerry puts his tail between his legs, takes his orders like a good little soldier from his puppet masters and falls in line.

This is your idea of a "stand up guy"?

---------

You may be saying, "hey, all is fair in love and war"...I agree, so democrats, you get what you wished for. LOL

So, now are you ready to buck up, with or without this "buried information" about democrats. Side-step them and join the fight? No? Please continue.

Parties suck, George Washington warned us of them in his farewell speech, not a couple of words, but almost 2/3 of his speech is a warning(before you start waving your flag, maybe you should read it)...who are you going to believe? The founder of our country, the true father, the guy that opposed tyranny, fought to win freedom...the guy that didn't even want to be president...or john kerry?

George Washington was a real leader, a true freedom fighter, and guess what...they called him a terrorist too.

So, I have a question for the big shot dems and their big phuqin mouths...would you like to explain why you decided to support the republicans as opposed to two other parties, that you could have just used like you do your supporters, boycotted the debates or took on your challengers in a seperate debate. Thus drawing attention, not away from you, but bush. Then, you may have had a chance against this "machine"....but NOOOOOOOOOOO, you fed the machine, and now the machine is too strong for you, your scared of it...and the stench is so odious you can't stand it, but you want us to believe that we can make a difference through YOU in 2006? 2008? By back room deals, nuance, and linguistics?

Your part of the problem, you just can't face facts and tell it like it is, as such, ya got played.

I too have been scammed by the MACHINE. But, I WILL NOT FEED IT ANYMORE. WE all want pretty much the same thing...so what's going on?

Kerry supports the patriot act(huh?), lieberman pushed for war, and war with iran(that little guy pounding his fist on podiums, are you nuts?), hillary pushed for war, fatherland security(oh yeah, she's real cool too)...but why is it, the Dems don't support cynthia mckinney? They won't go near her with a ten foot pole, btw, she's a DEMOCRAT that WON.

"The dems have no power"...precisely why that line, "for the good of the country", makes no sense. For the good of the country, it's time to put up, shut up, or lose the last of what you do have. John kerry went up against a powerful administration before, with no power, except the power of the people...he chooses not to harness that power. Why?

Follow in the footsteps of George Washinton? or repdems? Still not convinced?

I choose the father of my country. I choose to listen to him when he told me to watch out for political factions and powerful men. I choose not to slink away quietely while two corrupted factions(or a handfull of men) make a powerplay. I have no problem with people having money, it's what they do with it that's important.

I love this country, it's being divided harder then it ever has been. They have done this on purpose to keep us divided, get it? It's a classic technique: confuse, misinform, distract...divide and conquer.

The only other thing that could explain this, is not some "secret democrat strategy"...but a conspiracy. No, not the alien kind, not the tin foil hat kind...but the best democracy money can buy kind.

You really want proof? If we do have another election(2006), don't vote democrat or republican...then what will the CPD do when nobody wants to see them? Then you will really see the media blackout, then you will really see the corruption, then, and only then, will proof be slapping you in the face. You want to wait? heheh, you waited before...see where that got you?

Democrats are not liberals anymore: and who wants to be a "liberal" anyways? how about an american, that sounds good to me.

"We've got to repudiate, you know, the most strident and insulting anti-American voices out there sometimes on our party's left... We can't have our party identified by Michael Moore and Hollywood as our cultural values.
? Al From, CEO, Democratic Leadership Council

"You know, let's let Hollywood and the Cannes Film Festival fawn all over Michael Moore. We ought to make it pretty clear that he sure doesn't speak for us when it comes to standing up for our country."
? Will Marshall, President of the Progressive Policy Institute, the think-tank of the DLC

"Marshall also signed, at the outset of the war, a letter issued by the Project for th