I wrote this as a way to introduce people to the election fraud that took place. I couln't find a single article that had what I wanted. I've sent it to a number of people, and finally got up enough courage to send it to my *ie family. I've been trying to keep it fairly up to date, but that's pretty hard! I'd like a better reference than the Boston Globe article, but I don't know of any other MSM article that is comparable. So, tell me what you think, and I'm sorry it's so long:
I admit that I was very disappointed by the election: my guy lost. That happens in a democracy, right? The whole idea of democracy is that we elect our government, and we accept the result of our elections because we trust their validity. Indeed, in 2000, we accepted a flawed election, because the Supreme Court ruled on it. Life goes on.
But, this year was different. The doubts were sown in 2000, when post-election analysis showed that Gore really did win. But the doubts grew after 2002, when similar analyses showed evidence of tampering with the vote in GA and FL. This year, the doubts have grown to a crescendo as the evidence of election fraud has mounted up.
I have never been very active politically, but this fall and winter I have become so: I am convinced that we must band together, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents, to preserve our democracy. That probably sounds melodramatic, but please, hear me out. Election 2004 may be the biggest threat to our country's very foundation since the Civil War. Before you dismiss this out of hand, read a bit more. I am not writing as the liberal I freely admit to being, but as a patriotic American.
You say you haven't heard anything: what on earth am I talking about? Unless you get some of your news online from independent media, you will have gotten only snippets of the story. Why? The mainstream press IS investigating this: they know it's a huge story, bigger than Watergate, but they are afraid to touch it. Why? Well, think back to Watergate. If we had not had Katherine Graham of the Washington Post, Watergate would have remained a story of a two-bit burglary. But Katherine Graham backed her reporters, let them publish, and gradually the whole sordid mess came out. This year, we have no Katherine Graham, but, fortunately, we do have an independent press which publishes via the internet. Some of the reasons the press has ignored the story are: fear of losing profits, mostly consdervative financial backers (this is fact; the "liberal media" is myth), fear of being attacked like Dan Rather, and fear of losing access to Republican politicians, including the While House. But election fraud is just too big, and too important, to keep the lid on forever.
There are several reasons why the election seemed somewhat unbelievable to many people. High voter turnout usually favors the Democrats. The well known incumbent rule says that an incumbent with a low approval rating, is very likely to be defeated. Before the election the undecideds were the major players, since whomever they went with was supposed to win. They typically break for the challenger, and they went for Kerry. (I think it was something like 2 to 1). The youth went for Kerry. The evangelicals didn't vote at a higher rate than usual. And from anecdotal evidence, there were more Bush 2000 voters switching to Kerry in 2004, than there were Gore 2000 voters switching to Bush 2004. More than 35 major and minor newspapers that had endorsed Bush in 2000, endorsed Kerry in 2004. So, where did all those extra voters for Bush come from? So far, no one has come up with a good answer.
What many people do not realize is that the massive Get Out the Vote campaign had two goals: the first was exactly was it sounds like. The second was less obvious, but ultimately more important. Mechanisms were prepared to collect real data about what happened before and during the election. People wanted to be able to understand the election process in detail, to document the problems. This created a huge database of evidence, not just anecdotes, which is online. In addition, election results data are now available online, usually down to the precinct level, directly from the various state election offices. The data shows, very clearly, that almost all of the problems resulted in outcomes that favored Bush.
What happened after November 2nd was extraordinary: thousands of citizens across the country, united only by their love of country (and for some, loyalty to Kerry), a feeling that something wasn't right about the election, and the internet, began to scrutinize the numbers. Some were paid, as staff at various organizations, or lawyers. Many others were ordinary citizens, driven by patriotism (and some by partisanship), using whatever skills they had. It was truly democracy at work! These people picked apart data, looked for odd results, analyzed data, asked others to vet it, and published online. Some of them are well-known academics: Dr. Steven Freeman of U Penn (what an appropriate name!), and Dr. Michael Hout of UC Berkeley. A few results of these efforts have been discredited (OK counting backwards), others have been modified to reflect important criticisms, but thousands have stood the test of scrutiny.
When you hear someone sneer at the evidence, remember this: this evidence has received far more scrutiny than any news article you have ever read. The investigators are still at it, and every day brings a new revelation. There has been a significant shift in the attitude of those investigation this: in the beginning, there was a lot of partisanship: Kerry backers incensed that Bush cheated. But as time went on, most of them realized that this transcended any party affiliation: this was literally fighting for our democracy. The likelihood of the election being overturned is slim, at best, but the fraud must be exposed, and our electoral process must be reformed.
Could I and thousands of other people be wrong? Of course! At that point, all I will have lost is some pride, and I'll be exposed to a lot of ridicule. I can handle that: can you handle it if I'm right and you do nothing?
