| http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/index.cfm
Paper Ballots May Prevent Vote Fraud by BRENT BELESKEY Private Paper Ballots, The Visible Vote -- Beware of New Voting Technology That Leaves No Paper Trail! Joseph Stalin had a maxim: ``Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.'' This comes to mind as Congress prepares to debate the $5 billion Voting Improvement Act sponsored by Representatives Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Bob Ney (R-OH). The bill centers on five main principals. First, punch-card voting systems must go. Second, replace technologies. Third, the federal government must only fund, not try to mandate solutions. Fourth, cash grants for computer corporations research and development. Fifth, our election system requires constant maintenance. Ney and Hoyer maintain they have a unique opportunity to improve our system of government. But are these proposals really improvements to our democratic election process? Warren R. Bailie, Chief Election Officer of Ontario, Canada, maintains that a private paper ballot, placed in a ballot box and hand counted, with observers, in local precincts (with a maximum of 500 voters per precinct), is the best election process in any democracy. The method has been tried and tested, and is true and is serving over 35 million Canadians, as well as communities throughout the United States and the world. Union County, Florida (main city: Lake Butler) has this same private paper ballot system as Canada, as well as 1 in 100 American voters. Some of the people there are ready to fight with a Constitutional challenge, if the state tries to replace their working private ballot boxes. City Manager and President of the local Rotary Club, Richard Tillis states, "It was clear our private paper ballot and ballot box system worked. Why should we be forced to replace it with technological systems that fail?" Bill Kimberling (an official with the Federal Election Commission), Deputy Commissioner of Elections of the United States, declared at the annual meeting of the Maryland Association of Elected Officials on June 7, 2000, ``The Emperor has no clothes''! He has called Internet voting (ballotless elections), ``a breeding ground for fraud'' and a “business-driven threat to democracy.” In addition, the security of the secret ballot would be in danger if computerized Internet voting (ballotless elections) were expanded. “If people like Saddam Hussein and the Colombian Drug Cartel and friends have the technical means to undermine the free world's election process, why should we accommodate them?'' pondered Kimberling. “Remember we elect judges and sheriffs also, don't we?'' Despite the clear warnings and unrefuted overwhelming mountains of evidence piling up on all sides from diverse experts and authorities, localities in seven states in the United States used ballotless, computerized, touch screen voting election systems supplied by Global Elections Systems in the 2000 Presidential Election. However, with long line-ups, computer crashes and missing votes in cyber space, these attempts were a series of failures. Bob Urosevich from Global Elections Systems states, “You must get with the program. You just have to trust the system.” But how can one trust the system when there are no ballots to count or recount? To quote former President Ronald Reagan, ``Trust, but verify!'' Why then, the "rush to judgement" to adopt these computerized ballotless election systems? In a May 10th interview with GOP Congressman Bob Ney of Ohio on MSNBC’s and CNBC’s “Hardball”, Chris Matthews questioned Ney on the “Voting Improvement Act.” Transcript of Chris Matthews’ “Hardball” show follows: Chris Matthews: “What's the best voting system that you know off? What's the simplest, the one with a good paper trail, that can't be cheated on and works for 100% of the people, or close to it?'' Cong. Ney: “. . . the touch screen, as far as I know, is supposed to be a good device.” Chris Matthews: “But no paper trail! How do you recount a machine, thatwas done like an ATM machine? Is there a paper trail of how the person voted, so you can recount afterwards?” Cong. Ney: “Well, I think, what there will be, there will be a technology trail of sorts . . .” Chris Matthews: “Do you trust the sharpies in the big cities, that are always ahead of you one step? To adjust the numbers before even people vote that morning, which is an old tradition, in some cities?” Cong. Ney: (laughing) “Ahee, well, ahee, you got to watch that you know.” (End of transcript from Chris Matthew’s “Hardball”, May 10, 2001) Now let us consider the very important and authoritative study that was released in the United States in last month. The July 2001 “Voting Technology Project Report” from the California Institute of Technology and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology maintains in various quotations taken from the original text of over 70 pages: “Touch screens, in our opinion, are still unproven.” “This is not to say that optical scanning (as being mandated in Florida) is an ideal system. It (optical scanning) has plenty of faults and problems. This system also loses a significant number of ballots, though less on average than other systems. Election officials complain of paper jams... scanning is imperfect.” “However, in terms of one very basic requirement -- minimizing the number of (approximately 6 million) lost votes, electronic voting does not have a very good track record. Paper systems have performed much better . . .” “Paper ballots have the highest degree of auditabilty.” “It is extremely important to be able to conduct such an audit. So long as we can verify the official count through a systematic recount of the votes we can avoid having to call an entirely new election, a revote,” warned Caltech and MIT. (End of quotes from the Caltech and MIT study.) On March 27, 1998 an Ontario Court of Appeals Justice, Michael Moldaver, had no trust in "optical scanners" and questioned whether optical scanners used in 1997 Canadian Municipal elections "suffer fundamental flaws." But now legislators in Indiana and Florida have passed new laws to make these failed, ballotless, unverifiable computer election systems mandatory throughout their respective states. Soon to be, nationwide? Whether state legislators know it or not, the rush to adopt these unverifiable systems such as ballotless telephone voting and Internet voting are being driven by the so-called "Direct Democracy” movement. And it is certain that these state legislators don’t know that the “Direct Democracy” movement is in intimate alliance with the Anarchist-Communist movement, which can be verified by tracing web pages and where they lead. In Washington Post columnist David Broder’s book, “Democracy Derailed”, Broder warns of a new form of “direct democracy”, the very form of government the Founder Fathers of the Unites States feared most. The fact that the new direct democracy will be, if the “direct democracy” crowd gets its way, without ballots, makes things infinitely worse than even the Founding Fathers may have been able to imagine 200 plus years ago. This global "direct democracy" movement is currently being driven by “Referendum and Initiative Campaigns" paid for by a handful of billionaire elitists, such as George Soros. They are proliferating the appearance of other issues alongside their riggable elections push, such as, to name a few, pro-gun control, pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia, pro-drug, pro-casino/gambling and pro-child porn. In short, the so-called “direct democracy” movement aims for the overthrow of the United States Republic, all forms of representative democracy, and the undermining of legitimate constitutions throughout the world. On the Internet you will find websites and links which serve as the spearheads of various arms for the world wide “Anarchist /Communist / Humanist, Direct Democracy Movement", such as, www.ballot.org, www.ballotwatch.org, www.iandrinstitute.org, www.gotworld.net/ah/ah3.htm, http://frontpage.auburn.edu/tann, www.vote.org or www.vote.org/old.htm The United Nations / Organization of American States front men, from www.aceproject.org, also promote computerized ballotless elections and a rigged "Direct Democracy" -- not a form of “Representative Democracy” or a Republic, throughout the world. "A New World Disorder.” There is no question that our private paper ballot system can be counted on to protect our freedoms and liberties, in more ways than one. Remember again Tyrant Joseph Stalin's saying: “Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything!” – even more so when there are no tangible votes to count! All are invited to visit our new websites devoted to honest elections: * www.voterscoalion.com * www.nodirectdemocracy.com Brent M.P. Beleskey Director / Investigative Researcher Barrie, Ontario, Canada VotersCoalition.Com / International Voters Coalition |
