COINTELPRO-style disruption of election reform going on?

[eridani]

I was just reading some of my old notes about COINTELPRO, which was a government effort to disrupt anti-war and other radical movements in the 60s and 70s. One of their techniques was deliberately fomenting conflicts among movement leaders.

And I thought, gee, what if there were people who wanted to stop election reform dead, who noticed that one of the principals was extremely egotistical and inclined toward paranoia, and who then concluded that it might be a good idea to ramp that up a lot using techniques that had proven so effective 30 years ago?

Could that possibly explain any of what has gone on with this BBV thing over the past year?

[lala_rawraw]

1. Yep...

And also the most recent events, hence the outbursts recently.

[Last Lemming]

2. Lately?

is this re Andy Stevenson or some other debacle I managed to miss?

[eridani]

3. I meant that Bev Harris seems to be the type--

--that a COINTELPRO operative could jack into high gear with the right kind of stimulus. Not sure of any time frames.

[Junkdrawer]

4. Nail...Head...

:thumbsup:

[SophieZ]

10. Remember the recent trial of the Klansman in Mississippi?

Three civil rights workers were murdered in 1964?

What were they attempting to do in Mississippi?

They were.......

.....

registering voters.

--One of the victims, Michael Schwerner, and his wife, had their phone tapped while in Mississippi.

--Senator Eastland of Mississippi was feeding intell to none other than Edgar Ray Killen, the guy who was found guilty, lo these 41 years later.

--The police was "wall-to-wall Klan" in those days, in that area, according to a long-time journalist there.

--The activists, black or white, who went to civil rights meetings had their car tags recorded, and dossiers were made on them. The college students who came to Freedom Summer from the North had dossiers made on them BEFORE then even crossed the state line to get to Mississippi.

--Worst of all, the Klan or its slightly more respectable group, the White Citizens Council, got a local black to repeatedly spy on the civil rights groups and report back as to their plans -- where they would be, when. Perfect, eh? Who would suspect one of their own. I'd like to see him up for trial, with the rest of the no-goods.

One of the problems with a Cointelpro operation is that a sense of paranoia can start to seep into things.

It's good to talk about it, so that people can realize that not everybody is exactly who they say they are, in life, and in activism circles.

[thegreatwildebeest]

13. Ironically...

...Cointelpro targetted the KKK.

[eridani]

20. 90% of their effort was directed toward the left, though

KKK is still around, and the Black Panthers aren't.

[Amaryllis]

5. I've wondered the same thing. That's why I agree with Kip that it's

important not to respond/react to that kind of stuff; if you don't feed it, it will die.

[Peace Patriot]

6. Yup, I would say that the internal slaughterfest that I witnessed going

going on at DU when I first joined DU (and that almost drove me to exit immediately) has a haunting resemblance to other COINTELPRO ops, and to similar corporate ops, that I have personal experience of. Once one of these black ops gets going within a group, it is very, very difficult to stop, because it often involves inexplicable personal hurts, lies, charges and counter-charges, fears, threats, small pots of money (always in short supply among citizen activists, and often poisonous), and personal friendships and loyalties (sometimes forged in dangerous circumstances) suddenly busting apart. It is never easy to tell where it's coming from. It could be an active agent, or an unseen agent at work upon the personal weaknesses of a particular activist. And it could be just personal weakness that wasn't exploited by outside agents, but that looks like it was. (I mean, people can always be tempted by money, power and egotism to act like assholes, all on their own, without government or corporate help.)

The slaughterfest itself--whether instigated or not--becomes its own kind of poison. It doesn't matter who's right or wrong (though it seems to matter VERY MUCH at the time, to close participants). It's sometimes best to just walk away. Admit it's poison, and walk away--no matter what it is that you are leaving behind.

But there have been far too many instances of COINTELPRO and COINTELPRO-type instigations to ignore that possibility--and those involved in election reform, in antiwar activism, in anti-globalization protests, and in environmental defense work, should be very wary of it. It's my feeling right now that election reform poses the greatest threat to the Bush Cartel and their associates, and election reform activists should be especially alert to this kind of sabotage.

