The latest crop of opinion polls are nothing short of disastrous for New Labour, just ahead of the European elections. I don’t think I have linked before to UK Polling Report, which is an excellent site.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/
Postal balloting has already started. This has been thve vehicle for massive fraud in recent elections, after New Labour deliberately brought in a system wide open to vote harvesting amongst patriarchal immigrant communities where they have firm support. All parties have abused the system, but New Labour on a much vaster scale.
As an independent candidate I witnessed Jack Straw’s electoral fraud in Blackburn in 2005, where a monumental 29% of all votes were cast by postal ballot.
A key element of New Labour’s postal ballot fraud operation is that, by law, the postal ballots are mixed in with other ballots, out of view of the candidates and their agents, before the ballots are counted. That renders the fraud unprovable.
I have tried very hard to think of any valid reason for this provision of mixing in the postal ballots before counting, and other than facilitating fraud, no other reason occurs to me. I am quite simply stunned that we allow this fraud to happen.
An official who was present when the postal ballots were opened in Blackburn told me privately that they had the impression that 90% went to Jack Straw. Several of my canvassers had personally witnessed New Labour enforcers collecting up ssheaves of postal ballots door to door and taking them to local council community centres where New Labour were collating them. Whether the ballots were filled in before New Labour collected them, I know not.
New “safeguards” introduced since. chiefly regarding signatures, will make no difference at all in a situation where, rather than posting it yourself, you are intimidated into handing over your ballot unsealed to a New Labour man.
Lord Patel got his nose into the House of Peers’ trough solely for enforcing the New Labour vote among the Muslim community of Blackburn. I expect that is basically what the thief Baroness Udders was ennobled for, too.
The ennoblements in fact only symbolise an entire system whereby Muslim communities in the UK are kept dependent upon great streams of public money. Lord Patel’s own companies have benefited from a bewildering variety of government and EU grants and subsidies. Blackburn is soaked in EU regional funds and urban regeneration grants. It bristles with community centres, cultural organisations and community workers. The council is the biggest employer. I could go on and on.
Charles Moore is a fool. He is yet another Conservative who accepts the inane rubbish of Melanie Phillips and Michael Gove as expertise on British Muslims, who they never meet. (I was friends with Charles’ mum and dad, Richard and Anne, so I am really sorry the had an idiot).
It is in fact completely untrue that the Muslim Council of Britain supports attacks on British soldiers, as Moore claimed. The real disgrace is that, in return for vast flows of public funds and extremely lax visa regimes for relatives, orchestrated by Lord Ahmed, Lord Patel, Baroness Udders and others, British Muslims turned their backs on their co-religionists in Iraq and kept supporting New Labour for cash.
If their religion is true, they are nearly all going to Hell.
In a 2005 general election which New Labour would probably have won without fraud, all this did not seem to worry too many people very much. As the New Labour vote dwindles radically, these great batches of postal votes are going to stick out like a sore thumb.
The Returning Officer in Blackburn refused to show me the actual law he claimed said that postal ballots must be mixed in before counting, but I understand it still happens in all elections. It may be worth taking this to the European Court of Human Rights, in relation to the conduct of the European Elections, as a provision which plainly encourages electoral fraud in the UK and thus affects the balance of the entire European Parliament,
You’re absolutely right to be worried about this Craig – after all; it was how Labour won the Glenrothes by-election.
Have they ever found the voting registers that “went missing” from the Labour controlled Town Hall, which would have shown up the fraud?
Labour are synonymous with Sleaze & Corruption.
Yes, patronage of patriarchy is the modus operandum in relation to communities of South Asian origin in the UK – and not just Muslim communities of S. Asian origin – much as it was during the time of the Raj: Develop native elites. This is the British way of governing.
My family were on both sides of the Great Game in India / Afghanistan during that period, with one lot serving as top-level stooges, high court judges and military adjutants, etc. and also central in the infamous and doomed British attempt to conquer Afghanistan in 1839-42, and the other, throwing stones at, and (literally) being strung-up by, the ‘Tommies’.
Imperial tactics – whether in Ireland, South Asia or elsewhere – never die, nor do they fade away, they just migrate splendiferously into domestic policy.
Btw, just out of interest, and to be a little naughty, does anyone think that the 1992 UK election was fraudulently won? It wouldn’t have taken very much fraud, just a few, judicious manipulations. Then Kinnock went to the EU. I’ve often wondered about this.
Suhayl:
That’s an interesting proposition you make about Kinnock – remember that it wasn’t just him – his son also got a job in the EU and his wife and his daughter got a job in Downing Street.
Its called NEPOTISM – Labour are renowned for it.
“Listening to the Minister tonight, one would not think that in addition to welcoming Polish plumbers, builders, bus drivers and vegetable pickers, we should now be forced to welcome a Polish parliamentarian to investigate large-scale voting fraud here, in the mother of all Parliaments”…
http://tinyurl.com/nnf53f
We are rotten to the core.
Should we not find out who gave the word that established vote-mixing of postal ballots as protocol……and hang them.
Sukayl
No, I don’t think the 1992 election was a fraud.
KevinB
No, we shouldn’t hang them.
The paper chase seems profoundly inefficient in an electronic age.
If we can have unique bank accounts that work 24/7 all year, then why can’t we have a unique ‘voting’ account?
We all have National Insurance numbers, coupled with a computerized data base and a unique password, we could have a secure voting system, that would also be cheap to run and maintain.
Craig @10:57,
Don’t be wet; the best possible way to maintain a liberal democracy would be to threaten death for malfeasance.
