You see what having Ironsided in your forum brings to the table? Ban him!!

Former Member · November 2003

Yes, entertaining it is!

Now...

"You see what having Ironsided in your forum brings to the table? Ban him!!"

Huh?

Former Member · November 2003

Originally posted by Blagsta
His rise to power was a coup, this is well documented. [/B]

What is well documented is that the Democrats were not allowed to change the rules in the middle of an election in Florida to benefit themselves. What is well documented is the independent review of the re-count by the media which showed that Bush won.

Former Member · November 2003

Originally posted by loka
What is well documented is that the Democrats were not allowed to change the rules in the middle of an election in Florida to benefit themselves. What is well documented is the independent review of the re-count by the media which showed that Bush won.

Please...

Do not confuse them with reality; they prefer the safety of their delusions.

"THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!"

:rolleyes:

Former Member · November 2003

What's this? Neo-con Americans? Oh, we are gonna have some fun tonight!

Number one. Let's be really immature

2. Say things that might scare them like " I know a guy on the secret service who would like to kill Bush"

3. Bush is an idiot

4. You are an idiot if you think anyone who doesn't think Bush is great is a commie or Muslim ( which you over at your little forum seem to use as an insult)

Former Member · November 2003

Originally posted by loka
What is well documented is that the Democrats were not allowed to change the rules in the middle of an election in Florida to benefit themselves. What is well documented is the independent review of the re-count by the media which showed that Bush won.

Well it depends which sources you use doesn't it?

Former Member · November 2003

What the fuck has been happening here in the last week???

Former Member · November 2003

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
lmfao
Hey you guys your really entertaing me here

worra knobhead that bloody justice is

Wouldn't you just know that the one who bleats about the 'discipline' practised on mil.com would be the most undisciplined of the lot?

Former Member · November 2003

An American Invasion...

...and we're bickering amongst ourselves over this quagmire in Iraq!

They banned me at mil.com, so we will bring the debates here!

Ok?

Former Member · November 2003

Originally posted by Aladdin
What the fuck has been happening here in the last week???

Oh, haven't you heard? We're all decamping to mil.com 'cos it's soooooo good...

Former Member · November 2003

I think this is the Bushbot's latest example of "embedding"!

Former Member · November 2003

Originally posted by Clandestine
I think this is the Bushbot's latest example of "embedding"!

YIKES!

This could actually be my fault!

Sowwy!

But, ya gotta admit. It makes for a lil excitement around here...

...no?

Former Member · November 2003

Almost as exciting as a stroll through a minefield and about as intellectually stimulating.

Former Member · November 2003

Perhaps, you'd better not register at mil.com afterall!

Former Member · November 2003

OMG you gangwanking liberals shut up!

Bless. *smirk*

Former Member · December 2003

Originally posted by Blagsta
Well it depends which sources you use doesn't it?

Here's a source:

Independent Review Backs Bush's Florida Victory

Wes Vernon
Friday, March 23, 2001
WASHINGTON – An independent, nonpartisan analysis of Florida ballots shows once again that President Bush was the legitimate winner of Florida's electoral votes in the November election.

Conducted by the accounting firm of Johnson, Lambert and Co., the survey found, after analyzing 42,724 of the 62,605 ballots reported as "undervotes" in Florida, that a statewide recount of the Florida undervotes "would not have changed the outcome of the presidential election."

"Undervotes" are those ballots where there is little if any discernible marking for any presidential candidate.

The conclusions were publicized Thursday by the anti-corruption watchdog group Judicial Watch, which commissioned the survey.

The Johnson Lambert recount included 25,203 undervotes in the six nonmanual-recount counties of Collier, Hillsborough, Indian River, Miami-Dade, Pinellas and Sarasota.

The results of the firm's inspection "reveal the possible adjustments to the certified state totals had a manual recount been included in these counties."

Using the strict standard (no dimples, only clear punches, hanging or swinging chad), the survey shows Bush with a net gain of 116 votes. Using a more "moderate" standard that includes dimples, the president gains 107 votes. If a "more liberal standard" (using all dimples without conflicting presidential marks) is used to measure the outcome, Bush gains 116 votes.

When asked at a news conference why these findings were at variance with a survey by the Palm Beach Post, which gave a net gain to Democrat Al Gore, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton replied that the Palm Beach Post had counted "overvotes," where there were markings for more than one candidate. Other media outlets that have counted the Florida ballots have concluded there is no legitimate way to determine what was on the minds of people who marked their ballots for more than one candidate.