Just remember this: no matter what the personal injury--whether it's money, or credit for successes or for work done, or backstabbing, or whatever it is--it's best to at least BE FULLY PREPARED to just walk away and go do your citizen work elsewhere (with better people, or in better groups). If you are prepared for that, psychologically and spiritually, then you can better weather internal squabbles, and even help stop them, or you can, in fact, walk away, if necessary--learn something from it (if you can) and then leave it behind, shuck it all off, and put your passion, your commitment and your skills to work in a healthier group.

Think of the word "Enlightenment." Think of all the brilliant and courageous people who have sacrificed so much--sometimes their very lives--over the centuries and millenia to help humanity become enlightened--open-minded, reasonable, tolerant, well-informed, well-educated, just, fair, democratic and peaceful. Think of the Light. Aim for the Light. And you will never go wrong.

[thegreatwildebeest]

7. Oh please...

going on at DU when I first joined DU (and that almost drove me to exit immediately) has a haunting resemblance to other COINTELPRO ops, and to similar corporate ops, that I have personal experience of. Once one of these black ops gets going within a group, it is very, very difficult to stop, because it often involves inexplicable personal hurts, lies, charges and counter-charges, fears, threats, small pots of money (always in short supply among citizen activists, and often poisonous), and personal friendships and loyalties (sometimes forged in dangerous circumstances) suddenly busting apart. It is never easy to tell where it's coming from. It could be an active agent, or an unseen agent at work upon the pd.ersonal weaknesses of a particular activist. And it could be just personal weakness that wasn't exploited by outside agents, but that looks like it was. (I mean, people can always be tempted by money, power and egotism to act like assholes, all on their own, without government or corporate help.)

Agent provacetuers? On a Democratic party board? Come on now... is there anything on here so blazingly radical that it demands funding by police departments? No. Cointelpro stuff was focused on actual radical movements of the time, including black power and black nationalist movements, radical left/communist organizations, and the KKK.

Speaking as a person who is involved in radical activism (anarchism), even the amount of police involvement there is overstated, and usually limited to overt and open discussion meetings, and very rarely are there "police" involved in the more clandestine activity. We do have a modicum of security culture after all. but mor eimportantly, we don't have "leaders" or "hiearchial structures" that can lead to such power grabs...having flat organizations tend to eliminate such problems).


But there have been far too many instances of COINTELPRO and COINTELPRO-type instigations to ignore that possibility--and those involved in election reform, in antiwar activism, in anti-globalization protests, and in environmental defense work, should be very wary of it. It's my feeling right now that election reform poses the greatest threat to the Bush Cartel and their associates, and election reform activists should be especially alert to this kind of sabotage.

What election reform? You mean counting the ballots? Instant run off voting? The term "election reform" spans a number of people, including those who just seem to be concerned with using paper machines to count ballots, those who want some runoff scheme, and I have yet to hear anyone propose (outside of the Green Party) any sort of proportional voting scheme. And why would the Bush cartel be afraid of anyone, besides the usual paranoia of being on top? They have billions of dollars of companies behind them in a wide variety of sectors, have a stable evanglical religious base, they currently own all the branches of goverment, and have a political machinery par excellance.

I don't say this to be disheartening, but just to point out that too many people have delusions of grandeur and their own self importance in the scheme of things. And THAT kind of thinking leads to more problems than any agent provacetuer ever can inflict. You mention yourself the poison of money, ego, and just outright power grabs that infect the (authoritarian) liberal and left movements. All these years later since the 60's and people still haven't figured out ways to not be mini-Stalin's when it comes to small time activist groups. I would be more worried about that than about some cop being in my group or something.

[Chi]

8. Not sure if you're interested...

Heya thegreatwildebeest,
'very rarely are there "police" involved in the more clandestine activity'

Not sure if you're interested, but here's a relevant article in Salon.

---C&P----
Chris Hurley was just one of many cops all over the country who went undercover to spy on antiwar protesters last year. Nonviolent antiwar groups in Fresno, Calif., Grand Rapids, Mich., and Albuquerque, N.M., have all been infiltrated or surveilled by undercover police officers. Shortly after the Buckley protest, the Boulder group was infiltrated a second time, by another pair of police posing as an activist couple.

