[Peace-discuss] Fwd: Re: Voting machine theft- why no fight back?
Alfred Kagan
akagan at uiuc.edu
Fri Nov 5 13:25:31 CST 2004
Nebraska too.
>From: Red1pearl at aol.com
>Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 12:45:19 EST
>Subject: Re: Voting machine theft- why no fight back?
>To: s_silver at sbcglobal.net, chicagodan at yahoogroups.com,
> chicagomayday at yahoogroups.com, gangbox at yahoogroups.com,
> anti-cap-Discussion at yahoogroups.com
>
>Exit polling refers to over 20,000 individuals questioned at length
>over their votes, important issues, etc. right after voting. It is
>probably the largest and most consistent poll taken; the numbers and
>variety far exceed the numbers needed to be statistically valid. Yet
>they are reversed, and no one 'important' makes even a stink?!
>
>The Nebraska example of statewide theft below is on factual and
>points the finger, imho. The Ohio vote was largely (%?) on similar
>machines with no paper records by a similarly connected right
>winger. Yet we see no challenges; instead, Kerry drops the stand,
>"Every vote will count and every vote will be counted", and the
>media apparatus starts to clean up the uncomfortable facts by
>changing them. 1984 is us!
>
>The next question for me is, "Why then did Kerry so quickly abdicate
>and give up?" even faster than did Gore when that one was stolen and
>blocked in 2000?
>
>To me, they are corporate handmaidens or whores, however you like
>it. The last thing they want or will do is to show how rotten this
>system is. That's also why not one Democratic senator would endorse
>the Congressional Black Caucus's demand for a congressional hearing
>on the racist exclusion of Black votes in 2000.
>
>The Dems' campaign was run by 'advisors' whose day jobs is laboring
>for the multinationals and various business associations. No wonder
>they didn't bite the hand that feeds them so well. The Dems'
>dominant outlook is the Clinton centrists who are really corporate
>capitalists in progressive dress. (remember NAFTA and 'ending
>welfare as we know it'?)
>
>How do you explain their quick capitulations and corporate service?
>
>Earl
>
>
>In a message dated 11/5/2004 1:04:21 AM Central Standard Time,
>s_silver at sbcglobal.net writes:
>
>I trust goons like DeLay about as much as I trust Osama Bin Laden.
>
>Published on Thursday, November 4, 2004 by CommonDreams.org
>The Ultimate Felony Against Democracy
>by Thom Hartmann
>
>
>The hot story in the Blogosphere is that the "erroneous" exit polls
>that showed Kerry carrying Florida and Ohio (among other states)
><http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=388>weren't erroneous at all -
>it was the numbers produced by paperless voting machines that were
>wrong, and Kerry actually won. As more and more analysis is done of
>what may (or may not) be the most massive election fraud in the
>history of the world, however, it's critical that we keep the
>largest issue at the forefront at all time: Why are We The People
>allowing private, for-profit corporations, answerable only to their
>officers and boards of directors, and loyal only to agendas and
>politicians that will enhance their profitability, to handle our
>votes?
>
>Maybe Florida went for Kerry, maybe for Bush. Over time - and
>through the efforts of some very motivated investigative reporters -
>we may well find out (Bev Harris of
><http://www.blackboxvoting.org/>www.blackboxvoting.org just filed
>what may be the largest Freedom of Information Act [FOIA} filing in
>history), and bloggers and investigative reporters are discovering
>an odd discrepancy in exit polls being largely accurate in
>paper-ballot states and oddly inaccurate in touch-screen electronic
>voting states Even
><http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/3/52213/1921>raw voter
>analyses are showing extreme oddities in touch-screen-run Florida,
>and eagle-eyed bloggers are finding that
><http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/04/11/ana04025.html>news
>organizations are retroactively altering their exit polls to
>coincide with what the machines ultimately said.
>
>But in all the discussion about voting machines, let's never forget
>the concept of the commons, because this usurpation is the ultimate
>felony committed by conservatives this year.
