Interesting that the count in Florida may depend on absentee
votes from the military. It supports what I say in the upcoming
Disinfo Books volume, You Are Being Lied To, about the
defacto existence of a global military state. This may be the first
ever coup d'etat by mail.
The new issue of Steamshovel Press, now at the printer,
includes previously unknown Gemstone file material on Ralph Nader.
The Gemstone File, of course, is a bit of parahistory written
by Bruce Roberts, summarized in the Skeleton Key by Stephanie
Caruana and the subject of at least a half-dozen books (including
one by me called Inside The Gemstone File). Ms. Caruana has
transcribed this newly surfaced Roberts letter. It claims that Nader
settled for a small settlement in a defamation lawsuit against
General Motors rather than pursuing a large judgement that could
have gone a long way to correct the abuses he documented in
Unsafe At Any Speed. So this pattern of sacrificing
broader-picture goals for short-term money gain (like the 5% he
wanted for future federal financing) is not new and the corruption
of money is not limited to the Gore and Bush campaigns.
(The new Steamshovel Press is available for $7 from POB
23715, St. Louis, MO 63121. Checks payable to "Kenn Thomas.")
Otherwise, I agree that the situation in Florida only makes the
abuses first noted by the Collier brothers more in-your-face than in
elections past. Voting irregularities occur all of the time. In St.
Louis, Republicans successfully pursued a legal effort to deprive
the right to vote for many people through the early closing of
polls. The Steamshovel Press web site contains my suggestion
that Mel Carnahan's death might have been an assassination. I found
it interesting that in making the decision to accept his office,
Carnahan's widow had as inspiration the memoir of Hale Boggs' widow.
Boggs was one of only two dissenting members of the Warren
Commission who also died in a mysterious plane crash.
I am sure the debate surrounding the Florida count will not spill
into such areas. It will be limited to anger about ballots, not the
real bloody business of murder and conspiracy that has always been a
part of power politics. If they don't steal an election, they kill
for it. Dubya Junior in the spotlight, however, will give the
conspiracy community plenty of fodder, not only against the party
boy himself but against all of the improprieties of his puppet
master papa.
Kenn
Thomas
kennthomas@umsl.edu
www.steamshovelpress.com
The following anonymous note was sent to RTMark.com, a corporate
brokerage company:
Amid the chaos of the current Fortune 500-sponsored election we
should take a step back and, in the words of former Secretary of
State James Baker, stop hurling. We will construct a website that
would allow voters to recast their ballots in any election in our
nation's history -- especially this one. With all the benefits of
hindsight, voters will have the opportunity to shape history again.
Like children on the playground whose kickball game was marred by
controversial rulings -- we call a do-over. Do-over! Imagine being
able to recast the votes that you deeply regret now that you've had
to live with the consequences of your choices. Even better, imagine
readjusting your great-great-grandparents' miscast votes back in
Eighteen Something, when the Whigs and the Anti-Masons seemed to be
the elixirs of the moment.
Notice how the entire establishment is screaming about respecting
the law, respecting the electoral college, respecting the outcome,
and respecting the will of the people, as the illegitimacy of our
Corpocracy is revealed. As soon as elections whose institutional
foundations were considered unshakable are shown to be nothing more
than complex corporate sporting events -- the guardians of these
institutions demand strict adherence to obscure and conflicting
laws. The very existence of these safeguards attesting to the fact
that the establishment is well aware of its own precariousness. That
is why we call for a do-over. Why not? What's the difference? Just
do it over until a clear victor emerges. But this is exactly the
kind of politico-cultural mass realization that terrifies the 22,000
lobbyists who run the country.
Knowing what we now know, why shouldn't people be able to revote
not only in the 2000 U.S. presidential race, but also in previous
elections? The benefits of historical perspective will allow fresh
ways to look at (and vote on) old choices. Yeah, okay, we realize
the burning issues of, say, the 1844 elections, are seemingly tired
news. But the winner (Polk) subsequently led the U.S. into war with
Mexico. Doesn't every choice deserve to be revisited? Why not? It
can only widen the eyes of the present day voter.
www.rtmark.com