Alaska Election 2004: The Numbers Don't Add Up

The Alaska Election Results from 2004 don't add up, yet the state won't release the records so a transparent examination can find what happened to the missing votes. According to the State Div. of Elections, it's Diebold's software and we have no right to access their trade secrets.

How can any intelligent American accept that as an answer? We cannot verify the validity of our election results because a Private (Republican Owned) Corporation owns the machines. This makes no sense in "the land of the free".

What makes this claim beyond ridiculous is that copies of these files have been on the internet for over two years. Bev Harris at BlackBoxVoting.org has been exposing the hackable voting machines since 2002. The Diebold file systems are not really secret, so using that as an excuse to withhold data is patently absurd.

My question lies not with how Bush received 100,000 more votes in one counting... but in the Senate race where Tony Knowles was lost by 9500 votes. And just like Kerry, he wasn't interested in a recount- weird eh?

But some Alaska Democrats wanted a recount anyway. There's a $10,000 fee- the small group of citizens had $3,000 on Saturday, with the Deadline Wednesday- yet John Kerry wouldn't give them $7,000 from his cache of $51 million- why the hell not? What about Tony- did he have any money left?

Tony Knowles lost by only 3%, and just like Kerry- Exit Polls showed him winning. Why did his spokesman say Knowles will not be joining the recount effort?

Something is fishy with the Opposition Party in the USA.



wake up yanks before your

#163 On Tue, 2006 03 21 01:50 A Citizen said,

wake up yanks
before your consripted or in labour camps.
Bush kerry are seccond cousins and both members of yale secret cult skull n bones
as is rove and numerous others
www.benfrank.net
www.wingtv.net
www.scholarsfor911truth.org

looks like yer being spied

#206 On Wed, 2006 03 29 11:53 A Citizen said,

looks like yer being spied on too eh?

80 Eyes on 2,400 People
If terrorists come to tiny Dillingham, Alaska, security cameras will be ready. But privacy concerns have residents up in arms.
By Tomas Alex Tizon, Times Staff Writer
March 28, 2006

DILLINGHAM, Alaska — From Anchorage it takes 90 minutes on a propeller plane to reach this fishing village on the state's southwestern edge, a place where some people still make raincoats out of walrus intestine.

This is the Alaskan bush at its most remote. Here, tundra meets sea, and sea turns to ice for half the year. Scattered, almost hidden, in the terrain are some of the most isolated communities on American soil. People choose to live in outposts like Dillingham (pop. 2,400) for that reason: to be left alone.

So eyebrows were raised in January when the first surveillance cameras went up on Main Street. Each camera is a shiny white metallic box with two lenses like eyes. The camera's shape and design resemble a robot's head.

Workers on motorized lifts installed seven cameras in a 360-degree cluster on top of City Hall. They put up groups of six atop two light poles at the loading dock, and more at the fire hall and boat harbor.

By mid-February, more than 60 cameras watched over the town, and the Dillingham Police Department plans to install 20 more — all purchased through a $202,000 Homeland Security grant meant primarily to defend against a terrorist attack.

Now the residents of this far-flung village have become, in one sense, among the most watched people in the land, with — as former Mayor Freeman Roberts puts it — "one camera for every 30 residents."
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-secure28mar28,0,3284078.story?coll=la-home-headlines