Dr.Paul i Obama zwyciezaja

09.01.08, 00:33
Ciekawe czy Bialy Dom poprawi wyniki wyborow ?
wedlug wiadomosci ponizej jest to zwyciestwo nie tylko dla Dr. Paul
ale rowniez w demokratycznych prawyborach dla Kucenicha i John
Edwards , ktorzy sa teraz na 2 i 3 miejscu. Jednym slowem porazka
dla Hilary, dla neokonow i dla zwolennikow wojny. Rowniezs Kucenich
powiedzial ze poprze dr. Paul, a dr. Paul powiedzial ze zgadza sie z
Kucenich w wielu sprawach. Wow !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080107/NEWS/80107012
    • babsztyfikant Re: Dr.Paul i Obama zwyciezaja 09.01.08, 00:48
      hehehe,to sa rezultaty z palarni cygar.Wiesz jak sie okopcisz to rozne
      halucynacje sie przyplataja.

      A ja przepowiadam ze Hillaria sie poryczy teraz.
    • misterpee Re: Otwarte cyganstwo 09.01.08, 05:46
      Ordynarne lokaje tego samego pana "wygraly" niby wybory w N.H. Jaka
      bedzie reakcja na te ordynarne zlodziejstwo, Jak widac , nawet Obama
      nied ma pelnego zaufania illuminati. Stalin zdobyl 95% glosow.
      McCain troche mniej, Stalin prowadzil wojne przez wiekszosc swojego
      zycia, MCain zapowiedzial 100 lat. Stalin zyl 75 lat, McCain ma juz
      71. Czy Neokoni wybiora ta szkape czy tez tego ogiera na emeryturze?
      A Jaki bedzie prawdziwy gabinet cieni? Zapewne Cheney decyduje sie
      na swojego McCain.
      • felusiak1 Pozwól sobie zbadać głowę 09.01.08, 06:09
        Wiesz, to że Ronpaul tak ci się podoba to nie znaczy, ze ma jakąkolwiek nawet
        najmniejsza szansę i to niezależnie od "wyborów" w smoke shop
        Ladd Street. Dlaczego? Bo u rzeźnika przy Maple Street wygrał Brownback. I do
        tego miał wiecej głosów. Nawet żona masarza na niego "głosowała"
        • babsztyfikant Re: Pozwól sobie zbadać głowę 09.01.08, 06:58
          hehehe,felusiak sa trzy prowdy i felusiakowa.
          • cs137 Ostatnie doniesienia mówia raczej o wygranej Hil- 09.01.08, 08:14
            lary. Tak przynajmniej przeczytałem w Internecie. Z tym, ze ja się totalnie
            niepodniecam, nikomu nie kibicuję. Wiec prosze na mnie nie krzyczeć. A jesli ta
            informacja, ktora przeczytałem, była nieprawdziwa, to wkrótce zostanie sprostowana.
            • misterpee Re: pierwsze dowody zmiany wyborczych wynikow 09.01.08, 14:07
              Z New Hempshire dochodza juz pierwsze glosy o klamliwych wynikach
              wyborczych. Sa tam powiaty gdzie nie zarejestrowano glosow dla dr.
              Paul. Obywatele reportuja przestepstwa:

              www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBfmksI_wYY
              Voter Fraud Against Paul Confirmed in Sutton, N.H.
              Kurt Nimmo
              Truth News
              January 8, 2008

              According to a post this evening on the Ron Paul Forums, vote fraud
              occurred in Sutton, New Hampshire:

              Sutton with 100% reporting reported 0 votes for paul but poster in
              Sutton posted:

              My mom, aunt, and dad all voted for RP today in my hometown, My mom
              and aunt both work passing out ballots, and checking them off. I
              just looked at the politico map and it says their town has ZERO
              votes for Ron. Now i know that there isn’t corruption on voting in
              that little town, so where they reported it must be. What do I do,
              anyone know???

              Originally Posted by sstjean View Post
              This was posted to ronpaul-801 tonight: “This town numbers are wrong
              wrong wrong on this map. I am from Sutton originally and my parents
              and one aunt all voted for Ron Paul today and Sutton says 0. So this
              is wrong. This is a town that had 20 people counting the ballots and
              I have no reason to believe that they cheated. Small town and I was
              born and raised there. The real numbers will come in by morning. The
              electronic machines in the big towns are the ones we have to worry
              about.”

              Earlier in the day, Brad Blog reported other suspicious behavior:

              Our Spidey-sense started tingling before going to bed last night and
              hearing reports, on MSNBC, that there were 17 paper ballots cast in
              Dixville Notch, NH’s midnight, first-in-the-country voting. The
              report said that there were only 16 registered voters in the tiny
              voting precinct, yet 17 votes had been cast — suggesting that
              somehow, paper ballot “voter fraud” skullduggery was afoot.

              Brad, however, believes the story is easily debunked:

              Given that one of those reports seems to have begun on The DRUDGE
              REPORT earlier today, we’re not particularly surprised that the MSM
              kept repeating the easily-debunked stories running all day.

              That, even while there are reasons to be concerned about how the
              paper ballots used in the New Hampshire Primary will actually be
              counted by the hackable Diebold optical-scan systems used in the
              state, as controlled and programmed by an outrageously bad private
              contractor there.

              Of course, there is plenty of room for hank-panky, as Michael
              Collins notes:

              81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private
              corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as “Premier”).
              The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company,
              LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the
              people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS
              Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting
              software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots. People like to
              say “but we use paper ballots! They can always be counted by hand!”

              But they’re not. They’re counted by Diebold. Only a candidate can
              request a hand recount, and most never do so. And a rigged election
              can easily become a rigged recount, as we learned in Ohio 2004,
              where two election officials were convicted of rigging their
              recount….

              In short, the stage was set by Diebold and Republican operatives to
              rig yet another election, as the above first-hand account seems to
              indicate.

              Sphere: Related Content
Inne wątki na temat:
Pełna wersja