Charlie Rose - Mexican Presidential Election / Bill Keller / Robert Kennedy Jr.

RFK Jr. did a great job on Charlie Rose last night.

http://video.google.com/...;q=type%3Asv_charlierose

http://www.loosechange911.com/

Loose Change documentary and 9/11 questions covered in this months Vanity Fair.

I love that they're speaking up, but why now ?
I guess I'm so cynical now I suspect everything....
Should I take this as a good sign, or another fascist, dirty, stinking, no good, psy-ops operation?
I'm not ready to let my guard down yet, are you?

I'd say we keep our guard up, but go positive.

Floridiot

I feel the same way regarding all the terror plots they claim they're stopping, the Korea stuff etc. Makes me wonder what's real and what's another lie to keep us all in check!

But from the other commentors above it looks like things are finally starting to roll.

Here's some more on another phone jammer!

Hey, Chris, thanks for the link to Bobby on Charlie! The window said it is "free today" and that might mean anybody wanting to watch tomorrow will have to pay. Dunno. Just sayin'.

Welcome aboard, Catherine. Better late than never.

Ok, you guys convinced me a little, thanks

9/11 was an inside job, until we all confront the lies, nothing we do will make a difference. vote fraud will continue to happen. 911blogger.com
prisonplanet.com

Did you see the Hate on this Blog after the article ?
It looks like a tooth fest at a Redneck convention

Link

Floridiot!

Dammittall! I just ate!

99, I thought it was funny...at first

Hey Dredd & all, if your around, take a look at this one
Good story, with links to a new old timer, Edward Herman

Link

Floridiot #10

I scrolled down about half way throught the very long lists of comments following that link. Of all of those, I found only two which were not filled with hate!

This casual observation: "I bet that beard really itches."

And This one which makes a lot of sense: "Wow. We have terrorism stories coming at us from all directions right now. The midterm elections are coming up and the incessant fearmongering is underway. Americans are easily brainwashed, but hopefully we won't fall for this propaganda any longer."

But this one really takes the cake!: "Gadahn's world-view does not differ substantially from the world-views of Howard Dean, Cindy Sheehan or most college profs. Gadahn just wears a turban when he spews his fascism."

Howard Dean, Cindy Sheehan Fascists? Say What? - Get a dictionary you "MORAN"!

BB2, unreal ain't it ?
I hope that isn't the voice of John Q Pubic, though, we are finished as a race if it is

oops, forgot the L

Haven't read much yet, but so far, so good with Herman
(added link to my #12)

Link

And they say WE are filled with hate. Are these people ever going to wake up to theirs? Oh, but they have a reason,I forgot. God help us all.

Well. We are filled with animosity and righteous indignation... sometimes advancing to self-righteous indignation. So. We are not blameless in this. It's just really bad for the digestion and tens of thousands of Iraqis and millions of poor people that it is how it is here.

Floridiot #14/15

LOL

OT

So it does look like the NY terror thing is just more crap to keep us in line!

Ya BB2 #20 ain't that the truth. I think they are saving a terror alerts for election time. That trick is old now.

AAR & msm lot of talk about the liebermann debate But no talk about the real issue lamont's ITMFA position...

or did I miss something ?

JOJ

Hopefully people are starting to catch on to their tricks. The chief monkey-man's ratings actualy went down in spite of these phony terrorist preventions.

I was trying to find the article from the other day about his poll ratings falling after the supreme court ruled against him and came across this intersting article which plays out along the lines of these phony threats.
Osama bin Laden:
A dead nemesis perpetuated by the US government

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Evan Goldberg
July 7, 2006 (916) 651-4028/(916) 215-5953

BOWEN TO CHAIR NEW SELECT COMMITTEE ON ELECTION INTEGRITY

HEARINGS PLANNED THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA TO LOOK
AT PROBLEMS REPORTED DURING THE JUNE PRIMARY ELECTION

SACRAMENTO – “During the June primary, we had polling places that didn’t open until several hours after they were supposed to, voting machines that didn’t work at all, and thousands of voters who were told to ‘come back later’ once the problems had been sorted out. Ensuring the integrity of our electoral process isn’t solely about making sure electronic voting machines are secure and accurately recording people’s votes. It also involves taking care of some basic, fundamental issues that many people just take for granted. These are the types of fundamental, logistical problems we need to begin addressing now to ensure they don’t repeat themselves in November.”

