Here's an article I saw, IIRC, on a San Diego BBS imported
local newsgroup. . .

Thoughts?
Comments?
Supportive and/or Debunking facts?


         VOTE FRAUD AND THE BANKRUPTCY OF THE UNITED STATES

Note: This article first appeared as a post written by myself at
Free Republic. I was surprised to learn that it was copied from
Free Republic and re-posted at dozens of sites around the world. So,
it seems only fitting that the article re-appear here at my own
web site.

                         ------*****------

In recent months, I have posted a series of article on the
deplorable and quite frankly hopeless financial situation the
government of the United States is presently in due to reckless
and outright irresponsible fiscal policy.

In summary, the combined state and federal debt of the United States
now stands at $14 trillion. The United States, the world's largest
creditor nation when Ronald Reagan took office, is now the world's
largest debtor nation. The federal debt has doubled in the last 8
years, during what is reported to the American people as being a
record setting economic boom. During this same supposed economic
boom, the federal government looted your social security trust
fund for another 3/4 of a trillion dollars to balance the books.

A serious doubt exists as to whether this huge debt and its
crushing interest payments ($60,000 per taxpayer since 1960) are
really the responsability of the taxpayers. Considering that the
law under which this debt was incurred was voted into law before
most of us were born, it's clear that the taxpayers have never
really had a choice in the matter. Certainly the young people of
today, not yet old enough to vote, have had no choice regarding
the continuing payment of interest charges for a debt not of
their making. To hand such a huge debt to our children and order
them to pay it is indentured servitude at best, outright slavery
at worst. No valid argument exists as to why children not yet old
enough to vote are obliged to pay the debts of reckless government
officials who held office before these children were born. The
government decides that children shall be slaves to the debt, so
slaves they shall be (until some courageous parents decide to put
a stop to it).

Virtually every argument coming from those who would convince us to
go on parting with our hard-earned money to pay this massive and
impossible debt amounts to a claim that we always have the choice
to vote for politicians who will somehow change things, and that
the election of a particular candidate amounts to approval of his
or her policies. Put simply, the fact that the public voted for
Bill Clinton amounts to permission by the public for him to run
the federal government deeper into debt and loot our retirement
money, or so goes the theory.

One can easily challenge the logic behind such a claim. If, after
all, the only candidates on the ballot intend to borrow more
money, does that mean the voters approve of the eventual loans?
Does the fact that Hitler won his election prove that all Germans
approved of the death camps?

But beyond that simple fallacy lies a greater issue, one that
until now has never been fully and properly examined. And that is
whether the public really voted for those who are in power at all.
Are our elections truly fair, or are they simply an illusion that
the public approves of whatever despot has cheated his or her way
to power.

Cuba is a good example. It's now generally aknowledged by
historians that the elections which kept Batista in power were
rigged. The CIA is known to have rigged elections in numerous
countries around the world, to put in governments friendly to
American interest, often detrimental to the people of those
nations (often leading to revolution). A search through the news
reports of elections around the world shows that a truly fair and
honest election is indeed a rarity. It is therefore naive (not to
mention racist) to start out assuming American elections are
honset simply because we are Americans.

Are the elections in the United States fair and honest? A review of
the facts is far less than rassuring.

Since 1964, right after John F. Kennedy was assasinated, vote
tabulation for national elections has been handled not by the
government, but by a private company lacking any official
oversight at all. This company, which changes its name on a
regular basis, is currently called "Voters News Service" and is
located in New York City. This company is owned by a consortium
of TV networks and wire services, which are in turn controlled by
the CIA through its Operation MOCKINGBIRD. The TV networks will
make a great show of being "first with the election results", but
in reality all of them rely on the numbers sent to them by VNS,
while seldom aknowledging its existance during the election
coverage.

This is the voting process most in use in America today. A voter
punches a card in the voting booth. That card is run through a
computer at the local voting center, then that computer contacts
computers at Voters News Service, or the precinct official
telephones the numbers the computer shows him to Voters News
Service, which then announces the results via the networks. Poll
watchers are allowed to watch the voting booths, to gaurd against
polling place electioneering, but in most precincts, the actual
counting of the ballots is concealed from the public, and nobody
is allowed to see inside the voting machines, or review the
computer software that counts the ballots. 70% of all votes in
America are counted by machine, and nobody, not private citizen,
not local election official, nobody, is allowed to examine how it
all works. The accuracy tests conducted on the voting machines
before and after the actual election are utterly worthless, as
they cannot detect fraud designed to fool the accuracy test itself.
In 1988, when voting machines in Illinois were tested with tens of
thousands of ballots instead of the few dozen normally used for
the accuracy test, over 1/4 of the machines which had passed the
standard accuracy test were found to have mistabulated the larger
test vote results!

