Category Archives: GMOwar

Why it’s not too late to win Prop 37

 

WHY IT’S NOT TOO LATE TO WIN PROP 37

by Jon Rappoport

December 3, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

An email written and sent to me by Natalia Lee Gardener has offered a basic strategy for winning Prop 37, even at this late date. (chakra.yoga.bridge@gmail.com)

 

Of course, it will take some persistence and a few smarts. I’m sure the lawyers who worked for the YES ON 37 campaign have thought of it.

 

Basically, it goes this way: the NO ON 37 campaign committed fraud in their ads. They also committed fraud in statements they made in the California Voter’s Guide, which is a felony.

 

Another felony? Misappropriating the FDA seal and using it in their ads below a statement they falsely claimed was made by the FDA.

 

NO ON 37 was lying front to back. Read all about it here:

 

http://www.carighttoknow.org/documented_deceptions

 

Therefore, the election should be overturned. Voters were defrauded by false information. Votes were made against 37 based on lies spread by the NO ON 37 campaign.

 

A new special election should be held.

 

I know what you’re going to say. “If every election filled with lying statements were overturned, we’d be re-voting for every job from president to dog-catcher from now until the sun burns out.”

 

Perhaps. But let’s focus on the Prop 37 election.

 

The strategy of YES ON 37 is: let’s move on to other states and other ballots; we educated a whole lot of people in California; let’s take our fight elsewhere now.

 

Who says you can’t do two things at once? Go ahead to Washington state and mount a new GMO labeling campaign. But your lawyers? They can launch a legal campaign here in CA.

 

As Gardener pointed out to me in her email, chiropractors engaged in a long hard battle to gain proper recognition. They went all the way to the Supreme Court. They fought against very heavy odds. They played hardball. They won.

 

So why can’t the GMO-labeling forces do that?

 

And if they lose in court? They make a lot of noise and they appeal. They stir the pot. If the appeal loses, they appeal higher. They make a big deal out of this because it is a big deal. They kick ass. They act tough because they are tough. If they are.

 

I can’t tell you how many times important health-freedom issues have been lost because the people leading the good guys folded up their tents and walked away.

 

That’s always a losing strategy.

 

Why play nice with criminals? Why?

 

Being an idealist doesn’t rule out going into battle.

 

The issue is clear. The NO ON 37 forces committed fraud and felonies in their campaign. Therefore, many people voted against 37 because they bought the fraud and didn’t recognize the crimes. Therefore, we need a new Prop 37 election.

 

It’s like this. A guy sells you a bottle of medicine. He says the FDA approved the medicine. He says even the police favor the medicine. He says Stanford University and other esteemed scientific groups have praised the medicine.

 

These are all lies. But because you believe this guy, you buy the medicine. Then later, you find out he was lying wall to wall. So you take him to court.

 

Let me defuse another argument. It goes this way: “We’re succeeding. We’ve educated millions of people in CA about GMO labeling. Let’s build on that momentum and take the fight to other states and other ballot measures. If we suddenly challenge the Prop 37 election in a CA court and make a big stink about it, if we act nasty, we’ll drive away people in other states who would be on our side…”

 

Yeah, well, this makes no sense at all. Did millions of angry people in the streets during the Vietnam war have anything at all to do with ending that war? Should they have stayed home and eaten organic candy bars?

The Matrix Revealed

If the YES ON 37 lawyers show people everywhere they won’t back down from a fight, that they’ll take this all the way, they’ll gain allies. They’ll wake people up. They’ll add a new dimension to this war. A good dimension.

 

Forget all the pseudo-mystical nonsense about being nice and the universe being nice right back to you, or whatever it is that keeps people in a state of internally imposed slavery. A) The universe doesn’t work that way and B) it’s just an excuse to stay passive. In other words, it’s pure bullshit.

 

Forget the legal niceties and hair splitting over what the CA election law says about what constitutes fraud. Forget some carefully reasoned argument about why YES ON 37 stands no chance in court challenging the election.

 

That’s not the point. Don’t be a moron.

 

The point is what’s right and what’s true and what justice is.

 

Fight on that basis, and publicize the fight from one end of the planet to the other. Hold live streaming press conferences on the Web every week. Bring in Jeffrey Smith and other experts who will spell out all the dangers of GMO food, who will spell out all the lies Monsanto and the government have told about GMO food.

 

Get it?

 

GET IT?

 

Double down on the Prop 37 election.

 

USE the fraud to score victories.

