Make way for President Gore

[paul108 0]

Did Al Gore win after all? US newspapers would rather not say

By Charles Laurence in New York

(Filed: 21/10/2001)

 

 

THE most detailed analysis yet of the contested Florida votes from last year's presidential election - with the potential to question President Bush's legitimacy - is being withheld by the news organisations that commissioned it.

 

Results of the inspection of more than 170,000 votes rejected as unreadable in the "hanging chad" chaos of last November's vote count were ready at the end of August.

 

The study was commissioned early this year by a consortium including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and the New York Times, the nation's most powerful newspapers, and the broadcaster CNN.

 

It was regarded as a means of supplying final answers to the nagging questions over President Bush's razor-thin victory margin. The cost was more than £700,000.

 

Now, however, spokesmen for the consortium say that they decided to "postpone" the story of the analysis by the National Opinion Research Centre (NORC) at the University of Chicago for lack of resources and lack of interest in the face of the enormous story of the September 11 attacks and the subsequent "war on terrorism".

 

Newspapers were saying last week that the final phase of the analysis, the actual counting of the 170,000 votes, had been "postponed" but would become known at an appropriate time.

 

America's liberal newspaper establishment originally set up the commission in the belief that it would discover that Al Gore was the winner of the Florida count.

 

Their hope for a Gore victory appears to have been sacrificed on the altar of patriotism and a perception that America needs to be led into war by a strong president.

 

"Our belief is that the priorities of the country have changed, and our priorities have changed," said Steven Goldstein, the vice-president of corporate communications at Dow Jones and Co, the owners of the Wall Street Journal.

 

Catherine Mathis, a spokesman for the New York Times, said: "The consortium agreed that because of the war, because of our lack of resources, we were postponing the vote-count investigation. But this is not final. The intention is to go forward."

 

However David Podvin, an investigative journalist who runs an independent web page, Make Them Accountable, said he had been tipped off that the consortium was covering up the results.

 

He refused to disclose his source other than to describe him as a former media executive whom he knew "as an accurate conduit of information" and who claimed that the consortium "is deliberately hiding the results of its recount because Gore was the indisputable winner".

 

He also claims that a New York Times journalist who was involved in the recount project had told "a former companion" that the Gore victory margin was big enough to create "major trouble for the Bush presidency if this ever gets out".

 

He believes that the inspection, carried out over months by a team from NORC, proves that Mr Gore won Florida and, therefore, the election.

 

That theory, however, is countered by the NORC staff who say that they designed the inspection programme so that no one has yet counted the votes and no outcome could be known.

 

Dr John Mason, a professor of political science at William Paterson University, in New Jersey said: "The goosiness, the sensitivity, that the press which organised this analysis is showing to publishing the results and the persistence of questions about the Florida ballots raise questions. There is a sensitivity over the legitimacy of this president."

 

Staff at NORC have been puzzled by the idea that the media would lack the resources because, according to them, they have computer programs already designed and fitted for the final count.

 

Julie Antelman of NORC said: "They are all ready to go, and could have the count and the result within a working week."

 

She added: "We very carefully kept our distance from the political implications of whatever the result may be. We do not know the outcome, and do not want to.

 

"Our job was to prepare the raw data which goes into the counting programs: we are simply waiting for the order to deliver this data to the consortium, which we expected within the first two weeks of September."

 

NORC analysts studied each of the 170,000 votes which were discarded because they were considered spoiled or simply unreadable. Each ballot paper has now been analysed and recorded to the ballot box and constituency where it was cast.

 

French and Canadian newspapers suggest that the black-out can only raise suspicions, and the issue is being increasingly aired on the internet.

 

Dr Mason said: "It would be responsible to complete this study and produce the result, whatever it may be."

 

 

 

[Tarun 6]

Another maniac in the White House: what else is new?

Bushel Bushed. Non-Negotiable Nitwit:

He's all smoke, no substance.

When he appeals (with crocodile tears) to American children:

"Winter's coming. December's awful cold in Kabul.

Donate one dollar for food & clothing so Afghan children won't freeze or starve this winter."

Yeah right.

Like Bushing really cares about Afghan children.

Like the money will really get there.

Heroine in Asia, Cocaine in South America: Tell it like it is.

He timed this WTC attack just right:

to save his own rear end from hypothermia - extremely indecent public exposure.

