portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting global

election fraud | media criticism

Evidence of Systemic Gov't Election Racketeering Mounts in Mexico, Witness Comes Forward

IFE employee Loar Cibac Pereira Sánchez said that he was working in one of the electoral agency's regional offices (in Saltillo, Coahuila). He confirms that on Sunday night, as he was entering election results into the IFE PREP system computers, his boss, José Luis Fernández Mier, "ordered him to type in vote tallies favorable to Calderon and threatened to transfer him to a rural office if he didn't obey."

And another interesting eerie point pointing to systemic vote fraud, is that for the whole day of "prejections as the vote comes in" the other three candidates were frozen in place, despite votes presumably coming in all over the country and drastically changing the other two to flip.

and Subcomandante Marcos Speaks about Mexican Vote Fraud: Fox and the IFE Modified the PREP Results to Prepare an Electoral Fraud "We're not in the electoral vibe but for ethical and moral reasons, as Zapatistas, if we see something is wrong, well, we have to say it"..."We want to share a report that the Sixth Commission received. According to the report there has been a fraud in the elections for president of the Republic....[O]n (Sunday) afternoon between 5:30 and 6 p.m. Vicente Fox called (Luis Carlos) Ugalde, the IFE president, to ask him to change the entry of results of the PREP, the Preliminary Election Results Program, in such a way so that the first results entered came from the polling places that benefited Felipe Calderón and, that later they would create other votes for him."
"Ugalde-gate": Ugalde, IFE pres., with Fox, accused of vote fraud racketeering
IFE Whistleblower Confirms Marcos' Accusation (4.00 / 1) (#3)
by Al Giordano on Wed Jul 5th, 2006 at 10:46:55 PM EST
(User Info)
Check this out...

 http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/notas/360380.html

It reports that IFE employee Loar Cibac Pereira Sánchez in one of the electoral agency's regional offices (in Saltillo, Coahuila) confirms that on Sunday night, as he was entering election results into the IFE PREP system computers, his boss, José Luis Fernández Mier, "ordered him to enter the vote tallies favorable to Calderon Hinajosa and threatened to transfer him to a rural office if he didn't obey."

"The young man said that a strange blackout occured in the district IFE office, and when the light returned the results in the computer had changed and the PAN was then in the lead. He also said that when he was leaving alone he found some garbage cans outside the building with blank precinct and computer forms."

and

Here is another indication of suspicious activity: the tallies for Madrazo, Mercado and Campa remained the same ALL DAY. Even when Obrador's numbers began to shift, theirs did not. Spooky, eh?

Meanwhile, if after watching a consistent result for the first 70 percent or so of the tallying, the public finds it suspicious that the tallies are suddenly shifting, watch for that pain and rage to explode very, very shortly.

4:44 p.m.

65.68% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.91 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.6 %
Roberto Madrazo: 21.94%
Patricia Mercado: 2.73 %
Roberto Campa: 0.93 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.31%

5:01 p.m.

69.01% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.81 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.64 %
Roberto Madrazo: 21.98%
Patricia Mercado: 2.73 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.17%

5:31 p.m.

71.46% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.87 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.56 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.02%
Patricia Mercado: 2.72 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.31%

5:31 p.m.

-72.86% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.86 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.55 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.03 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.72 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.31%

5:31 p.m.

(I don't know why three increases all occurred at the same minute, at 5:31... I have read that the IFE computer has "crashed" twice to day.)

-73.58% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.85 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.57 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.02 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.72 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.18

6:12 p.m.

75.08% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.78 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.62 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.05 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.72 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.16%

6:25 p.m.

76.46% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.76 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.62 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.07 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.71 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.06%

6:42 p.m.

77.93% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.73 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.63 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.09 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.71 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.1%

6:57 p.m.

79.21 counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.71 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.65 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.1 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.71 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.06%

7:09 p.m.

80.12% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.69 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.67 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.11 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.71 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 2.02

7:22 p.m.

81.04% counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.65 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.68 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.12 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.71 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 1.97%

7:43 p.m.

82.46 % counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.6 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.71 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.15 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.71 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 1.91

8:11 p.m.

84.13 % counted

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.52 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.74 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.19 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.71 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

Margin: Obrador up by 1.78%

8:24 p.m.

84.84 % counted

Candidatos Presidenciales:

Andrés Manuel López Obrador: 36.51 %
Felipe Calderón: 34.74 %
Roberto Madrazo: 22.2 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.71 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %


note everybody else, i.e.,

Roberto Madrazo: 22.19 %
Patricia Mercado: 2.71 %
Roberto Campa: 0.94 %

sat frozen in place waiting, while the other two switched in the supposed last 15%.

