European press: It wasn't a miracle - Hillary won via a rigged vote
by Michael Carmichael
Global Research, January 14, 2008
Planetary Movement
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
The mainstream Italian media are reporting both the rigging of the New Hampshire primary for Senator Hillary Clinton and the official demands for a swift, accurate and impartial recount. In an article written by Marcello Foa, one of Europe's most respected journalists, it appears that vote tallies for all Democratic candidates as well as Republicans were reduced by Diebold vote-counting machines.
In an analysis of the hand-counted ballots, the influential Milanese newspaper - Il Giornale, reports that all Democratic candidates except Senator Hillary Clinton made gains when the New Hampshire ballots were manually tabulated, while Senator Clinton made inexplicably large gains where ballots were tabulated by computerized scanners.
According to the report, Ron Paul should have finished third in the Republican primary rather than fifth. Thus, it would appear that both Barack Obama and Ron Paul were the primary targets of vote-rigging operations in New Hampshire.
Il Giornale cites the Princeton study that alerted public attention to the vulnerability of computerized voting machines used throughout America to deliberate vote-tampering and election-rigging via manipulation of the memory cards.
The state of New Hampshire is equipped with computerized tabulation machines manufactured by Diebold, devices that have received a massive amount of negative publicity after the public awareness of vote-rigging surged dramatically following the presidential election scandal of 2000.
In previous statements, former President Jimmy Carter - who has a global reputation as one of the foremost authorities on election procedures - has frequently pointed out that the United States of America does not meet international criteria for electoral security.
Full Version: It wasn't a miracle - Hillary won via a rigged vote
QUOTE (Zeb @ Jan 19 2008, 10:26 AM) 
by Michael Carmichael
Global Research, January 14, 2008
Planetary Movement
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
The mainstream Italian media are reporting both the rigging of the New Hampshire primary for Senator Hillary Clinton and the official demands for a swift, accurate and impartial recount. In an article written by Marcello Foa, one of Europe's most respected journalists, it appears that vote tallies for all Democratic candidates as well as Republicans were reduced by Diebold vote-counting machines.
In an analysis of the hand-counted ballots, the influential Milanese newspaper - Il Giornale, reports that all Democratic candidates except Senator Hillary Clinton made gains when the New Hampshire ballots were manually tabulated, while Senator Clinton made inexplicably large gains where ballots were tabulated by computerized scanners.
According to the report, Ron Paul should have finished third in the Republican primary rather than fifth. Thus, it would appear that both Barack Obama and Ron Paul were the primary targets of vote-rigging operations in New Hampshire.
Il Giornale cites the Princeton study that alerted public attention to the vulnerability of computerized voting machines used throughout America to deliberate vote-tampering and election-rigging via manipulation of the memory cards.
The state of New Hampshire is equipped with computerized tabulation machines manufactured by Diebold, devices that have received a massive amount of negative publicity after the public awareness of vote-rigging surged dramatically following the presidential election scandal of 2000.
In previous statements, former President Jimmy Carter - who has a global reputation as one of the foremost authorities on election procedures - has frequently pointed out that the United States of America does not meet international criteria for electoral security.
That is all!!
Easy Trader. Vote fraud in primaries is commonplace. Buchanan got shafted here in AZ in 96 which gave milktoast Dole the nomination. AND...............................................
The dems do the same..........
Makes you wonder why we even bother to vote anymore..............................
The dems do the same..........
Makes you wonder why we even bother to vote anymore..............................
Nay, Nomad, though I understand and respect your point, my point is not that there is human corruption or that it is a regularity as that is unquestionably true, in all societies. My point is such allegations are as often as not gratuitous, rarely proven, in comparison to their numbers, as anything but accusers laying them out there and then walking away, leaving all duty to prove its truth unattended in the venues of truths litigation.
Oddly and very consistently in the USA, most allegation of such an “illegality” are never proven in court, in comparison to their numbers, they just are put out there to hang in the air with a perception of being foul, with the real smell as to its truth or falsity rarely proven or attended.
Thus one cannot, or rarely at best, distinguish between those prone to fallacy and conspiracy in justification of failures or sabotage and those who knowing of fraud, yet who rarely lay its proof upon the public table for the courts to decide.
Voter Fraud, last time I inquired, no matter the circumstance, no matter the locale, no matter the party, is illegal and thus, if it turns an election in ones favor over another, in its affect, that can be overturned, if it does not, but is still fraud, then those who make such allegation are duty bound to see that those that perpetuate it, pay, in legality, for their efforts to disenfranchise the America people.
