| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Jesus Was A Liberal" |
| Date: |
05 Dec 2004 12:14:14 PM |
| Object: |
What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for Bush
in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states. In
fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory was
snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in both
electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite" of
course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18 etc.
For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For example, K
is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went to
Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's
interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican
counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should
wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to make
up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were absurd.
Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing to
do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these "irregularities"
and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
| User: "monkeycrap" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 12:15:59 PM |
|
|
Were you born an idiot or did you fall and hit your head recently?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jesus Was A Liberal" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 12:22:46 PM |
|
|
"monkeycrap" <MC@aol.com> wrote in message
news:X66dnZJCuOnCzS7cRVn-gg@giganews.com...
Were you born an idiot or did you fall and hit your head recently?
Which part of this article are you disputing?
--------------------
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for Bush
in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states. In
fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory was
snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in both
electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite" of
course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18 etc.
For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For example, K
is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went to
Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's
interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican
counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should
wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to make
up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were absurd.
Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing to
do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these "irregularities"
and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JM" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 02:25:44 PM |
|
|
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:VlIsd.719266$8_6.474755@attbi_s04...
"monkeycrap" <MC@aol.com> wrote in message
news:X66dnZJCuOnCzS7cRVn-gg@giganews.com...
Were you born an idiot or did you fall and hit your head recently?
Which part of this article are you disputing?
All of it!
--------------------
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush
in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states. In
fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was
snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both
electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite"
of
course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18
etc.
For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For example,
K
is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to
Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's
interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican
counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should
wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to make
up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd.
Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to
do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities"
and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
07 Dec 2004 09:50:28 AM |
|
|
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:VlIsd.719266$8_6.474755@attbi_s04...
"monkeycrap" <MC@aol.com> wrote in message
news:X66dnZJCuOnCzS7cRVn-gg@giganews.com...
Were you born an idiot or did you fall and hit your head recently?
Which part of this article are you disputing?
"Florida first. ... Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes."
Let's start there ... support that statement with
factual evidence.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DDB" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 05:12:07 PM |
|
|
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:VlIsd.719266$8_6.474755@attbi_s04...
"monkeycrap" <MC@aol.com> wrote in message
news:X66dnZJCuOnCzS7cRVn-gg@giganews.com...
Were you born an idiot or did you fall and hit your head recently?
Which part of this article are you disputing?
There is nothing to be disputed the Ohio elections will be certified this
week and even Kerry knows he lost. Stop whining and just get over it!
--------------------
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both
states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the
national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of
the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite."
"KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual name
is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but
I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the letters of the
alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up.
It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the
Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You
should wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had
to make up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities" and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jesus Was A Liberal" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 09:05:12 PM |
|
|
"DDB" <IHatNoOne@Fakecomcast.net> wrote in message
news:M4-dnQBiLsFJCC7cRVn-tQ@comcast.com...
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:VlIsd.719266$8_6.474755@attbi_s04...
"monkeycrap" <MC@aol.com> wrote in message
news:X66dnZJCuOnCzS7cRVn-gg@giganews.com...
Were you born an idiot or did you fall and hit your head recently?
Which part of this article are you disputing?
There is nothing to be disputed the Ohio elections will be certified this
week and even Kerry knows he lost. Stop whining and just get over it!
Ohio statues require the voter fraud lawsuit being brought by Cliff Arnebeck
to be heard *after* the official count has been certified. The suit has been
filed. They are asking for full discovery. They claim to have solid
evidence already. They allege that the certified Ohio vote is significantly
incorrect due to massive vote fraud.
So, traitor, I guess you had better stop whining about the Democrats and
start praying that Arnebeck's lawsuit fails. Otherwise, get used to saying
"President Kerry."
LJ
--------------------
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both
states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the
national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of
the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite."
"KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual name
is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled
but I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the letters of the
alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the
third party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up.
It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the
Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties?
You should wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team
had to make up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down.
Kerry only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was
6% for Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place
to flip the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities" and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Litvintchouk" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 06:11:11 PM |
|
|
Jesus Was A Liberal wrote:
"monkeycrap" <MC@aol.com> wrote in message
news:X66dnZJCuOnCzS7cRVn-gg@giganews.com...
Were you born an idiot or did you fall and hit your head recently?
Which part of this article are you disputing?
The idea that this guy won't talk to the mainstream news media off the
record, or talk to the FBI, or even talk to Cliff Arnebeck, just because
"he fears reprisals", is absolute crap. Total *****.
