Purging voter lists is just the beginning: the U.S. has embraced a form of electronic voting that is unreliable, unverifiable and funded by the radical Christian right.
ES&S, Diebold and Sequoia may not be household names like Enron or Arthur Andersen, but these three companies will decide America's next president. In the 2004 presidential election, the full effect of electronic voting will be felt for the first time and these are the companies that will report the majority of the results.
Despite assurances from the corporations that own these machines, the reliability of electronic voting is under intense criticism. One of the most comprehensive examinations of electronic voting fraud came from brothers James and Kenneth Collier. In their 1992 book Votescam: The Stealing of America, the brothers detailed the long history of voting fraud over the past twenty-five years with a special focus on voting machines. American politicians and large media outlets have ignored their book, and their charges remain unanswered.
Now, their concerns are being echoed by a new group of writers, journalists and activists who have raised alarming and explosive details about electronic voting in America. While academics such as Professors Rebecca Mercuri and David Dill and organizations like the Association for Computing Machinery have carefully documented how voting systems are vulnerable to fraudulent manipulation, journalists Lynn Landes, Jerry Bowles and Bev Harris are alerting Americans to an electronic coup d'etat in the making. If their charges are true, and there is little evidence to contradict their claims, George W. Bush has already won the 2004 election.
"Given the outcome of our work in Florida and with a new president in place, we think our services will expand across the country."
-- Martin L. Fagan, ChoicePoint Vice-President
To understand how George W. Bush will win the next presidential election, it helps to understand how he won the last one. While all public attention rested on hanging chads, butterfly ballots and a skewed recount in the wake of the 2000 Presidential election, the root of the problem has been overlooked. As investigative reporter Greg Palast uncovered, the state of Florida purged over 90,000 people from their list of eligible voters under the guise that they were felons. In fact, almost none of the disenfranchised voters were felons...but almost all were blacks or democrats.
Palast's investigation revealed that at the heart of this ethnic cleansing of voter lists was the creation of a new centralized database for the state of Florida. In 1999, the state fired the company they were paying to compile their "scrub" lists and gave the job to Database Technologies (DBT, now ChoicePoint). DBT, a private firm known to have strong Republican ties was paid $2.3 million to do the same job that had previously been done for $5,700.
The first list of felons from DBT included 8,000 names of felons from Texas supplied by George Bush's state officials. The state government said they were all felons, and thus barred from voting under federal law. Local officials complained about the list and DBT issued a new one, this time naming 58,000 felons. Palast discovered that the one county that went through the process of checking the new list name by name found it was 95% wrong.
Because of the way DBT compiled its erroneous list, Florida voters whose names were similar to out-of-state felons were barred from voting. An Illinois felon named John Michaels could knock off Florida voters John, Johnny, Jonathan or Jon R. Michaels.
DBT didn't get names, birthdays or social security numbers right, but they were matched for race, so a felon named Joe Green only knocked off a black Joe Green, but not a white person with the same name. There was no need to guess about the race of the disenfranchised: a voter's race is listed next to his or her name in many Southern states including Florida because racial ID is required by the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
DBT's fee of $2.3 million was supposed to include verification that the individuals on their list were actually felons, but Palast's investigation showed that DBT could not provide any evidence that they made a single phone call to verify the identity of the names scrubbed prior to the 2000 Presidential Election.
Unfortunately, nothing is preventing this purge from taking place again on a national scale. Due in large part to the attention paid to butterfly ballots and hanging chads in the fall of 2000, the new Help America Vote Act (HAVA) demands that every state replicate Florida's system of centralized, computerized voter files before the 2004 election, presumably to avoid the paper-ballot confusion of the Florida recount. Martin Luther King III and Greg Palast recently co-authored a piece on the dangers of such databases, recalling the Florida debacle. Their conclusion: "Jim Crow has moved into cyberspace -- harder to detect, craftier in operation, shifting shape into the electronic guardian of a new electoral segregation."
ChoicePoint already has contracts with numerous states to provide electronic voter lists purged of supposed felons. They are a natural choice as one of the U.S.'s largest database companies. ChoicePoint provides information on federal criminal records by district for 43 states and also provides online access to more than 63 million criminal records for all fifty states. Who better to provide HAVA-mandated voter lists to state governments?
"It's not the voting that's democracy, it's the counting."
-- Tom Stoppard, 1972
Purged voter lists are only one method of pre-determining the outcome of an election. An even more serious problem lies inside the voting machines themselves. While representatives of Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia herald the benefits of their systems, not everyone shares their enthusiasm. Dr. Rebecca Mercuri is an Assistant Professor of Computer Science at Bryn Mawr College and has been referred to as "the leading independent expert on electronic voting technology." Shortly before the 2000 Presidential election, Mercuri defended her Ph.D. dissertation on the subject of "Electronic Vote Tabulation: Checks and Balances" at the Engineering School of the University of Pennsylvania.
Mercuri's website is an astonishing checklist of the lack of safeguards and other failings that plague the current crop of electronic voting systems. One of Mercuri's primary concerns is that electronic systems provide no way for a voter, or election officials, to verify that a cast ballot corresponds to the vote being recorded. As Mercuri notes on her site, "Any programmer can write code that displays one thing on a screen, records something else, and prints yet another result." There is no known way to ensure that this is not happening inside of a voting system. Companies such as Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia, which manufacture the machines and provide the code that runs them, simply take a "trust us" approach.
Mercuri also reports that no electronic voting system has been certified to even the lowest level of the U.S. government or international computer security standards such as the ISO Common Criteria, nor are they required to comply with such standards. Thus, no current electronic voting system is secure by the U.S. government's own standards.