If it is but someone’s sour grape fallacy and mean spirited intent to harm someone by laying the perception of foulness upon the wind without its accompany unmistakable provable smell, then the fraudster is the accusers who do such things. Problem is who can tell until one, lays its facts upon the public table as to the truth of it or the lie of it, hey?
It is not enough to say something is illegal, if honorable and honest and sincere, one must insist it is proven so that there is no doubt of its illegality. Otherwise, what are these accusers, but no life rumor mongers, seeking to depress reality and truth, to fit their visions of convenience and often deception?
Way to often today pundits, media and just the vile among us, accuse others, then merely walk away unaccountable, as if they who are accused MUST, in merely being accused, stand alone to prove their innocence’s, instead of the true American principle which insist the accuser are those who must prove their allegations.
In this, to those that know why in the UK they keep a reasonable and fair standard for proving liable and slander which is far easier to litigate than in this yellow press of opined supposition and ravenous political hyperbole in America. If we had such a standard in America, the price of false allegations, rumor mongering and sabotage would be very costly indeed. Thus what hear would less likely to be provably false than provably true.
Like the constant rants that the Iraq war is illegal as is regularly ranted in the world of conspiracy freaks the world over, for example. One would think, now on to 5 years, with no modest count in those so inclined to such an opine, many of which are willing, capable and brilliant in legal minds the world over who could easily lay it out so that an objective judicial verdict can be rendered as to its legality or not. Oddly there has not even been such a venue started, beyond the empty words of gratuitous political platitudes or in voiceless subjective forums of bias and no jurisdiction. Where is the beef of illegality and impeachment, proven so true by so many, except where it counts foremost and in sincerity?
As to proposition of wondering if it is worth voting. I ask you to go and speak person to person to those who do not have the choice of even voting or not voting. Likewise, perhaps to take a walk in the national cemeteries and ask those so silenced but in sacrifice in giving one that choice.
That is all!
Oddly and very consistently in the USA, most allegation of such an “illegality” are never proven in court, in comparison to their numbers, they just are put out there to hang in the air with a perception of being foul, with the real smell as to its truth or falsity rarely proven or attended.
Thus one cannot, or rarely at best, distinguish between those prone to fallacy and conspiracy in justification of failures or sabotage and those who knowing of fraud, yet who rarely lay its proof upon the public table for the courts to decide.
Voter Fraud, last time I inquired, no matter the circumstance, no matter the locale, no matter the party, is illegal and thus, if it turns an election in ones favor over another, in its affect, that can be overturned, if it does not, but is still fraud, then those who make such allegation are duty bound to see that those that perpetuate it, pay, in legality, for their efforts to disenfranchise the America people.
If it is but someone’s sour grape fallacy and mean spirited intent to harm someone by laying the perception of foulness upon the wind without its accompany unmistakable provable smell, then the fraudster is the accusers who do such things. Problem is who can tell until one, lays its facts upon the public table as to the truth of it or the lie of it, hey?
It is not enough to say something is illegal, if honorable and honest and sincere, one must insist it is proven so that there is no doubt of its illegality. Otherwise, what are these accusers, but no life rumor mongers, seeking to depress reality and truth, to fit their visions of convenience and often deception?
Way to often today pundits, media and just the vile among us, accuse others, then merely walk away unaccountable, as if they who are accused MUST, in merely being accused, stand alone to prove their innocence’s, instead of the true American principle which insist the accuser are those who must prove their allegations.
In this, to those that know why in the UK they keep a reasonable and fair standard for proving liable and slander which is far easier to litigate than in this yellow press of opined supposition and ravenous political hyperbole in America. If we had such a standard in America, the price of false allegations, rumor mongering and sabotage would be very costly indeed. Thus what hear would less likely to be provably false than provably true.
Like the constant rants that the Iraq war is illegal as is regularly ranted in the world of conspiracy freaks the world over, for example. One would think, now on to 5 years, with no modest count in those so inclined to such an opine, many of which are willing, capable and brilliant in legal minds the world over who could easily lay it out so that an objective judicial verdict can be rendered as to its legality or not. Oddly there has not even been such a venue started, beyond the empty words of gratuitous political platitudes or in voiceless subjective forums of bias and no jurisdiction. Where is the beef of illegality and impeachment, proven so true by so many, except where it counts foremost and in sincerity?
As to proposition of wondering if it is worth voting. I ask you to go and speak person to person to those who do not have the choice of even voting or not voting. Likewise, perhaps to take a walk in the national cemeteries and ask those so silenced but in sacrifice in giving one that choice.
QUOTE
The choice some assume is one of liberties chooses, to vote, or NOT vote, is in IMHO, an alternative like one able to speak, deciding not speak, its communication is quietly voiceless and in effect is disenfranchising to the cause and price of liberty.
That is all!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.