That’s the focus Senator Debra Bowen (D-Redondo Beach), the chairwoman of the Senate Elections, Reapportionment & Constitutional Amendments Committee, will bring to the newly-formed Senate Select Committee on the Integrity of Elections that she will chair. The three-member select committee – which includes Senator Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield) and Senator Joe Dunn (D-Garden Grove) – intends to hold hearings over the next two months to look at problems that arose during the June 2006 primary election and what can be done to prevent them from recurring in November.

“Clearly, the security issues involving electronic voting machines have garnered the bulk of the attention and rightly so, but there are logistical issues we need to deal with as well,” continued Bowen. “In San Diego, electronic voting machines with well-known security holes in them were sent home with poll workers days and weeks before the election. Why? Because the county has been sending paper ballots and other election equipment home with workers for years and it saw no reason to change that practice. Elections are different today than they were in the 1950s or even the 1990s, meaning many of the historical practices that elections officials have relied on may need to change to reflect that new reality.”

Aside from the voting machine “sleep-over” issues in San Diego, there were widely-reported problems in Kern and San Joaquin counties as well:

o In Kern County, improperly programmed voting cards prevented electronic voting machines from operating, requiring some people to use paper ballots to vote. Other voters were simply turned away from the polls altogether when there were no paper ballots available.
o In San Joaquin County, a number of polling places opened up to three hours late when poll workers didn’t show up to open the polling site or the voting equipment wasn’t properly set up.

“I certainly don’t condone the idea of sending voting machines that have a documented history of security problems home with poll workers days or weeks before the election, which is what happened in San Diego County last month,” continued Bowen. “On the other hand, I sympathize with the logistical problems elections officials face, because there’s no way to deliver electronic voting machines, in the case of San Diego County, to 1,700 polling locations just minutes before the polls open on Election Day.

“How do we conquer the logistical challenges of ensuring the voting equipment is accurate and secure, that poll workers are properly trained and show up on time, and that no voter is turned away or told to ‘come back later’ because the voting machines aren’t working or there aren’t enough ballots for people?,” asked Bowen. “These are the questions I’d like to see the select committee begin to develop answers to. We’ve done a lot to make it easier than ever for people to vote, but much of that work, not to mention people’s confidence in the integrity of the process as a whole, goes down the drain on Election Day when they show up at their polling place only to be turned away because the voting machines don’t work or the poll workers didn’t show up.”

The date and location of the committee’s first hearing will be announced in the coming days.

###

Evan L. Goldberg
Chief of Staff
Senator Debra Bowen
(D-Redondo Beach)
Evan.Goldberg@sen.ca.gov
(916) 651-4028
(916) 215-5953

Paul in LA #23

Thanks for that post. I was wondering what she would say about the violation of the chain of custody by Haas in CA-50.

She soft pedals it a bit, because she feels sorry for the poor election folk. That is a mistake.

Sympathy for the devil is not appropriate here.

The law was changed because the insecurity of the Diebold machine increased, increasing the danger a few months before the special and primary elections.

But Haas decided that what had been done "for 40 years" was "good enough for gummit work".

I think Bowen is headed for trouble, like the rest of them always have, if she takes the "poor election official" stance. Haas is an arrogant bureaucrat, and deserves a swift kick in the ass, not sympathy.

These lunatics have had decade upon decade (link here, and here), so they merit zero sympathy.

They merit only a swift kick in the ass if they take a business as usual approach to a death to democracy issue. Death to their campaign or their job is more like it ... we need honest, passionate, and real people as election officials in place of the current circus of warlords.