Electronic voting systems without individual printouts for examination by voters do not provide an independent audit trail. All voting systems can make mistakes and the ability to perform manual hand-counts of ballots is the only way to verify results. Computer glitches are already cropping up all across the United States. Numerous irregularities with electronic voting machines have already been reported:
In Georgia, which recently purchased 22,000 Diebold touch screens, some voters touched one candidate's name on the screen and saw another candidate's name appear. A former news reporter in Florida discovered that votes were being tabulated in 644 Palm Beach precincts: but Palm Beach only has 643 precincts. An earlier court case in Florida found the same discrepancy. A reporter in New Jersey observed 104 precincts with votes in an area that has only 102 precincts.
Baldwin County results showed that Democrat Don Siegelman won the state of Alabama. However, the next morning, 6,300 of Siegelman's votes disappeared and the election was handed to Republican Bob Riley. A recount was requested and denied.
In North Carolina, a software programming error caused vote-counting machines to skip over several thousand votes, both Republican and Democratic. Fixing the error turned up 5,500 more votes and reversed the election.
In Comal County Texas, an uncanny coincidence resulted in three Republican candidates winning by exactly 18,181 votes each. Two other Republican candidates outside Texas also won by exactly 18,181 votes.
In October, election officials in Raleigh, N.C., discovered that early voters had to make several attempts to record their votes on ES&S systems. Officials compared the number of voters to the number of votes counted and realized that 294 votes had been lost.
A report from the Caltech-MIT Voting Technology Project states that an estimated 1.5 million presidential votes were not recorded in 2000 because of difficulties using voting equipment and that electronic machines have the second highest rate of unmarked, uncounted and spoiled ballots in presidential, Senate, and governor elections over the last 12 years.
Federally mandated voting machines, almost exclusively manufactured by ES&S, Diebold and Sequoia are being constructed and tested under obsolete FEC recommendations. The US has authorized spending of over four billion dollars on new voting equipment, but as Mercuri notes, "failed to require or enforce adequate security, usability, reliability, and auditability controls over the products being purchased." The numerous flaws cited above ably demonstrate Mercuri's point.
Her concerns are echoed by Professor David Dill from Stanford University. He has created a resolution warning of the dangers of electronic voting machines. "Do not be seduced by the apparent convenience of "touch-screen voting" machines, or the "gee whiz" factor that accompanies flashy new technology," he writes. "Using these machines is tantamount to handing complete control of vote counting to a private company, with no independent checks or audits. These machines represent a serious threat to democracy."
"If you want to win the election, just control the machines."
-- Charlie Matulka, Nebraska Senatorial Candidate
Chuck Hagel first ran for the U.S. Senate in Nebraska in 1996. Electronic voting machines owned by Election Systems & Software (ES&S) reported that he had won both the primaries and the general election in unprecedented victories. His 1996 victory was considered one of the biggest upsets of that election. He was the first Republican to win a Nebraska senatorial campaign in 24 years and won virtually every demographic group, including many largely black communities that had never before voted Republican.
Six years later Hagel ran again against Democrat Charlie Matulka in 2002, and won in a landslide. He was re-elected to his second term with 83% of the vote: the biggest political victory in the history of Nebraska. Again, the votes were counted by ES&S, now the largest voting machine company in America.
While these victories could be dismissed simply as a Republican upset, a January 2003 article in the independent Washington paper The Hill revealed interesting details about Hagel's business investments and casts a different light on his election successes. Chuck Hagel was CEO of ES&S (then AIS) until 1995 and he is still a major stockholder of the parent company of ES&S, McCarthy & Company. Hagel resigned as CEO of ES&S to run for the Senate and resigned as president of the parent company McCarthy & Company following his election (where he remains a major investor).
Today, the McCarthy Group is run by Michael McCarthy, who happens to be Chuck Hagel's treasurer. Hagel's financials still list the McCarthy Group as an asset, with his investment valued at $1-$5 million. Campaign finance reports show that Michael McCarthy also served as treasurer for Hagel until December of 2002.
ES&S also has a connection to the Bush family. Jeb Bush's first choice as running mate in 1998 was Sandra Mortham who was a paid lobbyist for ES&S and received a commission for every county that bought its touch-screen machines.
The Hill's revelations of Hagel's conflict of interest was disturbing enough to cause Jan Baran, one of the most powerful Republican lawyers in Washington D.C., and Lou Ann Linehan, Senator Chuck Hagel's Chief of Staff, to walk into The Hill's offices to "discuss" the story. According to the author of the article, Alex Bolton, nothing similar had happened in the three-and-a-half years he's worked for the paper. It was, no doubt, a story Hagel would rather see go unreported.
"The Christian worldview is the answer. We need Christian statesmen who press for the Crown Rights of Jesus Christ in all areas of life. This isn't political salvation or an overnight fix. It will take decades of mobilization and confrontation to undo a century of godless socialism. It must be a grassroots movement that starts in individual families and churches and then moves outward to take dominion. It must encompass every area of life and not just the political arena. Finally, it must start soon, for there isn't much time left. The Florida elections have taught us that the Democrats with their liberal/socialistic worldview will stop at nothing to seize control of the government."
-- Dr. Val Finnell, published by the Chalcedon Institute
If the connections between Hagel and ES&S seem suspect, the origins of America's largest electronic voting machine companies may be just as distressing, especially for those who venerate the separation of church and state. The convoluted system of renaming and buyouts of America's voting system companies is a complicated story. However, once the various corporate trails have been followed, a disturbing picture comes into focus.
Brothers Bob and Todd Urosevich founded American Information Systems. Bob is currently president of Diebold and Todd Urosevich is Vice President, Aftermarket Sales of ES&S. (In 1999, American Information Systems, purchased Business Records Corp to become ES&S.)
American Information Systems (AIS) was primarily funded with money from Ahmanson brothers, William and Robert, of the Howard F. Ahmanson Co. The majority stake in ES&S is still owned by Howard F. Ahmanson and the Ahmanson Foundation.
