Doubt it when I say "all the time" ? Check out Victoria Collier‘s Truthout article, which tells you a summary of election fraud history, and the mechanism by which the election theft is accomplished, in ways which explain everything and also will truly surprise you:
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/BHoCEFiA.html
D) Is the Christian Science Monitor truly concerned about partisan mismarking of paper ballots, or are they just paid to create a slanted article? I will let you decide. My own mind is very clearly made up. In fact, I could quote parts of their article and prove them outright liars. Read on and you will see why.
Please consider these variables about computerized elections:
~Trade-specific computer programming, so that Diebold programmers must know Diebold's computer "language", other brands must be learned separately, etc...so that nation-wide, only a handful of computer programmers can even read the secret code---and therefore the secret vote. Repeat: The ordinary computer programmer cannot read each trade-specific code. Only those programmers specifically trained in each code, can. With top secrecy thus assured, how vulnerable is that to partisan influence?
In fact, just as video footage can be seen on the Web of Bev Harris physically wrestling computer programmers for tossed-out votes, so Victoria Collier's father and uncle did the same thing, way back in the 70s. Guess where? Dade County, Florida!
Their own run for public office culminated in their 24-year research project and the book, "Votescam: The Stealing of America" (James and Kenneth Collier, co-authors, published by Victoria House Press). That book, interestingly enough, has been falsely listed for decades as "out of print" and while it was being sold by Victoria herself, her website www.votescam.com has since been covered over with materials not her own, as if to obscure and void out access to her information. Accident? Methinks not. Her fax machine works, but there is no response. Whose mischief do you think this is? The book was so good that the Feds had to do everything they could to make sure the public has no access to it. To this day, while I had contact info for Victoria and was e-mailing her, I still can no longer reach or trace her. James and Kenneth Collier both “died an untimely death”, in Victoria’s words.
~Diebold is programmable by Satellite, according to Victoria Collier. Thus, if the election machine checks out squeaky clean, is serviced and comes up perfect, etc...all it takes is the pressing of a remote control button, and pouf! All is gone, without any trace at all. No messing with the machine directly to leave any evidence. No fingerprints to wipe off. Nothing. In fact, writes Victoria, "Diebold is the product of decades of election theft research" (See link above).
~Bev Harris sent out an email showing the screw on the front cover of the DRE's (election computers), which accesses the computer's memory card. Thus, you or I or any other computer dummy could turn the screw, right on the front cover of the machine, which your hips will be leaning against, and mess up the entire vote. Gone, pouf! Forever.
If the Christian Science Monitor is concerned that paper ballots can be mismarked by partisan precinct workers, then tell me the computers cannot be jimmied? Between erasures and duplicate pen marks, or untraceable computer voiding, tell me which leaves more evidence of fraud: The machine or the paper? Which would be easier to track and figure out what the voter’s intent was?
~According to Victoria Collier, the DRE's all are programmed to "Talk" to each other. Thus, if all machines check out squeaky clean---that is, all except one----that's all it takes to throw off all the votes, county-wide. Who would ever know that an election had been stolen, when each machine individually is working at 100 percent perfection level?
~That's exactly why we should raise very suspicious eyebrows at the notion of auditors being sent out "Randomly" to audit----wowee, one percent of the precincts! The Rush-Holt bill "improved" this by widening the audit figure to a whopping two percent of the precincts. Yay, gratitude! Now be cautioned here: It's not the VOTES that they are "randomly" auditing, representing equal cross-sector of the people. Nope. Instead, they are auditing PRECINCTS, an important distinction. Because the precinct at which they are "randomly" sent could be one of those squeaky clean ones, or nearly so. While the one and only machine county-wide also messes up the very votes which are being thus "overseen".
~Oh and let's not forget. According to Greg Palast, who broke the Florida voting roll purge story, it is (in this order) black areas which are nine times as likely to be heisted as any other; Hispanic (four times as likely); poor Democratic areas (three times as likely to be hijacked). Why? It has nothing to do with discrimination, surprise. Except, that is, against Democrats. Because it is these areas which vote Democrat.
In fact, echoes Victoria Collier, the Republicans have stolen elections "for decades" and Victoria very specifically says that this is not intended to be a partisan statement. Instead, it is historical fact. Sorry to all Republicans who this offends, but alas, we cannot argue with history. If the Republican in office smear the name of the Republican party, I am the first to side with any Republican constituent who objects. And in so saying, I am sure that I speak for many, many more!
~This should raise all the more eyes of suspicion about the "audits" done "at random"...in what precinct areas, please? Black and Hispanic and Democratic, or in wealthy Republican areas? Citizens need to keep track of this, and report publicly about it!
