A MINUTE WITH RON PAUL - THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

A MINUTE WITH RON PAUL | 2008-01-20

Literally.

It is amazing what a former congressman and a former staffer can jam into one minute.

I was on Capitol Hill the same time Ron Paul was.

Among other things he reminded me that HE had voted for my boss, John AshBROOK, in the 1972 presidential primary. He asked me if I thought "It was true what they say about John's death." This is not exactly John Birch stuff. The FBI had John's coffin buried while they still were examining the body.

I said I was SURE what they said was right.

Then he went back to work and I went back to retirement.

COMMENTS (5)

#1 Dave | 2008-01-20 15:14

Ron Paul's fundraising success earns him "a seat at the table". I wish I knew what he could possibly do with it, given his lack of reality.

Government spending revolves around public employee labor unions residing within the military, the intelligence agencies, the police, (and within the private sector contractors to all these aforementioned entities) and within agribusiness, secondary and higher education, Medicaid and the specialty medicine cartel.

There are two sides to this. One is "imperial" and the other "communist".

The regalian side (military, intelligence agencies, and police) is of course "imperial" in orientation. But so is the specialty medicine cartel, including big pharma. The agribusiness cartel is also imperial in orientation, just wealthy families whose wealth comes from government subsidies and the exploitation of farm Mexican labor.

In contrast, the "communist side" is increasingly represented by the AFL CIO's new SEIU and OPEIU manifestation, unions that have had great success in organizing the Medicaid industry, an industry that constitutes one half of all Federal and state spending. Their activities have brought huge new forces to the public employee union environment, particularly nursing home aids, in-home supportive care workers, nurses, and hospital and social service caseworkers. Ironically, this has benefited the specialty medicine cartel by catalyzing new inflows of government paid medical insurance, enhancing their loots.

Education and the teachers unions are certainly on the "communist" side also.

Ron Paul's pitch is to attack both the imperial and communist sides in an environment that has greatly worsened from the political environment John Ashbrook was in.

I have no faith in Ron Paul at all. He is a man without plan, except a fundraising plan. I don't think he has a clue of how to actually mitigate the imperial and communist forces running rampant and out of control in America's racially and ethnically destabilized society, a society also heavily engaged in very pressing foreign wars.

He has no navigation tools other than fundraising shtick, and an ideology wholly inadequate to the job, a big contrast to John Ashbrook.

Paul's kind tends to emerge in destabilized environments. Making splashes and waves that mean nothing. His whole game is not on all fours with real power. The imperial and communist players he so cavalierly alienates will find it easy to dispose of him. I am certain Paul doesn't worry them one bit. Unlike Paul, they are under no delusion that "representative government" means anything.

Just check the money success of the SEIU and OPEIU players. The money they have shaken loose (to support their communist goals), without anybody even realizing it, makes Paul's fundraising look like a mere handful of peanuts. The mainstream doesn't know anything about them. But try to find a real politician who doesn't.

#2 Pain | 2008-01-20 21:03

Bob-

Ron Paul could win all the votes, but Diebold will claim he lost. As you may know, it has been proven that voting results in the USA can be completely changed in under 1 minute. It also has been proven that this is now routinely done, especially in regard to Ron Paul. Since it is electronic, there is no paper trail of the fictitious voting results, nor is there a record of actual voting at all.

So, we are in a situation much like the USSR where the candidates are chosen in advance and the "votes" are conformed to that choice.

I am asking for your expert opinion. What are the advantages to pointing out that our elections are now TOTALLY fraudulent?

Can the administration's legitimacy be undermined by hammering this simple point, that Diebold leaves no paper trail and election results can be created at will?

There is a slogan online: "Live Free or Diebold" (since the first documented proof of fictitious results got attention in New Hampshire). Google search results for "Live Free or Diebold" are doubling every two days, so there is an obvious interest in this issue that the media bloc blacks out.

Diebold foresaw this happening early last year: they removed "Diebold" from all machines, and they set up a dummy board for the machine division below the actual board, as if they feared treason trials.

