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.

 

(??) Will Bush take election by military force?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Will Bush take election by military force?

The link below made me very nervous......
By placing Homeland security at the polls can he commit voting fraud? Blame an assasination of his enemies on Terrorists.. all while his operatives crawl over all political gatherings and voting facilities?

news.yahoo.com.../ap/20040708/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/election_terror_threat_13

sorry to double post i wasn't sure what area to put this




posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 10:55 PM
link   
In a word... NO.


It's not a concern. The assumtion here is that everyone that works in the Executive Department (in this case, Homeland Security) are mindlessly devoted to Bush, and unethical too. Those guards will still have jobs, no matter who the President and their local Congress member are. So 99.9% of them aren't going to risk their jobs (and a life of unemployment if it ends up on the national news) and even possibly going to jail to try to tamper with the ballot box under their guard in favor of anyone (Bush, Kerry, Nader, or a write-in even). Add to that the fact that, after the fiasco in 2000, all eyes will be on election procedures this year. So the likelyhood of anyone trying any stunts is very remote now.

As for the Democrats' request to have the UN "oversee" the US Presidential election this year...
...yeah, right. That's like asking the city mafia to oversee the election for Mayor!



[edit on 7/8/2004 by ThunderCloud]



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 07:50 AM
link   
I guess my imagination ran away with me... I just had this total picture of like "Brave New World" or maybe those NWO threads are finaly getting to me



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 08:14 AM
link   
For months I have been reading in ATS forums the theory about Bush possibilities of using an Al-queda attack on election time, so he can stay in power.

Last night on TV every thing came into place when homeland security says that it may actually be an imminent attack by Al-queda during elections.

We as citizen have to be aware that bush power is going to take effect with this (imminent latest possibility of an attack) he is starting to put his cards on the table and we probably are going to see an increase of military movement around the US, now he wants to very fast start pulling troops from Iraq, perhaps he wants to have them ready at home for the elections?

I feel that something is not right, Al-queda hates bush if they are going to do an attack they will do it before elections to damage bush, not during elections, and if this happens Bush can used it to stop the election for the public safety, so either way bush can play his card well to his advantage, perhaps some people in ATS have some visions of the future after all.


I am the only one that see foul play in a election day? or I am loosing my mind and becoming paranoid?



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Anyone remember what Tommy Frank say when there is a major terror attack?

Chess pieces are now moving into place. I doubt there will be election this year.



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 08:31 AM
link   
There are any number of cards that could be in play near election time...depending on how bad it's looking for him...

1) Rigging the elections AGAIN.... This is likely to be another close election...with his cronies in my home state, and in Texas, he's likely to be able to pull it off again, though not without even more skepticism, and an almost certain panel investigation after the election....

2) The Osama card... According to some reliable reports, Osama is, and has been, boxed in by the military in the Afghan mountains....and he hasn't been taken yet, as they are waiting for the right timing... The downside of this card, is that then we'd need another boogeyman, so another act with a different one responsible is almost guaranteed, in order to keep the public behind a war on terror....

3) The terrorist act card.... While I don't think he's directly behind it, inadvertently, those in his camp can simply stand back one day, and let something go off, instead of stopping it...again, all on the timing, and pressing need...



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 08:42 AM
link   
Ok well at least if I'm paranoid I'm not the only one. All I know is when I read that article I got the major creeps.

Botched or Zero election....

People get restless...

Homeland Security declares TERRORIST threat.. martial law..




posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 08:53 AM
link   
I foresee the security levels going to the highest and bush will have the right as the president to take all the necessary means to "keep the nation and his citizens safe" if that means stopping the elections until the "terror alert" goes back to safety levels, this is not funny but we should be ready for what is to come. Perhaps John Titor hoax was not that much off the reality check.


ATS did well on keeping the records on these hoax future accounts for us to read.



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 08:58 AM
link   
movies.yahoo.com...

HOMELAND SECURITY seeks entertainment liason!!
"The department is creating the job to make sure that dramatic portrayals of it are as accurate as possible, spokesman Dennis Murphy said Friday "

Media control



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Unusal me this is a link to the web site, but ATS have the actual postings I will search more but I have to leave, sorry I will find it when I come back if you don't do it first.

www.johntitor.com...



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 09:14 AM
link   
www.alternet.org...

more on HS



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 03:03 PM
link   
UnusualMe, This from John titor hoax

(16) There is a civil war in the United States that starts in 2005. That conflict flares up and down for 10 years. In 2015, Russia launches a nuclear strike against the major cities in the United States (which is the "other side" of the civil war from my perspective), China and Europe. The United States counter attacks. The US cities are destroyed along with the AFE (American Federal Empire)...thus we (in the country) won. The European Union and China were also destroyed. Russia is now our largest trading partner and the Capitol of the US was moved to Omaha Nebraska.

(41) The war is a result of faulty politics and desperation from Western leadership during the US civil war. Yes, I suppose you could stop it

42) Take a close look at the county-by-county voting map from the last elections.