There are a zillion ways a whistleblower can *prove* his case to the
authorities without jeopardizing his own position.
He obviously doesn't "fear reprisals" enough to stop spreading his
bulls**t to bloggers and websites.
If I had information that Bush actually stole the election, I would have
gone down to the Boston field office of the FBI (where I live) and
presented my evidence.
Let's see this a**hole do that.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "OICU812" |
|
| Title: Dream on losers |
05 Dec 2004 01:29:29 PM |
|
|
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
:
: RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
:
: The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
:
:
: --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
:
: Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
: I'm found out.
:
: The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush
: in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states. In
: fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
: vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
:
: The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was
: snatched from him.
:
: Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
: uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
: never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
: about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both
: electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite"
of
: course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18
etc.
: For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
: which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For example,
K
: is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
:
: So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
: Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
: Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
: number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
: party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
:
: Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
: to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
: additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to
: Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's
: interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican
: counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should
: wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to make
: up the votes as the night went on.
:
: In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
: the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
: some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd.
: Nine to one, eight to two.
:
: Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
: lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to
: do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
: People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
:
: In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
: Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
: only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
: Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
: the state to Bush.
:
: So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
: can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities"
: and the whisper will become a roar.
:
:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jesus Was A Liberal" |
|
| Title: Much worse than Watergate |
05 Dec 2004 01:31:06 PM |
|
|
"OICU812" <oicu812@oicu812.fm> wrote in message
news:wb6dnY9zXME9_C7cRVn-3g@adelphia.com...
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
:
: RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
:
: The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
:
:
: --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
:
: Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals
if
: I'm found out.
:
: The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush
: in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states.
In
: fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
: vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
:
: The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was
: snatched from him.
:
: Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
: uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
: never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won
by
: about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both
: electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite"
of
: course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18
etc.
: For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
: which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For
example,
K
: is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
:
: So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
: Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
: Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the
total
: number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the
third
: party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
:
: Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award
them
: to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
: additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to
: Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up.
It's
: interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican
: counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should
: wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to
make
: up the votes as the night went on.
:
: In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression
were
: the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
: some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd.
: Nine to one, eight to two.
:
: Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour
long
: lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to
: do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
: People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
:
: In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
: Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down.
Kerry
: only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6%
for
: Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to
flip
: the state to Bush.
:
: So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this
massive
: can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities"
: and the whisper will become a roar.
:
:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Litvintchouk" |
|
| Title: MSNBC Debunks This One Too was: Re: Much worse than Watergate |
05 Dec 2004 05:07:14 PM |
|
|
Jesus Was A Liberal wrote:
[who cares any more what he writes]
The following is from "Hardblogger," Chris Matthews' "Hardball" blog:
December 3, 2004| 1:27 p.m. ET
A vote fraud whistleblower... or not? (David Shuster)
If you look at some of the biggest scandals over the last 30 years, most
of them were brought to our attention by an "insider," a whistleblower
who put his/her neck on the line to stand up for justice and help a
reporter or investigation reveal evidence that needed to be told. Think
of "Deep Throat" in Watergate or Jeffrey Wigand in the tobacco company
nicotine-spiking scandal.
A few days ago, my colleagues and I were noting the absence of any
whistleblower in the fraud allegations swirling over the election... and
I mentioned that I considered this to be another problem for those
making the accusations. Surely, if the election had been hacked, there
would be somebody who might brag about it to a talkative friend, or
somebody who might know something and would be willing to contact a
reporter or stand up for the principle of free and fair elections.
Today, I was presented with an e-mail bouncing all over the Internet
from somebody identifying himself/herself as Brad Menfil. Menfil writes,
"I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if I'm found out." Menfil
alleges that "Florida and Ohio had to go for Bush in order for him to
win the election... in reality, he lost both states. In fact, he did
not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular vote by at
least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud."
When it comes to fraud, though, take a look at Brad Menfil. He starts
with a quick explanation of the computer encryption system that hacked
the results. Then, regarding Florida, he writes, "Does anybody wonder
why the Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic
counties?"
Actually, I don't... because that did not happen. I was in Florida for
the election. And I remember very clearly reporting live on MSNBC when
the heavily Republican county final numbers came in. I also remember
pointing out that it was going to be hours before we knew the results
from Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties... the biggest
Democratic strongholds. In fact, the final numbers from the big
Democratic counties came in nearly two hours after the big Republican
counties. I was there. Brad also claims that in New Hampshire, where
Kerry won "barely," the lead was actually 6% and "not enough fraudulent
activity took place to flip the state to Bush." I've spent a lot of
time in New Hampshire in recent years... and the granite state is one of
those places where voter rolls, precinct results, and town/village
numbers are scrutinized by almost everybody who lives there. As
Republican and Democratic officials in New Hampshire stated a few weeks
ago in response to similar claims, "the allegations are absurd."
