It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was the 2004 election stolen? RS says yes.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 05:00 PM
link   
This is a big story, long in coming.

Rolling Stone just published it.

Was the 2004 Election Stolen?



Republicans prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted -- enough to have put John Kerry in the White House. BY ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.

Like many Americans, I spent the evening of the 2004 election watching the returns on television and wondering how the exit polls, which predicted an overwhelming victory for John Kerry, had gotten it so wrong. By midnight, the official tallies showed a decisive lead for George Bush -- and the next day, lacking enough legal evidence to contest the results, Kerry conceded. Republicans derided anyone who expressed doubts about Bush's victory as nut cases in ''tinfoil hats,'' while the national media, with few exceptions, did little to question the validity of the election. The Washington Post immediately dismissed allegations of fraud as ''conspiracy theories,''(1) and The New York Times declared that ''there is no evidence of vote theft or errors on a large scale.''(2)


Full article:
www.rollingstone.com...

Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 2-6-2006 by AgentSmith]




posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Rolling Stone mag says teh 2004 election was stolen. OHHHHHH MYYYYYYY GOOOODDDD, it must be true then eh? Rolling stone is an entertainment magazine, they should stick to that. You werent crying when Al Gore wanted to discount all of the military ballots from overseas in 2000 were you? You want to blame someone for the loss, but you dont look at the fact that less than half of this country voted. Correct me if I'm wrong there.

Election 2004 Poll Results

check out this article
2004 Presidential Election Analysis

People use the whole diebold machines excuse in Ohio, when only two counties used the machines in Ohio. But the above article should clear this mess up.



posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Rolling Stone is a little late to be publishing something that has been proven over and over to be the case! Well, i guess it will sell.

5 years from now, the History channel will have a special on "HOW THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION STOLE ITS WAY"
I look forward to it.



posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ludaChris
Rolling Stone mag says teh 2004 election was stolen. OHHHHHH MYYYYYYY GOOOODDDD, it must be true then eh? Rolling stone is an entertainment magazine, they should stick to that. You werent crying when Al Gore wanted to discount all of the military ballots from overseas in 2000 were you? You want to blame someone for the loss, but you dont look at the fact that less than half of this country voted. Correct me if I'm wrong there.

People use the whole diebold machines excuse in Ohio, when only two counties used the machines in Ohio. But the above article should clear this mess up.


It wasn't just about Diebold, there were other ways they stole the election, too, and it wasn't just Ohio. If you Google "2004 stolen election" you will get alot of hits, all from different news sources, not one of which is rense.com or alex jones even, they are credible news sources with credible investigative journalists. And most importantly, an item that never made it into mainstream media: that the gov't General Accounting Office also thought the election was rigged!

Also, for more info, go to blackboxvoting.org

Go here for an excellent article about the stolen election. In the second or third paragraph it gives a link to the GAO report, from its own web site.

www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1529

And another must read:
www.whatreallyhappened.com...

And don't forget that the first election, 2000, was never kosher either. It was completely unconstitutional for the Supreme Court to appoint a president. The Constitution gives a very explicit process in the case that the election is disputed or tied.

If they're willilng to steal the first election, why wouldn't they be stealing the second one in 2004?



posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady

If they're willilng to steal the first election, why wouldn't they be stealing the second one in 2004?


What scares me is what's going to happen in 2008. I guess in 2.5 years, we'll know.



posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 01:55 PM
link   
I have the creepy feeling that there wont be any "elections" in 2008.

But, that's just me. Gut feeling, intuition, higher light, whatever.

Bush & Co. will have to be dragged out kicking and screaming!



posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe


I have the creepy feeling that there wont be any "elections" in 2008.

But, that's just me. Gut feeling, intuition, higher light, whatever.

Bush & Co. will have to be dragged out kicking and screaming!


Your probobly right. The bullhorn of the media will tell us all that elections are un-nessasary due to the marshal law put in place by another 911 style attack. Move along, nothing to see here.

