READER COMMENTS ON
"An Old School Republican on the 'Evidence of a Stolen Election'"
(36 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 1/19/2006 @ 9:37 pm PT...
Its even more then that because there is three levels to the voting machines:
"A National Defense Issue
There is another aspect of this hack that is of vital importance to our nation. Harri and Dr. Thompson explained to me that there are 3 levels of computer attack (and please remember that electronic voting systems are computers, whether they are networked or not).
Level One, called a "script kiddy," is the most primitive and can be copied by a novice from an internet site and then be used to create a virus or hack a computer or a computer system.
Level Two is more sophisticated and is the level at which most viruses, worms, Trojan horses and hacks are conducted, often by "casual hackers" who, for whatever reason, enjoy conducting "electronic break-ins" into computers.
Level Three is called a "Nation-State" attack. A Nation-State attack is a highly sophisticated, heavily funded electronic attack by a foreign country, a foreign operative, a terrorist group, organized crime, or a political group or operative within our own country. In other words, a Nation-State attack could be mounted by any well-financed group that would benefit from sympathetic candidates being placed in powerful positions or by certain agenda(s) being implemented, or by any group that wants to gain political or financial advantage or wreak havoc on our nation."
The truth about voting
An attack as advocated by the neocons has already begun and they fully plan to replace everybody with pod people on both sides.....or for that matter, elections...
Unless we finish this, and stop for good the voting machines.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 1/19/2006 @ 9:41 pm PT...
Nay, home run. A Grand Slam hit by a composite of Mark McGuire, Barry Bonds and Bobby Abreu.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 1/19/2006 @ 11:21 pm PT...
Where in the world is Tom Feeney ?
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/19/2006 @ 11:26 pm PT...
Holy smokes. That's just wonderful. A copy of his full statement should be trimmed in gold and sent to every member of Congress, every newspaper publisher, and every TV network excecutive...no editorial comment added, just "I thought you might be interested in this."
Is there any way to swift-boat Roberts?
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 4:27 am PT...
I'm speechless. Seeing this in writing is so dramatic and frightening.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 5:28 am PT...
Slightly o.t. but only slightly:
Driving home last night & listening to Randi Rhodes...she said something completely astonishing & yet completely believable: that bush has borrowed more money from foreign countries (China, Japan..etcetera) than ALL 42 PAST PRESIDENTS COMBINED.
I certainly agree with Robert #4 that
"A copy of his full statement should be trimmed in gold and sent to every member of Congress, every newspaper publisher, and every TV network excecutive...no editorial comment added, just "I thought you might be interested in this."
Hopefully these still work...copied them many moons ago:
Go here for addresses, phone & fax numbers for tv, radio & newspapers:
Go here for list of email addresses & fax numbers for members of Congress, the Senate & governors:
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/20/2006 @ 5:50 am PT...
It's mind-boggling, folks. Here we have a former Reagan cabinet official, who wrote for the Wall St. Journal and National Review (two of the most conservative publications in America), willing to broach a subject that brings discredit to the Bush administration. Meanwhile, all of the following have remained conspicuously silent on the 2004 election:
1) Every mainstream newspaper in the country
2) Every TV network in the country
3) The Democratic National Committee
4) John Kerry
5) Every U.S. Senator except Barbara Boxer
6) Bill Clinton (he said Bush won "fair and square")
7) Hillary Clinton
8) The U.S. Governors' Association
9) The League of Women Voters
10) Foreign leaders, even ones hostile to the U.S.
We might need a few of the above to climb on board, but Dr. Roberts' column is a huge step forward. The corporate-controlled media fear an economic implosion if Bush is exposed as a fraud, but they might fear the revolution Roberts hints at more. Democrats fear being branded as "sore losers," but if a clear majority of Americans knows Kerry really won they'll become "sore winners who got screwed" instead. Most foreign leaders are afraid of offending Bush, but would be less fearful of offending a crook.
The momentum if now on our side, I think.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 5:50 am PT...
Paul Craig Roberts has been writing a lot of anti administration articles for years, but this is the first I've seen about elections.
My sister and I are expecting to read of his assasination any day now!
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 6:14 am PT...