Last week, I spent two days at two different forums in DC. Both were about the huge numbers of irregularities (dirty tricks refined to a high art), plus evidence of fraud, in the election in Ohio. The first was non-partisan, sponsored by Common Cause, the second was called by Democratic congressman Conyers of Michigan and other members of the House Judiciary Committee. Although invited, no Republican representatives chose to attend. All the speakers emphasized that while their remarks concentrated on events in Ohio, the same things happened all across the country.
Despite the failure of the mainstream press to cover our failed election, for the reasons I mentioned above, the word is beginning to get out. People who learn about this travesty, regardless of their political affiliation, become intensely angry at the attempt to steal our democracy. The press has tried to keep the lid on this, but by now there is just too much evidence of election fraud and irregularities at high and low levels that it can't be suppressed.
There is now no doubt that election fraud took place in the 2004 election. Rather than call me crazy, read some of the references, and make up your own mind. I believe it was done by individuals at local levels, precinct and county, in ways that have always been done, as well as in new ways. But the increase in the use of computers dramatically increased the opportunity, and I believe, the fact of wholesale vote manipulation. Computer scientists have been screaming for years that the electronic systems are not secure. At the very least, the fix happened on a state-wide scale, and more likely, on a national scale. There is hard evidence of fraud in Volusia County, FL, for 2004. There is prima facie evidence of fraud in Ohio, and testimony about an attempt to rig the recount there, on 12/10/04. There are a hundreds of fingers pointing at nation-wide vote manipulation, and some pretty improbable outcomes. As the police would say, there is evidence, motive, opportunity, and method.
If you do nothing else, read either the Boston Globe article or watch this Power Point presentation. Both are somewhat dated, but they are a good introduction:
http://www.electionfraud2004.org/ <1> (You have to have Power Point to see it).
The Boston Globe, 12/1/04, is the first major newspaper to come out with a substantial story on this. It is not up to date, and they still want to be dismissive of the people who have uncovered the data, but they published:
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/12/01/voting_errors_tallied_nationwide/?rss_id=Boston.com%20/%20News%20/%20Politics%20/%20Recent%20Globe%20coverage <2>
The link below is about the election in Ohio, saying that if our government and our press applied the same standards to our elections as they did to the one in the Ukraine, they would be all over Ohio. International observers have also severely criticized our election process.
http://blog.radioleft.com/blog/_archives/2004/11/30/193915.html <3>
This article is about the kind of people we entrust our voting machines and vote tabulation to:
http://nightweed.com/3_november_2004.html <4>
Did that give you the creeps?
Six (now 13) Congressmen have requested an investigation by the Government Accounting Office into nationwide voting irregularities. The GAO has agreed the issue merits investigation, but note their role is not to investigate crime. There are several interesting documents on this site: one to the GAO office, a 15 page letter to Ohio SOS Blackwell, asking him to explain the many voting problems there, a letter asking for the raw exit poll data and the response, the agenda and statements from the 12/8/04 forum that I mentioned earlier. The letter to Blackwell is a good, documented summary of the Ohio election irregularities, though not up to date. There are statements and witness lists from the Conyers' hearing in Columbus. Are these partisan? Only because the Republicans have refused to join in these investigations.
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/issues/issues/election.html <5>
This article has some of the reasons why Ohio is having a recount. The recount might or might not change the outcome of the election, but that is not the point: our democracy is at stake here. If our votes are not fairly counted, we have no democracy, and if we let the travesty stand this time, we may not get another chance. The site is liberal, but I, and others, have checked the facts, so don't discount the article because of where it is. New information on this is that statisticians have analyzed the election data using tools used by cpas to find financial irregularities, and see evidence of this in the election numbers. One note on the article: the wording is poor. The judge had more votes than Kerry in a number of counties, but not statewide.
http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/000868.php <6>
Accidental? I think not. Other, recent events: Blackwell has prevented certified volunteers from having access to public records, a clear violation of Ohio law and prima facie evidence of election fraud; an elections office appears to have been deliberately left unlocked overnight; a witness testified that a Triad technician (Triad makes the tabulating computers) tampered with a machine in Columbus, and the technician referred to making sure the recount totals match; a programmer testified, under oath, that Feeney, then a Florida state congressman, now a US congressman, asked for a prototype of a program that could rig an election. If you want to read more, here are two updates, published just recently:
http://nov2truth.org/article.php?story=20041213223947579 <7>
and
http://www.freepress.org/index2.php <8>
The Ohio Recount is beginning !2/14/04. Unfortunately, there is fear that by dragging out the certification for 34 days, Blackwell and others have had an opportunity to hide their tracks. In fact, there is clear evidence of this: a witness has testified that a TRIAD technician tampered with the tabulating machine in Hocking County, and advised the election office personnel how to make sure the 3% hand recount matched the machine count.
