Posted on 10/18/2004 11:53:16 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
Dulles, Virginia – Next month, the United States will have the distinction of having joined the elite club of countries like Sierra Leone and Sri Lanka whose elections are scrutinized and critiqued by international election monitors. It is a national disgrace that is openly advocated by leftist activists and a group of congressional Democrats.
After UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan turned down a request from ten Democrat Congressmen to send poll watchers (he said the petition had to originate with the executive branch of government) the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) gleefully accepted a similar invitation channeled through the State Department. Soon afterward a Canadian newspaper headline gloated – accurately – "Third World Monitors U.S. Elections."
The OSCE has already dispatched a group of five “election experts” to the United States. There really wouldn't be a problem with the OSCE observing our election if they were here as observers; that is, to learn how democracy works and witness democratic elections in the country that does it better than any other.
But that is not the case. This group of international busy bodies is in the United States to cast judgment and provide support and cover to a hopelessly disgruntled group of partisan Democrats who, if George Bush is re-elected, will contest the election on any and all grounds. In debate on the House floor, Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas said a coalition of "some 10,000 or more lawyers" are ready to challenge election results that favor Republicans.
In its preliminary report, the OSCE began laying the foundation from which liberal partisans can contest the November 2nd results. During their visit here, the agenda of OSCE monitors was overwhelmingly stacked with liberal organizations: Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, NAACP, People for the American Way, and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, among others. The group met with eight representatives from Congress – all but one of them were Democrats.
The OSCE echoed Democrat complaints about the Help America Vote Act which established the Election Assistance Commission (EAC). "The establishment of the EAC was noticeably delayed," the OSCE report stated. The report also complained that without a national election guru in Washington, Secretaries of State "were left without needed guidelines, and found it impossible to avail themselves of the funding for new voting technology."
The OSCE carped that voter identification is made more difficult because Americans are not required to carry a "national identification document." This group of outsiders predicted "greater controversy" in the 2004 election than there was in 2000 because voting machines do not "produce the necessary paper trail."
In its history, the OSCE has given its seal of approval to the re-election of national dictators who garner more than 90 percent of the vote. Given that, you might think it would commend the U.S. electoral structure as a system in which vibrant, competitive races take place which often produce close, and sometimes very close, results.
The group also charged that states which allow overseas voters to voluntarily waive their right to a secret vote by faxing a marked ballot are “not consistent with…the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and OSCE commitments.” What the OSCE sees as a violation of a United Nations declaration is what we in America call freedom of choice. If the OSCE demanded we apply Kofi Annan's standards, thousands of U.S. military personnel living and fighting abroad could be deprived of their right to vote.
The OSCE report bemoans the fact that the U.S. has no “central election body” like the IRS which would efficiently administer the presidential election. Our Founders called that federalism and they purposely decentralized the voting process. We believe that citizens can better administer elections at the local level than can bureaucrats in Washington, much less Third World novices. Despite some glitches here and there, voters, poll workers, party monitors and the media apply checks and balances against one another to ensure the integrity of U.S. elections.
These European election police claim authority to sit in judgment of our elections because the State Department consented to the Copenhagen Document, an obscure diplomatic agreement, even though their own report states, "the absence of a central body administering elections in the U.S. creates a lack of clarity as to which authority…should provide accreditation to international observers."
No government authority should have invited international monitors to cast judgment on our elections. They are here only because Democrats, should they lose, will do all they can to embarrass their country. They have submitted our elections to a "global test" and rigged it so that we will fail. Their hatred for George W. Bush has taken them beyond the extreme.
Who in Hades invited these international monitors? Sheesh! Sounds exactly like a play by the demoncRATS to steal the elections.
1. Do we really care what they say or think?
2. Do we even have to cooperate with them in any way?
This makes me wretch. Colin Powell is a RINO and this is the most disgraceful, cowardly act I have witnessed in my life. The State Department needs to be cleaned out from top to bottom. God help those simpering, wimpy bastards, Powell included.
