Originally Posted by
Iolo/Penderyn
Nobody stole anything except your brain. silly child.
To Iolo/Penderyn: Asshole. I doubt if you know what and who you defending.
Stunning Facts: Lord Mark Malloch Brown, a George Soros lieutenant, whose company Smartmatic, is intimately tied to Dominion Voting Systems who flipped votes from Trump to Biden. Brown was also named UN #2 – Deputy Secretary General on March 3rd, 2006, and also former VP of the World Bank. His machine was used in all the swing states. Could this help explain the MI 200,000 vote sudden dump of Biden ballots, while WI got 100,000 late night delivery?
How did a close George Soros associate , a Quantum Fund VP, who lived in his NYC apartment get accepted for crucial voting machinery?
Soros Minion: How did a close George Soros associate , a Quantum Fund VP, who lived in his NYC apartment get accepted for crucial voting machinery? Especially after Soros’ unrelenting attack on the US justice system by funding leftist DAs? Brown was concurrently Vice-Chair of Soros Fund Management & Vice-Chair of Open Society Institute. Is Lord Brown George Soros’ favorite lieutenant?
Agent Provocateur Brown: So, what kind of person is Lord Brown? He secretly advances Soros’ goals. An adviser to billionaire Beny Steinmetz, Brown ruthlessly used his position to relay confidential information to Soros about Steinmetz’ company to ruin a business deal. Brown was sued and fined €90,000. Brown is also Anti-Brexit and a climate zealot. When criticized about his friendship with Soros, and living on his colossal farm, Brown claimed he was “doing God’s work.”
Failed Vote Software Company: Dominion is associated with vote disasters, “Dominion “got into trouble” with several subsidiaries it used over alleged cases of fraud. One subsidiary is Smartmatic, a company “that has played a significant role in the U.S. market over the last decade,” according to a report published by UK-based AccessWire. Litigation over Smartmatic “glitches” alleges they impacted the 2010 and 2013 mid-term elections in the Philippines, raising questions of cheating and fraud. An independent review of the source codes used in the machines found multiple problems.”
Smartmatic & Dominion Failures: Bloomberg criticized computer voter machines and software as inherently flawed in 2019. CBS News reported in 2019, “The voting machine lobby, led by the biggest company, ES&S, believes they are above the law,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. They have not had anybody hold them accountable even on the most basic matters.” Another concern is foreign ownership, and passive investors – like possibly Soros. Smartmatic’s figures were manipulated by 1 million votes in its 2017 Venezuela vote. Dominion failed in 2018 GA, but was retained, and failed again in GA and switched 6,000 ballots in MI this election, while PA, NV, AZ, WI, MN all used this. In 2019, GA citizens petitioned to have Dominion Voting Systems removed, as it failed in 2018 NV.
E-Voting Companies Run by Foreign Sociopaths?
“Elaborate election systems benefit company profit far more than taxpayers & voters paying for them.”
CONCLUSION: E-Voting Companies Run by Foreign Sociopaths? What do we really know about our voting machines and software? Hardly anything. For example, if a voting program was designed to throw 3% of the ballots to the opponent, how could that be detected? Writes the UK Guardian: “The fact is that democracy in the United States is now largely a secretive and privately-run affair conducted out of the public eye with little oversight. The corporations that run every aspect of American elections, from voter registration to casting and counting votes by machine, are subject to limited state and federal regulation. The companies are privately-owned and closely held, making information about ownership and financial stability difficult to obtain. The software source code and hardware design of their systems are kept as trade secrets and therefore difficult to study or investigate.” Let’s go back to hand written ballots and use electronics as a backup. That’s the only safe way versus electronic records.
Round Brown is not new to me. I posted messages about Brown for close to 20 years. I will start in 2006:
The late Robert Novak et al. had Mark Malloch Brown pegged in 2006. Ten years before Democrats got pissed off at James Comey none other than Goofy Annan’s Deputy Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown:
“. . . was injecting himself into the next American presidential election.
This from a message in 2003:
Where did the 40 b. go?
Maybe a better question is: Why is the U.S. giving more money to the U.N. for Iraqi humanitarian aid when the charity hustlers already have 40 billion dollars of Iraq’s money? The following excerpt from a NY Times article I got on the Drudge Report prompted my title question:
''On the humanitarian side, we want to save lives no matter what,'' said Mark Malloch Brown, director of the United Nations Development Program. ''When it comes to reconstruction, that's crossing a different Rubicon. We can't be authorized by a subcontract of the U.S. government. We have to be authorized by the Security Council.''
I was onto Brown when I posted this message before the 2000 elections. It is followed by something I got from Rush Limbaugh’s website.
Not long before the November 2000 election, the U.N. held its Millennium Summit which drew the usual suspects. The protesters who were demonstrating outside U.N. headquarters in Manhattan were protesting for a stronger U.N. Nobody was demonstrating to get rid of the U.N. Those protestors all said the same thing when you get right down to it: The U.N. is not doing anything to solve the problems of the world; so lets make it stronger. What a foul stratagem those demonstrations were. Mrs. Clinton, then engaged in her run for the U.S. Senate, would have been out there leading the troops except that the objective would have been too obvious — unlimited U.N. funding guaranteed by binding legislation.
