"Wayne Madsen's Vote Fraud Tale Spin" - Debunked.

[BreakForNews]

Copyright waived for DU posting by author/poster.

Wayne Madsen's
Vote Fraud Tale Spin

BreakForNews.com, 7th Dec, 2004 14:00ET
by Fintan Dunne, Editor EXCLUSIVE

http://www.BreakForNews.com/articles/MadsenVoteFraudTaleSpin.htm

When ex-NSA employee, Wayne Madsen hit the Internet with his tale of a massive electronic vote-stealing operation costing tens of millions of dollars, the story was greeted with skepticism by vote fraud activists. With good cause.

Despite their hunger for any report that would shed light on the exact method by which Bush had subverted the will of the people, Madsen's story --featuring a Cayman island bank, an offshore trust and a payoff check to conspirators for over $29 million-- was just a bit too tinfoil-hat for most.

Madsen reassured the doubters with promises to put more flesh on the bones of the story. After failing in two subsequent missives to add substantial details, he's finally laid it all out. Unfortunately, even fully-fleshed, Madsen's story is a corpse with no detectable pulse and a missing heart.

The heart of the story was his seminal account of a $29 million payoff check to an alleged Bush-linked offshore trust. Now he admits the check in question was a fake so inept that Nigerian scammers would blush at such incompetence. No such blushes from Madsen, who now says the check was just a follow-the-money pointer from his mysterious tipsters.

MSNBC's Keith Olberman, the thinking TV-watcher's no-tinfoil blogger, was aghast at such chutzpah, writing:

"..To turn on a dime and write that a document is real, and hard evidence of a crime, and then come back and admit that it’s fake, but still hard evidence of a crime, is an intellectual leap of faith worthy of Evel Knievel."

But Olberman, reinforcing his status as one who can tell wood from trees, declined to toss out the bathwater with the fake-check baby:

"There could very well be facts — even important facts — hiding in there somewhere."

Yes, but where!


FLOGGING A DEAD DOG

The confusion arises because Madsen's account is a half-dozen different stories melded into one, using much imagination and a few spots of circumstantial glue. Some parts are undeniable fact. Many are unverifiable or disputed. One aspect is pure tragicomic farce.

The most concrete story element was revealed in fullest detail by RAW STORY --who released an affidavit from software engineer, Clint Curtis alleging that Florida Republican, Tom Feeney and executives at Yang Enterprises, a software firm under contract to Florida's Department of Transportation(DOT) --had commissioned him to develop a prototype of software to "fix" touch-screen voting machines in south Florida.

But that angle is not new. In January 2004 Curtis registered a website to make these exact claims, albeit with the alleged perpetrator's names lightly disguised. He's even written a book (available on Amazon.com) which covers this and other topics --such as "Communist spies" stealing U.S. secrets. He's been openly promoting his story, and the book --on the Internet.

And Curtis has other vested interests in all this. In 2001, his main allegation had been that Yang Enterprises overbilled the Florida DOT on contracted software. By then he was working for the DOT, and these allegations --in which he was joined by his new boss at the DOT-- got both of them fired and led to court cases seeking their reinstatement.

Without dismissing the merits of the overbilling allegation, Clint Curtis has clearly got old axes to grind. Yang Enterprises have rubbished the overbilling claim. And Feeney has rather unconvincingly denied over-enthusiastic lobbying on their behalf.

But you can tell something is up. Within hours of Madsen and RAW STORY releasing their congruent versions of the software-vote-fix saga, a German Shepherd dog owned by Clint Curtis was found... dead. It's the second such dog of his to meet such a fate, RAW STORY breathlessly informed readers.

Clearly Karl Rove had the poor mutts iced. Ruthless, eh? What do you mean tinfoil? Case proven.


SKELETONS IN THE CLOSET

Even as RAW STORY's credibility was dying with Curtis' dog, back in Madsen's more expansive version of events there's dirty work afoot, it seems.

