Good Question here: "Why tinfoil hat?"

[annabanana]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4256521&mesg_id=4256788

This poster had nailed it as far as I'm concerned. The evidence is in and action needs to be taken. I have no reason to believe that the system works..

[Dogmudgeon]

1. The ramifications of losing faith in voting

It's one of those "third rail" or "radioactive" issues. Since representative voting is the foundation of democratic republican government, subversion of the voting system would be a far, far stronger threat than most politicians and political junkies can deal with. It's like Peak Oil and Climate Change and Yellowstone and the Pole Shift and the Return of Planet Nibiru with the Anunaki Masters and fifty potential cometary and asteroidal impacts all rolled into one.

Poisoned voting means the death of America as anything other than a political entity. That which is special and vital about freedom and public participation in political life will be crushed out like a stale cigarette. The Republican Party and the conservatives know that the blame will fall squarely on them -- and a good many of them think Bush handled the last three elections completely wrong, anyway.

This really is a big, nasty, dangerous problem, and it's mainly their problem, and it's potentially their political hides.

They invoke the Tinfoil Hat to try to make it go away -- even some DUers do. It may be absurd to try to figure out who did what and how, and to limn a complex scheme, but it's completely logical to think that somewhere along the line, something was done wrong, and the people got screwed -- again.

--p!

[leveymg]

3. Leads to another Big Unthinkable - coup d'etat, anyone?

If you have not already done so, I suggest you read the full text of the American Conservative article by Philip Giraldi. He makes several salient points, that I'd argue are interconnected.

No doubt you already know about Cheney's nuclear re-targeting order against Iran, but note the second paragraph about the CIA's internal review of 9/11. That's the next shoe that's going to drop - and, I think it's going to break the back of the Bush Administration and the Republican lock on Congress. This makes me conclude that BushCo is going to try to ramp up an Iran-related pretext for war as a grand distraction. That brings me to my final point, the professionals in the Agency and the Pentagon are going to block that, by any means necessary. Coup, anyone? B-)

**********


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9639.htm

Deep Background

By Philip Giraldi

08/01/05 "American Conservative" -- -- In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.

A CIA internal review of the agency’s performance prior to 9/11 is harshly critical of former CIA Director George Tenet, former Director of Operations James Pavitt, and the former chief of the Counterterrorist Center, Cofer Black, for not doing everything possible to confront terrorism. Pavitt, who was reluctant to take on risky missions against bin Laden encouraged by the National Security Council during the second term of President Bill Clinton, is particularly criticized. The report, completed by CIA Inspector General John Helgerson, is especially acerbic regarding the failure of the agency to stop two of the 9/11 hijackers, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, as they entered the United States. Black did not share information on the two men with the FBI agents assigned to the Counterterrorist Center at the CIA and also turned down a request for a formal memorandum to be sent to FBI Headquarters. The report will be finalized and given to Congress after those criticized in it add their own comments. Pavitt, as head of the Operations Directorate, has publicly accepted full responsibility for the agency’s failure, but Black has not acknowledged any deficiencies in his performance. Tenet has not yet responded.

[moodforaday]

4. Giraldi interview (audio)

There's also an mp3 of an interview with Giraldi, dated July 26, here:
http://weekendinterviewshow.com/

[Dogmudgeon]

5. An excellent, and chilling, point

I've already read the article. It came as no surprise, but it sickened me none the less.

Right now, I can't figure out who is with or against whom on the Washington chessboard. Bush has messed with the CIA at least half a dozen times, holding them up to public ridicule, and they appear to still support him. There have been puzzling defections from the Military-Industrial Complex, with lips sealed and skin pallid. The behavior of the economy has been utterly puzzling. Given Bush's oil-baron background, his nonchalance in regards to our energy resources is confounding.

Most frightening of all, there has been much loose talk of one or more nuclear attacks on targets in America -- spoken of with glee.

My anxiety is far from my being politically liberal. I don't know what kind of people would risk the destruction of the world's civilization(s) for political gain. Obviously, I am missing something, but I don't think I'm wrong to suspect the present leadership of some major, concealed, gamesmanship.

--p!

[leveymg]

6. It's not a Washington chessboard - it stretches across London, Tel Aviv,

Riyadh, Beijing and Moscow. There are several factions, some overlapped, others in inner-conflict. They are all playing for keeps.