But let's put aside the allegations about the election and look more
closely at this self-proclaimed "insider." Brad claims to work at the
RNC. The RNC is a big organization that leaks like a sieve. And while
that building (and the DNC) have their share of evil partisans, there
are also many folks in both organizations who believe that regardless of
the outcome, our elections should be clean.
Furthermore, take a look at Brad's explanation for why he seems
reluctant to be anything more than a cheerleader when it comes to
talking about alleged fraud. He writes, "I fear reprisals if I'm found
out." Let me get this straight: Brad, you know of fraud on a massive
scale that proves the election was rigged... but, to heck with
protecting the integrity of our democracy, you are more concerned about
protecting yourself against "reprisals?" Come on.
If you are really savvy enough to get a job in a national political
organization, you know there are a dozen ways that whistleblowers can
get their story "verified" and "told" while protecting their anonymity
and safety.
The fact is, Brad Menfil, or whatever his/her real name is... is a self
absorbed and sick punk. Menfil only seems to care about making an
argument, not about proving one. There are some thoughtful discussions
and honest investigations into the troubling election "irregularities."
Let's not allow those to get shoved aside or replaced because of
quacks like this.
Thoughts/comments/questions:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5445086/
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher Helms" |
|
| Title: Re: MSNBC Debunks This One Too was: Re: Much worse than Watergate |
06 Dec 2004 07:53:40 AM |
|
|
Steven Litvintchouk wrote in message ...
Jesus Was A Liberal wrote:
[who cares any more what he writes]
The following is from "Hardblogger," Chris Matthews' "Hardball" blog:
December 3, 2004| 1:27 p.m. ET
A vote fraud whistleblower... or not? (David Shuster)
If you look at some of the biggest scandals over the last 30 years, most
of them were brought to our attention by an "insider," a whistleblower
who put his/her neck on the line to stand up for justice and help a
reporter or investigation reveal evidence that needed to be told. Think
of "Deep Throat" in Watergate or Jeffrey Wigand in the tobacco company
nicotine-spiking scandal.
A few days ago, my colleagues and I were noting the absence of any
whistleblower in the fraud allegations swirling over the election...
There could be a hundred whistleblowers in this case. Maybe there are. Don't
hold your breath waiting for them to show up on Fox though. There could be a
thousand legitimate, well placed, knowledgable, credible whistleblowers out
there and our beloved "liberal media" will duly ignore every single one of
them.
and
I mentioned that I considered this to be another problem for those
making the accusations. Surely, if the election had been hacked, there
would be somebody who might brag about it to a talkative friend, or
somebody who might know something and would be willing to contact a
reporter or stand up for the principle of free and fair elections.
So now we're insinuating that it was done by some pimple faced 18 year old
in his bedroom? Again, even if that was the case nobody in the American
media will touch any story that might inconvenience George W Bush, which
this would if it cast any doubt whatsoever on the election results. We have
to dig for the truth out here because the people whose job it is to find it
are staunchly refusing to do it.
Today, I was presented with an e-mail bouncing all over the Internet
from somebody identifying himself/herself as Brad Menfil. Menfil writes,
"I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if I'm found out." Menfil
alleges that "Florida and Ohio had to go for Bush in order for him to
win the election... in reality, he lost both states. In fact, he did
not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular vote by at
least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud."
When it comes to fraud, though, take a look at Brad Menfil. He starts
with a quick explanation of the computer encryption system that hacked
the results. Then, regarding Florida, he writes, "Does anybody wonder
why the Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic
counties?"
Actually, I don't... because that did not happen. I was in Florida for
the election. And I remember very clearly reporting live on MSNBC when
the heavily Republican county final numbers came in. I also remember
pointing out that it was going to be hours before we knew the results
from Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties... the biggest
Democratic strongholds. In fact, the final numbers from the big
Democratic counties came in nearly two hours after the big Republican
counties. I was there. Brad also claims that in New Hampshire, where
Kerry won "barely," the lead was actually 6% and "not enough fraudulent
activity took place to flip the state to Bush." I've spent a lot of
time in New Hampshire in recent years... and the granite state is one of
those places where voter rolls, precinct results, and town/village
numbers are scrutinized by almost everybody who lives there. As
Republican and Democratic officials in New Hampshire stated a few weeks
ago in response to similar claims, "the allegations are absurd."
