TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Republican involved in Electronic Vote scandal dead
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

Republican involved in Electronic Vote scandal dead

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/12...t_dies_in_plane

Synopsis...

Looks like this guy, who was Karl Rove's IT guy, was involved in all of those conveniently close republican victories in the last 6 years regarding voting machine fraud. It says there were confidential inside informants who came out and said he was at risk to be taken out.

He was set to testify against Rove, when his plane went down. CIA assassinations of this kind usually involve private planes crashing, or people falling out of windows. They said they're going to do an investigation since it is highly suspicious and the plane displayed some strange behavior with an experienced pilot.

You'd think these people would be intelligent enough NOT to ride in private jets, since that's always what gets em. *sigh*

So what if the last 8 years of republican dominance were actually the greatest manufactured fraud in the history of our nation?

I heard the investor invloved in that big hedge fund scandal died too. Someone is cleaning them all one by one.

quote:

Originally posted by Kinezi I heard the investor invloved in that big hedge fund scandal died too.

What does that have anything to do with this thread?

Re: Republican involved in Electronic Vote scandal dead

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby CIA assassinations of this kind usually involve private planes crashing, or people falling out of windows.

Oh really?

omar torrijos in panama


but still, on foreign soil in another era. I dont know if you could get away clean with a setup like that nowadays with all the skeptics around with the internet as their tool.

would be nice to see some of the conspiracy theorists thoughts on here

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Damerchi but still, on foreign soil in another era.

Precisely.

There are a lot of people with a broad and misconceived notion of what the CIA is and what jurisdiction/capabilities it actually has.

I'm not saying anything until we hear from pkc.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Precisely. There are a lot of people with a broad and misconceived notion of what the CIA is and what jurisdiction/capabilities it actually has.

Some truth in your statement, as long as you'll acklowdge that it applies broadly to yourself as well. I'm glad you had nothing really to add to the thread of substance, as usual lately.

Run a google search for Freedom of Information Act, and various CIA assassination documentations. You'll find manuals and examples... if that's really all you were looking for from the thread, then you're welcome.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby I'm glad you had nothing really to add to the thread of substance, as usual lately.

Coming from the king of drug-induced one-liners... yeah, no skin off my back.

When there are threads of actual substance in the PDD again maybe I'll post something longer so that you might think it substantive. In the meantime, waxing poetic about threads about unfounded (and ridiculous) allegations or threads that are simply news articles without context or comment? Sorry, not how I'd like to spend my time.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Run a google search for Freedom of Information Act,

Also, I'll just add that I'm pretty familiar with the Freedom of Information Act since I've worked with it directly, which just lends credence to my supposition that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Some truth in your statement, as long as you'll acklowdge that it applies broadly to yourself as well. I'm glad you had nothing really to add to the thread of substance, as usual lately. Run a google search for Freedom of Information Act, and various CIA assassination documentations. You'll find manuals and examples... if that's really all you were looking for from the thread, then you're welcome.

Why don't you provide links for those of us who want to make sure that you know of what you are talking about?

quote:

Originally posted by guerra-monstru Why don't you provide links for those of us who want to make sure that you know of what you are talking about?

http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foia_updat...VII_4/page2.htm

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/foia.html

It doesn't show that he knows what he's talking about, but you can read the law if you'd like.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foia_updat...VII_4/page2.htm http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/foia.html It doesn't show that he knows what he's talking about, but you can read the law if you'd like.

Furthermore:

quote:

Bush Data Threatens to Overload Archives By ROBERT PEAR and SCOTT SHANE Published: December 27, 2008 WASHINGTON � The National Archives has put into effect an emergency plan to handle electronic records from the Bush White House amid growing doubts about whether its new $144 million computer system can cope with the vast quantities of digital data it will receive when President Bush leaves office on Jan. 20. The technical challenge was an inevitable result of the explosion in cybercommunications, which will make the electronic record of the Bush years about 50 times as large as that left by the Clinton White House in 2001, archives officials estimate. The collection will include top-secret e-mail tracing plans for the Iraq war as well as scenes from the likes of Barney Cam 2008, a White House video featuring the first pet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/27/w...ner=rss&emc=rss

People love to hate Bush so much that they're willing to dream up the most ridiculous ideas of secrecy and cover-ups that extend from sanctioned assassinations to multi-agency participation in 9/11. It would be funny if it wasn't so ignorant.

quote:

Originally posted by guerra-monstru Why don't you provide links for those of us who want to make sure that you know of what you are talking about?

A two second search of google:

http://www.matarese.com/matarese-fi...1997/index.html

There's also examples of attempts made on people like Castro, etc.

