This is a scam! Don't be fooled!

Unfortunately, as far as I can tell this is a scam.

They tell people how they can register to vote and cast a vote, but NOT how to prevent their vote from being stolen (there is no possible way with central tabulators "counting" the votes) or how to steal it back (which is equally impossible). An investigation into a stolen election cannot steal back the votes, it just documents the stolen election. Nothing can be done before November to prevent the election from being stolen because of HAVA and because they courts will not cancel an election just because there is every reason to believe it will be stolen and no way to prevent it from being stolen. They never have and they never will. I don't know about the rest of the country, but the California Election Code has a loophole that says that elections officials can violate the code if they feel it is necessary for them to do so in order to hold an election. In other words, it they feel a need to violate the law in order to hold an election, they may do so with impunity.

Last week Mark Crispin Miller published an article here on opednews entitled, "What YOU can do to prevent another stolen election."  I challenged him to point out ANYTHING in his article that said anything about what anyone one could to do prevent the November election from being stolen. There was a long discussion and his article was removed, possibly at his own request as OEN doesn't usually censor articles. The object of his article was also to raise money for litigation, but for a different lawsuit.

The election fraud industry, those who spend their time observing, monitoring, documenting, analyzing, investigating, litigating, and producing books and movies about stolen elections, is a growth business. People like Mark Crispin Miller and Greg Palast have quite likely already signed contracts and accepted advances for their forthcoming books on how the '08 election was stolen. If they didn't encourage people to vote in a rigged election and allow it to be stolen, they'd have to give the money back.

Even if the machines weren't rigged, and the count was accurate, our Constitution does not allow us to vote directly for President and Vice-President. That's why Bush was installed in both 2000 and 2004 BEFORE THE VOTES WERE COUNTED. According to the Constitution, our votes, which are called the popular vote, are actually symbolic and meaningless. Only the electoral college (meaning the political parties nowadays, although that may not have been the framers' intent), Congress, and the Supreme Court can decide who becomes President. The popular vote is irrelevant.

According to the Constitution, Article One, Section Five, Congress is the sole judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its members. So even when somebody wins an election for a seat in Congress, it is Congress itself, not the voters, that decides if that person will be sworn in. In '06 there were about forty seats where the Democrat won but the Republican was sworn in because the Democrats refused to investigate the stolen elections and they needed more Republicans to support the war and oppose impeachment.

And of course once an "election" is over, only Congress itself can impeach a President or Vice-President, or unseat a Member of Congress. No matter how much indisputable proof that the candidate was fraudulently elected, Congress has yet to remove anyone on that basis.

Because the private corporations that program the central tabulators that "count" the votes secretly, use undetectably mutable software, meaning that the coding can alter the results and then erase itself and all log traces of itself so that even a computer forensics expert can't prove what happened, it is usually impossible to prove election fraud and the courts have not been much help. Even if the lower courts were helpful, cases involving federal officials or issues having to do with federal elections can be appealed to the Supreme Court. Remember the Supreme Court? The partisan thugs who stole the 2000 election? If you spent a trillion dollars and hired all the best lawyers in the world, you couldn't get them to rule that stealing an election is illegal -- they're election thieves. Besides, they were the ones who pointed out, in Bush v. Gore 2000, that the Constitution doesn't even give us a federal right to vote, so what's stolen? Something we never had a right to anyway?

Governments hold elections so that they can claim to be democratically elected and to have the support of their people, which makes them a legitimate government in the eyes of the world. That's why, until the successful election boycott in South Africa, the ANC was criminalized, Nelson Mandela remained in prison, and the U.S. and other countries used the excuse that the Apartheid regime was the "legitimate" government of South Africa, to continue supporting Apartheid. Once the election boycott showed that they had only the support of the 10% or fewer South Africans who voted, the Apartheid regime was no longer able to claim legitimacy, and instead of continuing to be demonized and criminalized as Communists, rebels, insurgents, terrorists, and dissidents, the opponents of Apartheid became freedom fighters opposing an illegitimate government that had not been democratically elected and did not have the support of its people. The ANC was decriminalized, Mandela was freed, and when they had an honest election, millions turned out to vote and he became President.

