Archive | 2017 French Presidential Election RSS feed for this section

France there is still time! Coalition of Opposites or Unification of the Resistance

1 May

Vive la résistance!

response submitted (2017 05 01 11h21 UTC-05:00) to the Saker article: “France’s Melenchon to serve as Le Pen’s Minister of Finance

Can ‘democracy’ re-invent itself and save society from the otherwise impending collapse?
I agree with the direction of the article:

“… shouldn’t – Melenchon work with Le Pen for the good of France if she is willing to make this political horse trade in return for his support? …”

In fact, Le Pen has a historic opportunity, she can actively recruit all, the non-mainstream candidates, and negotiate overall target policy, thus forming an actual coalition, to represent the majority, and working the mechanics of (so-called) democracy to attain (what you and I must agreed upon is ‘required’) change, within the system.

Antiquated polar political ideology references are obsolete and divisive, let’s leave them behind.
This ‘left’ and ‘right’ labeling is a tool being used to confuse and divide the opposition to the agencies of ‘the empire’, in each nation-state branch office.
What is critical is the formulation of policy elements from all of the non-‘mainstream’ candidates, which redress the social structures favouring the elite 0.1% at negative sum gain to the 99%.
Averting the insane march to WWIII that the elite 0.1% is now pursuing, should be a clear, definitive ‘slam-dunk’ with the people, who understand, even if only at a sub-conscious level, that the 99.9% will only get catastrophic negative outcomes from any global war.

Le Pen must know that clinging to repugnant dysfunctional ideological policy platform-components will disable her candidacy.
That being said, she doesn’t want to disillusion her base.
Yet, at the core of the Le Pan and Mélenchon policies, there seems little conflict, though certainly, on the core issue of immigration, work needs to be done, and compromises on both sides made.

But let’s not lose sight of the most significant policy objective, emancipation from the global hegemony, ruled by competing faction among the 0.1%!

Check out this link:

https://cooperatiedevrijemedia.nl/real-big-money-revelations-by-an-insider-video/

 

Advertisements

The Line Must Be Drawn – communications lines need to be established!

30 Apr

French flag over-layed on French electoral map

2017 April 30th

The 2017 French Presidential Election is a case study in demonstrating how factions of the 0.1% manipulate the determination of prime ‘elected’ policy-makers, in ‘western’, ‘first world’, ‘democracies’.
At first I was bummed out, realizing that just like in the case of the 2016 American presidential election, the ‘fix’ was made at an initial phase of the process, at a time when attention is less, and from less people. The election itself was irrelevant for the hegemony of top 0.1%, which largely controls assignment of the [all but nominal] head of state; the entire process was about keeping Bernie out.
Likewise in France, the entire process was about keeping Mélenchon out!
A clear pattern is emerging in the recent 5 years.
The manipulation is visible at the stage prior to the final balloting!

In the American election, the fix, which let us not forget, was visible to the people, during the primaries, when the DNC were actively fixing it systemically against Bernie, so that their pro-in-group candidate, Hillary would win it.

Now in the French election, it’s in the first round.

In Canadian federal elections, as with the British electoral system, the electoral process step preceding the general election is the party leader selection process, done on a party-by-party basis.  You have to be a party member to participate in this process, and the rules vary across the three main political parties.  The selection process of the party leader may take place years prior to a general election; there is much laxer scrutiny of these leadership contests.

The take-a-ways are:

  1. More people have to get involved in the process – THAT MEANS YOU!
  2. Independently validatable processes must be set up to monitor and scrutinize the party leadership selection process
  3. Processes and templates for challenging party leadership results at every challenging point*, must be devised, communicated, and readied in advance of the processes running; definitely prior to the convention, during which the final selection is made
  4. All irregularities must be challenged immediately via every challenging point and all legal means available

 

challenging points – all viable levels of legal challenge, i.e. Provincial, Federal, Federal Election, Supreme Court, etc. plus all other avenues, i.e. party governance, media/popular will, international court, etc.

