Surprise: U.S. Mulling How to Delay Nov. Vote in Case of Attack
 

I don't know why this doesn't surprise me...
Maybe the risks of attack will rise in rapport to the polls showing Bush going down....


Or will election in America be similar to the one in Baghdad: one candidate only ... :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...tion_terror_dc

Third time I've read essentially the smae story. When will this trickle out to mainstream media? It's scary as all hell

I don't think it would be wise to go ahead with elections if we suffer a major attack like it's being talked about.
And considering they plan on taking out 1 or both candidates :2 cents:

Your statement has historical roots - unfortunately.

hahhahahhahahha

omg they can't pull this one off, can they?

How do you stay in power longer than you should? You declare a State of Emergency. That's how Hitler made himself King Dictator or whatever the hell he made himself.

So they wait until they "win" the war and they sway the people back to their side, THEN they let them vote. How diabolically evil. You can't write a story this good.

Try reading this in a new light:
"Homeland Security Department spokesman Brian Rochrkasse told the magazine the agency is reviewing the matter "to determine what steps need to be taken to secure the election." "

Secure may not mean to make the election safe, it may mean WINNING the election..

Funny how much power Al-Qaeda have all of a sudden. Now they can actually delay US elections.

Can we say that Osama Bin Laden is Bush's number one fan, and he will go to any steps necessary to ensure that Bush is re-elected?

See today's post I made about Doonesbury.

:1orglaugh

Nice :thumbsup

well I can't say if this is a good thing or bad... I mean think about it what if early on election day a few car bombs go off around the country at voting booths. That would defiantly stop people from going to vote could affect the out come.. It dosen't have to be a major attack like on 9-11.


However I don't want Bush in office another day, but the race is so close right now the election could come down to a few hundred votes just like the last one.

But let's see the positive side:

Democracy now exists in ... IRAQ

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Just need IRAQ to invade ( liberate ) the US and were are back to square one....

Last one was not about votes ...

take em both out.

anarchy in the us.

that should get rid of all the shite genes that infest that counrty.

vote natural selection!

The funny thing is rush limbough and/or other right wingers were speculating that bill clinton would pull something off so he could serve 3 terms. Now they are claiming that clinton doesn't want kerry to win so that hillary can be president. :1orglaugh

Did they vote on their current leader? I thought he was selected by the American govt?

The United States Government has emergency plans to cover everything. I'm sure this is a step taken every four years, only now it's getting more press because it's more of a reality.

Some time ago it was released that Bush asked for plans to invade Iraq long before it was even seriously considered. What wasn't released to the general public is that the US has plans to invade every country, including Mexico and Canada, in the "event of an emergency".

I'm not sure about you guys, but I know that I have plans to cover all bases in the adult industry. What would happen if credit card billing was become illegal in the US, or if porn sites were to suddenly become illegal in the US? Thus, you make plans for such events and take certain actions to protect yourself in the even of an emergency. This is no different.

If car bombs was to go off in Washington DC on the morning of election day I don't think it would change much. Perhaps the voter turnout would be a bit smaller. Doesn't matter - you vote for one idiot or another.

But he was selected by a democratically elected George Dubya, so it MUST be fair... :evil-laug

considering the last attack closed off numerous institutions [buildings, offices, airports, roads, schools k-XX, tv, radio, etc] i dont see how an election could happen if it WASNT postponed. might as well go a step further and say bush is planning an attack to delay the election and attempt to gain backlash votes.

/puts on tinfoil hat :2 cents:

It would give Bush & Co. a reason to pull some sort of election postponing due to terrorist activity in the U.S. ..

And I can see that very thing 'conveniently' happening..

Since federal elections are mandated by the US constitution, wouldnt it take a constitutional ammendment to "legally" change the dates of elections? Guess in war times it doesnt matter. All constitutional freedoms go right out the window in the search for the "good" of the people.

nope, i believe its ok. weather is one example that has previously been a threat.

It does not surprise me either...as they would be derelict in their duty if there was not a contingency plan.

Clinton got rid of Dean no problem. If Hillary wants to run in 2008 then Kerry has to loose.

Special this week tinfoil hats 5.95 plus shipping.

:Graucho

There used to be a provision in our legislation that stated in times
of war elections can be postponed. That was removed a long time ago, but that does not mean it can not be brought back. News likes this needs to be mainstreamed to the public and then I doubt that it would pass; but who knows.

It is being reported in mainstream media...print and TV.

Every time he tries something, I think, "No, they would never let him do that." But then they do, and he does.

:1orglaugh