He zeros in on the unfortunate fate of a Florida DOT corruption investigator, whose inquires into the DOT overbilling issue ended when he turned up dead in Valdosta, Georgia in June 2003 --an apparent suicide.

The investigator, Ray Lemme had told his wife he was working on a "big case." Clint Curtis says Lemme informed him a cover up of Yang's alleged malfeasance was coming from "as high up as I could imagine."

Had Madsen focused solely on this aspect, his article would have been a well-aimed expose. There's plenty of flesh on these particular bones, including signs that Jeb Bush's administration was interfering in the DOT's handling of the overbilling issue.

But we only have Curtis' word that his claims of a vote stealing scheme were being factored into Lemme's investigation. As a DOT fraud investigator --Lemme would have been concerned only about the question of overbilling. Vote fraud would have been well outside the scope of his inquiries.

Had it been Clint Curtis who ended up a suicide case, that would have been a real red flag. But the closest Curtis gets... is a suspiciously dead dog.


NOVEMBER SURPRISE

So what have we got? Much of this story revolves around Yang's claimed overbilling of the DOT -not Feeney's alleged plan to steal the election for the Bush boys. It's time to distill all this down to the vote fraud essence.

Despite the hoopla, it's clear the Florida election was NOT stolen with software Clint Curtis wrote for Feeney. The software Curtis touts on his website is merely a prototype of what such software might look like were someone to take the time to program it in full and stealthy detail.

But as it stands, Curtis' program is a mere skeletal outline --as lacking in electronic flesh as Madsen's early articles. It was written by Curtis, and has been promoted by Curtis.

We have only his word that the malicious intent was Feeney's.

And no amount of dead dogs can change those hard facts.

Despite Madsen's grand elaborations and whispers from shadowy tipsters, nothing links Curtis' sparse software with any greater plot to steal votes across America. Not even a real check.

And besides these questions about Madsen's "November Surprise" article, we have the issue of his pre-election article about an "October Surprise" --which never in the end materialized.

Back then, Madsen's publicity-shy informants had assured him that George Bush was ready to launch a strike against Iran to create an emergency backdrop to his reelection bid. It never happened, of course.

But it would be unfair to single out Madsen for this error. If you recall, the months before the election were rife with speculation about the type of "surprise" that Bush was going to engineer in October, 2004.

Everybody knew Bush was in a fix, pardon the pun. Conventional wisdom had come to believe that he needed to pull some stunt to avert defeat. But, absent all those "October Surprise" speculations, people might have realized something totally unsurprising was about to happen.

Bush would steal 2004 --just like he stole 2000. By means of vote fraud.

Big surprise, eh?

Madsen's mistaken "October Surprise" article was just one more element in a vast misdirection of Rovian proportions. That's why I would not like to put people off reading his material. Reading Madsen has it's advantages.

It's an excellent way of figuring out what Karl Rove wants you to think!

Or it was up until now anyway.

http://www.BreakForNews.com/articles/MadsenVoteFraudTaleSpin.htm
Fintan Dunne, 7 Dec, 2004 (hyperlink references soon)

Audio on this topic:

www.BreakForNews.com
"Inside Track" News Show

Listen Live mp3:
http://www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/mrn/audio/InsideTrackNews041206.mp3

Download Zip and Listen at:
http://www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/mrn/audio/InsideTrackNews041206.zip

[whistle]

1. The bigger the lie, the louder the denial...

...nothing that Wayne Madsen has written about has been debunked

[papau]

13. I believe Fintan Dunne has a good history for truth - I won't dismiss this

:-)

[The Backlash Cometh]

20. Yeah. They sure did spend a whole lot of time on this one.

I didn't bother to read it because it was so long, and I doubt that their sound-bite stalwarts will either.

[KittyWampus]

43. Yeah, It's MUCH Easier To Make "Sense" Out Of The Yarns Curtis, Brad

and Madsen are spinning... :eyes:

[Freddie Stubbs]

45. The US war with Iran?

:shrug:

Unless it is going on, and the media just sin't telling us about it?