Howard Ahmanson belongs to Council for National Policy, a hard right wing organization and also helps finance The Chalcedon Institute. As the institute's own site reports, Chalcedon is a "Christian educational organization devoted to research, publishing, and promoting Christian reconstruction in all areas of life... Our emphasis on the Cultural or Dominion Mandate (Genesis 1:28) and the necessity of a return to Biblical Law has been a crucial factor in the challenge to Humanism by Christians in this country and elsewhere..." Chalcedon promotes Christian Reconstructionism, which mandates Christ's dominion over the entire world. The organization's purpose is to establish Old Testament Biblical law as the standard for society.
Few individuals who are trying to alert citizens to the dangers of electronic voting are against computer voting unequivocally. Rather, the complaints focus on the lack of a verifiable paper trail and the inability of the public to examine the code that runs the machines. Professor Mercuri's October 2002 article, "A Better Ballot Box?" provides a solution to these concerns. She also poses a series of questions that she believes must be answered in order to allay security concerns. Mercuri's work is partly an attempt to design a machine in line with minimum standards set by the U.S. federal government, unlike the voting machines currently being installed across America.
The New York State Assembly recently passed legislation that specifically requires that machines "produce and retain a voter verified permanent paper record with a manual audit capacity" (but fails to mention the code that runs the machines). Rep. Rush Holt has introduced federal legislation, The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003 with similar aims. The measure would require all voting machines to produce an actual paper record by 2004 that voters can view to check the accuracy of their votes and that election officials can use to verify votes in the event of a computer malfunction, hacking, or other irregularity.
Other solutions exist to ensure the integrity of voting machines and address the concerns of people like Professor Mercuri. Jason Kitcat is the author of the Free e-democracy project, an open source project that builds Internet voting software. Likewise, Australia makes the code for their machines available online whereas American companies jealously guard the code that runs their machines. It seems a fair question, considering the list of problems that currently plague voting equipment: why are none of these alternatives being investigated?
The 2004 election will be the first to use nation-wide electronic voting. With the purging of voter lists, secrecy surrounding voting machines, the lack of a verifiable paper trail combined with voting machine companies with strong Republican ties and funding from the radical right, a Bush victory is all but inevitable. Welcome to the machines.
V. The final result of the Democrat Primaries is now in, earlier than ever before in history: Masonic Skull & Bones John Kerry is opposing Masonic Skull & Bones George Bush for the Presidency. Therefore, it really now does not matter for whom we vote, for a bona fide Skull & Bones Adept is going to guide this country for the next four years. The question of the hour is: which man does the
Illuminati want in the White House through 2008?
Remembering that labels are worthless, let us examine the label each man brings to the contest:
President Bush is the Republican Candidate -- He bills himself as a "compassionate" and "caring" Christian, and has become the unofficial leader of the Christian Right (NEWS1596). The Republican Candidate for any office is also supposed to be a "conservative" on fiscal matters, reigning in spending and working to reduce the size of government. Republicans are also supposed to care about balanced budgets and paying down the
national debt. Republicans are also supposed to place more confidence in market forces than in government programs.
Senator Kerry is the Democrat Candidate -- He bills himself as caring for the common, working class man, even though recent news reports indicate he would be one of the richest Presidents in history. John Forbes Kerry (J.F.K.) is the quintessential Liberal Democrat, in the John Kennedy/Ted Kennedy/Bill Clinton
mold. However, some readers might argue with me that John Kennedy was really not that Liberal, and they have an historic point; however, recent history has been largely rewritten to portray John Kennedy as a typical Liberal. Democrats are supposed to have more faith in regulatory, intrusive government than in either individual citizens or the market place. Liberals are supposed to believe in high taxes and even higher spending.
Both these candidates are carrying the label they are supposed to carry. However, history since Ronald Reagan shows how worthless labels truly are. No matter whether we have had a Democrat or a Republican in office, the general Illuminati plan for more intrusive, larger government that taxes high and spends
higher and continues the wasteful programs of its predecessors, continues, seemingly without limit. When President Bush, for example, came into office, Conservatives held their breath, awaiting him to roll back many of the thousands of Executive Orders Clinton signed while in office, many of them in the last
days of office; however, Bush quietly decided not to change one Executive Order. In like manner, Bush continued Clinton's pro-gay policy (NEWS1652), while beginning to spend so much money that we are now trillions more in debt than ever before.
As a matter of fact, Americans have traditionally been more at risk of losing individual rights and liberties when a Republican is in the White House than a Democrat. How can this be? Conservatives carefully watch Democrat politicians and scream "loud and long" when they try to pass any offensive legislation; however, the same Conservative citizens are strangely asleep and quiet when one of their "own" begins to pass the same offensive legislation that they screamed about when a Democrat proposed it! Can you imagine the uproar amongst Conservatives if Bill Clinton and Janet Reno argued, after 9/11, that they need dictatorial powers that would enable police to enter your home without a warrant, arrest you with no official notice of your charges, take you to an unknown jail facility, denying you legal counsel, being able to try you in absolute secrecy, and have the authority to execute you with no public notice,
not even telling your family?
Why, Conservatives would have arisen as one to demand true impeachment of President Clinton and Attorney General Reno; yet, because one of their "own" made the same demands, Conservatives lift not one voice in protest.
Who will win this Presidential race? The Illuminati will decide and we shall just have to wait to see. However, as I have stated before, I have noticed that, when the Illuminati wants the emphasis to be on Foreign Affairs, they will cause a Republican to rise to the White House, but if they want the emphasis to be on Domestic Affairs, they will cause a Democrat to win. If any of you doubt that our elections are rigged, just remember the sage advice given by that old Illuminist politician who never lost a race and whose percentage of victory never dipped below 91%:
"He who casts a vote counts for nothing; but, he who counts the vote counts for everything." [Josef Stalin, "Elected" Dictator, Soviet Union]
And, "Old Joe" made this statement before electronic voting machines arrived, making the stealing of elections that much easier!