With a totally centralised government for efficiency, and MPs given huge benefits via a single accountable very large wage, they would rule under the Damoclesian remit: that if they commit any act of malfeasance, they should be put to death.
“The paper chase seems profoundly inefficient in an electronic age”…
http://tinyurl.com/2j6dk5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quote_mining
JimmyGiro
No it is not.
I was pointing out that “in an electronic age” fraud can become to easy.
http://tinyurl.com/39pfmp
JimmyG
I once flirted with the idea of e-voting. I came to this conslusion:
In an “honest system” it would be an excellent idea…
Do we have an “honest system”?
lwtc247,
Finance is a system under constant threat of abuse, and yet the electronic banking of a personal bank account works fine.
Therefore even in a dishonest system, a secure private voting account is achievable.
George,
My example was the electronic banking system; if you show me a ‘tiny link’ whereby that system is regularly abused, then I’ll give you a big kiss.
X
Further, if the people so choose, each voting account could be given extra voting credit to those that have a greater vested interest in the government.
For example, tax payers, fathers, mothers, exporters, etc., could be given bonus votes.
“My example was the electronic banking system; if you show me a ‘tiny link’ whereby that system is regularly abused”
I could.
“then I’ll give you a big kiss”
Hmmm…I don’t think I will then,but thanks for the offer.
Jimmy, it’s a poor analogy. If money vanishes from your electronic bank account, you can tell it’s gone. If your electronic vote is wrongly apportioned or not counted, how can you tell?
I like the secret ballot and the physical existence of ballor papers.
Sukayl:
“does anyone think that the 1992 UK election was fraudulently won?”
I vaguely remember that shortly after that election the Guardian published an article pointing out that all the constituencies where the Tory victory did not follow the exit poll results were alphabetically contiguous, consistent with a single block of results being tampered with. Interesting, but probably just coincidence.
JimmyGiro:
The internet is awash with articles showing that the US electonic voting system, administered by Diebold, is so comically insecure it may as well have been designed to ensure that tampering and abuse is possible.
Craig,
We know where our money has gone from the bank statement; likewise we would have a vote statement to account for where and when our votes were received.
MJ,
The Diebold system is not the same as the bank clearing system.
“Further, if the people so choose, each voting account could be given extra voting credit to those that have a greater vested interest in the government.
For example, tax payers, fathers, mothers, exporters, etc., could be given bonus votes.”
As a non-father I disagree.
Not having children is better for the environment. I have ensured that my environmental impact does not continue, perhaps indefinitely, past my death. *I* should get extra voting credits for this responsible act of sacrifice for the greater good!
MJ
Votes are neither centrally collated or announced, so I can’t think how being “alphabetical” could possibly come into it.
1992 was perfectly explicable by the shame factor in admitting voting Tory.
Leo,
I too am seedless, and by being so we have our own vested interests; but parents have their self interest also, plus the responsibility to their offspring’s interest.
The reality is that nature made us diverse, hence we can not be equal, not even if we had egality: the equal right to be different.
It follows then, that our contributions and vested interests in government should be mirrored by our voting impact.
JimmyGiro:
“likewise we would have a vote statement to account for where and when our votes were received”.
But that would still not guarantee that the final published result was an accurate reflection of votes cast and receipts issued. To ensure that, every single voter would have to submit their receipts for independent auditing. A bit like the existng ballot-box system really.
Craig: I don’t think the 1992 election was rigged either. I was just recalling a Guardian article, to show that the question has had some serious-ish consideration in the mainstream press.
A ‘voting account’ sounds like a real bad idea to me. It would most definately end the era of anonymous voting, and this is fundamental to a free democracy.
Furthermore it would be much too simple to create fraudulent results with electronic voting. It cannot be compared with online banking. For example it would be easy to create a ‘hack’ which displays the correct choice made by the voter but counts the actual vote as whatever the ‘hacker’ wants it to be. This would make it incredibly hard to know anything has gone wrong.
Also different numbers of votes depending on who/what you are…… Sounds a little Athenian to me, haven’t we progressed?
MJ,
Computers are good at counting and accounting; much better than people.
CheebaCow,
Encryption will safeguard anonymity. And the ease of hacking would have meant the end of banking as we know it. There was a story of how a Barclays bank employee managed to use their computer system to embezzle £7M. Barclays realised that rectifying the fault was more important than legal retribution; so they did a deal with the employee, whereby he was let free if he told Barclays how to rectify their problem.
Hacking is possible if there is something to gain from it; but there are intelligent systems evolving to counter it. What incentive would there be to hack the votes from regular hackers? If secured computer systems were easy to hack, then the pentagon’s rather open system, would have folded years ago; and our banks clearing system would be defunct.
“Also different numbers of votes depending on who/what you are…… Sounds a little Athenian to me, haven’t we progressed?”
“From each according to their means, to each according to their needs”
I guess it depends on which side of the soup kitchen your on.
Rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic I see?
The system is so corrupt that we need to start marketing our electoral system to any self respecting banana republic, lord knows we need every revenue stream that we can find, after the free money bonanza to the bankers, and the MPs.
Craig, I can attest to postal voting fraud, which is further helped by the lack of any obligations for the ballot papers to be kept, and stored. ie the ballot papers are thrown away!!!
So far as the minority votes go, the feudal structure and the retainers thrown in the way of a few “leaders in the community” ensures the block vote.
Lets face it currently there is more than two million Muslim votes, and how many representatives do these Muslims have? Just reading any paper gives you an idea of the degrees of persecution these people come under, yet, there seems to be no reaction, other lying down and taking the abuse coming forth from the Muslim community, ever asked why?