http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/12/ale04104.html <9a> Needless to say, this is a felony. For some inexplicable reason, TRIAD posted preliminary Ohio election results on their company website at 11:00 pm on 11/2/04. Why? There will be recounts in other states, too. Washington state is having a recount for the governor's race. 500+ uncounted ballots were "found" in King County. A recount in New Hampshire changed the result of a state election, and I believe one changed in Illinois or Indiana.
http://www.votecobb.org / <9b>
Some of the most damning evidence has to do with exit poll data. I should explain them a bit, since there have been massive efforts to discredit them. In this country, until 2000, exit polls have been very accurate. In many countries, exit polls are used as an audit of the validity of the election. In Germany, a discrepancy of more than 0.1% between the exit polls and the result is cause for suspicion. We all know about the Ukraine: exit polls proved election fraud in the Ukraine, but not in the US.
The exit polls consist of the actual raw data, as collected, which is usually then manipulated by the pollsters according to the models they have to extrapolate the raw data to the entire country. (This is why there was so much difference in the pre-election polls: different pollsters use different models). Then, as the results start coming in, the exit poll data is "adjusted" by mixing it with results, thus invalidating its use as an audit. Other countries do not do this.
The exit polls showed huge shifts from Kerry leading to Bush leading in many states. The shifts were well outside the margin of error for the poll, and outside the 99% confidence levels. In other states, there were smaller shifts of an expected magnitude. But all the big shifts were from Bush to Kerry. There is testimony that the number of people polled did not change, but the reported results changed. This is why the analysts insist that the raw data is required, but the networks who own the data are refusing to do so until January, 2005. If it is OK to release it in January, why not now? If releasing the raw data would stop the speculation, why not release it? But, if it proves that the researchers are on to something, then vested interests (the same ones who are keeping you from knowing what is going on) might want to keep it under cover. The results reported in <10> use data released (unofficially) before the data was contaminated by results.
The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy by Dr. Steven F. Freeman, PhD, University of Pennsylvania also points a finger at Florida. (Note: there are several versions of this paper. You want the 11/22/04, v00p1). He should release Part II of this work soon. He says that the probability of the exit polls being wrong, in the pattern they exhibited, is 1 in 250 million. He says that under much tighter assumptions, the probability is still 1 in 600,000. Essentially, impossible. The chief criticism leveled at this work is that the only raw data available is early data, representing voters who voted roughly in the first half of the day. This sample MAY be significantly different from voting population.
www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/11/ale04090.html - 5k - Nov 30, 2004 <10a>
If that link doesn't work, try one of these:
http://www.dakotatechnics.com/downloads / <10b>
http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm <10c>
You can look at the complete US exit poll data yourself. This is accurate data on all the states and shows the exit poll discrepancies depicted graphically.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm <11>
Dr. Avi Rubin of Johns Hopkins analyzed Diebold's voting machines and found exactly how easy they are to hack: Dr. Rubin is one of many computer scientists who have strongly criticized the election machines, from a number of different angles. Since the source code (except for what Diebold left on an unsecured server) is proprietary, no one knows what is actually in it. Even though the machines are supposed to be tested and certified, the certification has been shown by BlackBoxVoting.org to be a joke. Furthermore, it is well documented that the machines often had very lax physical security, software updates were installed after testing prior to the election, and technicians frequently had free access to the machines, before, during, and after the election. Now, who owns the companies, again?
http://www.avirubin.com/vote <12>
Keith Olberman of MSNBC is the only mainstream reporter covering this on a regular basis.. His blog is here. Scroll down to November 7 (or earlier if you want his view of Nov 2 & 3), and work your way up. (Most blogs have the most recent posts first). The blog is continued in the next two links. It's an interesting historical perspective of how this story has unfolded.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6368819/ <13>
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6533008/ <14>
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240 <15>
He has been writing on this since about 11/7/04. By the way, he's not always right, especially about Bev Harris. He and Bev had a disagreement about who said what: just ignore that part, it doesn't mean anything. Bev is a crusader on election reform, and she can and has stepped on toes.