Letter from the Webmaster:
Logic dictates that we should have more than one person running against Bush in this year of 2004, yet, there is only one person in the forefront who has already been caught with a potty mouth on national TV. There are many excellent choices for the United States President, yet we are presented with only two. Why is this happening? Why is the media only pitting these two parties against each other when there are people who are far more productive and life-positive who would clearly be better leaders. What is the problem with this country? I say it's the same problem with the fact that we are constantly having to defend the environment against life-negative, toxic industries:
'A report issued by researchers at the University of Kent shows countries with high levels of corruption tend to have poor environmental conservation records. The study, entitled Governance and the Loss of Biodiversity, compares country scores from the "corruption perception index" published by Transparency International with the rate of change in forest cover and, for African countries, in its elephant and rhino populations. South Africa and Botswana are examples of countries with relatively little corruption and healthier wildlife populations, with Sudan and Ethiopia coming in at the other end of the spectrum. The report urges groups funding and carrying out conservation projects to factor the connection into their planning. Robert Smith, one of the report's authors warned, "If the money isn't getting through, sending more money isn't going to help."
'John Whitfield, Nature'
The bottom line: corruption at the highest levels in what used to be a proud and free country. The United States of America has slowly but surely been replaced by an alternate government. The American Republic has been like the "frog in the cool water that was slowly brought to a boil."
God help us All.
Ohio Stolen (blog entry, gnn.tv) 2004-11-03 16:26:30 "Greg Palast and Randi Rhodes reported today that the state of Ohio was stolen by the Republicans in election 2004. Ohio was the critical state that tipped the balance, giving the presidency to Bush. Turns out one County in Ohio, equipped with Diebold electronic voting machines, reported NEGATIVE 25,000 votes. Wha?!? That's what at least one election official in Ohio said. The votes from that County are lost. Not counted. GONE!" Fixed - The Stealing of Another Election (Democratic Underground.com) --by EarlG --Kerry winning Exit Polls --"FRAUD LOOKS PROBABLE --SoCalDem has done a statistical analysis... ...on several swing states, and EVERY STATE that has EVoting but no paper trails has an unexplained advantage for Bush of around +5% when comparing exit polls to actual results. In EVERY STATE that has paper audit trails on their EVoting, the exit poll results match the actual results reported within the margin of error. So, we have MATCHING RESULTS for exit polls vs.
voting with audits vs. A 5% unexplained advantage for Bush without audits." Address to receive newsletter: email@example.com Address to not receive newsletter:
firstname.lastname@example.org (or, pls. write to: email@example.com, and I can add your name to the roster) lrp/mdr CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, General Manager. Copyright © 2004, Citizens For Legitimate Government ® All rights reserved
Democratic Underground.com EarlG (xxx posts) Wed Nov-03-04 02:57 AM Kerry winning Exit Polls - FRAUD LOOKS PROBABLE SoCalDem has done a statistical analysis... ...on several swing states, and EVERY STATE that has EVoting but no paper trails has an unexplained advantage for Bush of around +5% when comparing exit polls to actual results. In EVERY STATE that has paper audit trails on their EVoting, the exit poll results match the actual results reported within the margin of error. So, we have MATCHING RESULTS for exit polls vs. voting with audits vs. A 5% unexplained advantage for Bush without audits. Maybe Dubayah believes God will see him through this, but it's going to take more than blind faith to pull the wool over the data and the facts....
Edited on Wed Nov-03-04 12:42 AM by SoCalDemocrat EDIT: Analysis of the polling data vs actual data and voting systems supports the hypothesis that evoting may be to blame in the discrepancies. Nevada has evoting but with verified receipts. In that state the Exit Polling matches the actual results within .1% accuracy. However for other swing states Bush has unexplainable leads. I'm still compiling data. Please help me determine what voting methods are being used in swing states and which are evoting without audit trails. Post your data under the individual state responses below.
Kerry is well ahead in exit polls, but still losing the counts. WTH is going on? Kerry is well ahead in Exit Polling in Ohio. We're being screwed....
Here is exit polling for Florida
- Male: 51/49 Kerry 47%
- Female: 53/47 Kerry 53%
- Dem: 91/8 Kerry 38%
- Rep: 94/6 Bush 37%
- Ind: 60/39 Kerry 24%.
(3,824,794 votes for Kerry & Bush) ...
- Male: 52/47 Kerry 46%
- Female: 52/48 Kerry 54%
- Dem: 86/13 Kerry 38%
- Rep: 92/7 Bush 39%
Ind: 60/38 Kerry 23%
- 3,824,794 votes for Kerry & Bush That means Bush is ahead by just 5355 votes in exit polling in FL.
- 2065388 Women (54% of total)
- 1759405 Men (46% of total)
- Bush leads male vote by 5% of M = 87970
- Kerry leads female vote by 4% of M = 82615
Another odd thing is that there are more Reps then Dems in Florida by 1%, which is not expected. Either there are more voting Republicans in FL than Democrats, a first and not matching known statistics, or more Republicans were exit polled than Democrats. If the exit poll is off by just 1% that's a difference of 382479 more voters who are Democrats. The results being posted however show Bush ahead 326,000 actual votes. This is simply not possible from the exit polling numbers. Even skewed for a 5% higher Republican vs. Democrat turnout from 2000, it doesn't add up.
Kerry leads Female voters by 7%, Bush leads male voters by 7%. Male vs. Female voter turnout is 47% M, 53% F. That means Kerry statistically has a 7% edge in exit polling in Wisconsin. Actual results however show Bush ahead by 1%, an unexplained difference of 8%.