Thank you FOX, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc, for being tools of the Satanic Cult.



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludaChris
Rolling Stone mag says teh 2004 election was stolen. OHHHHHH MYYYYYYY GOOOODDDD, it must be true then eh?


There will always be some people who don't believe anything until Faux News says it.

I suggest you look at who controls and who supplies the large "news" outlets and then perhaps you'll look at the quality of the reporting instead of the venue. Then again, maybe you won't.



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe


I have the creepy feeling that there wont be any "elections" in 2008.

But, that's just me. Gut feeling, intuition, higher light, whatever.

Bush & Co. will have to be dragged out kicking and screaming!



I had that thought a while back -- mainly because the president thinks he's on a "mission from God" and has supposedly called the US Constitution 'just a damn piece of paper.'

As soon as the initial plans for pandemic response were announced: military regional quarantines, it looked like a setup for suspended elections "in the interest of national security."



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   
I'm old enough to remember when mainstream news had news of labor (i.e. those who work for wages/salary) and international news. Now it's hard to distinguish between tabloid and mainstream news. Unless you get "alternative" news, you know more about American Idol voting irregularities than irregularities in your presidential elections! At the moment I trust the Academy Awards voting more than US elections.
I found this article credible. Note the list at the end (note books on topic).
As far as 2008, the party currently in power has ridden their horses in the parade across America and will likely welcome to have someone else to come in and scoop up the mess they left behind.



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 01:55 AM
link   
What is printed nowadays is simply lie after lie, cover-up after cover-up with certain ommisions leaking out here and there -if we happen to be so lucky! It would benefit us all to read any article we can find, that points out just what a lie/sham/scam this election was, so you can sift out the little tiny truths.
A lot of people who perhaps buy and read the article, may not have necessarily read all the details from their other sources. We do seem to be a Nation filled with people who'd rather forget our most shocking events and go about our daily lives, so isn't it a good thing every time an article reminds us and the rest of the world what a total lie we live in?

[edit on 8-6-2006 by Gary Heslin]



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 02:26 AM
link   
So it's now gone "mainstream". It was interesting watching the debate beforehand, and then seeing what actually happened in Ohio. There are, of course, still people denying that it all happened, but this is to be expected.

And naturally there are plans afoot to steal 2008, and who better to tell us about it than Greg Palast, who documented some of the shenanigans in Florida to such good effect.

I actually started a thread on this - 2008 - the fix is in - and there's an article there by Palast which makes pretty interesting reading.


GREG PALAST: And ‘08, so what's happening is there is no fix of the system. In other words, just like black folk get bad schools and bad hospitals, they get the bad voting machines, which are going to kill those votes... one of the things I discovered is the Republican Party has something called “caging lists,” which came to our -- you know, ... the way the Yes Men capture material by using false websites, so through a false website we were able to capture Republican Party internal missives, through georgebush.org.

And so, what happened was is that they sent us ... lists of literally tens of thousands of names of voters and addresses. We were wondering what the heck this was. It turns out these were almost all African American voters, who they were prepared to challenge in 2004, and they did, to say that these people shouldn't vote, because their addresses are suspect. And you'll see in the book that in the lists of thousands of black voters that they were challenging over their address were thousands of black soldiers who were sent to Iraq; go to Baghdad, and the Republican Party challenges your vote.

And the next thing that they’re going after is the Hispanic vote. So when we saw 2m votes cast/not counted in 2000, nearly 4 votes cast/not counted in 2004, you're going see that number massively increase in 2008.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 10:02 AM
link   
What still amazes me the most is the number of people who claim Bush keeps stealing elections, yet are unable to themselves accept that perhaps more than half of the country VOTED AGAINST THE OTHER GUY!

Seriously, there were only two canidates with enough steam behind thier campaigns in 2004 to be very strong hopefuls. (to the rest, better luck next time) In the spirit of "Denying Ignorance", I will point out that quite simply, a lot of people did not want to see John Kerry in office. Reasons why and counters to those reasons could (and in fact do) fill a whole number of forums and websites.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Travellar
What still amazes me the most is the number of people who claim Bush keeps stealing elections, yet are unable to themselves accept that perhaps more than half of the country VOTED AGAINST THE OTHER GUY!