---snip---

In the early 1970s, after the exposure of COINTELPRO, a program of widespread FBI surveillance and sabotage of political dissidents, reforms were put in place to prevent the government from spying on political groups when there was no suspicion of criminal activity. But once again, protesters throughout America are being watched, often by police who are supposed to be investigating terrorism. Civil disobedience, seen during peaceful times as the honorable legacy of heroes like Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., is being treated as terrorism's cousin, and the government claims to be justified in infiltrating any meeting where it's even discussed. It's too early to tell if America is entering a repeat of the COINTELPRO era. But Jeffrey Fogel, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Law in Manhattan, says, "There are certainly enough warning signs out there that we may be."

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/02/11/cointelpro/

[thegreatwildebeest]

9. When I said clandestine...

...I meant clandestine work by activists. For instance, very few ALF or ELF cells have ever been infiltrated, and whenever any sort of vaguely illegal thing is going to go on its not discussed at large convergences or at public collective meetings. Liberals need to get some security culture up in their place.

The internet is also a very poor medium for coordinating anything for the most part, in view of security. Nothing is EVER really secure on the internet, same with cell phones/phones, or meetings that have been fliered. And its too easy for people to "pose" than it is in real life, where most agents look like complete dupes.

I know that police have been all up in non violent anti war groups and a handful of other groups, but really, are they a more legitimate threat than peoples own ability to sabotage things in power grabs? No. I think people fretting about police action is ridiculous when groups own innefficiency, power hungry leaders, and organizational ineptitude, wreck more things.

[eridani]

22. Well, certainly we are capable of wrecking stuff on our own--

--but if we aren't a threat, why don't police just leave ua alone? And if anarchist actions are so effective, why are we at war? How many anarchists voted against the war and the PATRIOT Act?

[thegreatwildebeest]

24. You want to know who started this war?

but if we aren't a threat, why don't police just leave ua alone? And if anarchist actions are so effective, why are we at war? How many anarchists voted against the war and the PATRIOT Act?

How many people voted for this war? Every single Democrat this past election. Don't believe me? Look at Kerry's platform. Was there anything about pulling out troops immediately, or ceasing offensive actions? No where in his campaign did he suggest that Afghanistan was wrong either. There is no such thing as a "just" pre-emptive war. And you want to know how many Democrats voted for the PATRIOT Act? Every single one except Russ Feingold. I don't remember a sizable contingent of Democrats opposing the Iraq war, enough anyways, to stop it. Moreover anarchists don't buy into this sham of a democracy, or in fact any form of "representational" electioneering. We don't build parties, and we don't "Get out the vote". We do things directly, without intermediaries.

Oh and before you take potshots at people who actually have gumption to directly do things, know the facts. The Seattle protests shutdown the city and the meeting. This led again to the situation in Cancun where trade talks broke down AGAIN off the strength of protestors outside. Thousands of homeless people are fed by dumpstered food via Food Not Bombs, teaching people in a consensus based approach in free schools, agitating for flatter and more responsible activist organizations, running collective housing, bicycle collectives, starting Indymedia, setting up alternative radio, and other forms of media distribution. What have Democrats gotten us in the past 12 years? NAFTA, "Workfare", wars in Kosovo and Somolia, while ignoring Rwanda, East Timor, and Sudan.

Moreover, you're not a threat, as long as you stand in streets and hold signs. What are you going to do, sloganeer them to stop? If people are "Watching you" its to weed out the more direct action oriented and radical presence, not to stop somebody from holding a sign saying how much the Iraq war sucks. And also, hey hey hey, cops like to be assholes about protestors, especially if they think their unpatriotic. That doesn't mean you're a "threat". That just means they don't like you. That's not one and the same.

[Chi]

35. Did you answer your subject line?

I scanned your post and found no mention of Republicans, conservatives, or neocons....hmmm, must be me.
8)

[thegreatwildebeest]

41. For gentler, kinder war...

...pull the lever for Democrats. What was Kosovo? What was Somalia? Those "Wars" happened underneath a Democratic president. And last time I checked, Democrats weren't exactly calling for a unilateral pullout were they?

Har de har har har, you pointed out the obvious that Republicans are more bloodthirsty than Democrats. But thats a difference of degree, not intention. The "War" in Iraq would have been okay with UN approval, with multi-lateral coalitions by most Democrats...as if getting rubber stamped from the UN makes a war "right" and another war "wrong". What was the message that Kerry delievered time and time again, when we go to war we don't go it alone? So 9 countries killing a bunch of people is moral and 1 killing a bunch of people isn't? How does that work? It's either there all wrong or there all right. Does it matter if a civilian is killed by an American Tomahawk or a multi-countries coalitions bullet? Does death take into account the difference? It didn't, last time I checked.