Tom Feeney is in China Selling more secret weapon systems to the Chineese.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 6:15 am PT...
Personally, I don't think the "powers that be" give a shit about a revolution.. They have plenty of money, and their corps span the globe.. why should they care if the U.S. goes to complete shit?
Think about it. You have $25 billion tied up in various corps around the world, and in other financial interests. The U.S. falls apart and you lose what.. 20% of that? So now you only have $20 billion ?? Do you -really- think it's gonna be heart breaking for them to ONLY have $20 billion? Bill Gates is worth FIFTY ONE BILLION dollars.. If the U.S. goes COMPLETELY tits-up, he can STILL buy entire COUNTRIES.. Sure, it puts a damper in his race to amass more wealth than any other single person in the history of the world (who wasn't a leader of a soverign nation), but he just moves Microsoft's headquarters to Europe.. or China.. or Austrailia..
The only "rich" people who have anything to lose are those that aren't really "rich", but very well off but still working. That is, people worth a few million (to probably a few dozen million).. They don't have as much wealth in liquid assets, but I bet if you watch close, you can see a LOT of multi-millionares shifting their wealth to foriegn interests as we speak.. All they have to do is be on vacation when all hell breaks loose..
Ney.. the ones that will be screwed by all of this bullshit is the one group that is being disenfranchised by this.. The "masses" who can't just "hop a plane out", who don't have money to store in swiss banks, or invest in European assets, who don't have a summer home in Spain or Italy or London or Paris or the Bahamas. 75% of this country is gonna be stuck here, while the people -responsible- for this mess just walk away.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/20/2006 @ 6:50 am PT...
For Savantser: The super-rich would lose more than a chunk of their wealth if revolution comes (or if Bush is exposed as a fraud and/or is removed from office).
They'll lose power, too...over oil supplies, over preventing antitrust enforcement, over the ability to rig elections, over the regulating of corporate abuses, over newspapers and TV networks, over the use of fear to manipulate public opinion, over court appointments, over Congress via lobbyists, and over invasion of personal liberty.
Bush and the Republicans have all this power now. They don't exercise it simply to become rich...in fact, many are super-rich to start with (like Bush). It's a hunger to dominate, to control, to act monarchial that motivates many of them, and all of that would be lost if a "liberal" revolution succeeds.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 7:19 am PT...
Bill Gates has 51 billion pieces of paper that have worth only because we collectively allow them to have worth. What if the "revolution" decided that money was no longer useful. All of that amassed wealth (paper) becomes...nothing. What is valuable? Food. Knowledge of sustainable self-contained systems (water, energy, waste management, housing,etc.) If we all collectiely were able to decide that all of this ownership and collection of personal "stuff" was counterproductive to the course of human events, then Bill Gates would be just another person like you and me. If we don't get a handle on the impending energy crisis (i.e. oil WILL run out at some point) and start gearing ourselves towards green-building and sustainable energy sources then all of this capitalist infrastructure will eventually collapse.
OK, so that was a bit of a "what if" ramble, but I just wanted to make the point that we could resist this amassed wealth and power if we just said "No."
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/20/2006 @ 7:50 am PT...
For Soul Rebel: Your posting might have been "what if," but it was more than a ramble.
Bill Gates' wealth came from not from his genius, not even from his monopolistic control over the software and browser markets. It came from the market value of Microsoft's stock...as distinct from its intrinsic value.
What Bill Gates and Wall Street don't want you to know is that a share of stock has no intrinsic value, except for projected future dividends, discounted downward to a present-day value. To put it another way, if Microsoft had declared it would never pay dividencds on its stock, and wrote that pledge into its by-laws, then Microsoft's stock would have been worthless intrinsically, regardless of its earnings.
Ironically, Gates stopped just short of saying that Microsoft would never pay a dividend. Even after he'd become the wealthiest man on the planet, Microsoft paid nothing to shareholders, and didn't list itself on the New York Stock Exchange. Gates hated the government so much (because of the anti-trust harassment) that he didn't want to pay taxes on dividends he'd receive himself on all the stock he owned.
Microsoft eventually did pay a small dividend, but only after Congress passed tax-reform legislation treating dividends liberally. Moral of the story: Become the world's richest man by locating your business in America, but run your company according to a hatred of America's government, meanwhile being a hero to those who run it.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 7:54 am PT...
