Little Pipe's blog

Election Fraud and Tampering 2006: In Favor Of "R" Part By 4% Across The Country, 3 Million Votes Stolen From "D" Candidates

I've expressed my conviction before, that this last election was tampered with no less than the ones of 2000 and 2004.(for example here). That the "D" part won this time does not disproof the fact that the "R" part has massively intervened with fraud, hacking and manipulations. It's just that their efforts were still not good enough to keep off all of the pro-"D" swing that happened in the electorate desperately seeking for an alternative (and believing the "D" to be one such).

Now there is even some evidence for my assumption: the Election Defense Alliance (EDA) have now released a preliminary report about their ongoing investigations which made Editor Rob Kall write a background article.

The Election Defense Alliance has this to say:


Major Miscount of Vote in 2006 Election:
Reported Results Skewed Toward Republicans by 4 percent, 3 million votes

Election Defense Alliance Calls for Investigation

ex-CIA Director Robert Gates, now Secretary of Defense, also was lobbyist for the Election Industry

Some people have already shed some light on 74yr-old Rumsfeld's successor, Robert Gates (63 yrs). Who used to be the CIA director when George W. Bush's father was president. Who is a close friend to the Bush family since decades.

But did you know this? Robert Gates...

....was on the board of directors of VoteHere, a strange little company that was the biggest elections industry lobbyist for the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). VoteHere spent more money than ES&S, Diebold, and Sequoia combined to help ram HAVA through. And HAVA, of course, was a bill sponsored by by convicted Abramoff pal Bob Ney and K-street lobbyist buddy Steny Hoyer. HAVA put electronic voting on steroids."

(read more....)

Strange, how close all these threads run to each other...

There are 2 more political parties beyond the Democrats and the Republicans

Writing down these thoughts from my European perspective. The last couple of weeks a peculiar theory has materialized in my brain.....

Can't help but thinking that "Republicans" and "Democrats" are not the 2 biggest electoral parties in the U.S. There are 2 other parties, bigger, mightier, more influencial than the "D" and "R" camps. They are both secret. They both don't have a publically known name. At least not an official one. Dunno if they have a formal organization, Dunno if they have their own funding and financial structures. What are their names? Easy: one is "Demopublican Party", the other is the "Republicrats". They probably don't even need their own funding.... because they have secretely subverted the old "pure" parties, and taken control of the commanding heights already. In any case, these bodies do only club together to fiddle with offices, foster their Red Tape and advance their personal careers. Whoever is voted into offices -- nothing much changes fundamentally for their voters (just for those who were lucky to make it into their seats).

Sometimes one or two or 50 don't get re-elected. Sometimes a Defense Secretary, aged 74 years, looses his office. He'll be replaced by someone with similar "qualifications"....

"Steal Back Your Vote" [today's reading recommendation #2]

Today's reading recommendation #2. Extracts:

Steal Back Your Vote
Published by Greg Palast November 6th, 2006 in his blog

A lot of advice we’re getting from our progressive friends is to take photos of your ballot and silly stuff like that. Well, that’s all about how to complain after they steal it. I have a better idea: Win, don’t whine.

The regime’s sneak attack via vote suppression [see, "How They Stole the Mid-Term Election"] will only net them about 4.5 million votes. You should be able to beat that blindfolded. As that will cost about 5% of the vote. That means you can’t win with 51% of the vote anymore. So just get over it. If you can’t get the 55% you need for regime change, then you’re just a bunch of crybaby pussycats who don’t deserve to take charge.

#1: Vote Early, Vote Often

Vote today — at early voting stations — so you can spend tomorrow bringing out others to vote. Also, if you’re challenged, you’ve got another day to bring in more ID or scream bloody murder to your county elections board about your missing registration.

#2: Gang Vote

Arrive with five! Never go bowling, make love or vote alone. And volunteer at get-out-the-vote operations. It’s worth it just for the stale donuts, cold coffee and hot democracy.

#3: Tell Them to Take Their Provisional Ballot and...

If they try to hand you a "provisional ballot," scream bloody murder. If there’s a problem with your ID or registration, demand adjudication from a poll monitor, come back with proper ID, or demand appeal to the county supervisor of elections.