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SomthingsGotaGive]

17. I can't quite understand what you mean.

Perhaps you should explain a little more why you feel a certain way about this article rather than cryptic one liners.

If you disagree with the article please say why instead of making us try and understand your inference.

[The Backlash Cometh]

23. I think what he's saying is that this was predictable. The right-wingers

are going to try to debunk it. If they're not worried about it, why don't they help us investigate further? But if there is an investigation, then it must be with a truly independent reviewer. Something this country has not seen since the times of Nixon.

[Razorback_Democrat]

3. Yes, Karl Rove is working hard! n/t

[Vote4Kerry]

4. Why don't they just impound the machines and investigate the

allegations?!! That is the best way to end this controversy! Impound the machines, check to see if they were tampered with. How hard is that?!

[Monkie]

5. telling that everyone still says curtis IS for real

;)

[Quakerfriend]

8. They are getting frightened........

[Razorback_Democrat]

19. Curtis?

Clinton Curtis?

He's real

his affidavit's real

his story?

being vetted right now

[Shalom]

6. No DU Copyright Fees? Who Is Paying You, Then ?

I love your disclaimer:

"Copyright waived for DU posting by author/poster."

People like you just reinforce our conviction.

If Karl Rove wants us to think the 2004 election was fixed using Bushitler dirty money sources used in the past for previous crimes, so be it: I'll go along with Rove.

[Razorback_Democrat]

10. Kick! n/t

[ClintCooper2003]

7. My responses to this very lame refutation. Read them now!

1) Madsen has already pointed out that the check was a phony - perhaps a red herring, or perhaps an honest clue. I believe Madsen has been relatively upfront about the serpentine twists and turns in his ongoing investigation. Certainly some of what he says will be proven untrue and some of what he says will be proven to be true. The investigation is ONGOING!
2) Once again, I reiterate that the theories that were being spun about Watergate seemed preposterous, confusing, and incoherent at the time. Once again, we must wait to clarify the real story.
3) Madsen's story is sharper and more focused than it was two weeks ago.
4) This article DOES NOT in any way, shape, or form offer any sort of evidence to the contrary of Clint Curtis' claims about being asked to write a software program to rig elections.
5) If Clint Curtis' claims are untrue, why isn't a lawsuit being filed against him RIGHT NOW?
6) This article DOES NOT refute the fact that Lemme died mysteriously. It simply asks why Clint Curtis hasn't wound up dead. Well, if Clint Curtis wound up dead as well, wouldn't that shower even more suspicion on the Feeney crowd?
7) The article mentions that Lemme was supposedly just investigating "overbilling." Yes, and Kenneth Starr was just investigating "Whitewater" as well.

[Roger_Otip]

51. this is very true

i think one of the problems with madsen's style of journalism is that he publishes before other journalists would, when things are still in quite a rough state. that doesn't necessarily mean what he's saying is untrue, it just means he's publishing things which haven't been fully tested and checked.

but the same could be said of the writer of this debunking. it's not really a debunking at all, more an expression of skepticism, but to write off madsen is as short sighted as accepting everything he says at face value.

[ClintCooper2003]

9. Who is Kathy McMahon?

[Ima]

32. Irish Lass?

utvinternet.com

Registrant:
The Hostmaster ([e-mail])
UTV Internet
Ormeau Road
BELFAST, BT7 1EB
UK
[phone]


Domain Name: utvinternet.com




Administrative, Technical, Billing Contact:
The Hostmaster ([e-mail])
UTV Internet
31 Bruce Street
Belfast, NONE BT2 7JD
UK
[phone]





Record created on Feb 28 2000.
Record expires on Feb 28 2005.
Domain servers:
NS1.D-N-A.NET
NS2.D-N-A.NET

[Ima]

39. Irish Lad

Dublin 16, Ireland Dublin 16
IE

Domain name: BREAKFORNEWS.COM

Administrative Contact:
Dunne, Fintan

[BreakForNews]

58. Who indeed is Kathy Mc Mahon...

Kathy Mc Mahon heads up the research arm of BreakForNews.com
In fact she IS the research arm : )

Lots of exclusive stories broken on her information.