Things have gotten so rotten out there that I am inclined to trust the word
of a complete, possibly lying, stranger over a proven dingbat like Chris
Matthews. Matthews is a good little pack mule who always toes the line. He
always says exactly what everybody else is saying. He's just like Peter
Jennings or any other professional talking head. He never investigates
anything. He is the company man in the gray suit who never smells a rat,
ever. He could have been wounded in the back by a bullet coming from the
grassy knoll and he would still accept the Warren Commission Report without
even a hint of a question. He is the voice of "Just sit down and shut up.
Don't rock the boat. Nobody ever steals elections and you people are nothing
but a bunch of brainless conspiracy theorists. Now here's the latest on the
Ukranian election..."
But let's put aside the allegations about the election and look more
closely at this self-proclaimed "insider." Brad claims to work at the
RNC. The RNC is a big organization that leaks like a sieve. And while
that building (and the DNC) have their share of evil partisans, there
are also many folks in both organizations who believe that regardless of
the outcome, our elections should be clean.
Furthermore, take a look at Brad's explanation for why he seems
reluctant to be anything more than a cheerleader when it comes to
talking about alleged fraud. He writes, "I fear reprisals if I'm found
out." Let me get this straight: Brad, you know of fraud on a massive
scale that proves the election was rigged... but, to heck with
protecting the integrity of our democracy, you are more concerned about
protecting yourself against "reprisals?" Come on.
If Chris Matthews gave a rats ***** about our "Democracy" he wouldn't be doing
everything in his power to shut this thing off. It isn't the absence of
evidence that is making ever-bigger media guns come out on the "shut up"
side of this story; It's the wealth of it. They're the ones lowballing the
size of this thing, distorting it, cherrypicking which claims they will
publicly attack and calling anybody who so much as asks too many questions
names, just like they did during the Iraq invasion runup. They pop their
heads out of their little holes once in a while just long enough to
adamantly claim that they are all experts, everything was perfectly all
right and if there was a problem they would immediately report it.
Righhht....I mean, hell, look at all the bad stuff they've reported on
George W Bush over the last four years. Geez, Dubya has really had a rough
four years from the Westinghouse people, the General Electric people, the
Clear Channel people, The CNN people, The Fox people, the Sinclair people
and the Time Warner people, among other members of the American "liberal
media." Monica Lewinsky didn't spend as much time with the presidents *****
in her mouth as Chris Matthews and rest of the American media have. Mattews
is a Democrat, but so is Zell Miller. They have made their sympathies
abundantly clear over the last four years. We know whose side they are on.
Every day number of people they are able to fool shrinks a little bit more.
The sad part is that we don't know the full story about what went on on
November 2nd, and the people who are supposed to find out for us are far
more interested in putting a stop to the story than getting to the bottom of
it. So screw 'em.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher Helms" |
|
| Title: Re: MSNBC Debunks This One Too was: Re: Much worse than Watergate |
06 Dec 2004 08:04:49 AM |
|
|
Steven Litvintchouk wrote in message ...
Jesus Was A Liberal wrote:
[who cares any more what he writes]
The following is from "Hardblogger," Chris Matthews' "Hardball" blog:
December 3, 2004| 1:27 p.m. ET
A vote fraud whistleblower... or not? (David Shuster)
If you look at some of the biggest scandals over the last 30 years, most
of them were brought to our attention by an "insider," a whistleblower
who put his/her neck on the line to stand up for justice and help a
reporter or investigation reveal evidence that needed to be told. Think
of "Deep Throat" in Watergate or Jeffrey Wigand in the tobacco company
nicotine-spiking scandal.
Oh, one other thing. The "tobacco spiking" scandal didn't really exist. The
FTC requires tobacco companies to note the amount of nicotine on the packs.
The amount of nicotine varies every year due to weather and other factors,
so if the tobacco going into Camels this year doesn't contain as much
nicotine as the pack says, by law they have to add nicotine to get it up to
what the label says or the FTC will go ballistic.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 07:49:45 PM |
|
|
Exactly why the conservatives in the USA should ensure that another dem
never sees the inside of the Whitehouse for at least another generation.
Jeff
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush
in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states. In
fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was
snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both
electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite"
of
course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18
etc.
For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For example,
K
is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to
Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's
interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican
counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should
wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to make
up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd.
Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to
do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities"
and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DDB" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 05:17:31 PM |
|
|
First of all I'm bettin Jesus wasn't a liberal. Seems to me that he wouldn't
stand for a minute and let a baby be murdered. He also appears to have come
froma time when charity wasn't a government mandate as it is today.
I'm bettin the person who wrote this is a lazy ***** crack head!
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both
states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the
national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of
the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite."
"KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual name
is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but
I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the letters of the
alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up.
It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the
Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You
should wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had
to make up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities" and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jesus Was A Liberal" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
07 Dec 2004 09:57:50 AM |
|
|
"DDB" <IHatNoOne@Fakecomcast.net> wrote in message
news:94qdneNgOrqLCi7cRVn-tQ@comcast.com...
First of all I'm bettin Jesus wasn't a liberal.
You lose.
Give away all that you have to those less fortunate.
Turn the other cheek (to preserve peace at all costs.)
Blessed are the meek.
Thou shalt not kill.
Jesus was far too liberal for you and your treacherous, gloating, corrupt
ilk. You wouldn't be able to be the fat, greedy, racist, warmongering filth
that you are and follow his teachings. So keep lying to yourself. There's
plenty of room in Hell for hypocrites like you.
Seems to me that he wouldn't stand for a minute and let a baby be
murdered.
I agree: The US imperial storm troopers have killed thousands of babies in
Iraq, not to mention their mothers, fathers, brothers, grandparents, etc.
Hundreds of thousands of dead people, just like you - all of them God's
children - who never threatened the US in any way. They were just trying to
get along, and der IdiotFuhrer slaughtered them for no good reason.
Jesus would never let a warmongering, lying, corrupt imperialist like Bush
become president. He would have been leading the protests against the Iraq
war. He would have gone to Washington and exposed the obvious corruption of
the Republicans. We are just following in Jesus's righteous footsteps. We
will not tolerate corruption, lies, wars, violence, tyranny and the smirking
face of evil any longer.
He also appears to have come froma time when charity wasn't a government
mandate as it is today.
Why are you such a greedy and bitter enemy of Jesus, traitor? Why to you
hate Iraqis and want to slaughter them?
LJ
I'm bettin the person who wrote this is a lazy ***** crack head!
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both
states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the
national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of
the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite."
"KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual name
is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled
but I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the letters of the
alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the
third party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up.
It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the
Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties?
You should wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team
had to make up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down.
Kerry only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was
6% for Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place
to flip the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities" and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark T. Evert" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
07 Dec 2004 08:49:53 PM |
|
|
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:2qktd.528151$D%.489193@attbi_s51...
"DDB" <IHatNoOne@Fakecomcast.net> wrote in message
news:94qdneNgOrqLCi7cRVn-tQ@comcast.com...
First of all I'm bettin Jesus wasn't a liberal.
You lose.
Give away all that you have to those less fortunate.
Turn the other cheek (to preserve peace at all costs.)
Blessed are the meek.
Thou shalt not kill.
Jesus was far too liberal for you and your treacherous, gloating, corrupt
ilk. You wouldn't be able to be the fat, greedy, racist, warmongering
filth that you are and follow his teachings. So keep lying to yourself.
There's plenty of room in Hell for hypocrites like you.
Seems to me that he wouldn't stand for a minute and let a baby be
murdered.
I agree: The US imperial storm troopers have killed thousands of babies
in Iraq, not to mention their mothers, fathers, brothers, grandparents,
etc. Hundreds of thousands of dead people, just like you - all of them
God's children - who never threatened the US in any way. They were just
trying to get along, and der IdiotFuhrer slaughtered them for no good
reason.
Jesus would never let a warmongering, lying, corrupt imperialist like Bush
become president. He would have been leading the protests against the
Iraq war. He would have gone to Washington and exposed the obvious
corruption of the Republicans. We are just following in Jesus's righteous
footsteps. We will not tolerate corruption, lies, wars, violence, tyranny
and the smirking face of evil any longer.
You know.....the Roman government in Palestine in Jesus' time was probably
one of the most warmongering, imperialist and in many ways corrupt
governments the world has ever known.....yet there is no record of Jesus
protesting the government or even criticizing it......in fact many of his
followers were disappointed that he didn't take on the government as they
were expecting a messiah to lead them from the tyranny of the
Romans....Jesus' focused on individuals and they way that each person should
live their lives.....to characterize him as liberal or conservative......at
least in our political context would portray him as a political
activist.....which he clearly wasn't.
He also appears to have come froma time when charity wasn't a government
mandate as it is today.