I think in this case it seems likely it was an assassination, but I don't know for sure. That's just an opinion. That's not the only purpose the article serves, anyway.

Let's not be naive, that's what they are paid to do: they steal information and follow/kill people.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby A two second search of google: http://www.matarese.com/matarese-fi...1997/index.html

you're serious? sure you didn't get that from >HERE<

it reads like a junior in highschool wrote it, not a top secret official CIA tech manual. just my opinion of course

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo you're serious? sure you didn't get that from >HERE< it reads like a junior in highschool wrote it, not a top secret official CIA tech manual. just my opinion of course

I agree...

You give too much credit to our government, methinks.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby A two second search of google: http://www.matarese.com/matarese-fi...1997/index.html

And did you read this at all? Everything that came to light was on FOREIGN targets in the 1950's and 1960's - as that webpage indicates in the second paragraph, revelations in the 70's led to a moratorium on US-sanctioned killings abroad, and there is absolutely zero documentation on domestic assassinations.

Again, this is an example of you turning an incident isolated in time into a broad, insidious on-going conspiracy. It's cool to be disestablishmentarian, but it gets old really fast when you continually make leaps not founded in actual fact or logic.

EDIT: To beat you to the "Freedom of Information Act 1997" punch - it's standard operating procedure in the executive branch to declassify classified documents after a 25 year waiting period - that explains why the revelations within the CIA took place in 1972 but the document didn't surface until 1997. No conspiracy there either.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby You give too much credit to our government, methinks.

or you give too much credit to the interwebs? who cares really, it's dumb

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov And did you read this at all? Everything that came to light was on FOREIGN targets in the 1950's and 1960's - as that webpage indicates in the second paragraph, revelations in the 70's led to a moratorium on US-sanctioned killings abroad, and there is absolutely zero documentation on domestic assassinations. Again, this is an example of you turning an incident isolated in time into a broad, insidious on-going conspiracy. It's cool to be disestablishmentarian, but it gets old really fast when you continually make leaps not founded in actual fact or logic. EDIT: To beat you to the "Freedom of Information Act 1997" punch - it's standard operating procedure in the executive branch to declassify classified documents after a 25 year waiting period - that explains why the revelations within the CIA took place in 1972 but the document didn't surface until 1997. No conspiracy there either.

I fail to see your point in relation to me giving you one example of the information that you requested; seems like you're grasping for straws, and personally I just don't really care enough about the subject to continue a silly debate about it.

If you have anything to add regarding the article, feel free to post.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo or you give too much credit to the interwebs? who cares really, it's dumb

The government can barely fix potholes in the road, to be fair.

CIA is dirty as fuck. Its a little more difficult to prove their crimes on home soil than abroad - on foreign soil there are many times when CIA committed terrible deeds and crimes, from overthrowing democratically elected leaders, to assassinations, bombings, covert operations, wars, and bigger operations like Gladio. No point in covering those up tight because they can be/were justified in one way or another.

Just knowing about the various CIA involvements in such bullshit like Watergate scandals, the Jewels, the drugs from Central America, and so on and forth, one can only wonder how much illegal activities they've done over the years against their own people. Oh, not to mention the very intriguing Operation Northwoods - echoing 9/11 many years later. Though Northwoods was never carried out because of JFK's opposition and exposure, no wonder why he got killed later.


Anyways - as for the topic - this might have not been CIA's work, but it is very likely to be a work of some government jackal to protect Rove and his gang. Its a terrible shame.

Either way, whatever the government organization is, they will find a way to prove or justify and cover anything they need. And people will be fed that bullshit and accept, find a reason to explain anything. 8 years of Bush administration showed it. As much as some people blame just the Bushes and his gang, I think its pretty ignorant - the problem, in my opinion, runs much deeper, as the involvement. Corporations, government agencies, political parties, etc.

Just how many times Republicans and Democrats sang the same dam tune, playing along to each other, with Democrats failing to stop much of the lunacy when they had the power to do so.

When I first saw this cross the wire I knew deep down inside that it was very fishy.....
However, I will wait for more info to come out to make a full judgment on the story.

but something smells fishy....

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium CIA is dirty as fuck. Its a little more difficult to prove their crimes on home soil than abroad

Why would the CIA be active on US soil, when they have the FBI or the NSA?

quote:

Originally posted by LazFX When I first saw this cross the wire I knew deep down inside that it was very fishy..... However, I will wait for more info to come out to make a full judgment on the story. but something smells fishy....

/agree

quote:

Originally posted by guerra-monstru Why would the CIA be active on US soil, when they have the FBI or the NSA?

They wouldn't.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.