Thank you Catherine Crier !!!

Floridiot #12

I checked out the new links, but still, I like Dugger and Saltman better (links in my post #24).

We know that Catherine Crier is not an alarmist. I notice that after the FBI hack story hit the Washington Post Thursday (link here), Navy personnel files were hacked and SS numbers posted on the web Friday (link here).

What ... every day is major hack day these daze!?

The electronic election machines are far easier to hack than FBI and Navy computers are, yet the FBI and Navy computers are being hacked. Only fools think that the election machines are not being hacked.

So keep up the good work Catherine, it is a vital issue that really needs the nation's attention.

Lets all be relentless like Brad is. Hand counts are the way to preserve the American election system at this time ... machines are the way to corrupt it.

To Catherine Crier

Probably the most absolutely hilarious talking point fostered by Diebold, or perhaps fostered by the GOP directly, is this:

Yes, the electronic election machines are insecure, however, it takes a bad person to misuse the machines and commit fraud, and that is a felony. We do not believe that such people exist.

Yes, that hilarious statement was made by a Diebold warlord. The fact of the matter is that election felonies are being directed from the White House itself:

The fourth man indicted in a New Hampshire phone-jamming scheme --- in which Republican operatives jammed the phone lines of Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts in a 2002 Senate race --- will argue at trial that the Bush Administration and the national Republican Party gave their approval to the plan, according to a motion filed by his attorney Thursday.

(link here, bold added).

The election fraud reality is so blatant in America today that it is hard for honest people to believe. That is what the crooks are counting on ... the disbelief of the people.

But the people show in the polls that they think this republican dictatorship is a ship of liars. And they want that ship to sink during the November storm.

Hand counts are the only safe harbor for America ... and if the republican dictatorship gets its way, even that harbor is going to be sold to Dubai/UAE.

I found it quite interesting that a Kennedy did this research on the last presidential election. Didn't his family perfect this process back in 1960? I'll give RFK the credit for staying on top of corruption yet if you are going to look in Ohio maybe to be fair you should have made stops in West Virginia and Illinois to get some background on his Uncle's election. Unfortunately it's not just the Republicans that play the game.

More and more MSM attention to e-vote fraud, and insecure e-vote machines. Where were you for the last 5 years, MSM? The "Republican Noise Machines" remains strangely silent on the smearing front. Why? Maybe, because of Brad's article, that they plan to use it to their benefit for challenging elections this November. Brad, you may have answered my question I've been asking for several weeks.

Barno

This isn't tit-for-tat, not a game, that was then, this is now, and JFK didn't use the constitution for toilet paper... and HOW many different states are you guys going to bring into this ancient beef, anyway? No. Don't answer that. It is moot. Your comment is a really lame way to address the problem of election fraud with voting machines... no?

Unfortunately it's just Republicans who play the game in THIS century, and that's the one that counts for all our lives.

re: Barno #27

[1] The article in question stands or falls on its own merits, none of which have anything to do with the presidential election of 1960. Kennedy's article is heavily sourced, and none of the sources are members of his family. So your smear against the article, based on the family history of its author, is groundless and pointless. And I have to tell you that it does nothing for your credibility around here either, Barno.

[2] NO, the Kennedy family did not "perfect" the process. Compared to those who are currently gaming our elections, they were rank amateurs.

[3] Given that there was Democratic corruption favoring Kennedy in the election of 1960, why didn't Nixon raise a stink? Because the Republican corruption was far worse, and a full and proper investigation of the entire election would have been political suicide for Nixon. It would have put a lot of his supporters in prison, too. And his supporters weren't ready to go to prison until 1974.

[4] It doesn't matter to Brad or to his regular readers whether electoral corruption is done by Republicans or Democrats or anyone else. He stands against all of it and so do we. Any further questions?