Get LOUD! ~ Resistance – work for accountability at election time – France Presidential Election scam

25 Apr

Resistance Activities – The French 2017 Presidential Election scam

Flying submarines with The Saker
Reply comment to:
http://thesaker.is/le-pen-trump-arent-even-close-are-we-stuck-with-emmanuel-macr-obama/ from: claude on April 24, 2017 • at 6:09 pm UTC
As a French voter I agree with A. Mercouris’ analysis http://theduran.com/fading-le-pen-win-macron-victory-certain/, specifically his last 2 paragraphs:
“In saying this I should stress that I strongly doubt the ploy has actually fooled anyone. The reason Macron is now set to become President of France is not because anybody was genuinely fooled by the transparently false propaganda created around him. It is because a sufficiently large number of French voters willfully colluded in the deception, with the propaganda being their excuse – not their reason – for voting for Macron.
That shows that for all the talk of malaise in France there is still a sufficiently large number of French voters with a stake in the current system to preserve the status quo, thereby keeping it going at least for a while longer.”
The only thing we can hope is that future violence will not be a consequence of the acceptation of the deception.


… The only thing we can hope is that future violence will not be a consequence of the acceptation of the deception.

The entire ‘environment’ being created with the top 0.1%/sociopaths, is inevitably driving towards increased occurrences of violence.

Perhaps convincing the correctly alluded to … ” “…a sufficiently large number of French voters wilfully colluded in the deception, with the propaganda being their excuse – not their reason – … .” of the inevitability of the path, with the current trajectory, and guided by the executive branch of the top 0.1%

People have a natural fear of stepping out of the ordinary. In today’s environment, where real and fictitious fears are raining down, like psychological carpet-bombing, by competing agencies, amongst the top 0.1%, seeking to ‘get their fair share’ (gaming each other, because that is what they are, sociopathic ‘gamers’, gaming the system, and not even capable of stopping, even if the system is on the brink of collapse).

A better hope….
is to take actions to expose the grand lie, by capturing evidence of manipulations, and communicating it coherently and effectively to the “sufficiently large number of [all] …voters willfully…” colluding “…in the deception, with the propaganda…”.

These people need compassion (most of them), and assistance in unshackling them from the chains of this downloaded prison system of free thought.

Organize to identify better and more effective techniques in creating messaging that helps people out of the matrix.

The tiny minority has an almost zero probability of long term success, regardless of moral disposition.

giddyup

Get Loud – Resist the 0.1% destruction of everything!

The 2017 French Presidential Election – another fraud in the making? probably

21 Apr

2017 April 21st

Submitted as a comment at thesaker.is to the article “Champs-Elysees attack: Perfect timing, for some” at 15h50 (UTC-05:00) 2017 04 21

UPDATE: 20170425 17h10 (UTC-05:00) from: http://thesaker.is/le-pen-trump-arent-even-close-are-we-stuck-with-emmanuel-macr-obama/#comment-349016

“This petition has been created: http://www.mesopinions.com/petition/politique/commission-enquete-resultats-votes-election-presidentielle/29785


I’ve noticed several trends in the past 72 months (or so) of elections processes in G7 (plus ANZAC) nations.
1. Environmental factors, of course, as they are reported in the mainstream media, [apparently] result in candidates/parties/referendum polling outcomes to converge prior to the election timing.
2. Strange things happen during the actual voting process itself.
3. a candidate/party/referendum result is not as was (supposedly) expected by the experts, prior to voting

Now, in your article, the underlying direction is that these pre-election events have been manipulated to disfavour the ‘radical’ pro-more-equitable-living-standard candidate (for lack of a better word, this is the primary direction of the candidate, and a profession for common sense over traditional international affairs, where traditional international affairs is … a complete scam, like the EU and NATO direction towards a third world war!)

But the embedded assumption of a robust, rig-proof electoral process is in question, in my mind.

I feel like if they get it close enough, i.e. from a electorate perception management perspective, the highly-suspect polling process/reporting across this ‘western’ national subset, there are electoral process suasion mechanisms, getting better and better each running, to manipulate the electoral process to what ever the favoured candidate/party/referendum may be at the point in time.