In addition, Johnson Lambert inspected ballots in Broward and Palm Beach counties and noted some discrepancies and errors in the methods used for the official recounts in those areas as well as in the other six counties.

For example, although the Palm Beach manual recount resulted in a net increase of 176 votes for Gore, "we did observe errors in the way some ballots were either adjudicated [or] recorded for the candidates during this manual recount."

Johnson Lambert added, "If our observations represent errors, Gore's 176-vote margin increase [in Palm Beach] would be reduced by 62 votes."

It also turns out that there is a 253-vote gap between the number of ballots included in the certified election results and the number of ballots found and inspected by the firm's auditors in the six previously cited counties without manual recounts. The higher figure was included in the certified results. The Johnson Lambert auditing firm cannot, with certainty, account for this disparity. The report says:

"The difference of 253 ballots is presumed to be the ballots the vote-counting machines or elections officials recognized as valid votes during the process of separating the ballots for this review. These have not been recorded anywhere. Whatever the cause, there is no way to know, at this time, how these 253 ballots would have been counted in any recount."

Broward County appears to have won the prize for inconsistency, as far as Johnson Lambert is concerned.

"Broward County began their recount using a strict standard for determining votes, which primarily required clear punches or chad hanging by one or two corners in order for a vote to be counted. About midway through the process, the standard was changed to a liberal standard, which allowed dimples and pregnant chads to be considered primary evidence in the voter intent. This change in standard resulted in additional votes for Mr. Bush or Mr. Gore of 446 and 884, respectively."

Thus, we have a prime example of changes that gave the appearance (whatever the intent) of skewing the results to help Gore steal the election, just as Bush supporters claimed all through last fall's 36-day "extended campaign."

At the news conference Thursday, I asked Fitton if Johnson Lambert's examination of 68 percent of the ballots reported as undervotes in the eight counties where the survey was focused represented the final word of its examination of the matter.

While he did not slam the door on the possibility of sending Johnson Lambert to take a look at the other 20,000 ballots, Fitton pointed to the accounting firm's comment that, based on the results of this inspection, "the results of the Florida election would not have changed with a manual recount of these counties."

And then the next sentence would seem to drive a stake right through the heart of Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe's loud insistence that Bush "stole the election." That sentence from these auditors who spent months in painstaking and tedious examination of the Florida results reads as follows:

"Further, based upon the scope of our inspection and the analysis of the results thereof, it is our view that the results of the Florida election would not have changed with a manual recount of all the counties in the state."

Don't expect Clinton acolyte McAuliffe to refrain from putting the famous Clintonian spin on this. It's just that this time the Clinton machine now lacks the taxpayer-provided resources of government at its disposal to smear and ruin anyone who points to facts not in accord with its approved line.

www.newsmax.com

Former Member · December 2003

THE GREAT FLORIDA EX-CON GAME How the ?felon? voter-purge was itself felonious

Harper's Magazine
Friday, March 1, 2002

by Greg Palast

In November the U.S. media, lost in patriotic reverie, dressed up the Florida recount as a victory for President Bush. But however one reads the ballots, Bush's win would certainly have been jeopardized had not some Floridians been barred from casting ballots at all. Between May 1999 and Election Day 2000, two Florida secretaries of state - Sandra Mortham and Katherine Harris, both protégées of Governor Jeb Bush- ordered 57,700 "ex-felons," who are prohibited from voting by state law, to be removed from voter rolls. (In the thirty-five states where former felons can vote, roughly 90 percent vote Democratic.) A portion of the list, which was compiled for Florida by DBT Online, can be seen for the first time here; DBT, a company now owned by ChoicePoint of Atlanta, was paid $4.3 million for its work, replacing a firm that charged $5,700 per year for the same service. If the hope was that DBT would enable Florida to exclude more voters, then the state appears to have spent its money wisely.

Two of these "scrub lists," as officials called them, were distributed to counties in the months before the election with orders to remove the voters named. Together the lists comprised nearly 1 percent of Florida?s electorate and nearly 3 percent of its African-American voters. Most of the voters (such as "David Butler," (1); a name that appears 77 times in Florida phone books) were selected because their name, gender, birthdate and race matched - or nearly matched - one of the tens of millions of ex-felons in the United States. Neither DBT nor the state conducted any further research to verify the matches. DBT, which frequently is hired by the F.B.I. to conduct manhunts, originally proposed using address histories and financial records to confirm the names, but the state declined the cross-checks. In Harris?s elections office files, next to DBT?s sophisticated verification plan, there is a hand-written note: ?DON?T NEED.?