Who is Bush? Is Bush really just an "American"? Or is he the figurehead of a number of contending international factions, some are states and others are non-state entities, who are trying to control him in order to benefit themselves and weaken or destroy the others. Some of the most powerful facets in BushCo are quite clearly identifiable. I'll try to rank order the top half dozen in terms of their influence over the administration, and identify key figures controlled by them:

1) the energy multinationals and related global financial institutions who will by all means necessary regain private control over world oil and natural gas supplies (Bush Sr. and Cheney);
2) the Israeli far-Right and allied factions of its intelligence agencies (Wolfowitz, Feith, Lutti, Bolton and the neocons, AIPAC);
3) the Abdullah faction of the Saudi Royals (who are willing to sell off upstream oil to #1, above, nationalized after the 1973 war with #2, above);
4) private military contractors (Rumsfeld);
5) The "rogue" CIA, DHS and Justice Dept. that is criminally compromised in various ways and has been engaged in domestic political dirty tricks and international terrorism (Goss, Chertoff, Gonzales, Cofer Black)
6) the Republican Party and its Christian Right base (W and his allies in the Congressional leadership).

The internal dynamics of this group is extremely complex and volatile, and the factions so powerful, that it is indeed difficult to predict their actions. They clearly consider themselves to be above all laws, domestic and international, and some are fully capable of interfering with U.S. elections, carrying out the "creative destruction" of the American economy in order to build up more profitable new bases of operation in Asia.

I have no doubt this network is engaged in the actual, calculated destruction of the American Republic, as we have known it. They believe that a more authoritarian, centralized system of government by managed illusion is necessary to retain power. Eternal wars, national emergencies, and terrorism serves their long-term interest of consolidating dynastic wealth for themselves and their private sector patrons.

Those who are attempting to take them down are American patriots of the highest order.

[Dogmudgeon]

7. Ah! My residual parochialism is showing!

I have just a few (mainly dumb) remarks / questions:

1 - Even if they "win" their struggle to dominate oil and gas resources, how will they be able to deal with a scenario that requires the development of new resources they won't control? I know they will be in a key position to invest and profit from new energy, but except for nuclear energy, the new technologies are much more easily scaled to local communities and enterprises.

2 - Is Cofer Black all that powerful? He appears to know a lot of people but not to have much power; Rumsfeld kicked him to the curb a few years ago. Still, I guess that's the "complex and volatile" part.

3 - Complex dynastic systems are not very wealth-generating. They turn in on themselves quickly and tend to be too fragile to sustain prolonged conflict. And the program of fueling their power by destroying the foundation of that power seems suicidal. This is why feudalism didn't work out too well. Are they really THAT stupid?

Yeah, they're not really questions, they're rhetorical questions. My mind boggles. When the roller-coaster really gets going in the next few years, it's going to be a white-knuckled ride for all of us.

Thanks for the reminder, too, of just how big and ugly the situation really is.

--p!

[leveymg]

11. Answers (rhetorical?) below.

I have just a few (mainly dumb) remarks / questions:

1 - Even if they "win" their struggle to dominate oil and gas resources, how will they be able to deal with a scenario that requires the development of new resources they won't control? I know they will be in a key position to invest and profit from new energy, but except for nuclear energy, the new technologies are much more easily scaled to local communities and enterprises.

WHY ASSUME THEY CAN'T ADJUST THEIR BUSINESS MODEL? EXAMPLE: THEY PLAN TO MAKE HYDROGEN FUEL FROM PETROLEUM. IF WE ALL REVERTED TO WOOD-FIRED STEAM ENGINES, THEY'D SIMPLY BUY THE PRIME FORESTS ALONG WITH THE PATENTS TO GENETICALLY-ENGINEERED TREE SEEDS.


2 - Is Cofer Black all that powerful? He appears to know a lot of people but not to have much power; Rumsfeld kicked him to the curb a few years ago. Still, I guess that's the "complex and volatile" part.

COFER BLACK IS IMPORTANT ONLY BECAUSE HE WAS RUNNING CTC IN 2001 AND KNOWS WHO ORDERED THE 9/11 HIJACKERS LET IN AND THE FBI NOT TO BE NOTIFIED. I STRONGLY SUSPECT HE HAS SOME DETAILED KNOWLEDGE OF WHY, AS WELL. JUST IN CASE, THEY GAVE HIM AMBASSADORIAL RANK AND IMMUNITY. CURIOUS - WHAT DID RUMMY HAVE TO DO WITH BLACK BEING CAST OUT INTO THE PRIVATE SECTOR?

3 - Complex dynastic systems are not very wealth-generating. They turn in on themselves quickly and tend to be too fragile to sustain prolonged conflict. And the program of fueling their power by destroying the foundation of that power seems suicidal. This is why feudalism didn't work out too well. Are they really THAT stupid?

YES - THEY ARE that STUPID, AND ALWAYS WILL REVERT TO FORM. I READ A VERY GOOD BOOK A FEW YEARS AGO ABOUT REPEATING PATTERNS OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL FAILURE, JOSEPH TAINTER'S "THE COLLAPSE OF COMPLEX SOCIETIES". http://print.google.com/print?id=M4H-02d9oE0C&lpg=PA1&dq=The+Collapse+of+Complex+Societies&prev=

[Dogmudgeon]

12. Cofer Black et al.

1 -- About decentralization of energy production, I was thinking more of biofuels like algae-derived biodiesel, thermal depolymerization oil products, and solar/wind/hydro generation of energy beyond the needs of peoples' households. They are not one-man operations, and require at least business or community sized enterprises, but huge, centralized cartels are very difficult to operate when the number of providers/members is in the thousands. But I suppose there could be some way to whip them all into line.