The latest was:

Video Game Celebrates Fallujah Slaughter --Research by Kathy McMahon
http://www.breakfornews.com/articles/KumaWarAlFajr.htm

Previously, among others....

CLOSE CALL HEROS JUST MISS SADDAM --Research by Kathy McMahon
http://www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/gulu/saddam-capture.htm

Nick Berg's father was on right wing 'Enemies' list --Research by Kathy McMahon
http://www.breakfornews.com/BergWasOnAnEnemiesList.htm

Insecticide Causes Mad Cow Disease --Research by Kathy McMahon
http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/17/bovine_spongiform_disease.htm

Iraqatrix : It's Leather War ! --Research by Kathy McMahon
http://www.breakfornews.com/iraqatrix.htm

And of course, famously 7 days after 9/11...

WAG THE WTC II -- THE BLOCKBUSTER --Research by Kathy McMahon
http://www.wagkingdom.com/wag/the_blockbuster.htm

Oh yeah.. and we are partners (in all senses)
regards Fintan

[MarkusQ]

11. Kick!

[papau]

12. Fintan Dunne wrote "THE REAL SCOOP ON DIEBOLD" - interesting

Fellow seems real

THE REAL SCOOP
ON DIEBOLD

25th July, 2003
by Fintan Dunne, Editor - http://www.GuluFuture.com
FROM: http://www.GuluFuture.com/diebold_scoop.htm
On 24th July, 2003 an important story broke. Johns Hopkins University researchers found that electronic voting machines are full of security flaws which can allow fraudulent election results. A scandal indeed.

But like many reported 'scandals' this is a pseudo-investigation. In truth, the news was two weeks old. Alternative media site Scoop.co.nz first broke the unabridged full story, by Bev Harris --back in early July, 2003.

The Johns Hopkins team only decided to commence their investigation precisely when the Scoop story hit the Internet. Now, in double-quick time they are in print in the New York Times (followed by Yahoo News and MSNBC) with what the NYT called "the first review of the software by recognized computer security experts." Author of the Scoop articles, Bev Harris, although a world leader in this field, is sadly unrecognized --by the NYT at least. So the NYT coyly ignores the explosive content of her prior Scoop story.

Why? Note this remark by Aviel Rubin, of Johns Hopkins University, who led the team which examined Diebold software used in voting machines across the USA. When asked to comment on allegations by Bev Harris that the Diebold software may have been designed to facilitate fraud, Rubin described the claim as "ludicrous."

Rubin could dismiss the allegation of deliberately fraudulent design in Diebold software, because his team never examined the Diebold software in question. They only looked at security flaws in the touchscreen terminals and smart cards used by voters. It's true, these are deeply flawed, but not criminally flawed.

The jaw-dropping revelations in the Scoop story did not relate to the touchscreens, but the Diebold software running on the servers which collate the results from many individual touchscreens. It is here that the smoking gun was found.

Incredibly, this software keeps not one, but two Microsoft Access data tables of voting results. It's like a business keeping two sets of account books. The two tables are notionally identical copies of the votes collated from all polling stations. The software uses the first table for on-demand reports which might uncover alteration of the data --such as spot checks of results from individual polling stations.

And here's where it got scary. The second of the two tables is the one used to determine the election result. But the second table can be hacked and altered to produce fake election totals without affecting spot check reports derived from the first table. These will still check out.

The election officials using menu-driven Diebold software are never aware there are two underlying data tables.

Finally, alterations to the second table can be accomplished by dialing into the Diebold server across the Internet through a maintenance port. Whew!

Is this software designed with criminal intent? Consider this: If the IRS called to a business and found two sets of books -one used for IRS spot checks and a second, alterable set used to make IRS returns, do you think they might be a little bit annoyed?