For some reason I'd feel a whole lot better if I were hearing this on network/cable news or reading about it in national, state and local newspapers. We read about it on the web - BRADBLOG - VOTERSUNITE - WHOSCOUNTING and other sites dedicated to holding honest elections. We must remember that most people don't visit these sites and don't have a clue that there is any problem, they actually trust the machines they find in their voting booths and if told differently, toss it off as a "conspiricy theory" that has no basis in fact.
My Senator says that he's "looking into the matter." My congessman hasn't responded. For the most part my letters to newspapers go unprinted because they're "not in response to a printed article" --- catch 22!
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 8:00 am PT...
RLM, I agree that there is a huge push for "control" by the powers that be, but my point was, their "lives" aren't going to be overly disrupted if we have a full on revolution in this country.. That is, people in the streets shooting at each other and burning down buildings housing their "power".. The "people" responsible just walk away to some other country. "Revolution" isn't some political movement, it's anachary in the streets, burning, killing, pillaging. If the "process" breaks down because of insane levels of abuse by "the powers that be", civil war is the result.. not some kind of quiet changing of the guard.. WE are fighting to have -that- (quiet, legal, calm fixing) happen, and failing that.. failing those in power of backing down and stopping their abuses, civil war will erupt..
Once those "in power" leave, do you think they won't immidiately start trying to take control of where ever they end up?
Soul Rebel.. Bill's $51 billion isn't "in cash", it's in investments, in dividends.. in property.. in things that "have value".. Rich people don't do the things "we do" with our money.. Bill likely owns a few million barrels of oil, a few metric tonnes of grain, a chunk of a few banks, etc etc.. When the shit hits the fan and Bill gets on his private jet (who cares if he can't sell it, if it gets him out of harm's way, I think it has 'value') and flys to Europe and cashes in some of his bonds for spending money, and moves into his mansion in the hills (paid for already), do you really think anything we do "here" at that point matters? Sure, -after- the revolution the "rich" would have their wealth redistributed (possibly), but if they move their wealth out of "our reach" now, -before- things blow up.. then what? Sure, we can pull down their mansions (or give them to single-parent families), but what difference does that make when the guy that was living there, causing all our problems, is living in Spain in a palace there?
My point is, the "very rich" are likely moving their assets around.. protecting from massive financial loss. Turning the country upside down is of little consequence to them. Sure, they have to start over, but they start with tons of resources in their -new- place.. leaving us to sift through the wreckage and rebuild..
The problem is, they will come back once we get things fixed.. That's what they do.. leach off prosperity until they destroy it, then slink away to the next place in the line, only to repeat the pattern..
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 8:01 am PT...
There are a lot of simple realizations that would wipe out wealth and poverty in a moment, if folks would just have those realizations.
The rich and powerful fear that I think and will do anything to stop it. That's too bad, because they would be happier in a world without wealth and poverty.
No revolution is needed, beyond revolution of mind and spirit.
Little by little, awareness of Stolen Elections is spreading, despite all the obstacles. That in itself is amazing and hopeful.
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 8:11 am PT...
In the beginning I thought BG was a hero. A person that cared about this country, a geek, that just wanted to help the ordinary person have the ability to acquire information at the keyboard. He helped a great many people become 'millonaires (those with him from day one). When he completed his fortess in Washington State, he began to host his famous meetings...important people from all over descended to his enclave to discuss the 'future'. This was unsettling to me.
I think his vision has changed and he too, has become drunk with power. Tho he is big on contributing to charities, I question his motives, ie: tax credits, etc. We must not forget that his father is the Gates of Preston, Gates, and Ellis...Abramoff's employer when he started this whole lobbyist scheme. I cannot help but believe this firm is working for favors for MS. Fathers do love their sons. M4
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 9:34 am PT...
> the disenfranchisement of Democrats is likely to be a permanent feature of American 'democracy.'"
I am fully prepared for Hillary to be our next president so I think this statement is crap!