But don’t just walk away. If it’s provisional or nothing, take it — then return for the count to defend it.
       ( ----> more)

"HOW THEY STOLE THE 2006 MID-TERM ELECTION" [today's reading recommendation #1]

Today's reading recommendation #1. Extracts:

by Greg Palast, for The Guardian (UK), Monday November 6, 2006

Here’s how the 2006 mid-term election was stolen.

Note the past tense. And I’m not kidding.

And shoot me for saying this, but it won’t be stolen by jerking with the touch-screen machines (though they’ll do their nasty part). While progressives panic over the viral spread of suspect computer black boxes, the Karl Rove-bots have been tunneling into the vote vaults through entirely different means.

For six years now, our investigations team, at first on assignment for BBC TV and the Guardian, has been digging into the nitty-gritty of the gaming of US elections. We’ve found that November 7, 2006 is a day that will live in infamy. Four and a half million votes have been shoplifted. Here’s how they’ll do it, in three easy steps:

Theft #1: Registrations gone with the wind

On January 1, 2006, while America slept off New Year’s Eve hangovers, a new federal law crept out of the swamps that has devoured 1.9 million votes, overwhelmingly those of African-Americans and Hispanics. The vote-snatching statute is a cankerous codicil slipped into the 2002 Help America Vote Act — strategically timed to go into effect in this mid-term year. It requires every state to reject new would-be voters whose identity can’t be verified against a state verification database.

Sounds arcane and not too threatening. But look at the numbers and you won’t feel so fine. About 24.3 million Americans attempt to register or re-register each year. The New York University Law School’s Brennan Center told me that, under the new law, Republican Secretaries of State began the year by blocking about one in three new voters.

How? To begin with, Mr. Bush’s Social Security Administration has failed to verify 47% of registrants. After appeals and new attempts to register, US Elections Assistance Agency statistics indicate 1.9 million would-be voters will still find themselves barred from the ballot on Tuesday.


Information Request: "Gag Orders" and "Whistleblowers" for 9/11 Truth -- Who, What, Where, Why, When?

Is anybody from the ranks of the frequent 911bloggers able to create a well-written (and sourced) essay that explains "gag orders" and "whistleblowers" and how they influence the search for 9/11 truth?

While writing, please bear in mind that overseas readers are not at all familiar with both terms (and that above Wikipedia links do not necessarily serve to enlighten newcomers about their relevance to the 9/11 truth struggle).

Please explain about whistleblowers and gag orders in a comprehensive way. Simplify as much as necessary, but not more.

So what exactly are gag orders? Who can order a gag? Under which circumstances? For how long? With which consequences in case of breach? Is there a possiblity to overcome such a gag order at all?

What are "whistleblowers"? How many of them are known in relation to 9/11 truth? What are their names? Are they all gag ordered?

I believe if you are able to write such a piece in a way that makes a few stupid Europeans such as myself understand these 2 terms, you'll have a piece that will also enlighten quite a number of U.S. citizens.

Paul Thompson's "Complete 911 Timeline" hits Digg front pages. More diggs wanted!

Somebody posted a link to Paul Thompson's "Complete 911 Timeline" to Digg. It currently stands at 138 diggs and 38 comments, and currently is displayed on the front pages of the "View All" as well as the "World & Business" categories. Let's help it along some more:



Daniel Ellsberg interview: "Hastert got suitcases of Al Qaeda heroin cash for selling a vote"

A DailyKos blogger has transcribed an interview with Daniel Ellsberg ("Pentagon Papers" whistleblower of fame) that has some interesting revelations.

Also note, that the published transcription is not complete. It even contains a hint about this:

"[SNIP - for 20 minutes Ellsberg discusses martial law & the shredding of the constitution, 'the next 911, the Reichstag fire')"

Can we get Steele's book review of "Synthetic Terror" onto the Digg frontpage? on Digg front page

This Blog entry (reproducing the online petition of 9/11 widows) just made it to the Digg frontpage (with 132 diggs right now). It may soon be off again from the "all diggs" frontpage, but it will likely stay for a few more hours on the "politics" frontpage.