"Did lawyer-observers on Election Day miss fraud incidents?" is an interesting article by Ian Solomon, associate dean at the Yale Law School.
http://www.law.yale.edu/outside/html/Public_Affairs/537/yls_article.htm <16>
There are a couple of different compilation of problems reported about the 2004 general election:
http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp <17>
If you go to
https://voteprotect.org/index.php?display=EIRMapNation&tab=ALL <18> you will be able to do all kind of interesting searches. This site reports over 37,000 incidents that need examination, they have reported that they believe this is just the tip of the iceberg. This is an excellent website on the problems with our voting system:
http://www.verifiedvoting.com / <19>
A UC Berkeley research team has sounded a 'Smoke Alarm' for Florida e-vote count. Their statistical analysis shows irregularities that may have awarded 130,000 - 260,000 or more excess votes to Bush in Florida. report:
http://ucdata.berkeley.edu/new_web/VOTE2004/ <20>
press release:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041118/sfth066_1.html <21>
". . a reputable MIT political scientist succeeded in replicating the analysis Thursday at the request of the Herald and The Associated Press. He said an investigation is warranted." At least 7 researchers read the paper before release. Since then, it has been rigorously analyzed. One valid criticism is the flaw in any regression analysis: you have to include the right factors to determine the most likely cause. Of the factors they looked at, the use of e-machines was highly correlated with anomalies. Another criticism is that two counties, both large and both heavily Democratic accounted for most of the shift. I don't see that as valid: they should have gone for Kerry.
Votergate is a chilling documentary about voting problems can be viewed here:
http://www.votergate.tv / <22>
Bev Harris has been doing excellent research on problems with electronic voting for years. Her site is:
www.blackboxvoting.org <23>
This is not the best place for breaking news, but if you dig into the forums you'll see a lot of work being done. Bev is also working hard in the trenches in Florida. She has announced that Volusia County, FL, will be recounted, due to clear evidence of election fraud, and says she will file suit to a number of others to compel them to release documents. For an example of the kind of work that she (and others have done) go to this link: if you scroll down to message 57, you'll see a list of 5 precincts in Snohomish County, WA, with turnouts of well over 100%.
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/dcforum/DCForumID4408/34.htmlGreg Palast is an excellent investigative reporter who has uncovered widespread voter disenfranchisement.
"Kerry Won. . ." is one of his articles,. The level of voter intimation, misinformation, vote suppression, particularly among minority communities is enough to make you sick to your stomach. There are a number os others which you might find interesting.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php <24>
Here's a link to another article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/3956129.stm# <25>
His website can be found here:
http://www.gregpalast.com/index.cfm <26>
Here are two interesting weblogs (out of hundreds) on voting irregularities:
http://www.solarbus.org/stealyourelection / <27>
http://rottendenmark.blogspot.com / <28>
If you are a glutton for punishment, try these:
An extremely comprehensive collection of voting problems around the US:
http://shadowbox.i8.com/ <29[[br />
http://shadowbox.i8.com/stolen.htm <30>
A good vote fraud news site:
http://nov2truth.org/index.php?display=new <31>
A collection of vote fraud links put together by a concerned citizen:
http://ladyhawk.landmarkwebhosting.com / <32>
Rather than give you some links to stories in the mainstream press which may be removed or unavailable, just go to www.google.com/ and type in election fraud 2004. At last count, there were over 75 listings, some of which are duplicates.
What can you do?
Sign Common Cause petition to keep Ohio recount nonpartisan!
www.commoncause.org/DemandPureOhioRecount <33>
Sign this petition to Congress requesting an investigation into the 2004 Presidential Election
http://www.petitiononline.com/uselect/petition.html <34>
Get out and protest! The Ukrainians have made it clear they will not accept a fraudulent election. Why not us?
Join or organize protests in your state. See
http://www.51capitalmarch.com/ <35>
Other protest sites:
http://www.stolenelection2004.com/alerts.html <36>
http://meetup.radicaldesigns.org/calendar_display.php t... <37>
If you don't find anything near you consider creating your own
If you want to donate:
See FUNDING THE RECOUNT --before youdonate
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=201&topic_id=2617&mesg_id=2617 <38>
Green and Libertarian parties are financing their recount in Ohio. Donate or volunteer here:
http://www.votecobb.org / <39>
Help America Recount Link: www.helpamericarecount.org <40> is a 527 organization which you can use to help these efforts. Black Box Voting is investigating the election. Donate here:
www.blackboxvoting.org <41> Note: be sure you get blackboxvoting.ORG
Contact your Congressperson and Senators. Tell them to sign on to the request by John Conyers and others to have the GAO investigate the election fraud. Demand action on Republican owned and controlled voting and tabulating machines as well as corrupt Secretaries of State like Ken Blackwell.
To contact your Congressperson:
http://www.house.gov / <42>
You will need Zip+4 to find your represenative. You can get that here:
http://zip4.usps.com/zip4/welcome.jsp <43> To contact your Senator:
http://www.senate.gov / <41>
I have tried to check the facts as well as the links in this e-mail. I apologize if some of them do not work, but you can always cut and paste the address into your browser. Because I believe it is so important to get this message out to all Americans, feel free to forward this e-mail to your friends.
Sincerely,
Susan S Sachs
12/17/04
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(860 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
