Subscription preferences
Loading...
Working...
Got Rights?
Election Fraud - Vote Fraud
How is the U.S. vote counted, and how are elections controlled? What laws cover the election process, how transparent is that process, and what recourse and responsibilities do the voting public have to insure the integrity of the Vote? As you see here, its a bit obfuscated.
If you think the election problems of 2000, 2004, and 2006 have been corrected, you are mistaken.
The 2008 elections will take place WITHOUT a functioning U.S. Federal Election Commission.
Because only two of the FECs six members panel have been appointed, the FEC can't issue opinions nor levy fines.
In other words, the 2008 general election lacks accountability and oversight.
We the People are the final check in our system of government.
They stand to lose billions of dollars if we get an honest man in office.
The integrity of the ballot is essential.
Citizen Volunteers are absolutely required:
http://www.youtube.com/user/BlackBoxVoting
It aint gonna get better if we leave it up to the politicians to fix it.
If you think the election problems of 2000, 2004, and 2006 have been corrected, you are mistaken.
The 2008 elections will take place WITHOUT a functioning U.S. Federal Election Commission.
Because only two of the FECs six members panel have been appointed, the FEC can't issue opinions nor levy fines.
In other words, the 2008 general election lacks accountability and oversight.
We the People are the final check in our system of government.
They stand to lose billions of dollars if we get an honest man in office.
The integrity of the ballot is essential.
Citizen Volunteers are absolutely required:
http://www.youtube.com/user/BlackBoxVoting
It aint gonna get better if we leave it up to the politicians to fix it.
-
I Come From Ohio
-
by Nancy Pelosi
- 661 views
-
by Nancy Pelosi
Security and Prosperity Partnership
Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., has asked Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez in a letter to suspend plans that would further a proposal known as the "Security and Prosperity Partnership," until Congress has a chance to examine its goals.
"I know the administration has given assurances that the SPP is not a veiled effort to create a 'North American Union,' nor an effort designed to dilute American sovereignty by entering into a European Union-like arrangement with Canada and Mexico," said Tancredo, chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.
"Unfortunately, however, [the SPP's] 'recommendations' seem to be at odds with those assurances."
http://www.spp.gov/
The SPP.gov website has tried to counter We the People's opposition to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) by publishing a rebuttal titled: Myths vs. Facts. Note that item number one on the SPP.gov list claims these two things:
Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.
Fact: The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is NOT an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was EVER signed.
Their 'fact' does not hold up under scrutiny. It is basically a BALD-FACED LIE! It is propaganda in its boldest form. How do I know Because on a Canadian government website there was a statement made and signed by Prime Minister Martin which declares the following: "on March 23, President Bush, President Fox and I SIGNED the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America that establishes the way forward on our continental agenda for security, prosperity and quality of life."
The above quote can be found on page 2 of 5. It is the last sentence in the sub-section titled Canada in North America in a document signed by PM Paul Martin: http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/cip-pic/ips/ips-overview2-en.asp.
On March 23, 2005, President Bush met at his ranch in Crawford, Texas with Vicente Fox and Paul Martin (then PM of Canada) in what they called a Summit. The three heads of state then drove to Baylor University in Waco, where they issued a press release announcing their signing of an agreement to form the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).
This year, on March 31, 2006, Bush. Fox and new Canadian PM, Stephen Harper met in Cancun, Mexico. This time their press release celebrated what they called the first anniversary of the SPP.
The use of the word "dialog" is a carefully selected euphemism designed to make the SPP sound like an innocent discussion among friends. To admit that it is anything more would force the government to provide Constitutional justification for its actions.
Moreover, the SPP says it won't change our court system or legislative process and that it respects the sovereignty of each nation. And, says the SPP Myths and Facts document, it strongly rejects the idea that it is creating a European Union-like structure.
That defense is almost laughable in light of the massive activity-taking place in the SPP office located in the Commerce Department.
The SPP says it is a myth that Congress is not involved or supportive of its actions. The truth is, to date, there has been no legislation passed by Congress to permit its actions. No taxpayer funds have been appropriated. One "hearing" was held in Senator Richard Lugar's Senate Foreign Relations Committee. It was a friendly affair with friendly "dialog." No tough questions were asked. No one was held accountable for their actions.
Meanwhile, members of Congress are beginning to become aware of the SPP activities at the Commerce Department. Representative Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) is demanding the Bush Administration fully disclose the activities of the SPP, which he says, has no authorization from Congress.
Also see: TILMA (the Trade, Investment and labor Mobility Agreement)
"I know the administration has given assurances that the SPP is not a veiled effort to create a 'North American Union,' nor an effort designed to dilute American sovereignty by entering into a European Union-like arrangement with Canada and Mexico," said Tancredo, chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.
"Unfortunately, however, [the SPP's] 'recommendations' seem to be at odds with those assurances."
http://www.spp.gov/
The SPP.gov website has tried to counter We the People's opposition to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) by publishing a rebuttal titled: Myths vs. Facts. Note that item number one on the SPP.gov list claims these two things:
Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.
Fact: The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is NOT an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was EVER signed.
Their 'fact' does not hold up under scrutiny. It is basically a BALD-FACED LIE! It is propaganda in its boldest form. How do I know Because on a Canadian government website there was a statement made and signed by Prime Minister Martin which declares the following: "on March 23, President Bush, President Fox and I SIGNED the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America that establishes the way forward on our continental agenda for security, prosperity and quality of life."
The above quote can be found on page 2 of 5. It is the last sentence in the sub-section titled Canada in North America in a document signed by PM Paul Martin: http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/cip-pic/ips/ips-overview2-en.as
On March 23, 2005, President Bush met at his ranch in Crawford, Texas with Vicente Fox and Paul Martin (then PM of Canada) in what they called a Summit. The three heads of state then drove to Baylor University in Waco, where they issued a press release announcing their signing of an agreement to form the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).
This year, on March 31, 2006, Bush. Fox and new Canadian PM, Stephen Harper met in Cancun, Mexico. This time their press release celebrated what they called the first anniversary of the SPP.
The use of the word "dialog" is a carefully selected euphemism designed to make the SPP sound like an innocent discussion among friends. To admit that it is anything more would force the government to provide Constitutional justification for its actions.
Moreover, the SPP says it won't change our court system or legislative process and that it respects the sovereignty of each nation. And, says the SPP Myths and Facts document, it strongly rejects the idea that it is creating a European Union-like structure.
That defense is almost laughable in light of the massive activity-taking place in the SPP office located in the Commerce Department.
The SPP says it is a myth that Congress is not involved or supportive of its actions. The truth is, to date, there has been no legislation passed by Congress to permit its actions. No taxpayer funds have been appropriated. One "hearing" was held in Senator Richard Lugar's Senate Foreign Relations Committee. It was a friendly affair with friendly "dialog." No tough questions were asked. No one was held accountable for their actions.
Meanwhile, members of Congress are beginning to become aware of the SPP activities at the Commerce Department. Representative Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) is demanding the Bush Administration fully disclose the activities of the SPP, which he says, has no authorization from Congress.
Also see: TILMA (the Trade, Investment and labor Mobility Agreement)