Just checked, same pattern. Kerry leads in the exit polls by a clear margin, but is still behind in the reported results. This state is even closer. Actual is just 1% favor of Bush. Exit polls show Kerry with a wider margin. Women favored Kerry by 8% here out of 52% of total voters. Men favored Bush by just 6% out of 48% of total voters. Actual reported results don't match exit polling AT ALL in Nevada. *** KERRY leads by 1.3% in exit polls in NV ***
Can someone determine what percentage of precincts are DIEBOLD or electronic voting machines in these swing states? Of those compare the expected voting results from Male vs. Female against the results reported by electronic vs. non-electronic voting places. My HYPOTHESIS is we will find a discrepancy in the electronic systems vs. the exit polls and the non-electronic systems.
by Roz Hill 11-3-4
I watched the election results all night and into this morning. There are some very important issues to share. One is the surprise expressed by the pundits wherein they acknowledge that the massive voter drives were propelled by discontent. So how did the most hated occupant of the White House manage to exceed his 45% poll average to now claim he has a huge "popular" win. We are told that 22% voted on "morality" and that Bush took 80% of that 22%, and that is how he won. However, that leaves 78% who
were focused on Kerry issues. Why aren`t we told the percentages of the 78%??? The second surprise for the media was that the results didn`t match the exit polls AT ALL. The media has gracefully claimed they "just got it wrong." You remember we didn`t have exit pollsters in 2002. It saved any disagreement with THAT Republican "sweep." In fact, the pollsters have always been 100% accurate, with just 1 to 2% polling data, in legitimate elections. Bush took the Texas governorship from Ann Richards when she had a 70% approval rating. Is it magic? My "I TOLD YOU SO" is that I have SCREAMED since 2000 that if we don`t get rid of touch-screen "voting" computers, NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING else will matter.
So, here are the numbers (so far): 112,596,922 voters counted in the presidential race. Bush has been consistently polling at 45%, which SHOULD have given him 50,668,614 votes, instead of 58,073,612. This translates into 7,404,998 votes being siphoned off from Kerry votes. Now, how does that magic
work??? Taxpayers get hit with a bill for $3600 (or more) for EACH of the touch-screen "voting" computers, which are nothing more than dedicated COUNTERS except that they are marketed by Republicans (who vowed to ensure Bush`s victory); and the American people have not been allowed to examine or certify the software in these units. Here is how easy it is to "make magic" -- we need COUNTERS -
(B) = Bush; (K) = Kerry; (V) = Vote; (T) = Tally
This extremely simple bit of programming would shift 12% of the vote from Kerry to Bush, it would defy exit polls, and it would make it look like Bush had a huge popular win. It is time that the software in these SECRET Republican-owned computers be examined with a deliberate check for instructions that could modify the vote tally.
- If V = B, add 1 to B
- If T = 8, add 1 to B; Clear T; Skip 3
- If V = K, add 1 to K; Add 1 to T
There is a growing body of evidence that Electronic Voting Machines were manipulated during this November 2nd, 2004 election to give President Bush the
Over one year ago, the top executive of the Diebold voting machines told Ohio Republicans that he and his company were dedicated to deliver the state to President Bush in 2004!
NEWS BRIEF: "Voting Machine Controversy", by Julie Carr Smyth, Cleveland Plain Dealer, August 28, 2003, reprinted in Common Dreams News Center. www.commondreams.org (also see AlterNet, alternet.org)
"COLUMBUS - The head of a company vying to sell voting machines in Ohio told Republicans in a recent fund-raising letter that he is 'committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year'. The Aug. 14 letter from Walden O'Dell, chief executive of Diebold Inc. - who has become active in the re-election effort of President Bush - prompted Democrats this week to question the propriety of allowing O'Dell's company to calculate votes in the 2004 presidential election."
Can you imagine the audacity of the Chief Executive of a voting machine company boldly coming out to support President Bush in 2004, even going so far
as to say that he and his Diebold Company are dedicated to delivering Ohio votes for Bush in 2004! A company who is manufacturing electronic voting machines should go to great lengths to protect their integrity of impartiality. After all, a voting machine is to be the unbiased instrument by which voters express their will, not the biased means by which one candidate, and his party, achieve a goal which is pre-determined!
This story just gets worse.
"O'Dell attended a strategy pow-wow with wealthy Bush benefactors - known as Rangers and Pioneers - at the president's Crawford, Texas, ranch earlier this month. The next week, he penned invitations to a $1,000-a-plate fund-raiser to benefit the Ohio Republican Party's federal campaign fund - partially benefiting Bush - at his mansion in the Columbus suburb of Upper Arlington." (Ibid.)
Thus, the Diebold company was tightly in the back pocket of President Bush, starting at least as far back as 2003. However, toward the end of this article, we learn that most of the lobbyists for electronic voting machines are also highly connected politically.
"Blackwell said Diebold is not the only company with political connections - noting that lobbyists for voting-machine makers read like a who's who of Columbus' powerful and politically connected. 'Let me put it to you this way: If there was one person uniquely involved in the political process, that might be troubling', he said. "But there's no one that hasn't used every legitimate avenue and bit of leverage that they could legally use to get their product looked at. Believe me, if there is a political lever to be pulled, all of them have pulled it." (Ibid.)
CBS News even got into the fray over rigged elections.
NEWS BRIEF: "E-Voting: Is The Fix In?", CBS News, August 8, 2004, www.cbsnews.com
"CBS: To avoid a fiasco in this fall's election, Congress offered the states $3.9 billion to buy modern voting equipment ... The bad news is, they may have much worse problems all their own. California's experience was nothing like Maryland's ... So many of the machines malfunctioned or ran unapproved software that Shelley took the extraordinary step of decertifying them.
"Then there's the software worry."
At this point, the CBS article begins speaking about the investigations of Avi Ruben, a computer-science professor at Johns Hopkins University. Therefore, let us go right to that article, written in depth by the Jewish Times.