[Chi]

45. Not my point at all..

Heya G.W.B. ;-)
I would probably not make a generalization such as all members of a political party are more bloodthirsty than another.

You said you were gonna tell us 'who started this war', but have yet to hear your opinion on it.
Unless your opinion is that Democrats hold the majority of blame, if so just restate it.
It's your opinion, there is no wrong answer.

[thegreatwildebeest]

46. Democrat politicians didn't start the war...

...but I'm tired of people holding them up as figures of people who actively opposed it. Most Democrat politicians, and most Democratic voters, have said openly that they would have had no problem if this was done "under UN approval" or a bigger percentage of coalition forces, that we shouldn't be contributing "all" the resources and man power. That in fact was the message reiterated by Kerry and others again and again, that you can't go "into war alone" as if going to "war in a group" is a better alternative. It is not. They did not "oppose the war" they opposed how it was conducted. There is a major difference between those two positions.

Moreover, both parties are guilty of feeding the beast that causes these wars in the first place, from unequal and unfair trade practices, oil and natural resource exploitation, the clandestine funding and manipulation of foreign regimes in order to serve so called "national interests", and using military aid and export approvals to give weapons to friendly regimes. Theres a significant lack of totality in the criticisms of many Democrats and mainstream liberals. The war did not happen merely because Bush gave the thumbs. It's the excrement of a long messed up situation. Arguing against the war without examining the very structures that produced is missing the point. Because even if this war was "Stopped" it would have been a mere delay till another conflict.

[Chi]

51. And I doubt they would have voted for it without fabricated evidence

If the Dems on the hill had all the facts as we know them today (not a bogus NIE summary),
they would have never voted to give the President authority to go to war (Iraq).

Without an active WMD program, no threat to us, and no collaboration with Bin Ladin,
I would bet that over 90% of Dem legislators would have voted against, but that's just my opinion.

As for the messes our Gov't has created around the world, I'm totally with you on that.
Not sure if I would agree they are shared equally, but let them lie where they may, I hold no one above truth.

But I must say, I'm a little amused, by the fact that you once again fail to criticize the people
who actually started the war, since you seem so against it. 8)

[thegreatwildebeest]

57. I don't fail to criticize anything...

Criticizing Republicans for the war is a non-issue. Everyone knows their complicity in it, and in the larger events at play. Criticizing Democrats, however, to me anyways, is significantly more important as they are always put out as the more "sane" and "Anti-war" response to the Republicans heavy handed foreign policy. The simple fact of the matter is that is not true, and its ridiculous to hear people go on and on and on about how bad Republicans are, and then robotically let Democrats slide with equally horrendous foreign policy records. People being blind partisans on the issue and not expecting accountability out of their own party (which has basically sold them out for a hill of beans) in order to supposedly "win elections" (remember when the DLC said that moderates were needed to win? where has that turned out the vote?). People need to start moving the Democratic party more to being something other than Republican lite in order to actually get something, anything done.The Democrats platform leads like a slightly modified blueprint of the Republicans, and is basically "milder" on everything. That's what needs to be changed.

[Chi]

59. OMG...'complicity'!

There is a limit to how harsh you should be, and you just crossed it.

I would cool thy fiery tongue, before you get an unwanted visit by the Secret Service!

:eyes:

[eridani]

38. If direct action was effective, we would not be in Iraq now

None of the massive antiwar demonstrations stopped the war, so they were just as ineffectual in a practical sense as the 126 out of 133 votes against the war cast by Dem representatives.

The increase in the number of Dem senators voting against CAFTA was caused by lobbying, not direct action. If it goes down in the House, it will be because of people like those who stood by ferries for hours leafletting Jay Inslee's constituents. As a result, he has come out against CAFTA though he voted for NAFTA.

[thegreatwildebeest]

42. Symbolic protest is not direct action...

That's because they were holding signs in the street. Do you think this war would have happened if every recruitment center from here to kingdom come had been broken into and ravaged? Holding signs is not "Direct action" its symbolic protest, and effects nothing. Don't confuse the two and then say it doesn't work.


