Saturday, April 02, 2005

ELECTION FIX--Final statistical proof that the 2004 election was stolen... 

I alluded to the election fix (6. The voting machine fiasco) in my blog last night, but forgot to post the latest statistical evidence for the fix. Thanks to my bud in the heart of "W"-land (So. Carolina) for reminding me to post the evidence:

Please go to:


and read the results for yourself. It's really depressing, actually. The statistical bias (p<0.0000001 for you statistics fans) shows that the odds of an election bias in favor of Bush was 9,999,999 out of 10 million (see page 2). I'm not willing to bet this was the 1 in 10 million that was legit. The two charts that provide overwhelming evidence are those showing the fix in Bush counties (top of page 4) and the ones showing that all forms without a paper record have a similar 6% bias compared to that where a legal, paper record could be referenced (page 5). Interesting, no, that the polls and paper-trail votes matched almost exactly while the ones no one can hand-count don't? Don't ask what the statistical odds for that are...it makes 1 in 10 million seem like one side of a coin toss. It is really beyond the pale...this is far more damning than the evidence behind Ukrainian election fraud, and no one will do anything about it.

The fact is, the US elections are clearly being rigged. Most likely, the election was biased to the tune of 5% in the past election, exactly swinging a Kerry "mandate" of 2.5% to the reputed Bush "mandate" of 2.5%. Expect every single election from now on to be fixed. We no longer live in a Democracy. The coup d'etat has already occurred.

Also consistent with the hypothesis of corruption in the vote is the finding that the mean discrepancy is highest in Bush strongholds. It is easy to imagine that in precincts dominated by Bush supporters, the temptation is greater to distort the count for Bush advantage because the risk of detection and punishment would be least. Only in the most strongly Bush precincts did the mean discrepancy depart significantly from the median (10.0% vs 5.8%). If indeed there was corruption of vote counts among the Bush strongholds, this statistic suggests that its distribution was far from uniform, and would be consistent with large-scale vote count corruption in a small proportion of precincts. This hypothesis would be easy to check if E/M were to release their raw polling data.

I am sad to say that I appear to have been too lenient in my own analysis of the election. I had assumed that many Bush supporters were ashamed to admit they voted for him. I have now come to see that Bush supporters are quite the opposite: gleeful. They are a ruling minority, and their time is gonna come, but for now we are ruled by a kleptocracy.

We will see why this is so when I begin my review of an incredibly accurate and insightful book, Stephen J. Ducat's "The Wimp Factor". This may be one of the books of the decade.


Friday, April 01, 2005

More on systematic torture...Eastern Hemisphere 

A CommonDreams article shows that the torture in Iraq and Afghanistan is just as pronounced and promoted as that at Guantanamo:

Death of a detainee with no history of medical problems: Abu Malik Kenami died while in detention in Mosul, Iraq. On the day he died, Kenami had been ”punished with several ups and downs -- a correctional technique of having a detainee stand up and then sit-down rapidly, always keeping them in constant motion...and ha(d) his hands flex-cuffed behind his back.”

He was also hooded, with ”a sandbag placed over (his) head.” The file states that ”(t)he cause of Abu Malik Kenami's death will never be known because an autopsy was never performed on him.”

Soldiers were told to ”beat the f**k out of detainees”: Army documents include sworn statements that soldiers were told in August 2003 to ”take the detainee(s) out back and beat the f**k out of them.”

Perceptions of chain of command endorsement of retribution: A military intelligence team saw soldiers kicking blindfolded and ”zipcuffed” detainees several times in the sides while yelling profanities at them. The investigation concludes that at least three military personnel abused the detainees.

It adds that some of the soldiers ”may perceive that the chain-of-command is endorsing 'pay-back' by allowing the units most affected by suspected detainee actions to play the greatest role in bringing those suspects to justice.”

No bandied words can sugar-coat this report. The Iraqi prisoners, like Jews during the Holocaust, are "at the disposal" of their captors. While ultimately a trip to Guantanamo awaits those who survive for the long-term, it is obvious that the torture in Afghanistan and Iraq is systematic, sanctioned at the Rumsfeld/Bush level, and clearly understood to be against any ethical standards.

Why else the following attempted cover-up?

Evidence of abuse of a teenaged detainee: a high school student had his jaw broken, requiring his mouth to be wired shut, and could eat only through a straw. The victim was told ”to say that I've fallen down and no one beat me.”

However, the torture is too brutal to be suppressed:

The Army report concluded that the broken jaw was caused either as a result of a blow by a U.S. soldier or a collapse due to ”complete muscle failure” from being excessively exercised.

Surely, the soldiers are being sentenced, right? Far from it...

One soldier reports, ”He continued to mess with his mask/sandbag so I took his handcuffs off and put them behind his back and smoked him for another 20 minutes before I sat him down.”