NEWS BRIEF: "Ballot Boxing", by Joel N. Shurkin, JewishTimes.com, October 29, 2004
"One-third of voters in the November election will be using electronic voting machines ... Dr. Rubin and many computer scientists see nothing less than a threat to American democracy in these machines. They are easy to tamper with ... that makes it possible to rig elections ... In many cases, they are set up to prevent recounts in case of disputes ..."
While this sounds potentially very serious, the worst revelation is yet to come. Dr. Rubin accidentally got his hands on the Diebold software program -- Diebold's source code -- which runs the e-voting machines. Let us pick up the story from this point.
"(Dr. Rubin's) students pored over 49,609 lines of 'code', computer language commands that look like hieroglyphics to anyone not trained as a programmer. One line blew them away. It means nothing to laymen, but it was enough to make Dr. Rubin's hair stand on end. (interesting for computers commissioned as nothing more than counters...)
#define DESKEY ((des_Key* "F2654hd4".
"All commercial programs have provisions to be encrypted, protected by secret code so that no one could read or change the contents without the encryption key ... The line that staggered the Hopkins team told them, first, that the method used to encrypt the Diebold machines was a method called Digital Encryption Standard (DES), a code that was broken in 1997 and is no longer used by anyone to secure programs. F2654hd4 was the key to the encryption .. Moreover, because the key was in the source code, all Diebold machines responded to the same key. Unlock one, you can unlock them all." (Ibid.; Emphasis added)
Thus, a person working in cooperation with one of the candidates who is the "Gatekeeper" of the vote totals, could send one signal to all Diebold e-voting machines in his/her district, unlock them all simultaneously, and get inside the system to change the vote totals. While Diebold insists that it fixed its machines, Dr. Rubin says that the machines are not fixable; only a major effort to start all over can fix the problems with e-voting machines.
But, the news gets even worse, as a good hacker does not even need to have this source code to change vote totals! The State of Maryland hired a computer security company -- RABA Technologies -- to investigate the Diebold e-machines. What they found was just as disturbing as Dr. Rubin's discovery.
"RABA supported the Hopkins study in most of its accusations, and found even more problems. RABA's Michael A. Wertheimer and a team of company hackers broke into the Board of Elections computer, changed the results of a mock election and then backed out without leaving a trace. 'We did it in under five minutes', he told 'The Daily Show'." (Ibid.)
We are planning a major article on this subject, because there is so much information pouring out now that vote totals in key e-voting machine precincts that this issue demands a thorough review.
If vote totals were manipulated on behalf of President Bush and his candidates, you can understand why Exit Polls were so far off and why Republicans extended their control of both Houses of Congress. Think of all the implications if our voting system is rigged, and email your thoughts to me, at firstname.lastname@example.org. We shall consider your insights as we prepare this article.
However, one more thought on this subject is appropriate. All this information is clearly available on the Internet and through professional sources, and the circle of knowledge and revelation is increasing daily. Therefore, Kerry would have had ample reason to hold off his concession phone call and speech until more information had come to the forefront. Therefore, why did he concede just hours after his own Vice-Presidential candidate, John Edwards, vowed to not concede until "every vote was counted"?
The answer is simple: John Kerry is a Bonesman of Skull & Bones. Fraternal oaths more powerful than any oath of allegiance, forbid a Bonesman from hurting another Bonesman in any way, shape or form. Now, do you see a very large reason why it was important to know that both Bush and Kerry were life-long Adepts in Skull & Bones? These facts do influence and shape events and are shaping our lives.
III. How has this electoral victory benefited
A. This victory has given him a mandate to continue his policies of the past 4 years -- Almost immediately, President Bush began to use the word, "mandate" in his vocabulary. He even stated that this election had given him "political capital" and he intended to use it! Bush now has reason to pound a Republican-controlled Congress and the American people for full implementation
of all his policies, claiming that this election validated everything he had done these past four years.
B. This victory means he can now immediately proceed with his escalation of the Iraqi war without having to wait for the courts to decide who the victor really was. The President can continue his disastrous war in Iraq with startling impunity. Having already committed a force which is too small by 50%, the President can now throw even more troops into this battle. If you remember President Lyndon Johnson committing over 500,000 troops to Vietnam, you will recall that he took this action only after winning a 1964 landslide victory at the polls over Goldwater; even though President Johnson won this victory by promising to keep our soldiers out of Vietnam, he threw them fully into battle less than one year later. Historians now know that the decision to commit a half-million American troops to Vietnam was made many years before Johnson lied to the American people during the election of 1964 (Ralph Epperson, "The Unseen Hand")
U.S. Marines have been preparing for weeks now to launch a terrible attack on insurgents in the Sunni Triangle, Iraq. American commanders induced the President to formally ask Great Britain to move her 850-man elite "Black Watch" force northward from the southern area near Basra toward Baghdad, to protect our flank as we move into the cities of Falluja and Samarra, north and west of Baghdad. Recently-trained Iraqi forces are said to be accompanying our Marines. Daily, our airplanes have been hitting targets in these cities, expending copious quantities of Depleted Uranium munitions.
Cutting Edge has been posting articles on a resumption of the draft for the past year now. The need for a draft is becoming clearer by the day, as our existing troops are too few in number to win the battle, and are getting more sick by the day from Depleted Uranium. Therefore, do not be too surprised to hear one day that Bush has ordered a significant draft; already, plans have been laid just for this purpose.
C. This victory allows the President to demand that Congress pass every tiny part of his repressive domestic "anti-terror" agenda. Expect to hear demands from President Bush that Congress implement every single "recommendation" from the whitewash 9/11 Commission. These recommendations erode our Constitutional guarantees and personal liberties to such a degree that, when
the planned panics begin to hit, we will have no more freedoms that the poor Russian people had under the terror reign of Josef Stalin, or the German people had under the repressive dictatorship of Adolf Hitler.