However, that was revealed to be a lie, since instead of "98.5%" counted, they were caught lying that they had held back (and left uncounted) millions of votes, making only around 92% counted, before they stopped counting. besides, the whole thing ignores the systemic fraud of more people supposedly voting in over 18,000 polling locations than were registered...

more:

 http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2006/7/5/171915/9815


This phenomena of all the other candidates frozen in place, while a digital engineering is performed to make Obrador and Calderon switch, is the same vote fraud evidence between Kerry and Dean in the New Hampshire Primary in 2004. The only variable moving then between them is the vote fraud switcheroo that Kerry and Bush used to get rid of Dean in the New Hampshire Primary:

Title: Why Kerry afraid to speak on vote fraud? KERRY USED ES&S/DIEBOLD E-VOTE RIG TO OUST DEAN!
Author: worthy repost
Date: 2004.11.17 06:24
Description: KERRY USED ES&S VOTE MACHINES TO RIG THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY PRIMARY IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, TO OUST DEAN, SEALING THE SKULL AND BONES'ERS IN EACH "PARTY." KERRY IS JUST AS GUILTY AS BUSH OF VOTE FRAUD. THAT IS WHY KERRY IS QUIET. Dean would have been the Democratic Party Ticket, legally,--until e-vote fraud came to the "rescue" for the aristocratic elites of the U.S. Moreover, did you know that VP George H. W. Bush won a wierd "unexpected upset" (due to e-vote machines?) in 1988 against Republican front runner Bob Dole. This happened in New Hampshire as well. Everyone knows that Kerry's father was high up in the CIA, just like Bush's father, right? Everyone knows that Kerry covered up for Bush in the Iran/Contra Commission (and covered up for the Bush family in the BCCI investigation), right? The Iran/Contras commission was the "Kerry Commission." BCCI was (partially) investigated by Kerry as well. Small world, eh? Kerry will avoid this like the plague, because he is part of the Bush family networks, and a beneficiary of vote fraud himself to get to the Democratic Ticket in 2004!
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/11/303703.shtml


Subcomandante Marcos Speaks: Fox and the IFE Modified the PREP Results to Prepare an Electoral Fraud
"We're not in the electoral vibe but for ethical and moral reasons, as Zapatistas, if we see something is wrong, well, we have to say it"

By Subcomandante Marcos
Translated from Radio Insurgente by Narco News

July 4, 2006

The following text is translated from the final part of a radio program on Monday, July 3, 2006, in which Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN, in its Spanish initials) participated. The text is from a broadcast conversation between Marcos (Delegate Zero of the Other Campaign) and show host Lucas of Radio 620 AM in Mexico City. It can be heard in full at the following link:

 http://enlacezapatista.ezln.org.mx/la-otra-campana/371/

SCI Marcos: "We want to share a report that the Sixth Commission received. According to the report there has been a fraud in the elections for president of the Republic. The Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), in complicity with, or better said, with the sponsorship of the president of the Republic, held back between one million and one-and-a-half million votes so that they could be added to benefit the National Action Party (PAN) candidate Felipe Calderón.

"According to this report, on (Sunday) afternoon between 5:30 and 6 p.m. Vicente Fox called (Luis Carlos) Ugalde, the IFE president, to ask him to change the entry of results of the PREP, the Preliminary Election Results Program, in such a way so that the first results entered came from the polling places that benefited Felipe Calderón and, that later they would create other votes for him. According to this report, the candidate of the Democratic Revolution Party (PRD), would have had between one million and a million-and-a-half votes more than the National Action Party. But thanks to this play the results are being changed to exactly what they want them to be. It remains to be seen what the PRD and its candidate will say about this.

"If you have any doubt, if you saw it on television yesterday, look at the message by IFE, by the president of IFE, by Mr. Ugalde. Immediately after that, in fractions of a second, came the message by Vicente Fox, already answering the first message. It's clear that he knew beforehand what the IFE would say before the president of the Institute said it. And so according to the report we received they made an agreement to conduct this fraud and be able to impose Felipe Calderón. That is the report.

"We are not in the electoral vibe. But due to ethical and moral reasons, as Zapatistas, if we see something that is wrong, well, we have to say it, and what we are seeing is what they are doing, a fraud there up above. You are listening to Radio Insurgente, the voice of the voiceless."

Lucas: "Well, some newspapers and magazines have announced that, not in the same way as in 1988, but in a more sophisticated manner... The president of the council, of IFE, Ugalde, said last night that there were no possibilities of saying who won... They were preparing, or are preparing, so that Fox would tell them."