The increase in the number of Dem senators voting against CAFTA was caused by lobbying, not direct action. If it goes down in the House, it will be because of people like those who stood by ferries for hours leafletting Jay Inslee's constituents. As a result, he has come out against CAFTA though he voted for NAFTA.

Sweet! I'll remember to keep asking corporate politicians to lobby against their own interests. WHat does it matter now, anyways, about CAFTA? Dozens of smaller bilateral treaties have already been set up, even if CAFTA isn't passed. NAFTA has already wrecked the lives of millions. The WTO consistently rules in the cases of multinationals, the WOrld Bank/IMF pry open poor countries to be sucked dry of their natural resources for a bevy of corporations, and indeginous groups across South America are being thrown aside by their own governments as multinationals come a-calling for natural gas and oil. Such problems cna only be stopped by the people in the South taking things into their own hands, and for activists in the US to support them in the belly of the beast itself.

[eridani]

43. The war would have happened no matter what anyone did to recruiting

offices. Blowing up ships and planes headed to Iraq would have stopped it, but I haven't yet met an anarchist who has a tactical clue about how to accomplish such things, laying aside the obvious ethical objections.

There's been all kinds of 'direct action' to save trees, yet the world keeps losing them at the rate of thousands of acres a day.

[thegreatwildebeest]

47. Maybe if more took the direct action approach, and not signing e-petitions

Blowing up ships and planes headed to Iraq would have stopped it, but I haven't yet met an anarchist who has a tactical clue about how to accomplish such things, laying aside the obvious ethical objections.

What obvious ethical objections? Stopping a war machine? Is there an ethical objection to that somewhere?


There's been all kinds of 'direct action' to save trees, yet the world keeps losing them at the rate of thousands of acres a day.

Most of that is still symbolic protest, if you mean tree sitting and the like. There hasn't been a significant push in years for actual sabotage of logging companies. Maybe there should be. It interesting to note that in developing countries, such sabotage tactics have made it completely financially unsound for large companies to develop what are indigenous lands. Maybe if Americans started picking up those tactics we wouldn't see thousands of tree acres cut down by the day. If the same people who spend time and thousands of dollars lobbying the powers that be actually took it into their own hands we wouldn't have to worry about "votes" and asking for crumbs off the kings table.

For an example of effective direct action, I point to ALF which has managed to either run animal farms out of business or exposed many others. Over the years such actions have picked up and we're getting closer to getting rid of absolutely or restricting heavily animal testing and use of fur.

[eridani]

49. Doubt if many people would support killing a lot of Americans

Myself, I think that supporting sustainable agriculture is much more important than suppressing the use of fur.

[Stevepol]

33. I agree Peace Patriot. If Bev is right, and I think she is, that

GES at the time of its acauisition by Diebold in Jan of 02 had 5 ex-felons in "upper management positions," it seems to me these companies are pretty close to being mafia, and I don't think they would stop at anything. They certainly have plenty of money to wine and dine the Secys of State around the country. They could afford to fund some posters on DU I'm sure.

I doubt very seriously if Shrub knows much about the voting machine fix. He most likely thinks he really won the election by 2 1/2 % as reported by the electronic voting corps.

If Bev is as corrupt as some of the posters at DU say, I'm sure the DRE manufacturers could easily take her to court and destroy her. Look what they did to Kevin Shelley.

As you suggest, it's better to just ignore this type of personal vendetta stuff. It's too important to restore democracy in America to get caught up in stuff like that.

[kster]

14. Yep I think

Kip is right.

[kster]

11. Thats exactly what is

going on. We know to much and they are trying to get us off the subject.

The DRE'S,Optican machines and the central tabulators are not there to count votes, they are there to STEAL THEM, plain and simple.

[thegreatwildebeest]

12. And if the votes were stolen...

...what would it matter? In a democracy where theres a choice between two parties of vaguely similar policies, albeit a differance in degree, if the vote was stolen, its not a question of why, but is there any difference? What would be the point of stealing the damn thing? Thats like taking a peek at other players cards when the dealer and the deck are already rigged.

[GuvWurld]

15. The point is to maintain the mythology that runs our society

Democracy has been a myth for a long time. Capitalism too. And freedoms of speech, press, assembly, markets...