There was also a successful election boycott in Cuba. Fewer than 10% of the citizens voted. It still took the force of arms to oust the Batista regime, but since Batista knew that he only had the support of less than 10% of Cubans, it didn't take much force or many arms for Castro and his small, ragged, tired band of revolutionaries to oust him.

There is no way to prevent Obama from conceding to McCain without bothering to count the votes, if he chooses to do so. And it is sometimes good for the Democratic Party if the Democrat concedes to the Republican so that the Democrats can support the Republican's pro-war, corporate agenda, but keep blaming it all on the Republicans.

And remember the CBC petition to reject the fraudulent Florida vote in 2000? It failed because the CBC couldn't get a single Senator to sign their petition. Al Gore had personally ordered the Democrats not to sign. But if the Republicans get up a petition to reject the New York and California votes as "fraudulent," they'll have no problems getting Republican Senators to sign (and probably a few Democrats too!), and McCain will win. It is because the popular vote doesn't matter, that there are so many ways to steal an election. Voting does not and cannot prevent the election from being stolen and once it is stolen there is no way to steal it back. All you can do is whine and cry to Congress for the next four to eight years.

Compare that to our credit card laws. If a thief steals your credit card and runs up unauthorized charges, you just report the theft, the cards are canceled immediately, the thief can no longer use them, and you are responsible only for the first $50 of unauthorized charges. Imagine if a thief stole your credit card, ran up large bills, you reported it, and you were told, "Sorry. The law says that we cannot cancel your cards for four years and during that time the thief must be allowed to continue running up unathorized charges on your cards and you will be responsible for every penny of them." That's how our government works. When a Presidention or Congressional election is stolen, your only option is to allow them to continue bankrupting the country for their entire term of office and then try to vote them out in the next rigged election. In the meantime, you are responsible for all their unathorized spending. If our credit card laws were as bad as our Contitution, nobody would ever use one. That's why they're not.

Our government, as you know, is engaged in two wars of aggression based on lies, for which it borrows and spend a million dollars every two minutes to add onto our $9 trillion dollar national debt, which is actually a cover for $53 trillion in unfunded liabilities. And that's not mentioning the quadrillion dollar Ponzi scheme they call a derivatives market.

No matter how much you love your Party and your candidates, when you vote you are granting your mandate, delegating your power, and giving your consent to a government that isn't going to even bother to count your votes. All it wants is for you to vote so that it can continue to claim to be a democratically elected government -- a legitimate government with the support of its people.

It is not a legitimate government. It does not deserve our support.

No in November! 

Everyone who claims that they oppose the genocides in Iraq and Afghanistan, but puts their signature on a mail-in ballot envelope or in a voter registry book at the polls, is signing their consent for the wars to continue, saying that even though they may philosophically oppose the wars, they are willing to give their consent to a government that has already killed seven million innocents in our name and is bound and determined to kill more, in return for the privilege of voting in a rigged election. This is a fascist system. It is totally corrupt.

I used to respect JFK, Jr., Jesse Jackson (both Senior and Junior), and Greg Palast. But encouraging people to vote in a rigged election and lying about it -- telling them that there is a way to steal back their vote when there is no such possibility, is beneath contempt.

This is not a democracy, it is supposed to be a Republic. When you vote, you are supposed to be delegating your power to your elected representatives. Unfortunately, the Constitution didn't give us any way to hold them accountable, so they have no reason to represent us. When Rep. John Olver was presented with verified petitions from 80% of his constituents asking him to support impeachment, he said, "Spare me! I'm fully aware that the overwhelming majority of my constituents support impeachment. I will not."

Now that they have the voting machines rigged, they don't care what voters think. Read this article where it is all explained:  The Prevailing Theory  http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=8626

When you vote, you are consenting to be ruled, not selecting a representative. Once you vote, as Kurt Belleman explained in The Prevailing Theory, "your job is over." They have your consent and can do whatever they want and there is nothing you can do about it, certainly not steal back your vote. Once you cast it, it is gone, it is no longer yours, and you can't get it back.