Why are you such a greedy and bitter enemy of Jesus, traitor? Why to you
hate Iraqis and want to slaughter them?
LJ
I'm bettin the person who wrote this is a lazy ***** crack head!
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals
if I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both
states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the
national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of
the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won
by about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program
(in both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite."
"KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual name
is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled
but I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the letters of the
alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the
total number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts
the third party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award
them to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up.
It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the
Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties?
You should wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush
team had to make up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour
long lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest
thing to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it
takes. People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down.
Kerry only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was
6% for Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place
to flip the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this
massive can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities" and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 08:20:00 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:17:31 -0500, "DDB" <IHatNoOne@Fakecomcast.net>
wrote:
First of all I'm bettin Jesus wasn't a liberal. Seems to me that he wouldn't
stand for a minute and let a baby be murdered. He also appears to have come
froma time when charity wasn't a government mandate as it is today.
I'm bettin the person who wrote this is a lazy ***** crack head!
Jesus preached that individuals should share with then poor not that
the government should steal from the people for the benefit of the
poor. Jesus was a Libertarian.
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both
states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the
national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of
the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite."
"KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual name
is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but
I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the letters of the
alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up.
It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the
Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You
should wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had
to make up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities" and the whisper will become a roar.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Why would I listen to losers?" -- Arnold Schwarzenegger
"Long term commitment in relationships is only necessary because it takes
so damn long to raise children. Marriage may well be some kind of trick
to keep the males around beyond sexual satiation." -- Captain Compassion
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dirty Old Man" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 02:35:13 PM |
|
|
Give it up idiot, Michael Moore did. He now dresses and looks like a
republican.
Jesus Was A Liberal wrote:
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for Bush
in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states. In
fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory was
snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in both
electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite" of
course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18 etc.
For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For example, K
is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went to
Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's
interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican
counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should
wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to make
up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were absurd.
Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing to
do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these "irregularities"
and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sava Toufexis" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 12:30:33 PM |
|
|
I suggest you IMMEDIATELY send this vital and important information to John
Kerry personally. The day can still be SAVED!
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both
states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the
national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of
the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite."
"KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual name
is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but
I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the letters of the
alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up.
It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the
Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You
should wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had
to make up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities" and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JM" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 02:25:15 PM |
|
|
It wont be!
Get real and quit dreaming!
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush
in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states. In
fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was
snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both
electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite"
of
course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18
etc.
For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For example,
K
is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to
Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's
interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican
counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should
wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to make
up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd.
Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to
do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities"
and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jesus Was A Liberal" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 03:28:19 PM |
|
|
"JM" <jmeyers363@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:e8Ksd.892$%S3.130300@read2.cgocable.net...
It wont be!
Get real and quit dreaming!
Why do you want to destroy the democratic process, traitor?
LJ
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals
if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush
in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states.
In
fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was
snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both
electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite"
of
course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18
etc.
For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For
example,
K
is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the
third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award
them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went
to
Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's
interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican
counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should
wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to
make
up the votes as the night went on.
In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were
the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and
some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were
absurd.
Nine to one, eight to two.
Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour
long
lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing
to
do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes.
People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.
In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire,
Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down.
Kerry
only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for
Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulent activity took place to flip
the state to Bush.
So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this
massive
can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these
"irregularities"
and the whisper will become a roar.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DDB" |
|
| Title: Re: What will Bush do when his election win is overturned? |
05 Dec 2004 05:13:53 PM |
|
|
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:T3Lsd.141264$V41.89199@attbi_s52...
"JM" <jmeyers363@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:e8Ksd.892$%S3.130300@read2.cgocable.net...
It wont be!
Get real and quit dreaming!
Why do you want to destroy the democratic process, traitor?
Such rantings from lossers who couldn't figure out a way to overturn the
elections. Just take you medication and lkay down Liberal.
LJ
"Jesus Was A Liberal" <jesus@galilee.org> wrote in message
news:WdIsd.719253$8_6.650646@attbi_s04...
RNC Worker Exposes Bush Theft of 2004 Election
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals
if
I'm found out.
The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for
Bush
in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states.
In
fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular
vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.
The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory
was
snatched from him.
Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state
uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could
never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won
by
about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in
both
electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite"
of
course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18
etc.
For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in
which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For
example,
K
is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.
So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true
Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true
Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the
total
number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the
third
party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.
Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award
them
to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded
additional votes. The big Democratic counties ( | | | |