Many of us feel things are coming to a head (for better or worse) and sense change related to increased awareness and understanding of the myths. As long as the powerful elite hide behind the curtain and maintain the illusions then they can remain in power. As we pull back the curtain and more people get wise to the myths, we get closer to shifting the balance of power.

This explains why both parties, despite at times trying to appear so cut-throat as to want to eliminate the opposing party altogether, actually work very hard (openly) to perpetuate the two-party system. It also explains the elaborate charade of elections. They are trying to keep up a modicum of believability but clearly an increasing number of people are seeing through it.

[thegreatwildebeest]

16. While...

While what you say, is, for the most part true, I somehow doubt the people who believe the election was stolen are somehow "more" aware of the myths, anymore than anyone who still believes in democratic systems as a way to express political will. Having 200 parties wouldn't change the fundamentals of a system based on the abstract state and "Public Good" as opposed to the real freedom of a persons desires and their ability to express them openly and honestly. Having proportional representation wouldn't change this. Having state enforced communism didn't change it, or any economy where you "own" things or have it owned for you by the state. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is a system wherein the individual is able to fully express his or her will in concert with others without the need for overarching leaders, corporations, or state apparatus.

[GuvWurld]

17. I'm mostly anarchic too

I did not suggest who is "more" aware of the myths. I said as more people become aware of the myths our ability to debunk them increases and this is desirable.

Personally, I find myself compelled to offer people a myth-busting paradigm but that is just my instinctive drive to help others see what appears to me as reality. It also relates to my anarchic streak in that I want to take steps that have the greatest likelihood of causing large scale change even if the change is beyond my control or could have unknown effects.

I would most like to be in the position you describe (i.e. fully expressing my will in concert with others) where I am collaborating to manage change, and I would least like to be in our present situation where we have completely lost our voice and are struggling to educate others of their own disempowerment, even though some don't even want to hear it.

I'm long past ready for peaceful revolution but recognize we must first have a genuine change of consciousness and awareness among our fellow citizens. I have most directly attempted to contribute to this via the Voter Confidence Resolution, and more specifically by advocating for widespread adoption of the following key frames:

1. Current conditions ensure inconclusive election results.
2. Since the Consent of the Governed is not being sought, we must ask: Has the Consent of the Governed been withdrawn, YET?

There is no one single reform that is going to ensure conclusive outcomes and guarantee unanimous agreement about election results. We have to be looking at a comprehensive election reform platform. And we have to look at what kind of national network of support must emerge in order to coordinate such a collection of changes. I think we'll only be able to do this if we are collectively challenging the legitimacy of the government's claim to power.

[Kip Humphrey]

39. The Alliance is forming...

"We cannot continue to act the way we have and expect to succeed" (Judy Atler), began a spontaneous conversation circle on the evening after the Election Assessment Hearing in Houston. Bob Fitrakis, David Griscom, Kathy Dopp, Judy Alter Jo Ann Karasek, Bill Moss, etc., etc., agreed w need a national agenda, strategy, and plan. California's plight was an example raised where pooling resources, applying a common strategy, mobilizing and promoting common actions are needed and necessary.

The Alliance is forming... Anti-War groups had a summit in Washington DC in April. Those present agreed their movement should join forces with the Election Reform movement because the state of our elections is a root cause (combined with the MSM Wall of Silence) of the powerlessness of the people.

The Alliance is forming... The glaciers are melting. Our air is killing us. Our soil depleted. Our water poisons our children. The power of government is stripping our planet for corporate profit. Language itself has been cynically perverted with the intent to subvert environmental voices and confuse their message. We the people are powerless to stop the rape of our county and our planet.

The Alliance is forming... Beyond election reform, we are in a struggle for survival. The will of the people has been subverted, manipulated and ignored. The middle class has been robbed, diminished, and is being pushed to the point of extinction. The American dream has become a nightmare.

Our elections are stolen, our Democracy is lost. The Alliance is forming. Spread the word...

[Stevepol]

48. I agree with you Kip, wholeheartedly. If the cause is just, and ours is

then really nothing can stop us except our quitting. It will take a little time. These people are very well entrenched by now, but gradually as more and more people understand the issue -- really nothing more than whether or not we want a democracy, however flawed
-- the more we will succeed.

It's going to happen.

[Kip Humphrey]

52. The one thing they fear and that which history teaches us is

the uprising of the people works.