Yet even though the Johns Hopkins team sourced their data from Scoop and surely knew of the full implications of Bev Harris's discoveries, by only looking at touchscreen stations in their investigation, they can with straight faces dismiss the deliberate intent allegations as "ludicrous."

The real Diebold story may have been so hot, that some in US media and academia have co-opted the controversy and have masked it's full scope. It's not the first time this tactic has been used. For the straight dope on Diebold, go to the people who got the scoop!

- GuluFuture.com

[ClintCooper2003]

24. Yes, that is scary. Now I'm confused again.

God, it just seems hard to make a clear picture out of all this dust that's being swept into the air... I wish I were omniscient.

[The Backlash Cometh]

28. Well why stop there? Here's another reason to be confused.

Dunne uses Bev Harris as a valid source, and the DU moderators have made her a persona non grata on DU. LOL! If I wanted a mystery to solve, I've found it here.

[distantearlywarning]

14. This article doesn't "debunk" anything any more than Madsen or Curtis

prove it. Just another example of some Repuke trying to spin opinion as fact. This stuff irritates me a lot. You can't call something "debunked" until you provide actual fact to prove it wrong!

[Razorback_Democrat]

16. Absolutely! Kick

[KittyWampus]

44. The Burden Is On Madsen, Curtis Etc. To Prove Their Assertions With

facts, none of which have been forth coming.

[Megahurtz]

15. "Now he admits that

the check in question was a fake so inept that Nigerian scammers would blush at such uncompetence" ???????????

I don't see any actual quotes by Wayne Madsen ANYWHERE in this article.

Any idiot could write and publish this fluff. (and be paid to by any idiot)

[KittyWampus]

46. Madsen DID Though. Funny How When Madsen Claims One Thing

and it turns out to be untrue... he can then claim the exact opposite and some people still give him credibility.

[spoogly]

18. And The Spin Begins

Did anyone not expect this?

The higher the spin, the closer the truth.
The more personal the attacks, the more reliable the claim.

If we have learned anything from the last 4 years it is that.

[Razorback_Democrat]

21. Abolutely Kick! n/t

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Razorback_Democrat]

25. Read the Moderator's Message

Totalitarian?

LOL

[Broken Acorn]

26. Ditto

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pointsoflight]

35. I call it "spin" when the title is totally bogus, myself.

Debunked?

They don't offer a single piece of information showing that even one of Madsen's claims is wrong. That's not debunking. That's offering an unsubstantiated OPINION about his claims, nothing more.

[Zan_of_Texas]

64. DU totalitarian? You are free to leave.

[pointsoflight]

27. Where's the debunking? Not one single thing is proven wrong.

One can question he claims and offer the OPINION that they don't sound right, but that is NOT debunking...it's an OPINION.

What crappy reporting.

[righteous1]

38. True ,but it is a rather well thought out and compelling opinion n/t

[Shalom]

30. Broken Acorn Sounds Like a Broken Record...Must Bore Himself!

Dear Broken Record:

You have a perfect right to distrust Madsen, and you have done so, again, and again, and again, and again, and again.....

In fact, it seems like you don't do anything else..why is that ?

Certainly there is opportunity for you to do positive things, like encourage protest actions, start investigations, provide new leads, and so on.

But instead, you just make the same point, again, and again, and again, and again, and again.....

DON'T YOU BORE YOURSELF ?

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[trumad]

40. Alright... How's this for being positive.

I think that Madsen's hurting the real movement ala John Conyers, Arenbeck, etc. So with that said, I will take it upon myself to help debunk this fraud for the good of the cause. Now that's positive activism.

[Razorback_Democrat]

42. Isn't Clinton Curtis testifying at Conyers hearing? n/t

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mastiff]

36. I think it is too early to push this story.

This stuff may be true. However, it has the look of a "Aluminum Foil Hat" expose. Let's wait for more evidence. Pushing the story now just takes notice away from our proven evidence. I'm sure you noted how Republicans pilloried Dan Rather over Memogate. The story was true. The evidence was faked. Bush was not fulfilling his contracted obligations to the TANG. However, no one followed up on this. They just went after Rather.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

41. I agree --Let's let it play out

We really cannot be sure if any of the story is true or false. It sounds plausible to me, I hope it all turns out to be true, and I see no reason to pass judgement against him at this point.

