Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile Recent Messages

Deep Creek Hot Springs

The Moon is Waning Gibbous (93% of Full)


Advanced

Re: SC58

All posts are those of the individual authors and the owner of this site does not endorse them. Content should be considered opinion and not fact until verified independently.

January 11, 2008 06:50PM
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7770

Fraud US-Style: Fake Videos and Elections

............Now the latest "incident" and video making headlines. They involve a supposed Persian Gulf confrontation between Iranian and US vessels in open waters. A subsequent Pentagon video shows small Iranian boats v. US warships in the Strait of Hormuz earlier this week. The Pentagon and major media reported a fleet of high-speed small craft charged at and threatened to blow up a three-ship convoy of US warships. George Bush called it a "dangerous" provocation and warned of "serious consequences" if there are further incidents.

Iran's response came swiftly and called the Pentagon video and audio "fabricated." The incident was routine and something "normal that takes place every now and then for each party" to identify the other....Iran Navy units always put questions to passing vessels and warships at the Strait of Hormuz and they need to identify themselves. This is in accordance with the normal procedures." The Tehran spokesman said its Navy units "asked (the US ships) to identify themselves. They responded accordingly and continued on their (non-agressive) path."

On January 9 (according to Agence France-Presse - AFP), Iran's Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) accused Washington of fabricating footage of the incident it described as routine and non-confrontational. The country's state-run Al-Alam Arabic language international channel and English language Press-TV both quoted an IRGC spokesman with similar comments. This hardly needs elaborating. It's unimaginable that lightly armed small craft would challenge heavily armed warships from any nation, let alone likely nuclear-armed ones flying US flags. The very notion borders on the absurd. Imagining where this may lead, however, recall the August, 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident. No further comment needed.

Now the January, 2008 election: dateline New Hampshire. Zogby International has a well-deserved reputation for accuracy. It's January 5 - 7 pre-election poll numbers showed Obama at 42% v. Clinton's 29% - an impossible gap to close in a few days or even weeks. Yet magically it happened. Clinton miraculously snatched victory from certain defeat with 39% of the vote to Obama's 36% with the loser saying no more than "I am still fired up and ready to go." Where to he should ask after this type reversal with obvious grim signs for his hopes.

Consider final New Hampshire vote tallies for all candidates compared to Zogby's January 5 - 7 pre-election poll numbers. For Republican and Democrat candidates alike, they were dead-on right with one glaring exception. Something to ponder and question.

On the Republican side, something fishy happened as well to its one outlier - Ron Paul. The candidate's "war room" hand count showed he got 15% of the vote, but official counting gave him 8% and 9% in total when electronically tabulated votes were included. His web site said he scored 10% or better in every township and listed percentages for them all. They ranged from 34% to 10.25%. If these numbers are accurate, Paul got a minimum of 10% of New Hampshire's vote for a third place finish.

Another disturbing report also emerged. The town of Sutton admitted it voided all Paul votes. He got 31, but none made the official tally. It was blamed on "human error" that might account for a slight variance but highly unlikely to erase his entire total. Yet it did and raises strong suspicions of fraud. Once this information got out, other districts where Paul scored zero changed their final count adding votes for him never counted. Something clearly is rotten in New Hampshire. It doesn't say much for the process ahead, or past ones either for that matter.
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

SC58

Wizard 1255January 09, 2008 04:47PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 705January 09, 2008 05:39PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 734January 09, 2008 05:56PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 767January 09, 2008 06:46PM

Re: SC58

Paul P. 660January 10, 2008 02:27PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 730January 10, 2008 06:30PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 755January 10, 2008 09:21PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 611January 10, 2008 09:52PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 714January 11, 2008 06:50PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 628January 12, 2008 11:21AM

Re: SC58

Wizard 810January 12, 2008 12:10PM

Re: SC58

atheo 775January 13, 2008 07:29AM

Re: SC58

Wizard 706January 12, 2008 12:33PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 648January 12, 2008 09:21PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 694January 15, 2008 03:56PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 678January 15, 2008 09:45PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 647January 15, 2008 10:10PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 679January 15, 2008 10:28PM

Re: SC58

Wizard 1212January 15, 2008 10:44PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login