While researching the book, "VOTESCAM", the Collier brothers
actually managed to videotape members of the League of Women
voters forging ballots, and found hard evidence that Shouptronics
and Printomatic vote machines were rigged in the Dade County
Elections. In the Shouptronics, the wheels of the mechanical
counters were shaved to cause miscounts. In the Printomatic
machines, a malfunction revealed that the paper tape with the voting
results had been pre-printed before the voting even started! The
Colliers, along with attorney Ellis Rubin, handed the evidence to
the assistant State Attorney for Florida. Sadly, that assistant
State Attorney was Janet Reno, who in a pattern we have all become
too familer with, killed the investigation. 60 Minutes taped a
segment on the Dade County Vote Fraud, but never aired it.

Mandatory voter registration laws, such as "Motor voter" have been
a boon to election fraud, generating registered voters who don't
vote and whose names may be used to obtain absentee ballots. In
the California election that unseated Bob Dornan following his
efforts to investigate the Clinton White House, canvassers
discovered that nearly half of the names registered to vote in the
GOP election from 7 precincts simply did not exist. The California
Attorney General's office was informed by the precinct worker, but
again nothing was done. In 1998, almost 20,000 fraudulent voter
registrations were discovered on the voting rolls, but were
allowed to remain on the excuse that their removal in time for the
election would cost too much!

The evidence for massive vote fraud in the United States uncovered
by the Voting Integrity Project and organizations like it are
ignored by the government, which has obviously been the
beneficiary of such chicanery, and by the media, which is
complicit in the fraud. When vote fraud was suspected in the 1996
Arizona Primary (the one that ended Pat Buchanon's winning streak
after New Hampshire), the Arizona legislature passed a special law
forbidding a recount for that one primary election only! When the
Miami Magazine ran a story on the Dade County Vote Fraud, the
magazine was purchased just one month later by the editor of the
Miami News, Sylvan Meyer, who ordered that no further stories on
vote fraud be published. When precinct workers in the 1974 Dade
County elections discovered that the voting machines they were
using were rigged, they walked off the job and refused to certify
the election process. Police and fire fighters took over the
polling duties. The next day, the Miami Herald reported the walk
out, but not the reason. When the precinct workers went to the
media to report the election rigging, the media ignored them. So
did the local attorney general. So did the FBI. Citizens who tried
to observe the next election were arrested.

Typical of the horror stories associated with the media-owned
Voters News Service is what happened in Dubuque County Iowa during
the 1996 Caucuses. The county's 41 precincts met in 41 classrooms
at two high schools and voted on old fashioned paper ballots,
which were then counted in full view of all present (including
representives of the candidates), and the results posted for all
to see and verify. The vote totals were then phoned directly into
Voters News Service by the county chairman, again in full view of
all participants that night. Buchanon won the county by a wide
margin, garnering 870 votes. By next morning, Voters News Service
had dropped Buchanon's vote total for that county down to 757
votes, a 13% drop. Buchanon lost Iowa by a much smaller margin
than 13%.

The Iowa state GOP claimed it could do nothing about the problem;
they were "in VNS' hands". VNS, despite the paper ballots proving
Buchanon's 870 votes, refused to admit error and refused to change
the results for the county. Needless to say, the question of
whether Buchanon had had 13% of his votes shaved off in other Iowa
counties, ones in which computerized vote machines meant there was
no audit trail to check, was ignored. The fact that an obviously
fraudulent vote had made it all the way through the system to be
reported on national television was also ignored by the media.
(Iowa is the state, it should be noted, where a columnist for
Salon magazine was recently charged with vote fraud.)

The complicity by the law enforcement machinery of this nation is
astounding. In one election in Boston, a judge declared 968
ballots which had been declared "blank" due to multiple punches to
be valid, arbitrarily assigning most of the disputed votes to the
incumbant candidate, thereby reversing his defeat. In a computer
vote fraud case in West Virginia, an expert witness testifying for
the plaintiff sat down at a CES voting machine provided by the
defendants, studied it for a while, then with a single ballot card
added 10,000 votes to one of the fictional candidates. The judge
refused to allow the jury to see the demonstration and the
charges were eventually dropped.

