How can we stop another election from being stolen?
Seems we all know the dangers for 2008. Anyone who doesn't can read the article below, which pretty much covers it, except for one possibility: Another "terrorist strike," as several Republicans have suggested would be helpful, a declaration of martial law, and no election at all.
The question is how can we stop machine, telephone line and/or central scanner hacking, as well as other forms of election tampering, legally?
Until someone comes up with a fool proof plan, and it doesn't look as if our Congress has any real plan, I can think of only one thing we can do. We, as bloggers, citizen journalists, diarists, email writers and the like can make it very clear that if there is any reason to even suspect that the election has been stolen, all hell is going to break loose.
So, Powers-that-be, is anarchy what you want? Do you think that will help your beloved corporations and their bottom line? Do you have any idea how it feels to be surrounded by people who hate you? Have you ever felt that kind of fear?
Personally, I hope you never have to go through anything like that. So, don't mess with election 2008, unless you want a real American revolution.
The Bush/McCain Game Plan:
What May Be in Store for Obama -- And the Rest of America
by Elliot D. CohenNow that Barack Obama has secured the Democratic nomination, many of his supporters are looking forward with guarded optimism to a victory in November. However, while they assume that the road ahead will be a challenging one, and that the outcome may rest with key battleground states such as Ohio, what they may fail to anticipate are the kinds of obstacles that the McCain campaign in tandem with the Bush Administration might, in the coming months, place between them and victory.
It is easy enough to take one's eyes off the ball when concentrating on campaign speeches and strategies for winning over the hearts and minds of Americans. So what things might change the landscape of the current contest and tilt it in favor of the McCain camp?
First, the guarded optimism of Obama supporters assumes that the voting process will be largely a fair one. However, attention to past irregularities suggests otherwise. There are several familiar ways in which the election could be stolen. Some of these ways would be to disenfranchise African American voters and other would-be Obama supporters by purging them from voting lists, losing or failing to send out their registrations, deceiving these citizens about their proper voting precincts, and mis-allocating voting machines in precincts likely to go for Obama.
These, among other illegal and unethical tactics, were employed in key battleground states such as Florida and Ohio in both the 2000 and 2004 elections. It is pie-in-the-sky optimism to think that these same tactics won't be used, perhaps even more systematically, again in 2008. Meanwhile, faulty, insecure, and hackable electronic voting machines attached to malfunctioning printers will be used to record ballots.
In addition to these more conventional manners of voter fraud, there are also other possible ways to steal the election. All electronic voting machines transport their data over telephone lines to a central computer where tabulations of votes are made. These telephone lines are not secure, however, because, in putting into operation its unlawful warrantless surveillance program, the Bush Administration had installed computer technology at major telecom company hubs, such as those of AT&T, which intercepts and reads messages before they reach their final destination. It is therefore quite conceivable that the balloting data being transported from individual voting precincts could be intercepted and reconfigured before it reaches its main tabulation point.
Unless adequate legal protections are enacted to protect against such possibilities, we may never know whether votes were changed even before they were tabulated. Unfortunately, the Senate version of proposed legislation (S.2248) that is supposed to protect against abuses of privacy, gives telecom companies immunity against criminal and civil liability for participating in unlawful electronic searches and seizures, and does not offer adequate safeguards against the possibility of such illegal tampering with votes.
As if this wasn't unsettling enough, while the Senate and House debate the final disposition of S.2248, the possibility remains of government interception of all e-mails and phone calls sent through the phone lines, including the messages sent by the presidential candidates and their representatives. Thus, while the Nixon Administration had to break into Democratic National Headquarters in order to get the lowdown on its Democratic opponents, the McCain camp, with the assistance of the Bush Administration, may now have only to go online to read about Obama's latest strategy for winning the election; thereby giving it the potential to thwart this strategy before it succeeds. Again, it is pie-in-the-sky optimism to suppose that such tactics as this will not be used by what can arguably be regarded as the most corrupt administration in the history of America.
As recently learned, there is currently a secret deal being transacted between the Bush Administration and the Iraq government that would establish permanent military bases in Iraq, thereby nominalizing Obama's promise to withdraw troops from Iraq and giving greater credence to the stalwart position of McCain to keep American troops in Iraq.
The strategy of the McCain camp will undoubtedly include stressing McCain's military and foreign affairs experience and emphasizing Obama's lack thereof. With the establishing of permanent military bases in Iraq, this emphasis will be further vindicated.
Notwithstanding a National Intelligence Estimate according to which Iran discontinued its nuclear weapons program in 2003, Bush has stepped up his rhetoric against Iran. He recently proclaimed, "Iraq is the convergence point for two of the greatest threats to America in this new century: al-Qaida and Iran," and he threatened, "If Iran makes the right choice, America will encourage a peaceful relationship between Iran and Iraq. If Iran makes the wrong choice, America will act to protect our interests and our troops and our Iraqi partners."
The Obama camp, not to mention every U.S. citizen, should be prepared for the possibility that prior to the November election, Bush will attempt to use his "war powers" to sidestep Congressional authority and launch an attack on Iran. From a purely logistical perspective, with simultaneous wars going on in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran, including a permanent presence in Iraq, it would make sense to have a commander in chief who is experienced in warfare. Obviously, this would place McCain in the enviable position of being able to boast of his wartime experiences and would leave Obama grasping for a response.
For the Obama camp, trying to win a victory against McCain and his Bush Administration support system may be like trying to play cards against an opponent who is using a loaded deck. But all American citizens on either side of the political divide should be concerned about the prospects of the 2008 presidential race becoming a power grab where the lives and liberties of all of us are used and abused to amass power and dominance, both here and abroad.
Those who support Obama need to beware. But those who support McCain need equally to beware, for winning a contest that is fixed is not really winning; and when the contest in question involves the defiling of the U.S. Constitution and the destruction of democracy, there are values at stake that far transcend one's party affiliation.
A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTIONElliot D. Cohen is a political analyst and media critic. His most recent book is The Last Days of Democracy: How Big Media and Power-Hungry Government are turning America into a Dictatorship. He is the first-prize winner of the 2007 Project Censored Award.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.
No comments:
Post a Comment