Dade County won't pass the Afghanistan test of a fairly well-run process.
And a newspaper in Manchester England is trying to influence the US elections by having its readers write personal letters to registered voters in Clark County Ohio.
Thanks entirely to the jackwits in the State Department who see nothing wrong with forking over U.S. sovereignty to the thugs in the U.N.
Why we're putting up with this is beyond me. The United States taught the world how to run free elections. We don't need second-rate, second-world nations telling us how to do what we've been doing for over two CENTURIES.
A leftist stunt that has no credible standing or integrity.
Haven't you figured it out yet? Any election that Bush wins will not pass the Global Test. It won't even pass the MSM test.
Haven't you figured it out yet? Any election that Bush wins will not pass the Global Test. It won't even pass the MSM test.
If UN monitors show up at my polling place I'll kick them out. Hard.
"At least 13 members of the U.S. House of Representatives are calling for the United Nations to supervise this year's American presidential election, four years after one of the closest races in history.
"Rep. Corrine Brown's home state is Florida, site of the historic ballot recount in 2000 that eventually provided Republican George W. Bush with the margin of victory over Democrat Al Gore. Brown is perhaps the most outspoken advocate for United Nations supervision of the 2004 election. On July 16 as members of the House discussed the idea, she charged that President Bush "stole" the election in 2000 and called Bush's victory a "United States coup d'etat."
"'We need to make sure that it doesn't happen again,'" Brown said in taunting Bush and the Republican Party. "'Over and over again, after the election, when you stole the election, you came back here and said 'get over it.' No, we're not going to 'get over it' and we want verification from the world.'"
"She was subsequently censured by the U.S. House and her remarks were stricken from the congressional record.
"But Brown is one of at least a dozen members of Congress who want U.N. supervision of the elections, not only in Florida but across America. It's a responsibility that has traditionally been left up to state governments.
"Reps. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, Carolyn Maloney of New York, Barbara Lee of California, Jerrold Nadler of New York, Joseph Crowley of New York, Raul Grijalva of Arizona, Mike Honda of California, Ed Towns of New York, Elijah Cummings of Maryland, William Clay of Missouri and Julia Carson of Indiana made the formal request in a June 30 letter to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. Later, Brown lent her support to the effort." "We firmly believe in the importance of international human rights law and its applicability and relevance to the U.S. as a member of the international community," the letter to Annan stated. "Given the deeply troubling events of the 2000 election and the growing concerns about the lack of necessary reforms and potential for abuse in the 2004 election, we believe that the engagement of international election monitors has the potential to speed the necessary reform as well as reduce the likelihood of questionable practices and voter disenfranchisement on Election Day."
On The Net...At Home and Abroad:
http://www.islammemo.cc/news/newsimages/usa/john%20kerry001.jpg
http://www.islammemo.cc/news/one_news.asp?IDNews=47357
http://www.islammemo.cc/news/newsimages/usa/push_cross.jpg
http://www.islammemo.cc/news/one_news.asp?IDnews=47240
===
===
IslamOnline.com: "The Silver Screen Documents the Political Fray" by Dilshad D. Ali (October 14, 2004)
http://www.islamonline.net/English/artculture/2004/10/article08.shtml
IslamOnline Views & Analyses: "Against John Kerry" by Norman Madarasz (October 14, 2004"
http://www.islamonline.net/English/Views/2004/10/article07.shtml
===
===
http://www.islamicity.com/articles/Articles.asp?ref=IV0410-2488
Muslim citizens have a voice and can influence the selection of the rulers of the country ..
Audio
Mahathir's advice on US Elections
10/16/2004 - Political - Article Ref: IV0410-2488
Number of comments: 73
Opinion Summary: Agree:58 Disagree:9 Neutral:6
By: Dr. Mahathir Mohamad
Iviews* -
"Open letter to American Muslims"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
