This really shows how far the Middle East still has to go before it will be on par with our form of democracy.

 

I mean, if they were serious about stealing the election they'd be using Diebold voting machines instead of trailer trucks full of ballots.

 

NYT – December 14, 2005

Police Seize Forged Ballots Headed to Iraq From Iran

 

By DEXTER FILKINS

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Dec. 13 - Less than two days before nationwide elections, the Iraqi border police seized a tanker on Tuesday that had just crossed from Iran filled with thousands of forged ballots, an official at the Interior Ministry said.

 

The tanker was seized in the evening by agents with the American-trained border protection force at the Iraqi town of Badra, after crossing at Munthirya on the Iraqi border, the official said. According to the Iraqi official, the border police found several thousand partly completed ballots inside.

 

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, said the Iranian truck driver told the police under interrogation that at least three other trucks filled with ballots had crossed from Iran at different spots along the border.

 

The official, who did not attend the interrogation, said he did not know where the driver was headed, or what he intended to do with the ballots.

 

The seizure of the truck comes at a delicate time in Iran's relations with both Iraq and the United States. The American government has said Iranian agents are deeply involved in trying to influence events in Iraq, by funneling money to Shiite political parties and by arming and training many of the illegal militias that are bedeviling the country.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/14/internat...agewanted=print

Edited December 14, 200520 yr by FlaSoxxJim

This really shows how far the Middle East still has to go before it will be on par with our form of democracy. 

 

I mean, if they were serious about stealing the election they'd be using Diebold voting machines instead of trailer trucks full of ballots. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/14/internat...agewanted=print

Don't forget the Diebold machines owned by Bush's GREAT, BEST friend. We really need to get that conspiracy theory right!

Don't forget the Diebold machines owned by Bush's GREAT, BEST friend.  We really need to get that conspiracy theory right! 

Let's not forget the same guy said he'd "deliver" Ohio to Bush.

Don't forget the Diebold machines owned by Bush's GREAT, BEST friend.  We really need to get that conspiracy theory right! 

Some pretty interesting developments on the old Diebold newsfront these last two weeks, I'd say. Refusal to reveal source code. CEO steps down. Insider trading bombshell. Proof that the 'unhackable' memory cards can be hacked and votes riggged.

 

Good stuff.

We still havent given up the whining and conspiracy theories about the '04 election I see.

 

:rolly

why would anyone be concerned about faulty, hackable, and unverifiable voting machines?

We still havent given up the whining and conspiracy theories about the '04 election I see.

 

:rolly

Frankly, I'm more concerned about the potential to rig '06. :rolly :rolly

 

The implosion of Diebold will go a long way toward addressing those concerns.

why would anyone be concerned about faulty, hackable, and unverifiable voting machines?

 

Sadly, there's a whole lot of folks who think exactly that way.

FWIW, I saw an interview with a General this morning that's in charge over there and he said he has not heard that report. He said he did hear the same thing during the previous election/primary.

We still havent given up the whining and conspiracy theories about the '04 election I see.

 

:rolly

More like 2000, 2002, 2004, and upcoming 2006.

 

Hey - all kidding aside, anything's hackable. And for you all to suggest that there indeed was a grand scheme to hack votes so GWB could win Ohio... that's juuuuuuuust a little too far for me. (preparing now to see 7,856 links about how it happened from lib blogs).

More like 2000, 2002, 2004, and upcoming 2006.

 

Hey - all kidding aside, anything's hackable.  And for you all to suggest that there indeed was a grand scheme to hack votes so GWB could win Ohio... that's juuuuuuuust a little too far for me.  (preparing now to see 7,856 links about how it happened from lib blogs).

 

Punch cards or optical-scanned cards that can be physically preserved/protected and can be manually verified are quite a bit less hackable.

Punch cards

 

 

dude, punch cards are racist. You need to start reading the New York Times.

Edited December 14, 200520 yr by mr_genius

dude, punch cards are ricist.  You need to start reading the New York Times.

Just the 'butterfly ballot' variety.

Ricist?

 

Are we gonna start seeing conspiracy blogs now linking hanging chads to domestic rice paddys and irrigation controversies in California?

Ricist?

 

Are we gonna start seeing conspiracy blogs now linking hanging chads to domestic rice paddys and irrigation controversies in California?

I thought a Ricist was an avid Condi supporter. . . ?

Edited December 14, 200520 yr by FlaSoxxJim

Punch cards or optical-scanned cards that can be physically preserved/protected and can be manually verified are quite a bit less hackable.

Indeed. But they can also be altered. Just saying.

 

It bugs me that (not necessarily you, Jim or LCR but I want to make a point) a lot of people in this country thinks the elections are all thrown when a Republican wins a "big" election. There will ALWAYS be irregularities. It's impossible to stop. Yet, Diebold "threw" the election. Katherine Harris chumped Al Gore. I could go on in some congressional elections... but the point's the same. By in large, the elections system works. And it makes me cringe to see all these conspiracy stories, because people are bitter and pissed off about what happened 5 years ago and can't let it go. I'm sure we would all be s***ting rose petals if Al Gore were president right now. But he's not, and we're supposedly 10,000 times worse off for it, so now the elections are all rigged.

Are we gonna start seeing conspiracy blogs now linking hanging chads to domestic rice paddys and irrigation controversies in California?

 

 

START seeing? Typical liberal, doesn't even know about stuff.

Indeed.  But they can also be altered.  Just saying.

 

It bugs me that (not necessarily you, Jim or LCR but I want to make a point) a lot of people in this country thinks the elections are all thrown when a Republican wins a "big" election.  There will ALWAYS be irregularities.  It's impossible to stop.  Yet, Diebold "threw" the election.  Katherine Harris chumped Al Gore.  I could go on in some congressional elections... but the point's the same.  By in large, the elections system works.  And it makes me cringe to see all these conspiracy stories, because people are bitter and pissed off about what happened 5 years ago and can't let it go.  I'm sure we would all be s***ting rose petals if Al Gore were president right now.  But he's not, and we're supposedly 10,000 times worse off for it, so now the elections are all rigged.

 

Just because they may be impossible to entirely stop, that is no reason to not make inquiries into the irregularities. And when the "irregularities" happen with alarming regularity it is a responsible question to ask why, and what can be done about it.

Just because they may be impossible to entirely stop, that is no reason to not make inquiries into the irregularities.  And when the "irregularities" happen with alarming regularity it is a responsible question to ask why, and what can be done about it.

Oh, I agree - no matter what we have to make the system better. But to make the leap that the elections are "thrown" because of this, goes a lot too far, IMO, which is what I'm trying to say (I think).

Florida 2000 - thrown? Probably, but then again so was Illinois and Texas 1960. That stuff happens.

 

Ohio 2004? There was some funny business there, but I don't think Kerry won.

Florida 2000 - thrown? Probably

 

 

so you're saying Kerry lost the election on purpose? aka, it was 'thrown'.

so you're saying Kerry lost the election on purpose?  aka, it was 'thrown'.

 

Gore = 2000

Kerry = 2004

so you're saying Kerry lost the election on purpose?  aka, it was 'thrown'.

Kerry ran in 2000?

Kerry ran in 2000?

 

 

oops

 

Gore = 2000

Kerry = 2004

 

asdfsadsdfadf