But, why should we be too surprised, since the Skull & Bones secret society of which Bush is a member is an identical secret society to Hitler's
D. This victory will give President Bush the political muscle to fight and to defeat every attempt by dissident groups to get concrete answers to the many questions still remaining about 9/11 and its aftermath. Prior to the election, dissident groups like "911 truth" (www.911truth.org) seemingly were having success in finally getting their case publicly heard that too much has been hidden about the 9/11 attacks. ABC News even posted an acknowledgement of "the existence of alternative research and popular doubts about what really happened on September 11" (www.911truth.org)
Additionally, the New York Attorney General accepted a complaint demanding that a criminal inquiry be held "into the many still unsolved crimes of September 11, 2001 over which he has jurisdiction." (www.911truth.org).
You can expect the White House to now squash any and all such investigations. The official false story of 9/11 will forever stand (Unless the American People turn from docile sheep into actual humans with minds of their own).
This is terrible news since groups like "911 truth" have been successful in convincing many New York Citizens that government officials knew of the impending attacks ahead of time, but did nothing. If you have not yet read our expose' of this startling reality, please take a moment to read NEWS1956, entitled, "50% Of All New York City Residents, And 41% Of All New York State Citizens, Believe Government Officials Had Prior Knowledge of the Attacks of 9/11 But Took No Action".
Now, all voices like this one which can threaten the President legally will be silenced and/or muzzled.
E. This victory now allows President Bush to force Israel to give up even more territory and allow a hostile, armed Palestinian State to be created. Before the election, we posted a story in Daily News Updates that President Bush had attempted to force Sharon into giving up even more territory to the Palestinians than the Israeli Prime Minister was willing to give them. Now that Bush has won re-election, we can expect enormous pressure to fall upon the Israeli government to force Israel into an even less manageable and defensible area.
Perhaps that pressure has already begun. Listen to this startling news story, carried on Daily News Updates:
NEWS BRIEF: "Official Web site recognizes Green Line contrary to policy", Ha-aretz News, 3 November 2003
"The Israeli government's official Internet site, entitled 'Israel Government Gateway', directs surfers to a map service in which the Green Line - the 1949 cease-fire line that separated Israel from the West Bank until 1967 - is marked ... Showing the Green Line deviates from the policy the government has followed for more than 25 years. The cease-fire line had been erased from Israel's official maps at the political instruction of former housing minister David Levy after the Likud rose to power in 1977. Since then, the order was strictly observed."
Military experts for decades have warned that Israel cannot survive if she returns to the 1947 line of demarcation. Such a small territory cannot be defended according to standard military doctrine, especially against a hostile state which has been allowed to rise up from within the country, as a
Palestinian State would be if it is ever actually established.
Therefore, one must ask the question if the Israeli government under Sharon has already knuckled under to Bush Administration pressure, and that this official website is merely reflecting that knuckling under. But, now, let us return to this article to hear of an even more shocking fact concerning this official Israeli Government web site.
"The Green Line on the map does not pass through Jerusalem, as it did prior
to the 1967 Six Day War, but a gap is found in its place." (Ibid.)
A "gap" is shown on this Israeli Government web site at precisely the place where Jerusalem is located? What could this possibly mean? For starters, it could very well mean that Jerusalem will not be under Israeli control any longer! Notice the 1947 Israeli map we have posted, above; you will see that Jerusalem is shown on the map as a large roundish blob with the title, "International Territory".
Does this map presage the return of Jerusalem to international control? Certainly, that is the ultimate United Nations plan so that Antichrist will have a capital in which to make his headquarters once he arises. We have written extensively on the internationalization of Jerusalem. If you have not read our articles on this subject, please take the time to do so.
-- "THREE GLOBAL MEETINGS TO PRODUCE ANTICHRIST ARE NOW!"
- Posted July, 2000
-- "JERUSALEM NO LONGER BELONGS THE JEWS! IT WILL NOT BELONG TO THE ARAB EITHER. THE DEAL IS DONE, BUT ARAFAT DID NOT AGREE!"
-- "IS JERUSALEM ABOUT TO BE DECLARED AN INTERNATIONAL CITY IN WHICH A COMBINATION JEWISH TEMPLE/MUSLIM MOSQUE/ CHRISTIAN CHURCH CAN BE BUILT?"
* NEWS1587 -- ON
2/15/2000, POPE JOHN PAUL II SIGNED A COVENANT WITH PALESTINIAN ARAFAT CALLING FOR INTERNATIONALIZATION OF JERUSALEM ! THE PLAN OF THE HOUSE OF THEOSOPHY IS ON TRACK [NEWS1052]
"U.N. HAS OFFICIALLY CONTROLLED JERUSALEM SINCE 1999!"
* NEWS1643 -- FERVENT MASONIC DESIRE TO REBUILD SOLOMON'S TEMPLE IS THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THE EVENTS OF THE MID-EAST TODAY. ONCE COMPLETED, END TIMES' PROPHECY WILL BE FULFILLED!
-- "ISRAEL'S FORMER FOREIGN MINISTER PERES DROPS "WORLD CAPITAL" BOMBSHELL: CALLS FOR HOLY PLACES OF JERUSALEM TO BE CONTROLLED BY UNITED NATIONS!"
Once you know how important Jerusalem is to the Illuminati, and how they plan for their Christ to make his capital there for the first seven years of his reign ("Armageddon Script", by Peter Lemesurier), you will understand why this official Israeli Government Green Line map has an obliging hole where Jerusalem ought to be. Israel is proceeding forward with the
Illuminati Plan to internationalize Jerusalem!