Rigged elections have already been an issue for some time, but it would seem that this is the first time that the results can be created at will.

Could this be a means to embarrass the regime to the international community? Could it be potentially used to bring it down?

I hope you answer, because only you can get down to basics and have the PRACTICAL political expertise, I think.

Also, since it so easy to hack, do you foresee rogue activists hacking on their own and creating a war of hacking viruses?

#3 Pain | 2008-01-22 02:14

Bob-

Here are more details of the above. I put this in SF.

You are free to flatter me, attack it, tear it down, or do nothing. I hope it shows a confederacy of basics with details.

------------

Live Free or Diebold

If you want regime change in America, read this, learn it, and hammer the point home about fake elections. If elections are fake in the USA, then no regime there has any legitimacy whatsoever.

If enough of the right people in the right places are forced to admit that the regime is illegitimate, it will fall as flat as the wall fell in Berlin, ending the Soviet Union.

Sometime around August of 2007 in the Ron Paul forums, a new catch phrase was coined: Live Free or Diebold.

As of yesterday, this caught so much notice that Google's search results for it were doubling every two days.

What this phrase underscores is that in electronic voting, there is no paper trail.

Let me repeat that. Now that votes are electronic, there is no paper trail.

That means that if fraud is suspected, there is absolutely no way to prove the results.

If you think your bank got your account balance wrong, you can take copies of your account history, ATM receipts, etc. and have the bank investigate.

But in electronic elections, there is nothing to check. No account history, no voting receipts. There is no way to prove how you voted. There is no record.

There is no way to do a hand-count, since there is no hardcopy. There is no way to do a recount, since there is nothing to count.

Electronic voting in the USA is currently handled by one company: Diebold. When it won the monopoly of all voting in the USA, it claimed that although there would be no verifiable proof of voting results, their machines were rock solid.

The Diebold, they said, was unsinkable -- just like the Titanic.

The Diebold has been hacked

The reality is that the Diebold is relatively easy to hack. A thread here has already noted that: http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?p=5055627&highlight=diebold#post5055627

Indeed the Diebold machine HAS been hacked. This is no secret, one actual hack was publicized on CNN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbuwbkqAe_A

As noted in the above broadcast, it takes an amateur less than a minute. Also noted is the hack performed by a professor and his student at Princeton University.

Another publicized hack has been performed in California: http://www.votelaw.com/blog/archives/003859.html , http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0404/S00199.htm , and many other sites.

Since Diebold has been hacked and there is no record anywhere of the actual electoral count, Diebold was decertified in California, but in practice kept in use. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0404/S00199.htm

There is so much information online about this, you could spend all day reading up on it.

Conclusion: electronic voting leaves no provable record of the actual account, there is no possibility of a recount, and indeed the machine has been hacked.

Entire election counts can be created at will

In the CNN broadcast (see above), an entire vote count was created.

This means that entire election counts in the real world can be changed to the extent that the results are wholly FICTITIOUS.

Election fiction in real time

In real time, elections can be validated by comparing official results to statistical polls. Since these statistics have an accuracy between 0.5% and 2.5% (anyone familiar with statistics or simple standard deviation will recognize these figures), elections are called fraud when the official count differs from the statistical polling by 5% or more; in other words, this is more than twice the probability of statistical error.

Such statistical polling is used to validate elections in Third World countries. If an official declares himself to be the winner of an election not validated, the international community does not recognize his legitimacy, meaning that the world may not accept him as a representative of his country.

In the current presidential primaries, the USA has failed this test. One site, http://presscue.com/node/38034 , shows the count in New Hampshire for Hillary and Obama off by (53.23%-46.77% =) 6.26%, well outside the 5% allowable by international standards. If you browse around long enough online, you may find statistics indicating a difference of up to 15%.

This was quite a scandal online and in the media bloc. In the aftermath, for example in South Carolina, statistical polling has not been reported for validating the vote there.

Conclusion: Diebold holds a monopoly of voting machines, the machines have been hacked, real-time voting differs beyond what is recognized as fraud.