Barno, #27, give me a break. That was ages ago and irrelevent. That's the best you can do? That's it? Simple name recognition and guilt by association? What about all of the facts in the article? Ohio is a stinking cesspool of electorial fraud and vote suppression. I say start there. And clearly there *was* and *is* a concerted republican effort to thwart an accurate and fair vote, and obfuscate the process as much as possible.

-- Chris Hooten

#27 Barnumb, let just wait until fall to see whom is going to be doing all the complaining
I myself, think its going to be all your Conservaturd buddies

I guess I have a hard time believing that our district here in the 50th is the only one that has "logistical problems" getting machines to the polls without violating chain of custody rules. Why are other districts and states able to not have "sleepovers" of machines before theirs get to the polls? All it would take for Haas to be adequately concerned about this issue is to call some other ROV's elsewhere to ask how they are handling the same problem in a secure yet practical and inexpensive manner. I'm actually kind of curious how it is done in other areas besides San Diego. Anyone else have data on this? It doesn't seem to be a rocket science problem for those responsible for solving it.

Poll workers are Republican stooges.

For Barno: I think what most of us here on Bradblog have been saying (certainly Brad has) is that election fraud is wrong, period. It isn't a Democrat/Republican thing.

If you're going to use Kennedy's 1960 election as a rejoinder, then why not go back to 1888, 1876, and 1824? In each of those cases the Democrat (Cleveland, Tilden, and Jackson) had the election stolen from him by underhanded means.

The point is, there aren't any truly non-partisan people in politics. We all know that no Republican is going to say, "Bush stole the last two elections." And Democrats on Capitol Hill haven't said it, either, partly out of fear of appearing partisan. So is the answer to ignore election fraud? Do we take the Barack Obama approach and say, "Get real. There was fraud on both sides."????

To my knowledge Obama hasn't said a word about election fraud since making that asinine comment at the time of Barbara Boxer's challenge. So I'd have to assume he isn't interested in the issue, or feels it can't be addressed without appearing partisan. The fact that you would cite the Kennedy family connection here suggests that your attitude is similar to Obama's.
If that's the prevailing attitude in the country, I promise you election fraud will only get worse. No other issues will matter, because the smarter thief will always be able to impose his will on the voters.

I'm really bummed that Obama has started out relying too heavily on the counsel of the old hands. I hope he snaps out of it once he's got his sea legs, because we really do not need any more prevarication on Capitol Hill. We really do not need more human potential being pissed away on this fixation on being politically-astute... also known as being nowhere on real issues... also known as paying more attention to appearance than to substance.

That's not going to end the vast right wing corruption party at hand.

It is a slight relief to see growing recognition by more main stream sources on this grave matter but my stomach still carries a great stone in it as I worry about the coming months. The current power structure and paradigm has the destruction of our great country in mind to further their fascist-corporate agenda but the majority of even the liberals in this country have not accepted this scenario as fact. It is clearly an extension of the attempted 1934 coup thwarted by General Butler, and every other past attempt by an old power structure to gain control. Too many liberals are asleep at the wheel and TV to make a loud enough noise to crumble the looming structure about to encase our freedoms.

We really need to be covering the Mexican election as well. It seems clear to me that the same playbook is being used both at home and abroad.

Mexico 2006 = Ohio 2004 = Florida 2000.

Floriduh

We notice two names with same email and IP. Please pick one and stick with it. One of the primary rules of posting comments here is one-person-one-screen-name. Thank you. --99

Amen to that, Lambert
I'm totally with you on that
A little IRI shenanagans in there and you would have me sold, because that is the nexus of our electoral problems, along with NED, here and abroad

Bill Doyle, father of Joey Doyle, and a leading member of 9/11 Families for a Secure America and 9/11 Families United to Bankrupt Terrorism, was on the Alex Jones Show yesterday to discuss the coverup of 9/11. Mr. Doyle covered a variety of subjects, and issued a call to action against the TSA at the end of the show, which you can find out more about via a recent article on the subject posted here.

Here are a few quotes from the interview:

Jones: Sir you have questions about the official story don't you?