F. This victory allows President Bush to bring all of the powers of his Presidential office to bear on tying all loose ends together so that the repressive, technologically-capable government foretold at the End of the Age can arise. In a series of articles, we showed how the super-quiet government research office -- D.A.R.P.A. -- is throwing untold millions of dollars into the perfection of an implantable human chip so sophisticated that it fulfills all prophecy concerning the capabilities of the "Mark of the Beast" as foretold in Revelation 13:16-18. This chip is called, "MMEA, Multiple Micro Electrode Array. Once
you read these five articles, you will realize that the public attention focused on Digital Angel is probably meant to keep public attention off MMEA. These articles are: NEWS1875, NEWS1875b, NEWS1875c, NEWS1875d, and NEWS1875e.
We expect that President Bush will now pour enormous sums of money into other technical enterprises which Antichrist must have to completely fulfill prophecies of him and of his reign. Technical matters such as Surveillance, Non-Lethal Weaponry, and electronic control of every aspect of a person's life
come immediately to mind. Doubtless, you can think of many others.
G. President Bush now has a mandate to begin overthrowing "Non-Integrating States"
so that the "Gap" may be rapidly shrunk. Does Venezuela and Cuba have to now fear an actual invasion?
For nearly one year now, the Bush Administration has been mightily attempting to subvert and overthrow the Venezuelan government of President Chavez. Using Special Forces troops assigned to our diplomatic mission (NEWS1906), President Chavez became so alarmed that he publicly warned in March, 2004, that Americans would face a daunting task if they invaded his country (NEWS1900).
This warning was no fluke and was meant as a "shot across the bow" to dissuade President Bush from invading Venezuela in order to force the "Regime Change" deemed necessary to bring Venezuela into the community of nations known as the "Functioning Core". American pressure forced Chavez to call special elections, which occurred in August, 2004. Chavez won the election handily and has now solidified his power. However, now that the American President has won re-election, Chavez has to worry that, one day, he might wake up to a powerful American aircraft carrier group sitting off-shore loaded with Marines! If Chavez is not very careful, he might awaken one day to U.S. Special Forces troops in his bedroom, seizing him by the neck, as they did with Haiti's President Aristide.
Fidel Castro of Cuba is also on Bush's short list for "Regime Change". He, also, has publicly warned President Bush not to invade his country (June, 2004). He has taken steps to solidify his military and political situation, including the monetary change out of American currency. Fidel might wake up one morning looking at an aircraft carrier group sitting off his shore.
There are so many "Non-Integrating
States" in the world which must either be overthrown with a "Regime Change" so they can become "Functioning Core" or that must be destroyed (NEWS1967) that we expect President Bush to use some of his earned "Political Capital" to force "Regime Changes" all over the world. When you hear of a nation whose leader has just been deposed through a coup, or of a nation who has just been invaded by some military force, check the map we have provided in these articles to see if that nation is considered a "Non-Integrating State". This reality means that the world is going to experience a lot more war, all across the spectrum of "gap" countries -- just as Jesus foretold in Matthew 24:6-8.
These "Wars and Rumors of Wars", nation rising against nation and kingdom against kingdom are constituting the "Final Birth Sorrows (Pangs)" leading to the birth of Antichrist. They will build in intensity and number, finally resulting in the last "birth pang", World War III, out of which Antichrist will come striding.
IV. Secretary of State Colin Powell admits that the United States is losing the war in Iraq!
NEWS BRIEF: "Secretary of State Powell: Iraqi Insurgents Are Winning The War", Salon.com, Sunday 31 October 2004
"Secretary of State Colin Powell has privately confided to friends in recent weeks that the Iraqi insurgents are winning the war, according to Newsweek. The insurgents have succeeded in infiltrating Iraqi forces 'from top to bottom', a senior Iraqi official tells Newsweek in tomorrow's issue of the magazine, 'from decision making to the lower levels'. This is a particularly troubling
development for the U.S. military, as it prepares to launch an all-out assault on the insurgent strongholds of Fallujah and Ramadi, since U.S. Marines were counting on the newly trained Iraqi forces to assist in the assault. Newsweek reports that 'American military trainers have been frantically trying to assemble sufficient Iraqi troops' to fight alongside them and that they are 'praying that the soldiers perform better than last April, when two battalions of poorly trained Iraqi Army soldiers refused to fight'. If the Fallujah offensive fails, Newsweek grimly predicts, "then the American president will find himself in a deepening quagmire on Inauguration Day'."
For at least two weeks now, the news has been filled with reports of our impending attack against Fallujah and Samarra and other cities of the Sunni Triangle. However, we have been making a lot of plans without initiating a major assault -- at least of this writing. Bush officials have asked the British elite "Black Watch" military force of 850 men to move northward to take up position to
protect our forces as they attack these cities.
However, as this short Salon article indicates, the reason we have not yet attacked may be because we do not trust the Iraqi military forces which are supposed to attack alongside our forces. American commanders must be having a recurring nightmare that, as our Marines begin the final assault against these cities, the Iraqi insurgents who comprise the Iraqi forces 'from top to bottom' suddenly turn their guns on Marines! Without warning, our forces could find themselves under attack from the insurgents in the front plus from the insurgents within the Iraqi military forces.
Secretary of State Powell notes the high stakes: "If the Fallujah offensive fails, Newsweek grimly predicts, "then the American president will find himself in a deepening quagmire on Inauguration Day'."
Now that November 2 has come and gone, some disturbing reports of problems with electronic voting machines have surfaced.
Click here to take action!
- In Columbus, Ohio, an electronic voting system reported that Bush received 4,258 votes while Kerry received 260 votes in a precinct where records show only 638 voters cast ballots;
- In North Carolina, a machine lost more than 4,500 votes due to a mistaken assumption about the memory capacity of a computer;
- In Youngstown, Ohio, and South Florida, numerous voters complained that when they tried to cast votes for Kerry, the machines instead recorded their votes for Bush.
All in all, more than 30,000 complaints have been gathered from across the country. In the midst of such turmoil, it's crucial that an independent authoritative investigation be undertaken to sort this all out.
Click here to take action!