2 -- Here's a link to an UPI article on Cofer Black: http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040728-035041-4967r.htm

Not the most reliable source in the world, but UPI still has enough independence to provide decent news.

3 -- I've heard of Tainter's book, but have never read it. I'll have to see if my local library has it, or can get it on Interlibrary Loan.

Since I've been keeping nighttime hours again, it's almost my bedtime. Thanks again!

--p!

[Spike from MN]

9. So the contingency plan being drawn up

will be used to respond to another 9/11-type terrorist atack on the US? Uh oh. Sounds like a.) there will be another 9/11 and b.) Dubya and his cronies will use that as an excuse to attack Iran. They can't pull another "Iraq/WMD" style invasion because they have no credibility so it sounds like they have decided they need another 9/11 in order to invade Iraq. Oh great.

[wli]

2. they have to smear people because it's too "hot"

If people doubted the electoral process in large numbers they'd have too much unrest on their hands. So the MSM has to pass it off as "conspiracy theory" and smear anyone who mentions it as a "tinfoil hatter."

[Junkdrawer]

8. Ohio's "Bipartisan" Election Boards serve at Blackwell's pleasure...

A major complicating factor in the appropriate allocation of voting machines was the artificially inflated voter registration rolls in the county. The 845,720 registered voters in 2004 actually exceeded the 2000 total voting age population of Franklin County (800,657) by 45,063 persons. This unsettling disparity resulted from the loss, during preperation for computer system changes in anticipation of the year 2000, of voter history data necessary for purging the voter rolls of ineligible voters as required by the National Voter Registration Act. The County chose to start fresh with new voter histories, with the result that there had been no voter purge since 1999. The County resumed regular purging of its voter list only after the 2004 election, and on June 20, 2005 removed approximately 114,000 ineligible individuals from its voter registration list. The 2005 purge brings the voter registration total well below the 2000 voting age population in the county.

Yes, you read that right. Franklin County's "bi-partisan" Board of Election has just now "purged" 114,000 voters from the rolls! Tee-ing things up nicely, it would seem, for many more thousands of voters to find themselves suddenly ineligable to vote when they show up at the polling place in 2006!

Over one hundred thousand voters scrubbed from the voting rolls in just one Ohio County alone by their presumably "bi-partisan" BoE. That, while we have learned over the past several months how these Ohio BoE's are certainly not "bi-partisan" as Blackwell and their other defenders continue to maintain since a) There are "Democrats" on these boards who are specifically plants, in other words, "Democrats" in name only and b) All BoE members serve at the partisan pleasure of the distinctly partisan Secretary of State and Bush/Cheney Co-Chair, J. Kenneth Blackwell, who has routinely threatened BoE members with dismissal if and when they refuse to follow his personal partisan edicts.

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001512.htm

Common Cause has been calling for Independant Election Boards:

INDEPENDENT ELECTION BOARD

How does the current system work?

Ohio elections are currently supervised by the Secretary of State, a partisan elected official. In Ohio and other states, the actions of partisan elections officials have caused concern among many voters that elections are not being run fairly and have cast doubt on the results of close elections.

What would the amendment do?

This constitutional amendment would remove partisanship from the administration of elections and hand it over to an independent elections board. The board’s members would be chosen in a bipartisan manner and would be prohibited from being involved in politics.


The new elections board would have nine members. Board members would serve for nine years, to insulate them from political pressure. The board consists of:

Four members appointed by the governor
Four appointed by members of the general assembly who are members of a different political party than the governor – thus assuring bipartisan representation
One member appointed by a unanimous vote of the chief justice and justices of the Ohio Supreme Court. That person cannot have been affiliated with a political party for the previous ten years, assuring someone who is nonpartisan.
The appointments have these restrictions:

The governor and general assembly must appoint an equal number of men and women and must take into account the geographic regions and racial diversity of the state.
Members of the board may not be elected or appointed government officials, candidates, party officials or registered lobbyists. They must refrain from political activity while in office.
The board will have broad powers to prescribe uniform procedures to be followed by county boards of election, appoint and remove members of those boards, certify ballot language for statewide issues, approve voting equipment and maintain a statewide voter database. The board appoints the state director of elections, who is in charge of running the elections board staff.


http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=880425

[Land Shark]

10. of course the very danger the original poster (me) presents

is that any given theory of WHY this is occurring is bound to get it at least 1% wrong if not 100% wrong so the educated guessing about what has been made secret is hazardous.

I'm not saying don't do it, but make feature and objection #1 the secrecy.