It will take time but we are already the REAL majority. Irrespective of the reported vote, 64+ million Americans (source: TIA + at least 1 million disenfranchised) voted with their feet last November to get rid of Bush and his thugs. Those Americans are still out there, havn't drunk the koolaid, and don't like what's happening to our country any more now then they did in November 2004.

Remember how we felt right after the election: isolated and alone. The majority undoubtedly feels that as well. We need to reach them and let them know what we know, let them know they are not alone, and let them know what they can do about our lost Democracy. We don't need to take it; we just need to come together and speak with one voice, "WE WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!".

[BeFree]

56. I beg your pardon... No Difference?

"..its not a question of why, but is there any difference?"

Is there any difference? Would things be different if Al Gore was in the White House? Well, they stole the presidency from Gore, and Kerry too.

That is what we are all about, not whether one form of action is the best, but what shall we do to ensure that our voices are heard. The vote is the greatest voice and it has been stolen.


Our voices are added up in the ballot boxes. Without a correctly assimilated counting of our voices in whole, we are at the mercy of the theives. That process makes all the difference in the world. Gore would have heard us and responded in kind, but since our voices were stolen we have what we've got.


There will be, and have been, agents from the election thieves coming in here at any time looking to divert our attention or cause dissension. They have had some success, but in the end, will be miserable failures.

[yowzayowzayowza]

18. Itz been going on for far longer...

than a year. There have been many agent provocateurs, tho I doubt they have been at the governments behest, more likely the busyness interests involved.

Ignoring them is not always the best way to deal with them. Sometimes their rhetoric must be challenged.

[garybeck]

19. yes, you got it, that's why we can't let them

make us stop reading BBV's stuff.

Bev's personality will get her into trouble from time to time. But that doesn't have anything to do with her work.

Forget Bev for a minute. Just think about atheletes. Some of them are egotistical jerks, but they can perform on the field very well.

Do sports fans still watch them and cheer when they hit a home run? Of course the do, because their personality is not part of the game.

We should follow that.

[eridani]

21. A good analogy

I can't think back to regularly reading bbv.org in 2003 and 2004 without observing that everyone posting there and publicizing the issue was very sincere and very serious about the issue.

I remember being weirded out after talking briefly with Bev at an event, when she said that she thought that Diebold had gotten to David and that's why the book was taking so long to come out. I brushed it off at the time, but that is the kind of personality tendency that could really be exploited by anyone looking to mess with the election reform movement.

I didn't follow the earlier flame wars. I hoped that it was just a matter of people arguing about personal insults and disrepect, and that everyone would just cut it out and get back to work quickly.

I think that Peace Patriot's advice to cultivate the ability to walk away and keep doing the same work in a more productive environment is dead on here. I mean, whatever talents Bev has as a publicist, she clearly has no capacity whatsoever to lead a large movement or organization.

[Junkdrawer]

23. Speaking of which...

This is the most important technical revelation since the GEMS stuff, and yet it's hardly made a blip here on DU. The program to check whether of the optical scan memory cards have been tampered with resides....wait for it...on the memory cards.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x382381

[yowzayowzayowza]

28. Color me serprized!!!

BH running up the flag pole with someone else's work. I read that report: very intriguing. Yet another method to game the system.

But as one insinuated an agent provocateur by BH herself,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2564408#2565204

...letz not go overboard with the rehabilitation effort or restart her witch-hunts.

M'kay?

[eridani]

50. The provocateurs would be working on Bev as well as us

If someone is already a huge egotist with a paranoid streak, the interventions would work much better on her end of it.

[salin]

53. Agreed,

it is almost orwellian or would that be rovian that suddenly there is an attempt not just to rehabilitate - BUT to attempt to pivot and claim that those pointing out past problems - SERIOUS problems - emanating from BH - are the ones who are the "provocateurs".

Especially in light of Andy's arduous battle, exacerbated by ugly, ugly behaviors - that were abetted (dare I say, encouraged) by BH, I find those insinuations on this thread, and other recent threads, more than a bit disturbing.

[kster]

26. Nail.............Head

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[pauldp]

25. Two Words. Divide & Conquer.

Classic tactics. When will people realize it's all about power and money. Keeping the people divided is in the Elites best interest.

[kster]

27. Yep, especially now

that the voting machine gig is up. They are going to get more desperate than ever.