(63) Real disruptions in world events begin with the destabilization of the West as a result of degrading US foreign policy and consistency.

(64) This becomes apparent around 2004 as civil unrest develops near the next presidential election.

I found them.



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 03:31 PM
link   
christ so many of you need to get a grip. to whoever it was that said there probably isn't going to be an election this year you can go screw yourself. i have no problem with conspiracy theory but you're just being stupid. you've bought in the the anti-bush bull# that permeates are media and you actually believe he'd do that; as if he's some evil bad guy. the running stereotype that politicans (dems and repubs) are corrupt may be true, but none of them are downright evil and sinister as some of you would like to believe. the NWO thoeries are starting to go to your head. do everyone a favor, stop ranting and panicking, and just go vote, i don't care who for, just vote; punch your damn ballot and set aside you're ridiculous worries.

[edit on 9-7-2004 by astroblade]



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 03:40 PM
link   
nothing will happen, election willbe fine and people will be the same.



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 04:52 PM
link   


Textbe an election this year you can go screw yourself. i have no problem with conspiracy theory but you're just being stupid.


astroblade

This comment is out of place and insulting, if you disagree with the post say it but do not insult anybody here.



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Absent a massive, and I mean MASSIVE, attack against the US (i.e. multiple major attacks against the infrastructure in every state), the elections will go off completely as they should. It is absolutely ludicrous to think that they would not. The rule of law present in our system and the checks and balances between branches of the government ensure this. Those who think otherwise are either stuck in the past and still whining that Gore lost. Just because he lost doesn't mean there has to have been a conspiracy. Just because he lost doesn't mean there's a conspiracy brewing for the upcoming election. Is Bush the best choice for the republicans? I don't think so. Is Kerry the best choice for the democrats? Definitely not. Is all this gloom and doom about Bush "stealing" the upcoming election simply a recognition by many that Kerry is not the right choice and will not/cannot win? Is this why we're already hearing that Bush is going to "steal" the election?

Come on people, it's time for a little common sense! The only time an election may have been stolen was Kennedy's "win" over Nixon. Cook County is most unusual - dead people vote. Maybe that was the theme for the movie with the boy saying "I see dead people"



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 05:31 PM
link   
CommonSense,

I like your last comment about the death people voting, where I am from death people still vote.



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Actualy according to the polls Kerry is ahead by a few percent.. but it's going to be CLOSE at least if the presant attitudes towards the canidates stay the way they are. We all know what happened last time the election was CLOSE.

The Federal Government has been torn appart by this Homeland thing in a bill that seems it was purposely rushed, and not for all the right reasons.

Already warnings of a MASSIVE terrorist threat.. are being circulated by Homeland for the coming elections.

Just because we are Americans and think we are untouchable doesn't mean we aren't. Nations have been upset by dictators before we aren't immune.

If it turns out I'm just paranoid then so be it.. I'll certainly feel better.



posted on Jul, 9 2004 @ 11:34 PM
link   
Relax!


Some people ask, "What if we have a major terrorist attack again? Will the elections be halted?" No election in the U.S. has ever been halted, even due to war. The 1814 Elections happened in the middle of a British invasion of the U.S. The 1864 Elections happened in the middle of the Civil War. The 1934, 1938, 1942, and 1944 Elections happened during the Great Depression and World War II... in this case, the U.S. suffered a near economic meltdown and was directly attacked in the middle of the economic crisis... and of course, the 2000 Election was hotly contested, followed by a direct attack on the U.S. less than a year later...
My point is, the U.S. has survived worse already, so I'm not worried about the 2004 Elections.


Another thing that puzzles me... how would the survival of Osama bin Laden and another terrorist threat help Bush remain as President?
Bush, I think, wants just the opposite... a terrorist attack in the U.S. between now and November would not scare people into voting for him; it would enrage them into voting against him, thus ensuring his loss. People wolud think, "After all the crap that Bush has put us through for 3 years after 9/11/01, the U.S. is still attacked? Forget that, he obviously can't do the job." However, if he makes it to November with no more terrorist attacks in the U.S. since 9/11/01, people will think, "Well, we've been through a lot of crap, but most of the terrorists are over in the Middle East trying to stop us right now, so we might as well let him keep taking the fight to their home field instead of on over here on ours." Bush gets reelected.

If the Bush administration is reporting another credible terrorist threat in the U.S., it's only grudgingly that they admit it. If Bush is likely to do anything unethical between now and November, it'll be trying to hide a terrorist attack in the U.S. if it occurs, or trying to make it look like an 'unfortuante accident.' Even if Bush did 'rig' the 2000 Election (which he didn't... that's a whole discussion in itself), he won't even try it in the 2004 Election, because all eyes will be on the ballot boxes during elections for decades to come now.

The opposite is true for Kerry, of course -- another terrorist attack in the U.S. or Osama bin Laden showing us he's alive and well would guarantee his victory. I don't think he hopes for such a thing, of course... However, if it did happen, he's not stupid, he'd voice his concerns about Bush not being up to the task of stopping terrorism around the world loud and clear.




new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join