"What?" I hear you say.
It's the truth!
I've just read Greg Palast's "Armed madhouse" and it's quite an eye opener. Not just facts and figures, but he actually prints the documents he gets handed, just to make sure people don't doubt what he's on about.
Amazingly enough, the story of how the elections were rigged in 2004 didn't make it to most US TV stations (and I missed it on the BBC), but the same thing is going to happen in 2008.
"Rigged?" I hear you say, "Conspiracy theory!" I hear you mumble.
No. Actually, it's quite neat.
Let me try to explain in short:
1. Dump faulty voting machines in Hispanic and Black areas.
2. Cage list (lists of people banned from voting).
3. Force people to use provisional votes...and don't count them.
See. It's easy. And it happened and it's gonna happen again.
Now, if I can see that and you can see that and Greg there can see that, surely the Democrats can see that too. So why do they let it happen?
Because it suits them on a local level. For the majority of politicians, it's not really important who's in the White house, seemingly. The local elections (where they get their little whiff of power) are what's important to them. And faulty machines in some 'hoods, just isn't really worth nagging about, because that might lose them votes and let some black or hispanic guy in, instead of themselves.
As Greg mentions: The grand wizard would be proud. And not a civil rights defender hanging from a tree in sight!
It's all so much more subtle.
Greg is a very reliable journalist.
However, there is something much much more deep that some of my
U.S. friends will not like to hear, but...
Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. (at least in the mid and high
levels) are exactly the same thing, so it's no big deal who
is in the White House. Ideologically they are the same, also socially,
economically, culturally and spiritually speaking.
Period.
Originally posted by SeitseAs with most of simple seitse's posts, the opposite is true.
Greg is a very reliable journalist.
However, there is something much much more deep that some of my
U.S. friends will not like to hear, but...
Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. (at least in the mid and high
levels) are exactly the [b]same thing, so it's no big deal who
is in the White House. Ideologically they are the same, also socially,
economically, culturally and spiritually speaking.
Period.[/b]
No vote in the world is as significant as the US elections.
Socially, economically, culturally and spiritually.
A 5 year old could understand this.
Originally posted by Seitseexcellant points Seitse. RATED!
Greg is a very reliable journalist.
However, there is something much much more deep that some of my
U.S. friends will not like to hear, but...
Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. (at least in the mid and high
levels) are exactly the [b]same thing, so it's no big deal who
is in the White House. Ideologically they are the same, also socially,
economically, culturally and spiritually speaking.
Period.[/b]
i kind of agree with seitse. democrats and republicans are the same lady with different hats. of course, what concerns me is that the democrats seem to want the wars to end, so it would do some good to have a demo in the white house. other than that, whatever. i mean bush is a complete idiot and he still managed to not fire the "nucular" missiles and start a world war. so as long as thy keep their fingers off the red button, it shouldn't matter who is in the white house.
Originally posted by SALADINMan, I don't know, to be sincere. It seems that the kid has opposite
so whats this 'battle' with petrosian and you all about Seitse? I have not been on the forums regular for a while.. have i missed something?
views to mine, which is perfectly acceptable in a free environment.
But the guy is chasing me all over the place systematically disagreeing
with me (which is also acceptable in a free society) but with too much
passion and with quite monotone adjectives.
The kid is obsessed. Let him be.
How are you lately? Long time no read, mate.
Originally posted by SeitseWhilst it pains me to agree that a huge flaw in the US political system is its dependence on big business; you seem to miss the rather big point that different corporations support different parties.
Kid, you are wrong as [b]always.
Anybody who knows a little about politics understands the
transnational corporations are the ones in command, not the
politicians.
Of course a person like you is not expected to understand this.
Poor you.[/b]
You may think that Clinton is the same as Bush, i think that every British ambassador in the world would see it differently.
The republican party has far greater links with jewish groups, religious fundamentalism etc etc.
They have massively different views on taxation, governmental control racial equality and where religion should influence policies.
The US intervenes and influences the world more than whole continents do. The way they go about it differs massively depending on which power base is in charge. For example the democrats have always been supported by a large Irish lobby and so the Irish catholics see a massive difference. The way that Bush so blatantly is biased towards Israel is again a common feature of republicanism.
Would any democrat behave in the way Ronald RAYGUN did?
Originally posted by SeitseI think you have a point here. Listening to Democrates such as Senator Clinton before we went into Iraq, and subsequently voted to go into Iraq, if you closed your eyes it sounded just like Bush. However, now that it has exploded in the face of Bush they have the luxuary of sitting back and attacking the Presidents decision......that is of coarse except for tha pesky voting record of theirs.
Greg is a very reliable journalist.
However, there is something much much more deep that some of my
U.S. friends will not like to hear, but...
Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. (at least in the mid and high
levels) are exactly the [b]same thing, so it's no big deal who
is in the White House. Ideologically they are the same, also socially,
economically, culturally and spiritually speaking.
Period.[/b]
I enjoyed a skit on SNL where Hilliary was being questioned as to why she voted to go into Iraq and after saying they had WMD's and was a threat to world security. Whoever played her did it brilliantly when she smiled and said, "Well you know, those who know me the best know that my vote was done in all insincerity." 😛
Originally posted by SeitseAbsolutely. I have always been of the opinion that the Secret Service's main task is to ensure that at all times while the President is in the White House, that he is kept clear of every possible lever of power, and that should he naively attempt to actually impress his own personal agenda onto the office of the Chief Executive Officer, that they were there to dispatch him with the utmost of prejudice.
Anybody who knows a little about politics understands the
transnational corporations are the ones in command, not the
politicians.
Originally posted by shavixmirI will try and find the url where I trawled a bit of "conspiracist" scuttlebutt that quite convincingly linked the idea that the move to a totally electronic voting system will finally nail the coffin of the American public's exercise of democratic freedom. The reason for this conclusion is that the system can be massaged by very subtle algorithms that will be able to bring in the required result for the ruling elite every time. Yet it will assemble the result in such an incremental way that it would be hard to gainsay the final result because they would have been able to direct, influence and construct public opinion in the lead up to the election as well as during the tally of votes such that the Gore/Florida fiasco will never again reoccur.
"Rigged?" I hear you say, "Conspiracy theory!" I hear you mumble.
No. Actually, it's quite neat.
.
Originally posted by petrosianpupilI disagree. Although shareholders may appear in this or
you seem to miss the rather big point that different corporations support different parties.
the other event, the management of the companies (the big, mighty,
wealthy CEO's) still have the obligation to maximize profit for them,
thus the big time CEO's pour resources (maybe the money is the one
advertised by media but there is much more ways to support) on
both sides.
Not in vain big corporations have supported throughout the world
many kinds of regimes (right, left, fascist, Christian, Islamic,
presidential, parlamentarian, dictatorial, etc. you name it) as long as
they secure wealth creation for the corporations.
Companies have no ideology but to create wealth for shareholders.
Not in vain Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) codes are voluntary;
the big multinationals have resisted regulation beyond the pure,
most minimum possible company law.