Seriously, there were only two canidates with enough steam behind thier campaigns in 2004 to be very strong hopefuls. (to the rest, better luck next time) In the spirit of "Denying Ignorance", I will point out that quite simply, a lot of people did not want to see John Kerry in office. Reasons why and counters to those reasons could (and in fact do) fill a whole number of forums and websites.


The point is is that about 350,000 people in Ohio were prevented from voting for "the other guy". That would have been enough to put Kerry in office and not Bush.

If given the choice now, with Bush's current popularity going nosedown, Im sure alot of those people would be a bit more forceful with their vote.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Now I can see how the Democrats remain sore after losing in '04, but to claim the Republicans "stole" the election is just plain ridiculous, and to quote and post a whole bunch of Democratic and Left Wing Liberal Democratic politicians, websites, and the like in support of such a notion is an unfathomable waste of time.

From www.bradblog.com...:

The infamous idiot Dean states:
Howard Dean: "I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided."

The infamous idiot Kucinich states:
U.S. Congressman from Ohio, Rep. Dennis Kucinich: "The secretary of state is supposed to administer elections ? not throw them."

Pollster Lou Harris of the Harris Poll — described in the piece as "the father of modern day political polling" — says: "Ohio was as dirty an election as America has ever seen."

Despite Harris' comments, which may be amongst the most explosive in the article, Kerry himself brings up the rear…

The infamous idiot "Scary" Kerry states:
John Kerry: "Can I draw a conclusion that they played tough games and clearly had intent to reduce the level of our vote? Yes, absolutely. Can I tell you to a certainty that it made the difference in the election? I can't. There's no way for me to do that. If I could have done that, then obviously I would have found some legal recourse."

These Dem's got their meatloaf handed to 'em on a platter by the United States Voter in the Congress, the House, and the White House, and if they don't come out of the dense fog in which they reside they will suffer another whoopin' of the posterior this fall.

Wake up Democrats!

smoken edited some typo's


[edit on 11-6-2006 by smokenmirrors]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Here's a nice article, well thought out, and quite informative.
en.wikipedia.org...

I especially like the bit about calling on the 12th amendment to the constitution, had the last ditch effort to discount Ohio's votes altogether gone through. Gee, vote by state, 30 of which Bush carried, and 19 (not counting Ohio) that Kerry carried. So by disenfranchising 11 million votors, Bush would still have won the election.



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 05:23 PM
link   
If the election was stolen is of little importance, the question we should be asking is does it matter who won the election? Bush and Kerry are two sides of the same coin. Both members of the skull and bones and both enemies of freedom and a constitutional reupblic.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 08:54 PM
link   
Well, the election as I saw it was kind of a choice between two shades of grey.

Bush:
Very certain and clear in what he intends to do. It's what he believes is the right thing, and doesn't care what anyone else thinks.

That last bit certainly hasn't earned him a whole heck of a lot of freinds though.

Kerry:
No clear plan, or at least none that I can see as leading to anything but disaster. His campaign was "I'm not Bush, and I'll magicly make all those horrible things he did go away."

That's how I saw it when I mailed in my absentee ballot, and it's still how I see them.

Anyhow, I expect 2008 to be quite an interesting vote. Since Cheney probrably won't be running, and Bush is finishing his second term already, we'll have two canidates, neither of whom are incumbants.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Two sides of the same coin, yes -but it was more important to have Bush win, obviously. A skull and Bones Republican from the Family who entertains The Al-Kaeda or a Skull and Bones Democrat.

Same coin, uh huh -but they went with the one who would look incompetent when they needed him to look “dumb,” not evil -who should be tried for war crimes.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 03:33 AM
link   
An article in Rolling Stone, written By Robert Kennedy Junior, claims republicans stole the election?
Well with imartial reproting like that, who could doubt it?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join