> by November of 2004 a majority of Americans were aware that Bush had led the country into a gratuitous war on the basis either of incompetence or deception
Not true! All polls showed Bush ahead by 2 or 3 points before the election including most of the battleground states - www.realclearpolitics.com
You guys forget about all of the dead peopole voting in Chicago that put Kennedy over Nixon. Nixon chose not to fight it unlike Algore.
Good lunk on this one kooks!
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 9:57 am PT...
Paul.. you really need to use some of the other insults.. kooks is starting to get boring..
It snowed here today.. perhaps it would glisten well off "tin-foil".. I shall get out my hat, just for you..
Funy how these idiots are staying away from "conspiricy nuts" now that the indicments and investigations show that the "conspiricy" was real, and being comitted by their party
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 10:00 am PT...
lemme be clear.. indictments and investigations with regard to illegally funneling money..
The election "conspiricy" is just getting started.. though, with all the convictions in Ohio, and law suits around the country.. you'd be hard pressed to deny any wrong doing there too (but yet, Paul and his tiny-brained buddies are doing just that.. so much for "reality" and "accepting the truth"!).
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 10:10 am PT...
Paul is a real head case, thats for sure. I think the 1960 election gave him PTSD. Please get some professional help, Paul. Also, go read a book - Nixon and the RNC fought tooth and nail over those election shennanigans.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 10:28 am PT...
Who cares about Paul and his ilk? They've been drinking the cool aid for so long they don't even need it anymore. The fact that someone like Paul Craig Roberts is speaking out against the obvious election fraud speaks volumes for the influence Brag and blogs like this have had on Americans that can think for themselves.
Did you notice that Paul Robert's email address was offered at the end of his article? I sent him a letter congratulating him for his courage and common sense.
Hearings in the Capitol to initiate an investigation of Bush's illegal wiretaps; Abramoff spilling the beans on Delay, Ney & who knows who else; and Fitzgerald's ongoing investigation of the Plame leak all add up to strong signals that we're getting it done. Hopefully the house of cards is starting to tumble.
As a peace-loving, non-violent American citizen, I want to work for a peaceful transfer of power in this country into the hands of people who can be trusted to represent me and my interests in government. I hope a violent revolution never comes to pass, not because I fear for loss of wealth, but because I care about my family and fellow man and want to see our country again as a shining symbol of freedom and democracy.
The fact that a such a respected conservative Republican would publish such an article is one of the most encouraging things I've seen in a long time.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/20/2006 @ 11:16 am PT...
Oh, Paul, for God's Almighty sake! Is it possible you're such a poor student of history that you don't know Kennedy would have won the 1960 election even if Illinois hadn't been stolen for him by Daley?
Here are the elections in American history that were STOLEN, in the sense that the wrong man was inaugurated:
1824...John Quincy Adams finishes second to Andrew Jackson in both electoral votes and popular votes. But two other candidates win electoral votes, so Jackson lacks a majority. The decision reverts to the House of Representatives, where Henry Clay (who had finished fourth) swings a political deal that gives Adams the presidency and himself the job of Secretary of State.
1876...Rutherford B. Hayes finishes second to Samuel J. Tilden in both electoral votes and popular votes. But four states submit contested results (a total of 20 electoral votes). After a prolonged political battle extending almost to Election Day, a "bi-partisan" commission votes 8-7 on party lines to give Hayes all 20 disputed votes. This causes such a firestorm of protest that Hayes agrees to pull all Union troops out of the South in return for Democrats' acceptance of the outcome.
1888...Benjamin Harrison finishes second to Grover Cleveland in both electoral votes and popular votes.
But New York, a pivotal battleground state and where corruption is a way of life in the Big Apple, remains "too close to call." After several tallies and re-tallies, Harrison is proclaimed the winner. From his front porch in Indiana, Harrison declares,
"Providence has granted us the victory." From a smoke-filled political office in New York, one of his supporters says to a reporter, "Tell that S.O.B. that providence didn't have a damn thing to do with it."
2000 and 2004...No need to recap these two.
Footnote: Jackson, Tilden, Cleveland, Gore, and Kerry were all Democrats.
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 12:23 pm PT...