Thomas Alvin Cooper (2), twenty-eight, was flagged because of a crime for which he will be convicted in the year 2007. According to Florida?s elections division, this intrepid time-traveler will cover his tracks by moving to Ohio, adding a middle name, and changing his race. Harper's found 325 names on the list with conviction dates in the future, a fact that did not escape Department of Elections workers, who, in June 2000 emails headed, ?Future Conviction Dates," termed the discovery, "bad news.? Rather than release this whacky data to skeptical counties, Janet Mudrow, state liaison to DBT, suggested that ?blanks would be preferable in these cases." (Harper's counted 4,917 blank conviction dates.) The one county that checked each of the 694 names on its local list could verify only 34 as actual felony convicts. Some counties defied Harris' directives; Madison County's elections supervisor Linda Howell refused the purge list after she found her own name on it.

Rev. Willie Dixon (3), seventy, was guilty of a crime in his youth; but one phone call would have told the state that it had already pardoned Dixon and restored his right to vote. On behalf of Dixon and other excluded voters, the NAACP in January 2001 sued Florida and Harris, after finding that African-Americans?who account for 13 percent of Florida's electorate and 46 percent of U.S. felony convictions ?were four times as likely as whites to be incorrectly singled out under the state's methodology. After the election, Harris and her elections chief Clay Roberts, testified under oath that verifying the lists was solely the work of county supervisors. But the Florida-DBT contract (marked "Secret" and ?Confidential?) holds DBT responsible for ?manual verification using telephone calls.? in fact, with the state?s blessing, DBT did not call a single felon. When I asked Roberts about the contract during an interview for BBC television, Roberts ripped off his microphone, ran into his office, locked the door, and called in state troopers to remove us.

Johnny Jackson Jr. (4), thirty-two, has never been to Texas, and his mother swears he never had the middle name ?Fitzgerald.? Neither is there evidence that John Fitzgerald Jackson, felon of Texas, has ever left the Lone Star State. But even if they were the same man, removing him from Florida?s voter rolls is an unconstitutional act. Texas is among the thirty five states where ex-felons are permitted to vote, and the "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution forbids states to revoke any civil rights that a citizen has been granted by another state; in fact, the Florida Supreme Court had twice ordered the state not to do so, just nine months before the voter purge. Nevertheless, at least 2,873 voters were wrongly removed, a purge authorized by a September 18, 2000 letter to counties from Governor Bush's clemency office. On February 23, 2001, days after the U.S. Commission of Civil Rights began investigating the matters, Bush's office issued a new letter allowing these persons to vote; no copies of the earlier letter could be found in the clemency office or on its computers.

Wallace McDonald (5), sixty-four, lost his right to vote in 2000, though his sole run-in with the law was a misdemeanor in 1959. (He fell asleep on a bus-stop bench.) Of the "matches' on these lists, the civil-rights commission estimated that at least 14 percent - or 8,000 voters, nearly 15 times Bush's official margin of victory - were false. DBT claims it warned officials "a significant number of people who were not a felon would be included on the list"; but the state, the company now says, "wanted there to be more names than were actually verified." Last May, Florida's legislature barred Harris from using outside firms to build the purge list and ordered her to seek guidance from county elections officials. In defiance, Harris has rebuffed the counties and hired another firm, just in time for Jeb Bush's reelection fight this fall.

###

Special thanks to Fredda Weinberg for cracking the Florida computer files and crunching the numbers as well as to all the volunteer researchers who contributed to this investigative effort.

Read the complete and latest material on the ethnic purge that fixed the election in Palast's new book, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, out this week from Pluto Press.

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=122&row=1

Whilst the "independent enquiry" findings may address the issues of ballots cast, the real fraud was in the complete disenfranchisement of 10's of thousands of voters who were not afforded their Constitutional right to vote in the first place, thanks to a handy bit of Database engineering and centralisation which turned innocent people into "felons".

Advice to Florida voters in the future is, cheack you last name at the door or find out if anyone with your last name anywhere in the state has or has had a felony conviction at any time in their life, then go get your name changed.

You see what having Ironsided in your forum brings to the table? Ban him!!

Comments