International monitors at US polling spots draw criticism from voter fraud groups

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   

United Nations-affiliated election monitors from Europe and central Asia will be at polling places around the U.S. looking for voter suppression activities by conservative groups, a concern raised by civil rights groups during a meeting this week. The intervention has drawn criticism from a prominent conservative-leaning group combating election fraud.

UN Monitors Story

Uh... really? Both sides have engaged in some sort of voter manipulation over the years, last time I seem to remember the Black Panthers being involved in a row about voting in Pennsylvania. But the bigger question is, is it legal for the United Nations to have a presence in our elections? Personally I think this is a very bad sign of things to come, but I'd like to hear others thoughts...




posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   
It's pretty sad when we have military all over the world and spend trillions on the rest of the planet but the UN is monitoring our elections.

Just another small step in the effort to eventually subjugate US citizens to UN rule.

I think they should defund the UN and kick them out of the US altogether. They are collectively an enemy of the US.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by vkey08
Uh... really? Both sides have engaged in some sort of voter manipulation over the years, last time I seem to remember the Black Panthers being involved in a row about voting in Pennsylvania. But the bigger question is, is it legal for the United Nations to have a presence in our elections? Personally I think this is a very bad sign of things to come, but I'd like to hear others thoughts...


The US and European election systems are so flawed and politicians in general so corrupt, anything that helps can only be a good thing.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


I don't know if it is illegal, but it certainly speaks volumes of the state of our nation. Having the UN monitor makes me uneasy.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   
While I'm not supportive of the UN in domestic policy especially within these United States, I am compelled to state that it's about time somebody took an interest in WATCHING WHAT GOES ON.
Voter fraud is rampant in my community and throughout the county. County election officials refuse to remove dead voters from eligible voter lists, instruct polling officials NOT to turn anyone away or fill out "provisional" ballots" even if they're not on official list of registered voters - instead requiring election judges to contact the County Election department (so those folks can illegally add voters on election day).
Criminal complaints about illegal voting at the municipal level get no service from the county law enforcement, district attorney or election department.

ganjoa



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


I trust our own government aboout 100 times more than the UN, I trust a rabid dog to baby sit my children more than I trust our government.

So ya I say they can get ##snip## out of my country, and keep their agenda 21 loving asses out of our election.

Also, why is it since Obama has been presideant, everything by all the federal LEOs has been about conservative groups? And all the loonie lefties have gotten a pass? The are the ones threatening white people away from polling stations, and threatening violence if their guy loses.

It is a rediculous position, that the UN with more human rights violations than any single country I can remember, can be fair and impartial about anything. As it is widely known, they have an agenda one way or another for eveything they do.
edit on Sun Oct 21 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: Mod Note: Do Not Evade the Automatic Censors



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by vkey08
 


I don't know if it is illegal, but it certainly speaks volumes of the state of our nation. Having the UN monitor makes me uneasy.



You and me both Beez..... While I agree with some other posters that something needs to be put in place to keep rampant fraud from happening, this is NOT the way to do it, having foreign people monitor our elections would be just step one, what's next, UN taking over CPS?



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
I'm with badgerprints on this. Incrementalism. Getting us used to seeing the UN uniforms.

It's not the small amount of voter fraud that's killing us anyway. It's the corruption of the entire system. It's in the "machine" politics; the selection of candidates by political power elites and the crushing of candidates who reflect the people's will. It's the behind-closed-doors treatment of ballots and vote counting. Who's watching all that?

The entire thing is a farce, and the presence of UN monitors--or lack thereof--means not a damn thing. It's a show that's intended to silence critics of the last election; except that it will end up having the opposite effect because it's a show put on by idiots for idiots....



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


If we can't do it then someone has to do it for us.

It only makes sense for the UN to do this, we are the most powerful nation on the planet. I'm sure the rest of the world has some interest in how we control them.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I participated some on another site about this topic. I have some mixed feelings myself...but consider this for openers.

What are some of you afraid of? That one party or the other might actually get caught and we get to be embarrassed on the world stage? I think it's a great idea.

This is a highly contentious election. The whole freaking world knows that and the whole world is watching. We like to say we are the model for the whole world...so why not let multiple representatives via the U.N. observe? I think it's an extremely good idea for a few reasons. Put your money where your mouth is ...so to speak.

It assures we here in the states are not going to get tricked, screwed and lied to.

It will help assure that none of the parties...two party paradigm or even the third parties... are "cheating"

It sets an example to the rest of the world that even the big bad USA is willing to show how "fair and equal" our elections can be.

How can any of you find this as a bad idea? Unless...you are afraid your candidate and your party might not be so "above the table" in their behaviors and actions....but no...we don't have anything to worry about...everyone has played fairly and by the rules....oh...wait.

Now, that being said.

I am not a fan of the language of Agenda 21 and I am not a fan of the U.N.'s involvement in gun control conversations. I can see why some folks do not trust the U.N. I can understand and appreciate their opinions on the topic.

However, for our "global" image as the country that spreads "freedom and democracy" I think it might be a good idea to let the world see our process. Let them see it can happen.

It will be rather embarrassing if someone gets caught cheating though. If that were to happen, I don't think many people have continue to hold onto those promises of "freedom and democracy" we keep trying to sell.
edit on 10/21/2012 by Jeremiah65 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by vkey08
 


I don't know if it is illegal, but it certainly speaks volumes of the state of our nation. Having the UN monitor makes me uneasy.