SCI Marcos: "Well, yes, this is what we are seeing. We make this announcement to whom it may concern... They are setting a trap with the PREP and the Federal Electoral Institute. He wants Felipe Calderón, additionally, to protect the backs of the presidential couple Vicente Fox and Marta Sahagún for all the corruption hey have done. You are listening to Radio Insurgente, the voice of the voiceless of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation."

 http://www.narconews.com/Issue42/article1961.html


Mexico: Reuters & Bloomberg concede Obrador has a 1.5% lead.
By Jeb Sprague,
Posted on Thu Jul 6th, 2006 at 12:46:41 AM EST
At approximately 8:30 (PST) on Wednesday night (July 5, 2006), Reuters News Online has suddenly referred to Lopez Obrador (PRD), the leftist candidate, as having a 1.5% lead over Felipe Calderon (PAN), the conservative candidate heavily supported by Washington insiders and NED "democratization" grantee organizations.

Reuters writes, "The lead of Mexico's leftist presidential candidate narrowed to less than 1.5 percentage points over his conservative rival on Wednesday with results in from almost 88 percent of polling stations in the recount of a fiercely contested election.... Results of the recount on display at Mexico's Federal Electoral Institute showed Lopez Obrador had 36.38 percent of the vote with results in from 87.73 percent of polling stations. Conservative ruling party candidate Felipe Calderon was second with 34.92 percent."

Another Reuters article "Mexico leftist's vote recount lead below 1 point" posted online at 9:21 PM (PST) writes that " Mexico's leftist presidential candidate saw his lead over his conservative rival fall to under 1 percentage point on Wednesday with results in from 92 percent of polling stations in the contested vote."

The NY Times just minutes ago put up an article by Ginger Thompson (known for her '04-05 coup-and-post-coup-violence-cover-up-reporting on Haiti) covering the breaking news. She concedes "the count" is "now tilting toward the leftist candidate, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who had 36.3 percent of the vote, while the conservative candidate, Felipe Calderón, had 34.9 percent." A Bloomberg article titled "Lopez Obrador Leads After Partial Mexico Vote Recount (Update3)" and a Reuters article "Mexican Markets tumble as leftist takes early lead" (both published at approximately 3 pm today on the internet) appear to be the first articles in the Anglo-American press referring to an Obrador lead in the Mexican Presidential election.

The Bloomberg article ringing an alarmist bell, takes a financial perspective explaining that "Mexican stocks slumped and the peso extended losses on Wednesday after a closely watched presidential election count showed leftist candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador taking an early lead." It seems certain that the NYSE will also take on a slump tomorrow morning.

Just yesterday a Los Angeles Times editorial made the poor argument that Obrador was showing his true authoritarian nature by claiming victory. The editorial failed to mention that Calderon had declared an unwarranted victory hours prior to Obrador's announcement, which would seem an important bit of information for cognizant readers.

Prior to this announcement of Obrador's lead, a slew of critical articles appeared castigating Obrador as "authoritarian" while Calderon often appeared as the charismatic "compromiser". In an AP/Forbes article titled "Calderon Willing to Include Rival in Gov't ", published just hours before the announcement of Obrador's lead, Calderon is shown willing to accept Obrador into his government, while Obrador "won't concede the presidency.." History should take note that these jump-the-gun comparisons were made prior to the final tabulation of votes. Will Obrador likewise be asked if he is willing to accept Calderon into his government??

Mexico's electoral authorities have still not engaged in a proper recount, requested days ago. No doubt, if Obrador is allowed (which seems unlikely) to successfully cross the electoral threshold needed to win he will be subjected to a press campaign of demonization on both the southern and northern shores of the Rio Grande. Will Lou Dobbs Tonight declare the proverbial war? There has to be some way to blame all of this on Chavez, right?

Famed FOIA researcher Jeremy Bigwood explains that a victory for Obrador "would be big. Bigger possibly than the election of Chavez in Venezuela. This is on the American doorstep. They will do anything to stop it."

What will Mexico wake up to in the morning?

 http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2006/7/6/04642/19874
500 murdered for protesting in 1968 07.Jul.2006 13:39

wiki


Votes of other three remained frozen... 13.Jul.2006 12:33

anonymous

When you say that the votes of the other three candidates stayed frozen, I am not sure if you think that the other candidates did not get any votes at all. In reality what you are pointing to is the percentage, which stayed near-constant, which in no way means that those three candidates did not receive any votes; what it means is that they kept getting votes in a number that kept the percentage point constant, which is entirely possible. That said, it is highly unlikely that Madrazo got only 2 votes out of every 1000 votes meanwhile the total count went from 65% to 84%. So the conspiracy theroy still stands, but by itself your argument does not hold much water.