I think we can assume that the ‘establishment’ (who/what ever they are), would prevent the pro-more-equitable-living-standard candidate from attaining power, as per your article.
I don’t think Fillon could win by fair electoral process, but he is at least in the top two preferred candidates for the ‘establishment’.
Assuming that they also consider Le Pen to be too ‘unpredictable’ to attain.

The best place to ‘get rid of’ Melenchon is in the first round, when there will be less clarity on the actual process, due to the larger number of variables and moving parts.

They (whomever they might be), would want it clear in the run-off; so, assuming (likely correctly) that Le Pen cannot win a run-off, except conceivably against Fillon, they might want her in the run-off, against Macron, the recent super-friend of the faltering middle-class republicans, so as to ‘fix-without-touching’ the run-off round.

Remember, these past contests have been more about keeping the candidate/party/referendum policy they don’t want out, more than putting in a particular candidate/party, as was the case in the US election, which was ultimately about keeping Bernie out, and had little ultimately to do with the choice between Trump and Clinton, for as hindsight is now showing us, mostly only branding differentiation, as opposed to actual policy differentiation.

Test:
1. expect a torrent of anti-Russian false-flag stories, like… supporting a border client regime in anti-LGBTQ… activities, and then link it back to Melenchon. There is probably one more they’ll let out of the bag before the election; since it is 15h00 (at UTC-05:00), it’ll have to happen pretty soon; Melenchon and Fillon to go in the first round.
2. with second round candidates Le Pen and Macron confirmed, we’d expect a switch in the mainstream media to anti-anti-immigrant material, i.e. [wordlessly assumed) Le Pen supporters bashing 30 year+ Arab immigrant women, who will have elaborate back-story development about how ‘françaises’ they were, and the wonderful things they’ve contributed to French society
3. but a good ‘terror’ incident never hurts an establishment candidate, for there is comfort in the known, and at a sub-conscious level, this may trump a longer-term visceral (potentially yet sub-conscious) yearning for change from the establishment; Macron may have differentiated himself enough (no doubt using the latest BI large data crunching statistical techniques)
4. Prediction: Macron in the run-off with a healthy margin over Le Pen, with the ongoing outrage over the gathering evidence supporting electoral fraud, in the primary, disfavoring Melenchon stiffled in the media, using the [likely unworded] ‘conspiracy theory’ dismissal technique
5. business as usual with NATO marching to war with Russia, with Macron’s reluctant admissions of ‘word order’ realities, forcing his hand….

I’m convinced there are clear trends in manipulating ‘democratic’ electoral processes, which are observable, but I’m still working on formalizing the emerging electoral process manipulation trends, at least for the prime techniques observable.
I might rant it out, incidentally, by blog at: urblurb.wordpress.com

Innoculants:
1. very, very robust, disciplined election scrutineering and reporting processes and execution; it will be tricky getting any meaningful information through the mainstream, so
2. ready alternative information distribution channels, and as close to instantaneous reporting by them
ultimately, however, lawyers will have to be involved, and immediately, to take actions to challenge the first round results
(as I write this analysis, having thought it through as I wrote, I am becoming more and more convinced of the prediction, but… it may be beatable! remember, this is France, and they can really get stuff stuck in their craugh, when they want to; I hope they’re still like that).
Due to the decrepit state of the judicial systems in the ‘first-world’ ‘western’ ‘democracies’, they move ridiculously slowly (the lawyer busy themselves with preparing large bills); so,
3. a ‘hurry-up’ legal election results disputation process needs to be prepared, and just the details finalized to launch, at multiple fronts and levels of government, as is viable under French election law.

I’m convinced the fix is in, but strangely optimistic that it could be beaten.

If you are in France, and want to take the battle to the offensive (there’s no other defense like it) ready:
1. disciplined process-driven scrutineering
2. non-traditional communications channels to broad electoral bases
3. ‘hurry-up’ legal election dispute processes, across multiple fronts and all available legal levels of challenge

4. watch and collect the data/evidence
5. communicate via established channels
6. cross the ‘t’s and dot the ‘i’s and launch legal challenges

Good luck.

France has lead the way before, (possibly due to an entrenched cultural obstinacy), it would be good to have a strike back now.

Showing it that it could be done might possibly co-ordinate the many submarines, stealthily lying in wait, across the deserts of the world.