Only three states, California, Florida, and Michigan, have laws
requiring that the voting machine source code be placed in escrow
should it need to be examined after an election. None of those
states have any means to verify that the source code placed in
escrow is in fact the origin of the compiled code running on the
machines election night, and in Michigan, the escrow is simply
handled by the voting machine company itself with no overview by
a state agency or public interest group.

All the voting machines used in the United States come from just
three companies. The Presidents of two of them have been convicted
of vote fraud and yet all state governments continue to do
business (at very steep fees) with just these three companies. The
largest of the three companies has direct access to 50% of the
nation's votes. Nobody is allowed to inspect the machines, or
watch as the vote totals are accumulated and counted, and there is
no audit trail anywhere along the path from the voting machine to
Voter's News Service, the private media-owned company that without
any official oversight, tells us all what the election results
are.

Most states have now passed laws requiring a challenge to election
results to be filed within a few weeks of the election, far too
short a time for anyone to properly determine if such a challenge
is warrented.

Despite such an obvious inhibition, a Democrat who lost a
legislative seat in the 1998 Hawaiian election did file a
challange, claiming there was vote fraud. A quick audit showed
that vote fraud involving absentee ballots had indeed occured,
but mostly by the Democrat; who had cheated, but not enough to
win. This scandal triggered public questions about several races,
including that of the Democratic Governor, Ben Cayutano, who had
been trailing his Republican challenger all during ther election
night, only to have a sudden surge of votes at the last second
push him over the top. The governor offered to over-ride the
state's two week filing deadline for election challenges and allow
a full recount, then back-pedaled and made a full recount
contingent on a "pre-audit". The "pre-audit" was assigned to the
company which had run the election, along with a warning that if
it turned out the election was flawed, their final payment would be
withheld from the State of Hawaii. Needless to say the pre-audit
found no errors in the election, and despite the urging of the
Voter Integrity Project (which was conducting its own
investigation) the full recount was canceled. The voting company,
ES has again been awarded the voting contractr for the 2000
elections, without any open bidding.

Who chooses what government we live under? Those who cast the
votes, or as Stalin observed, those who count them? Do We The
People pick those who govern us, or does a private company, owned
by the CIA controlled media, and operating without any public
oversight do? Have We The People consented by vote to bear the $14
trillion burden of a government's reckless fiscal policy, or was
that consent and that vote fraudulently obtained?

Just think about all it really means if the elections are being
rigged on a massive scale.

It means that the contract between ruler and ruled is broken. The
government does not govern with the consent of the governed, it
rules by treachery and deception. The crown it wears is a stolen
one, usurped from the people by three voting machine companies and
one media owned results-announcer totally beyond review and
reproach.

So, now we come back to the issue of government debt and who is
really responsible for it. If, as appears to be the case, our
elections are routinely being rigged, then it cannot be argued
that We The People either chose, or approved of, those officials
who borrowed trillions of dollars without our permission and
sought to enslave us to that debt.

In an atmosphere of doubt about the validity of the voting process,
it cannot be assumed that the American people have actually voted
for or approved of any of the government's actions and policies
for the last 35 years. That includes a couple of wars and some $14
trillion in debt, and the $60,000 in interest payments alone each
taxpayer has had to fork over since the 60s.

In light of the numerous incidents of vote fraud uncovered through
the years and the quite obvious stonewall on the subject by the
officials who benefit from rigged elections and the media that at
least helps in the rigging, it is dangerous to assume that
American elections are honest. The burden of proof must lie with
VNS and the voting machine companies to prove their honesty.

In an atmosphere of doubt about the validity of the voting
process, it appears that the entire voting process is a sham, a
trick to fool the American people into accepting whatever is done
to them by creating the illusion that the people somehow voted for
and approved of whatever is being done. That's how Batista fooled
the Cuban people. That's how the USSR fooled the Soviet citizens.
And that's how the American government fools us.

Do We The People owe that $14 trillion? No, we do not. It was
borrowed without our permission. No citizen agreed to repay that
money.

Those government officials who borrowed that money and intend that
We The People should be forced to repay it can no longer do so on
the assumption that they rule with the consent of those who vote.

The best that can be said is that they rule with the consent of
those who count the vote.

Your friend,
<+]::-{)}  (Cyberpope(the Bishop of ROM!))
Ask me how to connect with me in any of 5 different Instant Messengers

--- PPoint 1.76