Doyle: oh, without question. if you wanna believe [..] the 9/11 commission - that's all a fallacy.
..
Jones: .. its just an ongoing coverup. Sir, do you smell a rat?

Doyle: oh, well there is no question [..] there is something very questionable about this whole procedure.
..
Doyle: The 9/11 commission is probably the worst representation of the 9/11 families, or for that matter the American public, because it is a sham, it really is. We had tons of questions that we asked them to ask, they wouldn't do it, and the continuing coverup is just beyond belief.
..
Doyle: It almost looks like there was a conspiracy about 9/11 if you really look at all the facts, a lot of the families feel the same way.
..
Doyle: From everything that I have looked at I am sure there is a lot of complicity at least - in the least - there had to be a lot of complicity.
..
Doyle: There is just such a continuing coverup, why don't [they] just let the information about 9/11 be known? Then maybe this conspiracy type of thing would go away, but its never gunna go away, or at least i don't think it ever can go away, because they were complicit.
..
Jones: With your 7,000 members [..] what percentage, just guesstimation, would you say believe that 9/11 was an inside job to some extent.

Doyle: Maybe half, maybe. It's probably 50-50, you know a lot of people themselves are probably trying to move on in life, and a lot of them are seeking mental health organizations [..] they don't even want to look back to 9/11 because they just can't believe that our government failed them so badly.

http://prisonplanet.com/...6governmentcomplicit.htm

Former Reagan Deputy and Colonel Says 9/11 "Dog That Doesn't Hunt"
Col. Ronald D. Ray asks why half a trillion defense budget couldn't protect Pentagon, astounded at "conspiracy theory" put out by government

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones/Prison Planet.com | July 1 2006

The former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran and Colonel has gone on the record to voice his doubts about the official story of 9/11 - calling it "the dog that doesn't hunt."

Col. Ronald D. Ray joined Alex Jones for an hour long interview in which he gave his views on a wide array of subjects, including the war on terror, porous borders and the Bush administration.

Ray questioned the feasbility of having a budget of half a trillion dollars a year yet not even being able to defend the Pentagon.

http://www.prisonplanet....006/010706doesnthunt.htm

#38, I imagine you are already aware of this piece and all of its links that you have to read, This gives you the starting and the ending result of the evil a foot , all we need now is the middle
These are the tricksters and their training ground

Link

Greg Palast did a lot of great stuff on the Mexican elections. it sure as hell looks like to me that its the same tactics. the leftie got screwed.

#33... CALIPENDENCE

The logistical problems that the 50th is having with the machines are everywhere else as well. That is a big PROBLEM ! ! ! The machines all can be hacked by anybody who has custody of them. Machines with wireless components are even easier to hack. Logically there is no logistical solution to this problem. The only solution that I can think of that might render these machines trustable if properly implemented would be to have them print out a numbered copy of the ballot for each person casting a vote. The machine could easily produce a spreadsheet of each numbered voters selections and immediately after the counting is complete post that spreadsheet on the internet where voters could check to insure that their vote was counted as cast. This type of a system is needed to insure against vote loss should any machines break down on the day of the election too. Whether the result of a mistake or fraud any software errors must also be detectable. Therefore some kind of a system similar to this is needed anyway before anybody should be expected to believe that the output of these machines should be trusted to represent the will of the voters.

Bob Young

The system you describe assumes enough voters would have easy enough access to the internet to check, and that the spread sheet could jibe with the actual votes. They could still throw the tally any way a hacker wanted, no matter what the spread sheet seemed to say.

What is wrong with paper ballots, marked with black ink, counted by hand? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Boo-hoo if the networks have to wait for the precincts to be completely counted. They can still wildly speculate and make sensational statements based on exit polls.

The ONLY reason we are going through this awful, filthy, rotten, despicable, un-American, tedious and ugly bullshit is because very powerful and rich people want to put anyone in office they like, while letting the public think they voted for them.

IT'S THE ULTIMATE IN AMERICA'S CORRUPTION!