It really hurts me to have to debunk people who I used to respect as much as Greg Palast, Jesse Jackson, and RFK, Jr., but when they tell outright lies, what else can I do?

There is no way to steal back your vote. Once you cast it, it is gone. You can document, investigate, publicize, and litigate from now until doomsday, which may be closer than you think, but you have delegated your power to a fascist government, consented to the continuation of genocide, and you can't get your vote back any more than you can bring back to life the millions of innocent men, women, and children we've killed in Iraq and Afghanistan for Halliburton. Read Dahr Jamail's recent post, "We Blew Her to Pieces," about the Winter Soldiers' testimony. Is that really what you want to vote for? Because no matter how you vote or who you vote for, that's what you're consenting to. It is done in your name. And Palast, Jackson, and RFK Jr. are telling you to fight for the right to vote to consent to genocide. Is that a right worth fighting for?

If you don't like the wars and don't like the fiscal mismanagement, you don't have to consent to continue them. Withdraw your consent. Don't vote. If they don't have your consent, they are no longer a legitimate government and they cannot continue to rule. 

Hey, Greg! If I turn out to be correct in my prediction that the '08 election will be stolen by a successful Republican petitition to reject the electoral votes of some large blue states, can I get a mention in your forthcoming books and films about how the election of 2008 was stolen?

Permission to reprint this comment is hereby granted.

by Mark E. Smith (21 articles, 30 quicklinks, 100 diaries, 1325 comments) on Friday, September 19, 2008 at 8:22:31 PM
 

Scam

I have reposted it. I will repost it again in a few minutes. there are a LOT of us who agree with Mark. Please don't ignore this, it's very important to our lives and our future as a nation.

by Sharon Froehlich (0 articles, 9 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 32 comments) on Sunday, September 28, 2008 at 3:41:23 PM
 

I agree with Mark, it's a scam!

Don't vote.

Close your bank account and don't pay taxes. It's the only way to take back the country from the already-very-rich.

by jeff prager (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 185 comments) on Saturday, September 20, 2008 at 5:59:33 PM
 

I also agree.

We need to detach ourselves from the government any way we can.

Don't vote in November. It's broken and can't be fixed!

by Sharon Froehlich (0 articles, 9 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 32 comments) on Sunday, September 28, 2008 at 3:31:47 PM
 

Thank you!

Thanks Jeff and Sharon.

Rereading my post, I see I made some typos in there, but I think the message is clear.

And you've just inspired me to write another little essay which I think I will titlle, "How You Preauthorized the Bailout."

If enough people vote (and from what I can learn in the 2004 election almost half the electorate voted), the government can claim legitimacy and continue to do whatever it wants in our name. Once we consent, we cannot revoke our consent. Bad idea. That's handing them a blank check. I think that with the bailout, a lot more people are beginning to understand that.

We can email, phone, write, fax, visit their offices, protest, whatever we want, but we have no way to stop them from doing whatever they decide to do. We vote, they decide. Votes are supposed to give us a voice in such decisions. In a genuine participatory democracy, we could vote directly on the bailout. We could even vote directly for President and Vice-President, and our votes would be final and could not be overruled by the Supreme Court or Congress. In a genuine republic, we'd have to vote for representatives, but we'd be able to hold them accountable. If enough of us didn't like what they were doing, we could hold a recall election and remove them immediately instead of having to endure whatever damage they cause until their term of office is up.

This is tyranny and anybody who votes for tyranny is consenting to tyranny. I don't think that's what most Americans intend to do when they vote. 

Spread the word! No in November! It doesn't matter what Congress does, what matters is that THEY are doing it and we are not. That's not how democracy works. Even if they do the right thing this time, which is very unlikely, that is no reason to give them our authority to do the wrong thing the next time. Don't vote!

by Mark E. Smith (21 articles, 30 quicklinks, 100 diaries, 1325 comments) on Tuesday, September 30, 2008 at 6:38:10 AM