Susan Estrich Blows The Rigged Election Wide Open - Page 11

Buzzkill · #**101** 01-27-2008, 06:24 PM

Yes it is.Im a lazy pot smoking uneducated terrorrists because i believe we have a corrupt government PUNISH ME!

natrone23 · #**102** 01-27-2008, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzzkill

Yes it is.Im a lazy pot smoking uneducated terrorrists because i believe we have a corrupt government PUNISH ME!

I don't think your any of those, i would just say that I have have seen zietgeist, loose change ect............but i have also read all of the counter arguments and debunkings and i would advise you to to do the same before you come to a conclusion

WillieNelson · #**103** 01-27-2008, 07:17 PM

Here is more "proof" than you fools have ever provided.

index

6isafraidof7 · #**104** 01-27-2008, 11:42 PM

double post...

6isafraidof7 · #**105** 01-27-2008, 11:43 PM

I don't agree... watch zeitgeist.

WillieNelson · #**106** 01-28-2008, 05:52 AM

I have subjected myself to Zeitgeist and many other movies trying to build support for a lie. I think the link I posted explains everything. And the proof is in the pudding. I can site 100 credible sources from countries around the world that report the same findings on the elections and 9/11. Election results are reprted as they are read, with no conspiracy involved. Saudi Islamic extremists brought down the WTC buildings. End of story.

GrowRebel · #**107** 01-28-2008, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillieNelson

They post links back to sites with no credibility and no evidence. The only credible(source) link was a NYT article on the canidates that wanted a recount and it did not provide any evidence that actual "fraud" had occured. Those two(GR and Med) make unbased acusations all of the time and get upset when I want proof of crimes. Evidence is needed against any criminal, but these two rely on lies and hearsay. If these machines were accesed by "hackers" and proof existed of it; the hackers would already be in custody.

Let's get back on topic people shall we ... there is a 911 thread so go there ...
...Buzz you are wasting your time providing links to these assholes ... just let the viewing audience see ... that's all you need do ... it help to show just how incredibly stupid these people are ...

So The Rolling Stone isn't credible ... Robert F Kennedy isn't credible .... since when?

I guess you might as well pretend there is no evidence ... you can't dispute any of it ... that's obvious ...

Now we all see what your lame idea of credible source ...
... nothing more need to be said ... the facts speak for themselves ...

... and fraud did occur I posted the link to the story ... your just too stupid to except the facts ... so you make shit up ... and do it rather badly I might add.

WillieNelson · #**108** 01-28-2008, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrowRebel

Let's get back on topic people shall we ... there is a 911 thread so go there ...
...Buzz you are wasting your time providing links to these assholes ... just let the viewing audience see ... that's all you need do ... it help to show just how incredibly stupid these people are ...

So The Rolling Stone isn't credible ... Robert F Kennedy isn't credible .... since when?

I guess you might as well pretend there is no evidence ... you can't dispute any of it ... that's obvious ...

Now we all see what your lame idea of credible source ...
... nothing more need to be said ... the facts speak for themselves ...

... and fraud did occur I posted the link to the story ... your just too stupid to except the facts ... so you make shit up ... and do it rather badly I might add.

Hey shit for brains. We have nothing to prove. Every count that has taken place is honest. You are the nutjob that says that these are lies. Where is the proof of this? Where is the hacker that changed the numbers? I want to see him in handcuffs. You can't provide proof, just sites created by other nutjobs like you. The link I posted is just as credible as anything you have shown. Where has Rolling Stone said, as fact, that anything you claim has happened?

WillieNelson · #**109** 01-28-2008, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrowRebel

...

... and fraud did occur I posted the link to the story ... your just too stupid to except the facts ...

At least you finally admitted that your evidence is just a "story". I am not a fan of fiction, I prefer proof. You can keep all of your fantasy stories to yourself. You and the other nutjobs that like fantasy need to find a new crowd to preach to. And find a better story, big kids read non-fiction.

GrowRebel · #**110** 01-28-2008, 09:36 AM

Here are more reports of fraud that Ted Nuggent (I refuse to refer him as the great liberal Willie ...Nuggent fits much better) claim didn't happen ...

New Hampshire Primary - Sham Chain of Custody(YouTube)
... and they NEVER answered the question of "Why did they change their procedure?"

New Hampshire 'Diebold Voting Machines' Hacked(YouTube)"New Hampshire Sec. of State Appears to Lie to Media About Kucinich Hand Count"NH Secretary of State Calls For Temporary Halt in Republican Hand Count, Candidate Albert Howard Objects
The recount is already discredited and with it the primary itself. They have been caught cheating on several levels so now the only thing they can do is find a way to call it off. Apparently this delaying tactic has NOT worked and the count is back on again.

Multiple Errors In Louisiana Caucus Creates GOP Challenge
The Louisiana State GOP changed the rules at the eleventh hour to allow other candidates to file more delegates, even though there were plenty of delegates to compose full slates in each congressional district. At the time of the original January 10 deadline, Ron Paul had the largest number of delegates pledged to him. The party then changed the rules to give other candidates until January 12 to file more delegates.

So much for Nuggent's bullshit that nothing was found ...