Obama doesn't know the difference between "bi-partisan" and "non-partisan." When he said, "Get real. There was fraud on both sides," he was really saying, "You can't attack election fraud unless only one side is doing it."

Which is a nice way of ingratiating yourself with the other party, which Obama, a new Senator, was evidently trying to do. That's BI-PARTISANSHIP. If he cared more about the people who sent him to Washington than about the people he'd be working with there, however, he'd have challenged the vote along with Boxer, adding the comment, "There was fraud on both sides; we have to examine all of it before we can determine who won." That would have been NON-PARTISANSHIP.

Dredd #26 said:

"Yes, the electronic election machines are insecure, however, it takes a bad person to misuse the machines and commit fraud, and that is a felony. We do not believe that such people exist."

Felons - "We do not believe that such people exist."

WTF? Are you idiots blind, or just plain ignorant?

In 1996 Federal courts convicted 43,839 persons of violent, property, drug, and other felonies. State courts convicted 997,970, bringing the combined U.S. total to 1,041,809 felony convictions. (latest figure I could find in a quick search)

I also came across this site which could prove interesting: Strategic Plan 2001 - 2006

RLM

Obama has shown his willingness to be disingenuous, and his willingness to jeopardize his constituency, all of us, in his attempts to get along in the Senate. He has also done some positive things in this effort, but he is not living up to the promise that galvanized us in his convention speech. I want someone who will place the people above comity with pit vipers, and who can rock our world with speeches like that. So far it just looks like the wrong sort on non-partisanship trying to look like an effort for bi-partisanship. I'm really, really disappointed... so far. (I still hold out a little hope he will wake up and become his own man --- that is to say: Our Man.)

Agent99 #46 said:

"They can still wildly speculate and make sensational statements based on exit polls."

Don't you mea{n }: "They can still wildly speculate and make sensational statements in spite of exit polls."

There went that "n" again: (sound of wireless keyboard bouncing off wall)

Agent99

Actually enough people do have internet access to insure that the counting of the ballots cast would have to be accurate. To insure that everybody who could check could not find an error they could not cheat on those who do not have access. They would have to know which ones have access to rig the count of the votes that were cast. There would still have to be a way to insure against adding extra ballots to those that were cast. I suggested a list of names and address as a check on this a week or two ago in another thread but I don’t think that will fly. The right to privacy can keep that one grounded. We would still need a solution to that problem but we do under the older systems as well.

This type of system should be used with any type of ballots that are used to guard against corrupt counts. Paper ballots can be counted wrong too. Remember all the hanging chads and missing ballots from years gone by?

Well, Bob, if you mark them with a black marking pen, no chads hang, and with paper ballots, they can be counted and recounted until they are worn to their constituent atoms by any and all who wish to verify.

Please give me some reasons we need electronic voting at all. The only ones I can think up are mooted because they are either venal or criminal or both. So they don't trump our ability to verify. What trumps our ability to verify, our ability to have confidence in election results?

N O T H I N G ! ! !

No?

Agent BB2

That too!

AGENT99

At this time the machines are clearly the least reliable in use. They are not alone in being easy to alter. Paper ballots can be discarded if there is no way to verify their existence. My system used with paper ballots would make such fraud easy to spot. Paper counts are slow and costly. Recounts are never complete counts and the powers that be are trying to make even partial recount impossible.

“The ONLY reason we are going through this awful, filthy, rotten, despicable, un-American, tedious and ugly bullshit is because very powerful and rich people want to put anyone in office they like, while letting the public think they voted for them.
IT'S THE ULTIMATE IN AMERICA'S CORRUPTION! “

I could not agree more! Faith based voting is clearly their ultimate goal and they are almost all the way to achieving that goal!

Thanks to the "N" herder!

