Whatofthenight.com

And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger

2020 Election Fraud


I was in my men’s group just before the New Zealand’s 2014 election. A group of upper middle class traditional Anglican men with an average of about 50. The question was asked who are you going to vote for and we went around the room. 60% said Conservative, 20% said National and the rest undecided. This very much took me by surprise as if this group was typical then the conservatives should be showing much higher in the polls. If this question was asked at a Baptist, Pentecostal or an Apostolic church the percentages of Conservative voters would be much higher. 16 to 18 percent of New Zealanders attend church at least once a month and would consider themselves spirit filled Christians. This should therefore equate to 10% of the vote and there are many non-Christians who also voted Conservative. Why did the election result say they only got 4% when some simple maths say they should have got 14% or more? Is someone changing the voting results and if so how. I believe that the Electoral Commission has been compromised. That small parties are having their votes reduced so they look like they have no chance of getting into power. However, it shows up two ways. Firstly, that we are seeing a fall in the total vote and secondly, because there are four to five hundred thousand Christian voters the figures for Christian parties end up clearly ridiculous.

I had heard of other examples from around the world accusations of vote changing in computerised systems. USA, Cananda, UK, Ireland and Spain to name a few.

I thought I would look at some of the history of voting in New Zealand since the change to MMP and the Christian parties that have come and gone. The first Christian party to make an appearance was the Christian Heritage Party. They were not well received by Christians in general and there was much debate as to whether there should even be a Christian party. They receive around 2% of the vote in the 1993 election. The last first past the post, election.

The next election saw them team up with other Christians to form the Christian Coalition. They received 4.3% of the vote. The total turnout was 88% a disappointing turn out considering it was a new system and the vote had had a 94% turn out just 9 years earlier. Many Christians were still stuck in traditional voting habits but it still looked about 3 or 4 % below what it should have been. It looked light from a Christian voter perspective and an overall turn out perspective. This is the same time that the UK elections started to get a fall off in votes and strange results.

The 1999 election saw two Christian parties. Christian Heritage and Future New Zealand. Together they received 3.7% of the vote. This was also disappointing as Labour led coalition was certain to get into power with a number of antifamily and antichristian policies. Christians were becoming more aware of the voting system and who to vote for. There was also a move by tradition Christian labour voters to other parties. The vote should have increased but fell. At the same time the total vote fell from 88% to 84%.

The 2002 election was interesting, Future New Zealand team up with Peter Dunne’s United party. This was not well advertised and many Christians were unaware. Also Mr Dunne did not have a good reputation outside of his electorate. Yet this party of odd bedfellows managed to get 6.7% of the vote. A 5% increase from the Christian vote. Christian Heritage with Grahame Capill as a popular leader was still around and picked up 1.2% of the vote as well. National had put up an uninspiring candidate for Prime Minister meant it was a good chance for non-Christian voters to vote for a minor party. The vote for minor parties was unbelievably low when you would expected an increase. Interestingly the total vote fell to 77%. The vote fixing seemed to be aim at minor parties in general.

2005 was much the same with about 8% of the vote missing. The vote for the Destiny Party was extremely low. Even though Brian Tamati had many critics he still stood for Gods principles. His television show had sound doctrine and was quite popular. 14500 votes was overkill by those adjusting the figures. For all of the criticism Brian has suffered he has still brought more souls into the Kingdom of God than all of his critics put together.

2008 saw National get back into power. We still see 8% of the votes missing. What was interesting this election was a surprise drop in votes for NZ First? Who conveniently fell below the 5% mark and allowed National to get in. There was no Christian party as such. Some had Christian principals.

2011 saw the emergence the Conservative party who targeted the half million Christian voters. They managed to get just 2.65% of the vote. A disappointing result but what you saw was a 5% drop in the total vote from 79 to 74%. We are now missing 12 to 14% of the vote

2014 had the most interesting election on record. Our best ever turnout was 94% and by rights this election should have matched it. We got 77% that is 17% of the vote not counted. If as I suggested at the start of this article 66% of Christians voted for the Conservative and another 2% of non-Christians also voted Conservative then we are looking at a result of 14%. That still leaves 8% still missing. David Cunliffe had his backing from the unions and had a socialist agenda. This made Labour a target of the adjustments. A 2.5% drop in votes ensured he lost but if he had retained that 2.5% we could easily have a socialist Government now. A 2.5% adjustment fits in well with the missing votes. These villains who are manipulating our election results are getting bolder each election but they take a massive risk targeting Labour. They have the feet on the ground to expose this fraud.

Actually if you stop and think about it it’s obvious that the vote counting process, if computerised, would be a target for hackers. If it is someone in authority with a vested interest then it would be very easy. With it being so easy it means that the amount of outfits capable of doing this would be extensive.

Hopefully, at the next election we can do something about this fraud. The votes are counted at each electorate. They then enter these figures into a central computer or phone them to someone who enters them in at the Electoral Office. It is at this point that they are adjusted. It would probably not be by Electoral workers as there are too many people. Someone is getting in though a back door and adjusting the results from elsewhere. Because it is done by subtracting votes it could well be done by a small virus. If a copy of each polling booths result is collected and sent to the parties then the totals can be cross checked. This would make it very difficult to cheat.

This is not a problem peculiar to New Zealand. This is how they fixed the elections in the counties mentioned already plus Greece and Ukraine. How they adjusted the vote in Scotland on independence to the opposite of what the independent polls were showing. However this simple view shows there is something rotten at the Electoral Office. The recent election in the UK got a result that was contrary to the polls by a long way. Conveniently the conservatives got in with 51% of seats. Do you hear alarm bell because I do.

One scary little set of figures to finish off with. There are 3.5 million people illegible to vote in NZ. About 90% register which takes us to around 3.2 million and 77 percent voted. That’s 2,446 million votes. Because Christian’s are law abiding I would suggest a minimum of 95% would vote. That’s 95% of the 18 percent of the 3.5 million totalling around 600,000 (3.5*.18*.95). That’s around 25% of votes cast which makes my figures very conservative.

It is not who you vote for that counts but who counts the votes.