At night, the prisoner had to sleep with the sandbag on his head and his hands cuffed behind his back. On the morning of the fourth day, he was found dead in his cell. According to the report, an autopsy was supposed to be performed, but no record of it was provided. As the result of another investigation, the Army has decided not to prosecute 17 U.S. soldiers implicated in the deaths of three prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2003 and 2004, according to a new accounting released by the Army last week.

Why are these soldiers free? The prisoner was obviously murdered? Can you say "web of complicity"? Thought you could. For the same reason Bush & co. don't want Saddam tried in public...too much can come out.

It is overwhelmingly probable that this starts at Bush's level, and undeniable at Rumsfeld's level. Until there is a branch of government with the temerity or lack of Party loyalty to properly investigate, though, murderers will go free. There has to date been no proper investigation of:

1. The systematic torture in Iraq and Afghanistan
2. The institutionalized torture in the Guantanamo death camp
3. The WMD true story--remember that Powell, Bush and Cheney did not say their "intelligence" (never mind the obvious oxymoron there) was leading them at the time--they pointed at the pictures and made their own "intelligence" interpretations. No fair re-writing history...we remember what you said.
4. What really hit the Pentagon
5. Why the planes hitting the twin towers had no windows
6. The voting machine fiasco
7.-Infinity...DeLay, Enron, etc. etc. It NEVER ends!

Meanwhile, the American public hides from the truth. Blankets are coming off soon folks.


Not an April Fool's Joke...a terrible precedent... 

How far is it from calling a gunshot to the head a mercy killing to the gas chambers?

Now a soldier who killed an Iraqi served no time:

The most disturbing quote? This might be it:

"He was in a state I didn't think was dignified. I had to put him out of his misery," Maynulet said in his defense according to U.S. military's Stars and Stripes magazine.

This is ominous. What if someone praying in the direction of Mecca isn't dignified enough? What if a non-evangelical Christian isn't "dignified" enough? What if someone "was in a [blue] state I didn't think was dignified"?

As if the horror of the systematic torturing weren't enough, now we see that murderers can walk based on their sense of dignity. You think it can't happen here? It already has and is.


Wednesday, March 30, 2005

The Pope goes nuts...religious world in a frenzy!!! 

OK, the Pope really threw the whole religious right out of whack with his latest whimsy...

Turns out the Pope pulled the tube from Schiavo...to help himself...


I wonder what Jesus would do about this one.


Sunday, March 27, 2005


Book review on Guantánamo:

This is an interesting approach to the problems in Guantánamo, with Michael Ratner, an important defender of civil rights, being interviewed (and sometimes refocused) expertly by Ellen Ray. In one compelling page after another, the ignominy of the US "process" in Guantánamo is spelled out for the reader. If, after reading this, one is left with any questions about whether the US has "moral high ground" anymore; whether or not the US actions in Guantánamo are legal; and whether or not Gonzales and Bush should be tried as war criminals, then let me spell it out here.

1. The US has lost any real or perceived moral high ground it had before the Iraqi War. From Bagram to Abu Ghraib to Guantánamo, the US is systematically torturing its prisoners, without representation or charge, and often without crimes. Afghan prisoners were collected, like Jews during the Nazi years, in shipping crates packed like sardines (300-500/case). When many died of suffocation, the US-led coalition (in this case, mainly Northern Alliance thugs) shot holes into the crate to help them breathe. Roughly 90% of these prisoners died en route to the Bagram facility. Torture of any sort is against the Geneva Convention and various other torture conventions/agreements of which the US is part. Torture of anyone--even a known murderer--is illegal (not to mention completely ineffective), and the torture of innocent people is beyond the Pale. I will not attempt to reproduce all the forms of torture that our tax dollars are currently supporting; suffice it to say that the book spells out several grisly practices. But the focus is on...

2. In compelling and relatively layperson-friendly terminology, the book shows how the torture in Guantánamo is illegal, even if the prisoners are "terrorists" and not combatants. Guantánamo is under complete US jurisdiction, and the prisoners should have rights to a US court system. They do not. And it is not legal, in spite of machinations by Gonzales...

3. A letter from Gonzales (W's newly-appointed Attorney General) to Bush and Colin Powell proves that Gonzales--and even more clearly Powell, to his credit--recognize that "US officials" (read "Bush") will be held culpable as war criminals for what is going on in Guantánamo. However, Gonzales tries to create a "culpability void" by saying that the US need not follow the Geneva Convention because the folks at Guantánamo are not combatants in the "quaint" Geneva Convention sense, and that Bush would follow the Convention anyway, out of his normal moral high ground. Well, he has not followed them. In fact, Bush has followed his own distorted version of morality in which he has all rectitude and everyone else is worthy of torture, lies and disdain.

If the Dems can take control of the House and Senate in 2006, there is a chance that Bush can still be tried during his presidency. But it's going to take a lot of heretofore clueless folks to get their acts together quickly for us to see the day. The real problem is that the rest of the world has already made their verdict. And, sadly, that verdict--as this book shows--proves the US more guilty than the average prisoner at Guantánamo.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?