Petition to U.S Congress -- Widows Ask for Declassification of July 10, 2001 Meeting

Here is the reproduction of the "Public's Right To Know - Declassification and Release of Documents" petition created by and written by Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie Van Auken:


View Current Signatures
Sign the Petition

To:  U.S Congress; Press/Media

We, the undersigned, demand the immediate declassification and release of all transcripts and documents relating to the July 10, 2001 meeting that took place between former CIA Director George Tenet and then National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice. It has been alleged that this urgent and out-of-the-ordinary meeting was called to discuss the increasingly dire warnings of an imminent al Qaeda attack within the U.S.

Given that much of the July 10, 2001 meeting has already been made public in Bob Woodward’s newly released book, “State of Denial”, it is unacceptable to continue to keep these documents and transcripts hidden from the American public’s view.

In addition, we again call for the declassification and release of both the redacted 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry Into The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 (JICI) and the CIA Inspector General’s report, “CIA Accountability With Respect To The 9/11 Attacks”.

The disastrous nature of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks warrant the release of all of this information so that the American public may learn what its government did or did not do to protect them. Had this nation been properly warned of the looming and imminent terrorist threat, life saving choices could have been made that day.


The Undersigned

Secret Message From 9/11 Commission Co-Chair, Hidden Inside A Public Interview: "Please Re-Investigate!"

In a lengthy interview with CBC, Lee Hamilton, 9/11 Commission co-chair makes some stunning revelations. Remember, Hamilton is the guy who felt it necessary to co-author a book "Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission". The journalist who asks some sharp questions is Evan Solomon. The interview was done back in August.Lee Hamilton, 9/11 Commission Co-Chair

Here are some interesting tid-bits:

Question: Now, one of the stipulations, you write in the book, one of the ways that you thought that this ought to be successful, this report, the Commission Report, is on page 23, you said if the American people would accept the results as authoritative, and the recommendations.

And when I measure that against a Zogby poll done in May, that says now 42% of Americans say that "the U.S. government, and its 9/11 Commission, concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts the official explanation of September 11th, saying there's a cover-up" - 42%, Mr. Hamilton - what does that say to you about the efficacy of the Commission's report?

BitTorrent download for "Improbable Collapse"

The new (and high-rated) video "Improbable Collapse", directed by Michael Berger, is now also available as a BitTorrent download (699.15 megabyte) through mininova. See here:

The video sports interviews with Prof. Steven E. Jones, whistleblower Kevin Ryan, 9/11 truth research pioneer Jim Hoffman and Dr. David Ray Griffin. For some full reviews of it.... hmm, I don't know of any (yet). Just watch it yourself. It is probably the best one that is out there right now, if you look for something to show to 9/11 truth newbies (like your Aunt Tillie, or your Uncle Sam).

Whole City Of Baghdad Celebrates Its Liberation -- Hundreds San Francisco Protesters Against War In Iraq

Who said only the mainstream media are capable of doing propaganda??


We can do it too... :-)


Bad publicity is good publicity or: How to make the best of hit pieces

I haven't looked at the South Park episode dealing with 9/11. However, this 911blogger website's traffic statistics seem to suggest that it served huuuuuuuuuugely to direct curious people to look up for "truther" sites. I wonder how many hits did get as a result (after all, one character was wearing a T-shirt with their address on it, and did only reap the "side effect")?

Second, I've come across an interesting an interesting article at ("Analyzing South Park's 9/11 Show"). It's really worth a read:

'One thing I've found over the last few years is that media will often write a "9/11 hit piece" and then weave within it many links and information that gets the reader curious about the fact that the official story doesn't really make sense, when you look at it. This harkens back to the old KGB run Soviet Union, where journalists would "hide" facts within stories, and the Soviet people were savvy enough to get the "real" message.

A few months after 9/11 a Canadian newspaper writer did just this, writing what looked like a 9/11 hit piece, but working major disturbing facts in it, and then giving my email address for those wanting more information. When I called him, he apologized for the hit piece quality, but said that's the only way he could get the facts to the public, past his editor. The result was amazing. I got hundreds of emails from angry Canadians who believed that 9/11 was an inside job, and who'd read past the Trojan horse hit piece aspect and saw the facts within the article.'