A lot more people see this problem than we think,
I said before, my cousin is a farmer in the midwest and he doesn't even look at the news (he thinks its all corporate propoganda), he doesn't think, he knows that the elections are being ripped off
I told him in the last election cycle to get out and vote
he said "it wouldn't do any good, they (the corps) control it anyway"
My fav is "It seems contrary to American common sense for voters to have reelected a president who had failed in such a dramatic way."
He hit the nail on the head there, "Common sense"
is the keyword, folks
Its easy to get some people to fall for the crap though
remember, some people think TV wrestling is real too
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 1:55 pm PT...
watch the price of GOLD increase
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 4:03 pm PT...
Please ignore you-know-who - it's not worth the space! It's really great to see the article. I'm forwarding it to friends and family.
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 4:29 pm PT...
As someone who knows peace as well as the horrors of war, I want to end these war-mongering nazi neocons once and for all.
And I mean the entire operation on down, Cheney especially. Dealt with them long enough, they need to never be allowed back into power again. And by the way yes Ariel Sharon(Election Fraud king..) is in a coma...nobody knows the outcome.
As Roberts says I realize its not about republicans....and definitely not democrats...With the conspiracy on all sides, and even in the Nader campaign camp, this is truly about the neocons.
And when the voting machines are disbanded once and for all, which I will see to it and war them out the door, their empire will stay in ruins.
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 5:20 pm PT...
For the record, what part of this conspiracy reaches the Nader camp?
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
said on 1/20/2006 @ 11:19 pm PT...
I don't remember all the details, I just know that Kevin Zeese's staff had been involved in some funny business and they never took alot of election rigging accusations seriously.
Nader, Camejo, and Cobb all led the charge....but not these staffers.
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
said on 1/21/2006 @ 4:15 am PT...
Yes , in fact they shuffled his ballots onto four different initiatives. And there was a case in Missouri and Ohio where Cobb got over 90,000 votes in several counties. It was a mistake of course, a machine 'error'
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
said on 1/21/2006 @ 12:10 pm PT...
Interesting, I haven't heard anything about that. Did this 'funny business' have anything to do with getting Nader on ballots? I don't know anything about their staffers. It surprises me that they have any at all, frankly.
Anyone who doesn't take electoral fraud seriously, will not be taken seriously by me. The same goes for candidate disenfranchisement (what the Democrats did to Nader in 04).
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
said on 1/21/2006 @ 1:38 pm PT...
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
Can We Count?
said on 1/21/2006 @ 4:46 pm PT...
What's more, this isn't even the first homerun of the new year for Mr. Roberts. Here are the opening paragraphs from his New Year's column:
"By Paul Craig Roberts
01/02/06 "ICH" --- -- Caught in gratuitous and illegal spying on American citizens, the Bush administration has defended its illegal activity and set the Justice (sic) Department on the trail of the person or persons who informed the New York Times of Bushs violation of law. Note the astounding paradox: The Bush administration is caught red-handed in blatant illegality and responds by trying to arrest the patriot who exposed the administrations illegal behavior.
Bush has actually declared it treasonous to reveal his illegal behavior! His propagandists, who masquerade as news organizations, have taken up the line: To reveal wrong-doing by the Bush administration is to give aid and comfort to the enemy.
Compared to Spygate, Watergate was a kindergarten picnic..."
The rest is here (or click):
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/21/2006 @ 5:04 pm PT...
It's "treasonous" to reveal his illegal behavior, eh? Then why in the name of Aldrich Ames did he say on several occasions (without being asked) that
surveillance (spying) requires a warrant..." ???
Bush convicted himself of criminal conduct in his own words by publicly defining the paramaters of illegality. In Clintonian terms, Bush "inhaled." After he got caught, suddenly it was O.K. for reasons he hadn't specified earlier.
This is a slam dunk, folks. It isn't even a close call.
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
said on 1/22/2006 @ 7:03 pm PT...
This article, by Paul Craig Roberts articulates very clearly what can happen if electronic voting continues as it is today. That last paragraph is the kicker, especially this:
".....dissent will become pointless unless it boils over into revolution...."
How many of us are wondering(privately or otherwise), if, should there be ONE more election like the last TWO major elections, with the power-mad republicans "staying the course".....just sayin'.
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
said on 5/2/2006 @ 5:41 am PT...
Very good site. You are doing great job. Please Keep it up... .!