[Carni]

54. EXACTLY!

Nail-- Hammer-- Head!

[NVMojo]

37. interesting journalist ...

http://www.fintandunne.com/

of the same investigative type ilk as Madsen in a sense, only Madsen has security experience. This guy is very prolific, do a google on his name. He has some interesting articles and spins out there.

[thedutch]

48. the $29m check

I have a friend who was scammed by a fake check ( $3000 ), he showed it to me after the police knocked on his door and questioned him about it. It was very similar looking to the one in Madsens story. What I find compelling is the fact it took a WEEK AND A HALF for the bank to find out it was a fake; by that time the perp had most of a week to decide what to spend the money on. Some of these forged checks are very good, and Madsen can't be blamed for falling for it. As for the rest of the story, I'm waiting anxiously to see how it pans out.

[robbedvoter]

49. I'll put that in the thinking hat with Madsen's and Curtis's stories.

As facts come in, i'll weigh it all. The style of this is about as breathless as Madsen's, so for now I have no reason to prefer either. But I am watching for further facts.

[mdb]

50. Here comes the spin.

Perhaps Curtis does have an axe to grind especially if Feeney had his hand in getting Curtis fired from DOT. But, what better reason to let the cat out of the bag?

As for Feeney having influence on getting Curtis fired.

Jacobs' advertisement also claims Feeney may have used his influence to have a whistleblower fired.
http://www.wesh.com/news/1708579/detail.html

[Viktor Runeberg]

52. Yargh

You know, anyone can be skeptical about anything. I know both scientists and Christians who are skeptical that we have any free will, for instance. They think the notion that we can freely do anything is just nonsense. And you can talk with them for hours because they won't change their minds, so convinced of the cleverness of their skepticism they are.

This doesn't debunk anything, it just shows that with the evidence so far you're not convinced. I'd guess that no amount of evidence will ever convince you, just as no amount of evidence could convince a large chunk of Americans that we could ever have a truly evil president - especially not right now! Wanting more evidence is good. But you don't want that, you just want the evidence that's starting to come out to go away.

Gee, that makes you clever.

[Carni]

53. Who the hell is "break for news" ???

I am quite convinced that if the Madsen story is a bait and switch then it's probably like the AWOL/ Rather/ set up.

Meaning; the story about the fraud and the methods are probably true (or is very close to the truth as to method used) but the players and info given to Madsen are deliberate disinfo designed to ruin the credibility of whatever might come out later (Like that is anything new with bushco... this is, after all, how they cover all their crimes)

In any event if the right wingers are coming over here to post crap like this, then they must be nervous--LOL

I have a news flash for you right winged freep types...

Your man will be kicked out of office before he makes it through another four years.

There are already some serious rumblings from the repukes he has screwed during his reign and if you freeper types think anyone in DC is as loyal as you fools are to herr bush, you must be sharing Rush's hillbilly heroin.

[Peace Patriot]

60. Carni

That makes the most sense of everything I've read so far--that the story is probably true, and the evidence (or some of the evidence) given to Madsen is false. Maybe it rings true just because of the CBS Memogate prototype.

I read Madsen's pre-election warning regarding phoney terrorist alerts sufficiently messing up the freeways in Southern California, etc., to turn the Electoral Vote around, if Kerry was winning in the east. It was a very plausible scenario. I even sent it to our SOS, so that he was warned, and could have some contingency plans for possible cancellation of the election, evaluating Bush Inc. terrorist alerts, what Schwarzenegger might do, etc.

There had been Bush Inc. talk at that time of accepting a "partial" election in Iraq, and I could well imagine a scenario in which their election fraud plans in the eastern US failed them for some reason, and they had to go to Plan #2, a red alert on the west coast that would cause an incomplete vote--with major police and military presence in minority voting areas, roads blockaded, people unable to get to their kids at school, one hour to vote after work and unable to get there, etc. (I know the L.A. freeways, and it wouldn't take much.) Remember that thing about an Iraqi computer having US school building plans on it?, it was around the same time, weeks before the election.

