Further Claims Of A Fraudulent Count - Page 4 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Further Claims Of A Fraudulent Count


Recommended Posts

That's another issue. It is an impossibility to ensure that 100% of any given ballot is precisely representative of the eligible electorate at the point of the vote. Could it be improved? Probably. Will it ever be perfected? Never.

Most addresses I looked up had 1 occupant (pensioners that had lived alone for years) in real life but the database had around 10 occupants. If these extra 9 people (who may not be real people) could vote then it's a huge issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most addresses I looked up had 1 occupant (pensioners that had lived alone for years) in real life but the database had around 10 occupants. If these extra 9 people (who may not be real people) could vote then it's a huge issue.

I agree - but there are many factors involved in inaccurate registration of voters. Fraud is only one of them. To commit the sort of mass deception of the kind being claimed here would require undetected fraud on an industrial scale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Postal voting is ‘wide open to fraud’ and should be scrapped in its current form, a top judge warned last night.
Judge Richard Mawrey, who sits in judgment on election fraud cases, said ballot-rigging was now a ‘probability’ in some parts of Britain due to the extension of postal voting.
Mr Mawrey, a deputy high court judge, said the introduction of ‘on demand’ postal voting had failed to boost turnout. But he warned it had made Britain’s electoral system vulnerable to fraud on ‘an industrial scale’.

Industrial scale...interesting phrase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.michaelmeacher.info/weblog/2013/07/blairites-are-up-in-arms-about-falkirk-because-they-fear-theyve-lost-their-monopoly-in-fixing-seats/

"Why did they never investigate how they got them selected, by getting the regional secretaries put in place at the start of the Blair regime to instruct local parties who the candidate preferred by the leadership was and telling them actively to canvass for that person, and if all else failed there were always the ballot boxes and postal votes that could be tampered with?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree - but there are many factors involved in inaccurate registration of voters. Fraud is only one of them. To commit the sort of mass deception of the kind being claimed here would require undetected fraud on an industrial scale.

Who's to say those listed are people registering to vote? They certainly don't exist at the addresses I checked (occupant(s) lived there for more than 30 years...alone).

Please keep in mind that the database I'm referring to here is/was located in Thames House (Security Service HQ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For such an important thing, it strikes me that voting in the UK is childishly easy to manipulate if you have the will and the means.

(I'm not saying it happned last week, btw)

It can surely be improved by ;

-removing postal voting

-sending people a ballot card with a barcode. Have barcode checked by PC in the polling station, instead of the medieval system of paper lists that we have just now.

-make sure everyone who turns up to vote has picture ID. No ID, no vote.

It's archiaic how it's done just now.....the UK is holding onto some bizarre Victorian values that dictate that 'how it's always been done is the best way', and they also rely on a ridiculously high element of trust...something that I suspect strongly has been abused for decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can surely be improved by ;

-sending people a ballot card with a barcode. Have barcode checked by PC in the polling station, instead of the medieval system of paper lists that we have just now.

Im not convinced. I used to believe technology was the way forward but I think I'd rather avoid any and all technology given the unseen hackery that can be committed. What is the importance of the barcode on the ballot paper. As long as it makes its way into the box, it's supposed to be secure, right?

I definitely agree with ending postal votes though. Didnt trust this process before, trusted it even less after Glenrothes and Im not sure I trust it in any way shape or form now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely agree. Ill never forget the confidence from No politicians on the night of the vote. From just after 10pm, they knew they had won. YouGov's 99% certain that No had won just confirmed that confidence.

It definitely stank.

listen stop this...

I knew at 9.15 when the local polling supervisor told me the turnout was 96% already. The rich and old in this affluent area were tuning out in HUGE numbers and I knew there was no way we could match this.

At Ingliston, the first samples taken from counting the postal votes were coming through at 5 past 10. We were losing big on postal votes too.

Our telephone canvassing in the week up to the election saw undecideds moving to NO - this had not happened before. Before I got in the hall I knew it was over. I saw Carmichael doing a victory interview at 10 past 10 on the basis of the early info. This is how it works.

nothing dodgy happened on any scale. Tories peeking at the postal ballots, yes and they should get their arse kicked. Isolated incidents of idiots general faffing around - yes.

Referendum nicked - no we lost...

I have no doubt they were fecking about illegally and Davidson may end up having to resign if she knew and didn't report it, if not face charges

Well maybe that's what we want to look at.

And things like this...

For such an important thing, it strikes me that voting in the UK is childishly easy to manipulate if you have the will and the means.

(I'm not saying it happned last week, btw)

It can surely be improved by ;

-removing postal voting

-sending people a ballot card with a barcode. Have barcode checked by PC in the polling station, instead of the medieval system of paper lists that we have just now.

-make sure everyone who turns up to vote has picture ID. No ID, no vote.

It's archiaic how it's done just now.....the UK is holding onto some bizarre Victorian values that dictate that 'how it's always been done is the best way', and they also rely on a ridiculously high element of trust...something that I suspect strongly has been abused for decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Far too easy to register and far too easy to get a postal vote. I remember at the count one of my team, very experienced, saying, that many postal votes had the same type of cross written by the same pen/pencil. If most of the postal votes were elderly these crosses would be all over the place. If the "intelligence services" were involved they would have needed to fiddle around 10% of the vote - around 330k. That's a big job - but the best coups are the ones you don't believe are possible.

The next step is to get the marked up registers and compare that with the postal voting list and see if anything jumps out. It's not impossible the fiddling process, if there was one, started last year with new additions to the registers, not this year.

Westminster were so determined to keep us - don't think there's anything they were not prepared to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how many people living out with scotland suddenly had an address in scotland that they used the register so they could vote. Know I could have registered at my parents and my boss who has a Scottish wife told me plenty of her side registered and got a postal vote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone took a sharpie to the polling booth?

This fraud thing isn't going away. If anything it's building momentum. I was always a bit suspicious of this high turnout and 'silent majority' chat before the referendum but like others here I can't see how they'd manage 400000.

Clearly it was a combination of electoral fraud and meek Scots that lost it in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont know what to make of that at all

As im a bit of a cynic my first impression was it must be pish but i obviously will wait for the truth to come out

What makes it a bit dubious is the guys other vids & likes on Youtube

Secondly If there really was an attempt at electoral fraud by powers unknown would they leave hundreds of Yes votes undestroyed in a bin bag to be found by a well known "exposer of miscarriages of justice" ?

If it looks like shite and tastes like shite then it probably is ...shite (as much as i would like it to be true)

Edited by Ally Bongo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly it was a combination of electoral fraud and meek Scots that lost it in the end.

Well monsieur lewelk, yesterday we were being told it was just 'us who lost it', and now today it was a combination of electoral fraud and maybe meek Scots that lost it... and so you see why perhaps tomorrow it could just be fraud that lost it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they went for it it will have been from every angle possible not just one. Chip away, death by a thousand cuts, each one if discovered deniable as a local event and irrelevant to the overall majority, with the postal votes industrial scale rigging up the sleeve as final insurance...

I think we will find it is varied, wide scale, and everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...