>
>At the founding of this nation, we decided that there were important
>places to invest our tax (then tariff) dollars, and those were the
>things that had to do with the overall "life, liberty, and the
>pursuit of happiness" of all of us. Over time, these commons - in
>which we all make tax investments and for which we all hold ultimate
>responsibility - have come to include our police and fire services;
>our military and defense; our roads and skyways; our air, waters and
>national parks; and the safety of our food and drugs.
>
>But the most important of all the commons in which we've invested
>our hard-earned tax dollars is our government itself. It's owned by
>us, run by us (through our elected representatives), answerable to
>us, and most directly responsible for stewardship of our commons.
>
>And the commons through which we regulate the commons of our
>government is our vote.
>
>About two years ago, I wrote
><http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0131-01.htm>a story for these
>pages, "If You Want To Win An Election, Just Control The Voting
>Machines," that exposed how Senator Chuck Hagel had, before stepping
>down and running for the U.S. Senate in Nebraska, been the head of
>the voting machine company (now ES&S) that had just computerized
>Nebraska's vote. The Washington Post (1/13/1997) said Hagel's
>"Senate victory against an incumbent Democratic governor was the
>major Republican upset in the November election." According to Bev
>Harris, Hagel won virtually every demographic group, including many
>largely black communities that had never before voted Republican.
>Hagel was the first Republican in 24 years to win a Senate seat in
>Nebraska, nearly all on unauditable machines he had just sold the
>state. And in all probability, Hagel run for President in 2008.
>
>In another, later <http://www.alternet.org/story/16474>article I
>wrote at the request of MoveOn.org and which they mailed to their
>millions of members, I noted that in Georgia - another state that
>went all-electronic - "USA Today reported on Nov. 3, 2002, 'In
>Georgia, an Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll shows Democratic Sen.
>Max Cleland with a 49%-to-44% lead over Republican Rep. Saxby
>Chambliss. 'Cox News Service, based in Atlanta, reported just after
>the election (Nov. 7) that, "Pollsters may have goofed" because
>'Republican Rep. Saxby Chambliss defeated incumbent Democratic Sen.
>Max Cleland by a margin of 53 to 46 percent. The Hotline, a
>political news service, recalled a series of polls Wednesday showing
>that Chambliss had been ahead in none of them.'" Nearly every vote
>in the state was on an electronic machine with no audit trail.
>
>In the years since those first articles appeared, Bev Harris has
>published her book on the subject ("Black Box Voting"), including
>the revelation of her finding the notorious "Rob Georgia" folder on
>Diebold's FTP site just after Cleland's loss there; Lynn Landes has
>done some groundbreaking research, particularly
><http://www.ecotalk.org/AP.htm>her new investigation of the
>Associated Press, as have
><http://www.notablesoftware.com/evote.html>Rebecca Mercuri and
><http://verify.stanford.edu/dill/>David Dill. There's a new video
>out on the topic, Votergate, available at
><http://www.votergate.tv/>www.votergate.tv.
>
>Congressman Rush Holt introduced a bill into Congress requiring a
>voter-verified paper ballot be produced by all electronic voting
>machines, and it's been co-sponsored by a majority of the members of
>the House of Representatives. The two-year battle fought by Dennis
>Hastert and Tom DeLay to keep it from coming to a vote, thus
>insuring that there will be no possible audit of the votes of about
>a third of the 2004 electorate, has fueled the flames of conspiracy
>theorists convinced Republican ideologues - now known to be willing
>to lie in television advertising - would extend their "ends
>justifies the means" morality to stealing the vote "for the better
>good of the country" they think single-party Republican rule will
>bring. Continued at
><http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm>http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm
--
Al Kagan
African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
Africana Unit, Room 328
University of Illinois Library
1408 W. Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801, USA
tel. 217-333-6519
fax. 217-333-2214
e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20041105/f8b83a1c/attachment.html
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list