If Bushala was truly religious, the "Ends Justify the Means".

His deviations might be justifiable.

But America's excessive brutality worldwide only breeds more hate.

Even the French hate us.

Even the British hates us.

They + others are keeping quiet, feigning support for now.

By us I mean our Murderous Amerikan Foreign Policy.

Would Gore HaridAs make a better President than DAnava-Bush-anam?

We'll soon be finding out. Sooner than Bushman thinks.

 

 

 

[paul108 0]

THE MEDIA COVER-UP OF THE GORE VICTORY

PART ONE: RELIABLE SOURCE REVEALS THE COVER-UP

http://makethemaccountable.com/coverup/index.htm

 

By David Podvin

 

According to a source whose previous information has proven to be accurate, the Consortium of news organizations that recounted the presidential votes in the 2000 Florida election was shocked to find that former Vice President Al Gore decisively won the state, and it is now concealing the news of Gore's victory from the American people.

 

The source is a former media executive who previously revealed information that the Bush administration was lying about Clinton staffers having vandalized the White House. That information led me to accuse Karl Rove of manufacturing the 'crime'. My accusation appeared in an article that was posted by Buzzflash.com on January 28, 2001, and it was confirmed by a General Accounting Office investigative report several months later.

 

Having previously established credibility as a well-informed and accurate conduit of information, the executive now claims the Consortium is deliberately hiding the results of its recount because Gore was the indisputable winner.

 

Originally, the Consortium believed that there were three potential outcomes of the recount, any of which would have been acceptable to the participating news conglomerates. The first was a Bush win, which would have resolved the issue. The second was a dead heat/inconclusive result, which would have maintained the status quo. The third was a narrow Gore victory, which would have given die hard Democrats a debate point, but would have simply been another photo finish recount that most Americans would have disregarded as being currently irrelevant.

 

The Consortium was stunned to discover that the recount revealed Gore won a clear victory. Even after casting aside the controversial butterfly ballots and discarding ballots that were "iffy", Gore decisively won the recount. While the precise numbers are still unavailable, a New York Times journalist who was involved in the project told one of his former companions that Gore won by a sufficient margin to create "major trouble for the Bush presidency if this ever gets out".

 

Gore?s victory was large enough that it became apparent he would win prior to the Consortium recount being fully completed. And contrary to a recent claim by the New York Times, the terrorism of September 11 was not the crucial factor that determined whether to release the results to the American people. Prior to that time, the de facto majority shareholders in the publicly traded New York Times Company reportedly intervened on the side of quashing the recount results and convinced the other participants to shelve the story. The executive claims that the most important decisions at the Times are made by the influential money center banks that exercise actual voting control of a majority of stock. These banks are extremely pro-Bush. In addition to their control of the Times, they have substantial financial clout with the Washington Post Company, Dow Jones and Company, and the Tribune Company. As a result, the banks exert tremendous influence on a majority of the Consortium.

 

The story of Gore's victory has been spiked at the highest levels of the media conglomerates that are involved, rather than at the cosmetic steering committee level of the recount project. The Consortium reportedly has received intense pressure from members of the Bush inner circle both in and out of government, but has not been lobbied by representatives of Gore.

 

The huge disparity between the original recount and the Consortium recount stems from the G.O.P. tactics in Florida. Their strategy was to aggressively contest every pro-Gore ballot, even the obviously valid ones. The Republicans then accused the vote counters of being biased because most of the challenges were resolved in favor of Gore. By using this approach, the Bush partisans successfully intimidated the counters into bending over backwards to show "fairness", resulting in thousands of legitimate Gore votes being disqualified or relegated to a pile of disputed ballots.

 

"It was the old baseball manager's trick of crying about every call in order to pressure the umpire to give you more than your fair share," said the executive. "And it worked in Florida. However, in the relative calm of the Consortium recount - absent the pressure tactics - the Bush total remained basically consistent with the original count, while the Gore total shot way up."

 

As for what will happen next, the executive said, "Once the dominant pro-Gore trend became apparent, the Consortium was never going to release the results; the pressure from the big money boys was too great. Terrorism just provided a better excuse for withholding the information than the "technical difficulties" stalling tactic that was otherwise going to be used. The Consortium is determined to make sure that the original results of their recount will never see the light of day."