Dangling that (HAVA) carrot,to get the states to hurry up and buy is not going to work much longer.

Only a matter of time before we expose them completely, if we all stick together and move forward on this.



KEEP PUSHING.........

[SophieZ]

30. Like water....

Like water flowing around rocks, fraud will find its way around obstacles in a system.

"Less vulnerable" is not a high enough standard of security for a voting system. "Practically impossible" is the standard we need.
--Roy Lipscomb


Roy made the above statement in an email today, and I thought it was worth sharing.

While we are busily trying to head off the crooks at the pass of electronic voting and transmission, they are already far along in their plan to centralize and computerize voter registration, have larger centralized precincts, and expand even more the un-securable early voting and absentee voting.

One short listen to the Baker-Carter folks was enough to see that's where they want to head.

I have my hands full, but I wish we could send out a scouting party to start strategizing how to counter THAT newest bag o' bunk.

[kster]

29. kick.nt

[autorank]

31. Here's the god news. Their shit is now getting old. It won't work.

There was indeed disinformation and agents provocateur back in the 60's. In fact, a guy I got to know in NYC, police officer, told me about this in the mid 70's over beers at an Irish Rose. He was part of that group in NYC.

BUT here is the good news. This bull shit won't work any more. Their boy is in free fall. The old one or two trick pony days are over. People are a majority against the war and against * without any real CM (corporate media) coverage.

We need to be clear on who we are and what defines us, voting rights. The harder we work, the more people know that there is a broad based movement.

Keep an eye out but focus in the main prize: being there with all the arguments and evidence when * slips below 40%; ride the wave of public discontent; and provide them with a legitimate excuse for the stinking situation we're in. This is one excuse that's true and appealing at the same time. Do you really think the masses are either (a) even going to know virtually unknown whatever in a tiny movement or (b) care about that person, e.g., "Lets see, I'm no longer upset or paying attention to the fact that all our problems come from the f'ing stolen election because a figure I've never heard of is strange." No way. Push on, work harder, let them try their old tricks. (The next one, btw, will be the Nixon two step--nail the VP and replace him w/a "management friendly" modern-day Gerald Ford and then "resign" Bush...won't work either.)

[Bill Bored]

34. Don't forget the Presidential Pardons!

Rove will be first on the list.

[autorank]

37. Right, then he gets the mandatory "radio show." TBN turdblossom.net

[Helga Scow Stern]

32. Of course there are agent provacateurs here.....

whether they are self-styled or on a payroll, they do exist.

They emerge when there is something important to accomplish that can be disrupted by attacking individuals or creating divisiveness.

Anyone who doesn't consider this just hasn't been paying attention. It is quite shocking when you run across it, and very effective, unless you are able to somehow not be caught in it.

[autorank]

44. "...or on the payroll..." Ojai Person, that's both true and harsh.

I like it. Pseudo-sophisticated stuff seen here ... nice ones, then nasty ones, then nasty ones trying to be nice. I figure that whereever they're going is what's hot; it bothers them. The "rBr" debates were world class. I was impressed at the knowledge of the ERD crew, TIA, eomer, etc. and ERD's overall loyalty to the truth. The part that bothers me most, aside from the "visiting professors" is the personal slanders against Andy. There was a guy who just did it and did it well. He must have been a terrible threat to someone but his integrity stands. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[kster]

36. kick.nt

[Desertrose]

40. kick

[freedomfries]

54. KICK

[kster]

55. KICK.NT

[SmokingJacket]

58. Reminds me of the Jean Seberg story...

Jean Seberg was an actress in the sixties and seventies, and very interested in liberal causes, particularly racial justice. She supported the Black Panthers, gave them money, and let them use her house -- and was targeted by CoIntelpro as a result. The FBI actually sent letters to gossip columnists claiming that the father of her unborn child was a Black Panther in order to tarnish her reputation and ruin her career. THAT was the kind of crazy tactic they engaged in.

Seberg attempted suicide several times and eventually succeeded. There is some question as to whether she actually was murdered. I don't know. I do know that being the target of a massive, shadowy government smear campaign can push a vulnerable person into a suicidal paranoia.

If anyone tells you that election reform or the anti-war movement is too small potatoes to warrant government surveilliance, remember Jean Seberg!

(google Seberg + cointelpro to see the actual documents)