I would not think that they have the jurisdiction... Anyway, this is the handy work of the NAACP and the ACLU and it stinks to high heaven. I smell a set up considering the close relationship between Obama and the UN. (They crafted his Obama Doctrine)...

I don't like it one bit and neither will the voters. I wonder which areas they plan to show up. My money is on Ohio for starters and other key battleground states.

Not good...



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by beezzer
 


If we can't do it then someone has to do it for us.

It only makes sense for the UN to do this, we are the most powerful nation on the planet. I'm sure the rest of the world has some interest in how we control them.


Practically every other nation in the world has stricter regulations regarding voter registration and proper voter identification. For Some reason the US is being held to a different standard... Even Canada requires an I.D. to vote. Why no UN presence there? Ever see voters with permanent inked fingers in foreign lands? That's to ensure that they don't show up to vote twice. It is a free for all in the US and state after state have sought measures to PREVENT fraud only to be shut down time and time again and Obama is helping to shut them down. They were problems in Ohio back in 2008 with same day registration and voting and I expect bigger problems this year.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 
I would have not problem having UN monitors observing our elections up here. In fact, an independent look at 'robo-calls' would be quite handy. As to you guys, I would only hope that they would have access to analysis of voting machine shenanigans...which seem to be endemic...hanging chads, and whatever other complaints seem to pop up.

We send our observers all over the place...I think it's weaselly to get all bent out of shape when the favour is returned.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   
The UN is one of the most corrupt organizations in all of human history. It is also an agenda driven one that undermines the sovereignty of any independent nation. It is interesting how partisan their "monitoring" has been so far. They demonize common sense efforts to combat the very real and prevalent problem of voter fraud (as reported by local media sources the nation over as opposed to national MSM who claim it doesn't exist). On the other hand,there has been nary a peep about the current administration's attempts to suppress the overseas military vote (members of the military favor Romney about 4-1).

But we're supposed to trust these people? There are many factions and nations in the UN who would love to make the US a weaker nation. They would be about as "fair and balanced" as the network that uses the phrase as a motto.

The UN should exist as a forum for diplomacy, but should have no legal power over anything or anybody.
UN monitors. Gimme a break.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


Voter fraud is practically non-existent in America. Voter supression is on a much larger scale. That's why the UN is here, to prevent voter supression.

If voter fraud was so terrible in this country then why are we ranked 120th out of 169 in voter turnout (66%)? The percentage is even lower (47%) when you include voting age participation. I would expect something much, much higher if voter fraud was the problem that you and so many state legislatures claimed it to be.

Denmark, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom don't require voter ID and have far, far higher levels of voter turnout than the US. Spain, Greece, France, Malta, Belgium, and Italy require voter ID but provide the ID automatically to all of their citizens, all of which have a far higher turnout than the US.

The problem in America isn't too many people voting, it's not enough.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


If both sides were asking for it, maybe, and only if the Supreme Court said it was OK, remember this is a Constitutional Republic and having foreign observers monitor our elections may not be entirely legal under our laws.. (I actually think it's not but I'll let the SCOTUS take that question up) In this case it's very much a biased request, from a person that is slipping in the polls and has some tough questions to answer to the American People..

Something just doesn't add up here, what's the UN going to do invalidate our election? They just don't have that authority, in the end, as always, the Electoral College will decide who our next president is, and in case anyone was wondering (outside of the USA where we all know this in the backs of our heads) they do not have to vote along the lines of the popular vote... they can cast their own ballots..

ie: Representative Republic.. so no matter what happens in the popular vote (and they normally vote along the lines of who wins the state by practice) they have the final say unless it's a tie or no one candidate gets 270 electoral votes..



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
So I decided to go ahead and read the article. I think two paragraphs are important of note here:

Neil Simon, director of communications for the OSCE’s parliamentary assembly, agreed the U.N. does not have jurisdiction over U.S. elections but noted all OSCE member countries, which include the United States, have committed since 1990 to hold free and democratic elections and to allow one another to observe their elections.


So, under international treaty, which is the 'law of the land' according to the US constitution, this is perfectly legal.


The OSCE has 56 participating states from Europe, Central Asia and North America, including the United States and Canada. It has assessed elections in the United States since 2002.


This has been going on for 10 years already and only now conservatives are upset about it?



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


they may have assessed, but never actually had people at polling places I would wager, there's a distinct difference.. and I'm not upset based upon conservative vs liberal, i'm upset because this is just plain smells wrong..



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


Yup its legal....

All they do is observe to see how things go and will document incidents that prevent people from voting, like black panthers etc etc etc.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


How do you assess without monitoring?

They were here in 2008:

General Elections, 4 November 2008
Following an invitation from the Government of the United States of America to observe the 4 November general elections, ODIHR conducted a needs assessment mission and subsequently deployed a limited election observation mission on 10 October


In 2004 as well:

Presidential Election, 2 November 2004
In response to an invitation from the Government of the United States of America, ODIHR conducted an election observation mission of a targeted nature to the 2 November elections.


Started in 2002:

General Elections, 5 November 2002
In line with the 1990 Copenhagen Document commitments, the United States invited ODIHR to observe the 5 November 2002 general elections. In response, ODIHR deployed an Election Assessment Mission for these elections.


It's all right here.





new topics
top topics
 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join