[valaya 0]

Fortunately for the devotees, they know that Sri Krsna is always in control and therefore they don't have to concern themselves with such mundane matters.

 

Through their personal sacrifices all living entities can be freed from material bondage and the entire atmosphere purified. HARIBOL!

 

valaya RR

[Tarun 6]

Valaya: should the PANDavas have concerned themselves with mundane matters?

[valaya 0]

Originally posted by Tarun:

Valaya: should the PANDavas have concerned themselves with mundane matters?

Prabhu, with all due respect, we is we and they are them. Think of the real power a pure devotee has achieved by concentrating on that one goal...

 

 

[paul108 0]

Originally posted by valaya:

Prabhu, with all due respect, we is we and they are them. Think of the real power a pure devotee has achieved by concentrating on that one goal...

 

 

 

Since we now have a "president" who is almost like Kamsa, bringing puny living entities such as myself so much grief, I would really appreciate if someone could request Krishna to help us.

 

Also, since Krishna is also in control of spiritual matters, we shouldn't have to worry about spiritual matters like prasada distribution since Krishna is making sure that everyone is fed. If Krishna wanted every household to be stocked with Srila Prabhupada's books, he would've arranged that already. Hey, maybe I can just forget about trying to convince people to stop supporting animal slaughter, since Krishna already is taking care of that, so cows have no worries.

 

Perhaps it just shows my lack of devotion, but I just can't watch the world go to hell without doing what I can. It would be great if I had enough appreciation for chanting Hare Krishna that I could just do that, but I've been associating with matter for a long time. Maybe someone can put me in touch with Krishna so that I don't have to waste my time with the material energy, but I don't think it will be easy. I'm a bit of a rascal as you've probably noticed.

 

 

[paul108 0]

INSIDE THE CONSORTIUM BALLOT STUDY

 

By Sharon Becker, as told to David Podvin

 

In February of this year, I personally witnessed Al Gore pick up almost enough votes in the Consortium ballot study, in my county alone, to win the state of Florida and the presidency.

 

As the newly elected chair of the Polk County, Florida, Democratic Executive Committee, I went to our local Supervisor of Elections building to observe the ballot study being conducted by the National Opinion Research Center for the media Consortium.

 

In the coding room, there were four people seated at a long table who were examining the ballots. Surrounding them were four Republican observers. I was the only Democrat present. The other people in the room were a representative from the University of Chicago and an employee of the local election supervisor.

 

In our primarily Republican County, the voting equipment is of the optical scanning variety. Voters use pencils to fill in little bubbles that are then read by the machines.

 

From my position in the room, I was able to observe the process during which the 'overvotes' were counted. These were ballots in which the citizen voted more than once in the same race.

 

According to Florida law, such ballots must count if the intent of the voter is clear.

 

There were two primary reasons that ballots were designated as 'overvotes'. First, the ballot design in our county had Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Lieberman?s name immediately above the word 'Libertarian'. It was sufficiently confusing that some voters put pencil marks next to both 'Lieberman' and 'Libertarian'.

 

At the bottom of the ballot, there was a section that read, "Write In The Name Of Your Candidate". It did not mention that a voter should write in a name only if they had not previously selected a candidate.

 

Outrageously, in GOP controlled Polk County, the election supervisor had ruled that ballots containing a filled bubble for Gore and the written name of Gore did not indicate whom the voter wanted for president.

 

Watching as six hundred ninety one 'overvotes' were reviewed, I saw the coders establish that far more of them were for Al Gore than for George W. Bush. This provided the vice president with almost enough votes in our one county to offset the official 571 vote lead statewide lead for Bush.

 

NOTE: MakeThemAccountable has spoken with observers, coders, and supervisors throughout Florida, in both Democratic and Republican counties. Their accounts are all similar to that of Ms. Becker - during the ballot study, they observed an overwhelming trend for Al Gore. She is the latest eyewitness to refute the Consortium's absurd claim that no one could possibly know who was doing well in the ballot study because the ballots have yet to be tabulated.

 

Participants in the study are reluctant to come forward now, because to do so would violate their confidentiality agreement with the NORC. They are waiting to see what the Consortium does with the ballot study. Some of them have told MakeThemAccountable that, if the Consortium continues with its pattern of concealment and deception, they will view that as a breach of their agreement and are prepared to come forward with first hand knowledge of the truth that Al Gore decisively won the state of Florida.