I distinctly had the feeling we were being set up for something, of the terrorist alert variety, just from the most obvious things in the news.

I've no doubt at all that Bush Inc. would do such a thing to retain power. I think Bush Inc. is capable of literally ANYTHING. No conscience whatsoever. No scruples. Power is ALL.

So I was glad to have someone who does scenarios like this for a living (Madsen) lay out what they actually might do. It helped me to think strategically. It ALSO helped me to grasp what Plan #1 was, when it happened. (The electronic voting machines--of course! A set up for fraud!)

Then Cheney made that weird last minute to trip to Hawaii--of all places--the weekend before the election. I was very, very worried about that. (What was he up to? Why would he want to be outside of US air space for significant portions of time, two days before the election? Was the No. Korean nuke situation going to be used?)

The upshot? I've no doubt at all that Bush Inc. had several contingency plans for retaining power--and what Madsen may be looking at, currently, is ONE of them, maybe one that wasn't needed, but with tracks still laid, useable for another purpose (discrediting Madsen, discrediting election fraud accusatons, or throwing fog around the $ issue?).

It is certainly a good guess that there was contingency planning WITHIN the Election Fraud Plan--a picking and choosing of where to do the fraud, depending on how things were going on election day, and what they needed--for the Electoral Vote, for the popular vote, for public perception (burying the Exit Poll data with the fraudulent electronic "returns" on TV, for instance).

They had "means and opportunity" to do anything they wanted (and certainly "motive")--including phony terrorist alerts, which they'd been setting up for months.

So, I just wanted to chime in here that I find Madsen's line of thinking very useful, and plausible, and not at all in the fantastic or tinfoil category. However, he is so well known that it wouldn't surprise me at all to find that Rovian types had tried to mislead him.

One objection I had to Madsen's recent allegations is that I didn't think $29 million or an elaborate undercover scheme was needed, for what they actually ended up doing (one hacker, a couple of minutes). But maybe it would have been needed in certain circumstances--like the inserted lines of code not working for some reason, or not working as efficiently as expected. (And maybe only some part of Plan #2 was used--for instance, the Warren County security lockdown.)

Maybe the political types didn't really believe how easy it would be to hack the whole election (or a third of it, or whatever they did)--even though they had tested it out on a smaller scale in several elections (Georgia '02, for instance). So they put these more draconian measures on track, just in case--then found out, on Election Day, just how easy it all was.

I hope Madsen is open to all the possibilties--and doesn't get stuck defending something that was a decoy, or an unexecuted contingency plan. It's easy to get defensive under pressure, and not see what's really happening. And it would actually be extremely useful to know what exactly this is--decoy, contingency, what? --even if it didn't happen, or wasn't fully implemented.

The fact that they created a decoy, or designed contingency plans, would point yet more red flags at fraud.

If Burkett and CBS had been more careful, they would have realized that the scam was pointing to the reality that was being covered up--although this was pretty hard to see.

I'll tell you something, though. The majority of American voters didn't give a crap about it. They saw through it all--and threw Bush out, and voted Kerry in--by a landslide!

So, give them some credit! They ARE able to sort out facts and see through B.S. And they DON'T believe everything they see on TV. And--I keep saying this over and over--they KNOW, deep down, that Bush was not capable of winning an honest election, and that something is very wrong. They just don't have all the facts yet, to corroborate that sure instinct.

[Carni]

61. Hatfield was another victim of the bait and switch

Fortunate son was if anything a fluff piece (except for the coke allegations and the AWOL bomb)

In addition remember the two counties in Florida in 2000 where GOP operatives were given two weeks of unsupervised access to the central Florida database with their laptops, to "correct" absentee ballot applications? The name of one of them was Michael Leach and he used to post at Freerepublic.

