Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

So OK, we have no proof, no concrete proof of deeper nefarious workings and anecdotal is notoriously dangerous when the sample size is so small. Do you think that just because we’re suspicious, we’re then going to wildly jump to unsustainable conclusions?

And yet, up and down the land, people are reporting the same thing – that the UKIP vote does seem strange in places, not to mention the voter turnout.

Take commenter Wolfie’s example:

vote does not correspond

My wife is surprised by the result in our constituency. Everyone she knows said they were voting UKIP yet they only got 4000 votes while the Tory token ethnic they just planted here as a safe seat got 60% of the vote.

While I’m not surprised at a loss it seems too low.

And then he adds:

The turnouts everywhere seem so unusually high.

It’s a good question to ask just how they would have achieved fraud and my answer is – just how would the Exit Poll, twice now, have been so uncannily accurate when the professional polls were so askew?

Let’s take this one step further and obviously I’ll need to choose my words carefully, as it’s messing with The Man.  There is a point where dirty pool is one thing – and the Tories are quite capable of that and the papers, in praising their campaign mastermind, have admitted that.

That’s one thing.  Sheer illegality is another and let’s go even further – illegality by the body entrusted with fairness – the Electoral Commission.

The relevant point is at 1.12 in the clip:

There are strict laws on copyright in this country and the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) wades into these things, e.g. on 26th May, 2012, plus other regulatory bodies – all the Of- designations – wade in too. And they demand scrupulousness.

Now you tell me how that at 1.12 showed scrupulousness – Caesar’s wife – and tell me how the Darlington issue and the way it was handled was scrupulous:

Darlington Council has two options – to try to contact the 89 voters and call them back or proceed with the election as it stands with the 89 votes counting.

Due to doubts that all 89 would be contactable the council has chosen the second option.

And this:

Darlington Borough Council leader Bill Dixon said he was unaware of any problems. Ada Burns, Darlington Council chief executive, said: “We have taken advice from the Electoral Commission and are confident that the election can go ahead as normal. “The turnout so far has been excellent and the message is to keep voting.”

There is a thing called lack of due diligence and then there is an enormous bloody lie in which many people are involved.  It really would take a huge tacit agreement to go along with something which the supervisors in the booths call “fair” but you’d do it if you thought it was in the name of “fairness”.

How did CCHQ know, at 11.35 p.m., exactly how many votes Farage would lose by next morning, with the verification of votes only at 7 a.m. and the count thereafter, with the announcement at 11 a.m.?  How, eh?

I repeat – the verification did not take place pre-11.35 p.m.

Commenter Chuckles sounds a word of caution though and it is well worth looking at this Twitter link:

Interesting how the press are completely unable to step outside their own prejudices and take a wider view. The circle jerk reporting of how the polls were completely wrong, what a Cons triumph/landslide/victory it is etc etc.

At 11 or so [Election] night Nigel Farage sent out a tweet that none of them understood –

https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/596434882290708481

i.e. the huge across the board gains that UKIP made everywhere opened the road for the conservatives to get their majority. The UKIP gains from Labour and Lib Dems were quite extraordinary, not that that counts for anything in a UK election.

Pause and reflect on that and then maybe on this:

The study by think-tank Policy Exchange predicts that there could be as many as 13 million errors on the electoral roll at May’s general election in seven months’ time.

In 2005, there were approximately seven million errors on the electoral register compared to between 13 and 15.5 million in 2011 and 2014.

Missing papers, postal voting, expat reports – it goes on.  We have had the discussion many, many times about out-and-out illegality but then there is sheer incompetence covering for illegality, in the sense that if you use cut-price bolts in a spaceship, it will fail and crash, though those who approved that did not exactly try to crash it.

CCTV chose that very moment on 7/7 to fail – it had been fine before, it was fine after.

Moving on, the timing of the rise of Sturgeon – the desired result was that DSK Wee Alex would not succeed, would step down and the groomed Lagarde Sturgeon would be ready to assume the mantle, then carrying 56 from 59 Scottish constituencies.

Who is she?  Explore it, explore her Marxist roots for yourself.  She is a classic Common Purpose profile – something nasty in the upbringing, turned to rampant socialism, never grew out of it, is twisted in some way, like Catherine Ashton, like Harman [and her delectation for PIE].

These aren’t wild words, they’re verifiable words.

To rephrase all this – it’s one thing being able to read the political marketplace and as Etienne Davignon was quoted as saying – they’re just good talent spotters – no dispute there, they play blinders. It’s their life’s work, so why not?  Stacking the deck with your own regulators, insider traders and the well-placed phone call are one thing.

Outright fraud is another.

The EU and big business needed a Tory majority.  The people supposedly delivered it for them.

3 comments for “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  1. May 9, 2015 at 11:44 am

    I agree wholeheartedly James, something rotten in the state of Denmark.
    The biggest question for me was the Farage count.
    Also despite registering to vote an having sorted the issue of “other names” on the register at our property we still received a postal vote for someone we had never heard of, and who to our knowledge has never lived at our address…strange… we returned it, but , who knows.
    The there was the story of the dead man standing for election… http://rt.com/uk/256937-dead-candidate-lib-dem/

  2. The Jannie
    May 9, 2015 at 9:10 pm

    “Due to doubts that all 89 would be contactable the council has chosen the second option.” Total bollox. The way notes are taken at the polling station desk would make it possible to trace them. I doubt if it would take 24 hours.

  3. Budvar
    May 10, 2015 at 1:54 am

    Thing is, it doesn’t need a big conspiracy of election officials to rig an election. Now if it was me, I would look at where the weak link in the chain was, in this case, the travelling of the ballots from the polling station to the count. Van turns up at polling station, seals applied etc, it’s locked in the van, candidates follow van to count, at the count the van is unlocked and out comes the ballot box….Only it isn’t the ballot box that went in, but another that’s been primed with the results you want. Who would know?

Comments are closed.