Mark Crispin Miller is professor of media studies at New York University and the author of the book: Fooled Again, How the Right Stole the 2004 Elections. He is known for his writing on American media and for his activism on behalf of democratic media reform. His books include Boxed In: The Culture of TV, Seeing Through Movies, and Mad Scientists, a study of war propaganda. Miller writes in his book, Fooled Again, that the 2000 U.S. Presidential election and 2004 U.S. Presidential election were “stolen”. Miller presents extensive documentation, backed by 56 pages of notes, supporting his contention that the outcome of both elections was altered and controlled by a small minority. He states that the American voting populace can no longer assume that their votes will be accurately assessed, and that the installation of electronic voting machines in state after state is a fundamental flaw in the U.S. electoral system. He appeared in the 2004 documentary Orwell Rolls in His Grave, which focuses on the hidden mechanics of the media, its role as it should be and what it actually is, and how it shapes (to the point of almost controlling) U.S. politics. He is a signatory to the 9/11 Truth Statement … (full text).
Mark Crispin Miller is professor of media studies at New York University and the author of the book: Fooled Again, How the Right Stole the 2004 Elections. He is known for his writing on American media and for his activism on behalf of democratic media reform. His books include Boxed In: The Culture of TV, Seeing Through Movies, and Mad Scientists, a study of war propaganda. (Carolyn Baker.net).
Another Bio on NYU.edu.
Mark Crispin Miller – USA
The video: Mark Crispin Miller – Elections: Fooled Again, 80 min, April 4, 2007.
Obama’s Election Too big to steal? + Addendum, October 29, 2008.
He says: “The Right will steal the next one too – unless we stop them” … and: “The integrity of our elections is certainly not a partisan concern or a left-right issue, but a civic matter of immeasurable importance. If we aren’t free to vote our representatives and leaders in and out of office, we really aren’t free at all, whether we declare ourselves as Democrats, Republicans or independents” … and: “Big brother is you, watching” … (on wikipedia /Quotes).
Votelaw: Edward Still’s blog on law and politics, October 21, 2008.
Citizens face major problems when polling machines malfunction, October 28, 2008.
Online video: Mark Crispin Miller with Bill Moyers interview, 15 min. See also its transcript on the same page.
Find him and his publications on wikipedia /Bibliography; on Google Video-search; on inauthor Google-search; on Google Book-search; on Google Scholar-search; on Google Group-search; on Google Blog-search.
Early Voting Sees Reports of Voter Intimidation, Machine Malfunctions, October 22, 2008.
He says also: ““If this movement were to be given a name, I think it would be most appropriate to call it Christo-Fascism, and if anyone objects to my using the word fascism, because it seems so redolent of the Axis powers, and after all we valiantly defeated fascism once, well understand this about fascism: when it arrives it never shows up in the discarded costume of some other country, and when fascism comes here, it’s not going to be wearing a toothbrush mustache with a luger in his belt and go goose-stepping around the mall, because that’s Germany. And it’s precisely characteristic of fascism, that it seems absolutely, totally expressive of the homeland; it seems completely familiar, it’s when 150% America puts a flag on its lapel and a cross around its neck and a real folksy way a talkin’. But just because it’s red, white and blue, doesn’t mean it’s American.” – Mark Crispin Miller, A Patriot Act … (on wikipedia /Quotes).
Then he says: … “Yes, there were foreign observers here, and I spoke to the two who tried to monitor the polling places in Ohio. They were not allowed within 100 yards of the polling place by Secretary of State Blackwell. But there were only 11 two-man teams for the whole nation. The fact of the matter is, they weren’t really allowed to see anything. This raises a much more fundamental question: you said the Democrats were prepared for shenanigans, but in an important sense they weren’t prepared at all. Because the Democratic Party refused, and continues to refuse, to face the threat posed by electronic machines. [And that threat] is imperceptible and undetectable fraud. That’s the beauty of it. So what did they do? They flooded the polling places with Ohio and Florida lawyers, standing around looking suspicious; but what good could that do? I talked with Kerry myself three years ago when he was one of the candidates for the Democratic nomination and I tried to urge him to pay attention to the machines. It had no effect on him and the Party refused to face it and it still does. So, no, they weren’t prepared. The fact is, they were grossly unprepared. And that Kerry could have allowed himself to be talked into conceding the next day is clear evidence that they’re in complete denial” … (full long interview).
And he says: … “Well, election theft is a two-part process. On the one hand is vote suppression. The purpose of vote suppression is to shrink the electorate before the fact. In the last four years or so they have moved somewhat away from fraudulent manipulation of ballots cast toward grand pre-emptive tactics meant to prevent people from voting in the first place. So within the realm of vote suppression, they have managed to purge literally millions of names from the voter roles. In New York state alone, we learned last week, 1.5 million voters have been purged without their knowledge. That’s New York; it’s not even a swing state. There was a report, I think on Daily Kos, that the Justice Department has managed to effect the purge of 13 million votes. I don’t know how many of those are legitimate purges because a lot of peoples’ names shouldn’t be on the list because they’re dead or something. But between legal purges conducted by the Department of Justice and illegal purges of the electronic voter roles carried out by various partisan secretaries of state, and voter caging and other tactics, they’ve managed to do a great deal to shrink the pool of voters who would vote against McCain. That kind of thing will require a lot of fighting and amassing evidence which means that there’s got to be a lot of video interviews, polls, phone calls placed to the hotlines-what I’m saying is that this grand stroke of dis-enfranchisement before election day has to be exposed and evidence thereof collected and made available. But that’s not the only thing you do when you steal an election. You also engage in electronic fraud. Here, we have the testimony of an incredibly important person named Stephen Spoonamore who is the star witness in a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation in Ohio. He’s a conservative Republican and a former McCain supporter, but most importantly, he is a prominent expert in the detection of computer fraud … (full interview).
Finally he says: … Ultimately, though, it is the machine itself that’s in command, acting through those workers. They let themselves become the media’s own media–the instruments whereby the system does its thing. I finally learned this when I studied the Gulf War, or rather, the TV spectacle that we all watched in early 1991. There was a moment on the war’s first night when Ron Dellums was just about to speak against the war. He was on the Capitol steps, ready to be interviewed on ABC–and then he disappeared. They cut to something else. I was certain that someone, somewhere, had ordered them to pull the plug because the congressman was threatening to spoil the party. But it wasn’t that at all. We looked into it and found the guy who’d made that decision, which was a split-second thing based on the gut instinct that Dellums’ comments would make bad TV. So that was that–a quick, unconscious act of censorship, effected not by any big conspiracy but by one eager employee. No doubt many of his colleagues would have done the same. And that, I think, is scarier than any interference from on high … (full long interview).
Lies in a Time of Threat: Betrayal Blindness and the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election, by Eileen L. Zurbriggen, University of California, Santa Cruz, 8 psf-pages;
2004 United States election voting controversies;
Mother Jones (magazine);