Well, and, Bob, uh, I guess I should add that I'm including in my dreams for a reliable count of paper ballots, that it be made the law of the land, maybe even a Constitutional Amendment, since we're so hot for them lately, that any and all voters be allowed recounts upon demand, that citizens be drafted to insure ballot boxes aren't destroyed or stuffed, that we have in place a system of checks and balances that are fraud-proof. The cost of counting and recounting is immaterial on this issue. The cost to our country of rigged votes is inestimable, and I don't think there is a way to make a computer do the right thing, unerringly, and without a bazillion ways to game it so subtly that no one can ever really feel sure. Hang the speed imperative. We don't have to know instantly.

Or, IF nobody can be convinced we're modern enough without the blasted machines, they need to be non-proprietary, possibly programmed by an international consortium, with members made up of citizens from all democracies who get life in prison for doing anything that would throw an election.

AGENT99

I’m not as anti-machine or pro-paper as you are. To me it is verifiable honest counts at one end. Faith based guess work at the other end. Right now we are clearly moving our election laws toward faith based guess work no mater which system does the counting. The method of counting used is not nearly as important to me as the ability we have to verify that the count reported by whatever system is in use is the actual count. We are almost at the extreme opposite end of the spectrum from where I would like us to be. We need transparent results which numbered receipts of individual ballots would help out with. There is clearly room for improvement beyond that point.

In my initial response here I was just trying to establish a minimum requirement that would have to be in place before any rational person could be expected to trust the accuracy of the counts that any of the machines used in our elections are giving us. We sure are a very long way from that minimum requirement at this point in time.

Bob

And, WE'RE TOO CLOSE TO AN IMPORTANT ELECTION to be fiddling with machines right now. We have to get humans, lots of them, on it. INSIST on counting physical ballots, as many times, using as many people, as it takes.

We can work out the rest of it for the future, AFTER we make sure we all vote and all count this November. We've got four measly months, dude. We have to JUMP on it. All of us, and no fooling around.

It's time to start naming names.

58% of the public relies on General Electric (MSNBC and NBC) News Corp. (Fox), Disney (ABC), AOL-Time Warner (CNN) and Viacom (CBS) for its information. This is far too much power in a democracy for a handful of profit driven companies whose "news" deceives more than it reveals.

The co-conspirators in this crime include all of the heads of the MSM News Networks and all of the talking head shills who know that ACTUAL TRUTH, yet fail to report it out of loyalty to their paycheck vs. loyalty to their country and their own conscience.

Call them out.

Call them by name.

Demand of each an explanation for their participation in this RICO-sized Criminal Conspiracy to overthrow the US government, and in so doing, destroy the US Constitution and all it stands for.

Top 25 Censored Stories of 2006

http://www.projectcensor.../censored_2006/index.htm

The Top Censored Stories of 2004 to 2005

#1 Bush Administration Moves to Eliminate Open Government

Source:

Common Dreams, September 14, 2004. Press release.

Title: “New Report Details Bush Administration Secrecy”

Author: Karen Lightfoot
http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/0914-05.htm

Sean McManus - President of CBS News

Steve Capus - President of NBC News

David Westin - President of ABC News

Roger Ailes - President of Fox News

TO CONTACT MAJOR TELEVISION STATIONS

http://www.coalitionforw...edia/mediachallenge.html

Ask them:

What happened to the Watergate Poker Party Scandal?

The Dubai Ports Scandal?

The 9/11 Insider Trading scandal?

The Abu Gharaib Torture scandal?

The Fitzgerald Investigation?

The AIPAC/Franklin spy scandal?

The missing Iraqi Reconstruction Funds?

The other covert spies that were outed by Rove when Plame's identity was revealed?

The damage done to the US WMD monitoring program by Plames outing?

The Domestic Wiretapping Scandal?

The story of the "Dancing Israelis" arrested in New York on 9/11?

The "Israelis Art Student" Spy Scandal?

The intentional bombing of the Al Jazeera News Office in Baghdad?

The forger of the Niger Document?

The location of US Torture Prisons?

The USS Liberty investigation?

The failure to even discuss PNAC and its impact on US policy?

Thank you Catherine Crier for the best alert yet!

Sorry, 99 it's a relative.