As for Secretary General Goofy Annan: He used the Summit to challenge “world leaders” into “giving” billions of people a better life in the 21st century. He was not talking about billions of dollars — he was talking hundreds of trillions of dollars because that is what it would take to give billions of people meaningful charity. Just one bowl of soup a day for two billion people, at a dollar a pop, amounts to $730 billion dollars a year. The American taxpayer’s tab will be 23% of whatever the U.N. spends if American Communists get it their way. That is 167 billion 900 million dollars a year for starters —— and that is without counting the cost of the soup bowls.
Also, there are six billion people in the world; so assuming that Goofy means only two billion people should be put on global welfare, that figure amounts to one third of the world’s population. Since Goofy used the plural of billion he could have meant three or four billion people, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt on this one and go with two billion. In any event, it is all moot because no matter how much money the ol’ Goofer wants, it sure as hell will not go to the poor in Third World countries. Any country that gives money to the U.N. could save a few bucks in administrative costs by simply depositing the dough in numbered Swiss bank accounts. That is where most of it will end up anyway.
And this message from 2003:
Response To UN Weasel
Hanson's Response To UN Weasel
April 4, 2003
I urge you to read Victor David Hanson's piece in the National Review Online dealing with the failures of our NATO allies in Europe - with the exceptions of the UK, Spain, Denmark, Italy and some others. He chronicles how the failures of France and Germany have damaged the world, and how this war presents the greatest opportunity we've ever had for a worldwide re-alignment of nations. This brings me to Mark Malloch Brown, head of the United Nations development program.
Brown said that the U.S. "would have little choice but to return to the United Nations in establishing a post-conflict Iraq administration, stressing that the U.S. has no international right to take over Iraq's royal industry and warning the rebuilding costs would far exceed current oil revenues." He claims the U.N. has set the goal of halving world poverty by 2015, which must mean they are going to spread capitalism. That is the system that is given the most prosperity to the greatest number of people.
The U.N. wants us to sign up for Kyoto and the international criminal court so that they can bring us down, not raise the rest of the world up - which is why you can guarantee they'll blame us when their anti-poverty program fails. We're the cause of everything bad in the world, because we take so much (never mind we feed and clothe the world) of the resources - which is the belief of the Democratic Party leadership in this country. That's why they ally with France, German and Russia who have now "demanded" that we let them in on rebuilding Iraq.
Victor David Hanson's piece provides a perfect response of this U.N. clown: "The United Nations has lost its soft spot in the hearts of Americans, and is more likely to appease dictators than aid consensual governments. The general-secretary should be scrambling madly before the armistice to win our good graces — never has American support for the U.N. been lower, even as a U.N. resolution has never been better enforced at almost no cost to its general membership." That's right, and it dovetails with Congressman Mark Kennedy (R-MN) banning France, Germany, Russia and Syria from participating in rebuilding Iraq. You guys had your chance to get in on the liberation, and your opposition cost us more blood. You're out.
As soon as I read that Mark Malloch Brown claimed that the U.N. has set the goal of halving world poverty by 2015, I immediately thought of my post where Annan challenged world leaders into giving billions of people a better life. Now it seems to be set in cement that the U.N. is entitled to the money even though I do not recall anyone taking up Goofy’s challenge. Goofy shakes the can, then less than three years later the U.N. is claiming all sorts of authority over the U.S. in the U.N.’s phoney claim on Iraq and its oil.
According to the U.N., the U.S. has no legal authority over Iraq’s oil but the U.N. does. And the U.N. has their illegitimate clowns in The Hague ready to backup its claim. The U.N.’s main problem is that the U.S. has its military to backup its plan to rebuild Iraq without the U.N. having a say. Let s not forget that Americans did not liberate Iraq for its oil, or for any of the reasons we are being accused of, nor do we want to stay in Iraq any longer than is necessary to get a decent representative government up and running.
Incidentally, the Socialists running the Democratic party have complained bitterly about not knowing the cost of the war, the occupation, and so on. Since it is the Democrat party’s announced candidates for the 2004 presidential race who are such big supporters of the U.N., how about some numbers on the costs involved in the U.N.’s grandiose plans to halve poverty by the year 2015? I will even settle for a people number rather than a dollar amount. If they will tell us exactly how many people they want to put on global welfare, I can work out my own costs from there. I would also like to know if halving poverty means that half of the poor people will be given welfare? Or does it mean that everyone considered to be in poverty now will only be half in poverty by the year 2015? And when can we expect the other half to be saved?
When U.N. charity hustlers smell a buck, as they do in Iraq, I can only paraphrase the late astronomer Carl Sagan (1934-1996) talking about the stars —— trillions and trillions and trillions. Sometimes I have to laugh because those characters at the U.N. would make a brass monkey cringe if it ever came down to a balls contest.
Reply With Quote
Verified User
Stealing Six States Is Petty Larceny
Posting Rules
Bookmarks