Like you said several plans were considered and or used to rig this last election...bush's general unpopularity would have made that a necessity IMO

[Tace]

65. Carni: I Think You Are Spot On In Your Thinking

[BreakForNews]

55. References for BreakForNews article

Here are the references promised for this thread's feature article:
See the original article to see them hyperlinked in the text at:
http://www.breakfornews.com/articles/MadsenVoteFraudTaleSpin.htm

regards, Fintan Dunne

Clint Curtis interview
http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=479

Curtis software analysed
http://rawstory.com/exclusives/byrne/vote_rigging_concept_1207.htm

Curtis makes promotional internet postings
http://www.thudfactor.com/textpattern/index.php?id=996#c002008
http://everythingstinks.com/es/2004/08/my_truth_is_tha.html

Bradblog re Curtis affadavit
http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001024.htm

Curtis website Voetfraud page
http://www.justaflyonthewall.com/votefraud.html

Curtis suit for DOT reinstatement
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:E4uhEslOp5gJ:www.hsmv.state.fl.us/Bulletins/JanFeb2004.pdf+%22Clinton+Curtis%22+suit&hl=en

Curtis 2001 allegations against Yang/Feeney
http://web.archive.org/web/20021219105233/http://www.news-journalonline.com/2002/Jun/9/STAT001.htm

Daytona Beach News-Journal investigation
http://web.archive.org/web/20021219105233/http://www.news-journalonline.com/2002/Jun/9/STAT001.htm

Daytona Beach News Journal investigation -more articles
http://web.archive.org/web/20030404215356/http://www.news-journalonline.com/special/feeney.htm

Bush pressures Feeney over Medicare bill
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:n5y3OTnLlTsJ:home.earthlink.net/~fsrhine/2003.11.01_arch.html+tom+feeney+voting+software&hl=en

Madsen 4th article on Vote switching software
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/120604Madsen/120604madsen.html

Madsen 3rd article
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/120104Madsen/120104madsen.html

Madsen 2nd article
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/112604Madsen/112604madsen.html

Madsen 1st article
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/112504Madsen/112504madsen.html

DU Discusses Madsen 4th article
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x117320

Wayne Madsen "October Surprise" article
http://www.lebanonwire.com/0410/04102002LW.asp

[righteous1]

56. Thanx for the Links BFN n/t

[Carolab]

57. I keep saying this

Fisher's story makes much more sense

[Psyop Samurai]

59. Thank you, Fintan...

...appreciate your work, as always.

I wonder what Vreeland's up to these days? :eyes:

[BreakForNews]

62. Correction - BreakForNews.com

Our story leading this thread states that RAWSTORY's credibility
was affected by their over-hyping the death of Clinton Curtis' dog.

While RawStory.com, BlueLemur.com and BradBlog.com all ran
with elements of the Clinton Curtis story, for the record it
was Brad of BradBlog.com who hyped up the dog's death:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2004/12/06.html#a962

(extract)

" I've just spoken with Clint Curtis, the "whistleblower" in this case, and he's reported that his previously healthy three-year old German Shepard has been found dead. Just a few hours after I published my story on Mr. Curtis. (snip) ...I suppose it's a good reminder of the kind of folks that Mr. Curtis has been dealing with down in Florida for so many years.(snip) ...whoever decided it was a good idea to kill an innocent animal in order to threaten or warn or intimidate Mr. Curtis in some way. "
Brad
THE BRAD BLOG - The uprising WILL continue...

Our original story now notes this correction at:
http://www.breakfornews.com/articles/MadsenVoteFraudTaleSpin.htm

[The Backlash Cometh]

63. A correction on page 16. Hmmm...

[BreakForNews]

66. Correction up front

The correction is warranted and is upfront.

That's why they call it journalism.

[The Backlash Cometh]

68. Perhaps you should apply the same process to Madsen?

[Razorback_Democrat]

67. FYI Brad Blog reports that the dog was shot!

and he is hoping to get a copy of a police report but doesn't know if one was filed or not.