Diebold hides its name

This blog seems to have a number of additional links for you to browse: http://life-its-ownself.blogspot.com/2007/08/diebold-dissolves-re-forms.html . This site has a link to Diebold's official announcement (http://www.diebold.com/whatsnews/pdf/premierelections.pdf) that its machines will no longer carry the name "Diebold," and that a subsidiary board has been set up underneath the actual board of the Diebold corporation.

Clearly, Diebold is aware that their machine is being used to invent vote counts. Could it be that they fear potential criminal charges? Treason perhaps?

Short history

Florida

You remember the chad fiasco over the physical hand count in Florida. As you ought to remember, a great deal of political resources were used in the drama of hanging chads, etc.

Of course, the chads were actually trivial in importance, these paper ballots had been used successfully for decades. But the way in which they were handled was new. The controversy was new. The media attention and the politics involved were doubtlessly orchestrated.

Why?

In the aftermath of Florida's election drama, officials announced that no longer would paper ballots be used. Electronic voting was the only way, and Diebold the only solution.

What they were saying was this: this recount was so embarrassing that never would there be a recount again.

But without recounts, or at least without the possibility of recounts, there is no way to verify votes.

Without a recount, there is no way to check to see if the count is fake.

Ohio

In the following presidential cycle, came up the Ohio controversy. You ought to remember that votes in several places differed from independent statistical polling by more than 5%. As I note above, 5% is the internationally recognized cut-off for declaring results invalid.

Thus in many precincts in Ohio, the votes were invalid.

The only way to remedy this would have been to have a second election, this time by hardcopy. But this was not done.

The Rubicon was crossed.

Ohio thus became a test case to see what would happen when there was an indisputable case of vote fraud. Nothing happened, giving the green light to do it again and bigger next time.

And so we have now New Hampshire, and elsewhere (such as South Carolina), independent statistical polling is not publicized.

In other words, since fictional vote count was successful in New Hampshire, there is no need challenge electronic voting again.

At least official and in the media bloc.

Where you come in

The Ron Paul campaign, in August 2007 or earlier, introduced a fine catch phrase: Live free or Diebold. This is a reference to the state motto of New Hampshire, "Live Free or Die," which dates back to the American revolution.

If you are visiting this forum, you likely believe in your heart that it is time for a revolution again.

Over the last century, history tells us that hundreds (or more?) regimes have been brought down for fake elections.

The old Voice of America radio was famous, among many things, for hammering home the fictitious nature of elections in the old Soviet Union (USSR). As you ought to know, that regime was a dictatorship with few freedoms for its subject people.

Why?

They could not vote. Yes, there were elections. However, the regime chose public officials, and after the elections, the count was conformed to those choices.

This is also how it is done in the Third World.

This is also, now, how it is done in the USA.

President Ronald Reagan united the left and the right in the USA in what is called the "Reagan Coalition." You ought to remember that his most famous speech was given in West Berlin. This was a city, a world-capital, that was split in two to keep people from fleeing the Communist terror of the Soviet bloc.

In that speech, Reagan uttered the famous words: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

Not only did Mr. Gorbachev, the leader of the Soviet dictatorship, tear down that wall, but the entire Soviet bloc collapsed!

Now, twenty years later a similar situation exists here. Certainly life is far freer here now than it was there then.

All the same, no free people can remain long free where there are no free elections.

Where there are not completely free elections, the people have no voice in their government.

Such government is a dictatorship.

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.

Live Free or Diebold.

--------

Note: I wrote this in about an hour for this web forum. I apologize for typos, bad writing, and anything else you don't like.

#4 mderpelding | 2008-01-23 21:04

Ohmygod dialectic...

"There are two sides to this. One is "imperial" and the other "communist".

Quotes are mine.

This is CRAP.

Now to Ron Paul.

Imagine Jefferson Davis having to say MLK is his hero to get elected.

To me,that says more about the electorate than about the man running for office.

#5 Lord Nelson | 2008-01-24 19:47

What retirement??

The real action is here and now!

BTW. I talked to Truck Roy on skype and we will record something on Monday.

Just hope its good enough to air.