 

If I’m reading the tea leaves correctly, the lawyers connected to YES ON 37 don’t want this fight. They absolutely don’t want it. (Joe Sandler, Andrew Kimbrell) But I believe some other lawyer can step up on behalf of the voters of CA and gain standing and go to court. How about you, Gerry Spence? Or do we need Bill Kunstler to rise out of his grave and start raising hell?

 

In 1982, I interviewed Bill Perry, who was the chief PR man for Lawrence Livermore Labs, where they design nuclear weapons. Bill told me the nuclear freeze campaign, which was getting off the ground, wasn’t an issue for him…until one day he saw that the protestors at the Lab fence came from all walks of life.

 

They were hippies, guys in suits, housewives, lawyers, doctors, office workers, long hairs, short hairs, no hairs. Then, he said, he knew he was on the wrong side.

 

That’s what the GMO issue can be. People from everywhere, all kinds of different people, standing together on this issue. When that is reflected on television and computer screens, then others will realize it’s a universal situation.

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

If you shop through Amazon, then consider supporting Jon’s work by doing your shopping through Jon’s Amazon referral link.

GMOs plus Obamacare: Your ticket to slavery

GMOs plus Obamacare: Your ticket to slavery

by Jon Rappoport

November 20, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

At this late date, there are still people who don’t see the consequences of Obamacare. They cling to the notion that it’s simply a wonderful system that will allow more people to get vital medical care. That’s all they see or want to see.

They agree that medical treatment has an alarming toxic track record. But they don’t want to admit that Obamacare will spread that toxicity even further.

Why are these people blind? Because they think of themselves as caring humanitarians, and they fit Obamacare right into that self-serving picture. It’s part of their “religion.”

Also, they don’t want to “be negative.”

Some day, I’m sure, being negative will get you a public decapitation in the town square.

Okay. Here we go.

The recent study which revealed that rats fed with GMOs developed cancer is just one example of the health hazards of GMO food.

The argument advanced by the Monsanto forces and their allies is: “people who eat GMO food aren’t dropping like flies, so we’re all okay.”

This is a case made by con artists for idiots.

GMO crops were originally introduced with no human safety studies. The crops were given carte blanche because the whole approval process was rigged.

People could be developing cancers as a result of eating GMO food and no one would know. People could be developing serious digestive disorders and neurological problems and no one would know.

To pursue this in detail, read Jeffrey Smith’s classic, Genetic Roulette: The Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods. Smith lays out 65 GMO health risks, with references. He also shows how safety assessments of GMO foods fall horribly short.

The GMO overlords need a cover-story-diversion for the harm their foods inflict. That cover story will, increasingly, be fashioned and sculpted by Obamacare.

Obamacare will eventually morph into a blueprint of all diagnosable diseases and disorders, and permitted treatments.

That’s what health insurance does. It assembles a comprehensive chart of what is covered by policies.

This will allow a perfect cover for the protection of “favored toxins.” In other words, when disease strikes as a result of GMOs, pesticides, other environmental chemicals, chemtrails, and so on, the medical diagnosis will fail to name the true culprits.

It’s called concealment.

Under Obamacare, who will put together that all-embracing list of permitted disease-diagnoses and treatments? The US Dept. of Health and Human Services. DHHS is a cabinet post under the president.

Therefore, the federal government (in collusion with pharmaceutical companies) will control, in great detail, the practice of medicine, and if that makes you feel warm and fuzzy, I have condos for sale on Pluto. You think the CDC and FDA are overbearing now? You haven’t seen anything yet.

Here’s a case of how this con game would function:

Let’s say a young boy suddenly develops rapid mood swings. He’s up, he’s down, he’s all over the place. He throws tantrums, then he sits in his room and won’t talk to anyone.

Unknown to him or his parents, the cause of all this bizarre behavior was GMO corn. The inserted genes in the corn provoked a massive inflammatory response, in which his immune system attacked the myelin insulation surrounding his nerves.

But the medical diagnosis, according to the Obamacare chart of allowable interpretations: Bipolar disease.

Now come the Bipolar drugs. Lithium, Valproate, with their highly destructive adverse effects—and the sanctity of GMO crops is protected.

And to take this a step further, the company that produces and sells GMO corn seeds knows all this. It knows that many people who are being diagnosed with Bipolar are actually suffering from an autoimmune reaction to the genes inserted in the corn.

They have the perfect medical mechanism for covering up their secret.

In fact, this company is not just a GMO producer. It, like other giants, is also a chemical and pharmaceutical outfit. It makes a drug used to treat…Bipolar.

The circle is complete. The secret is protected, the money rolls in through several allied channels, and only the patient suffers.

Obamacare, in one of its several heinous aspects, is a stealth operation used to conceal crimes.

If you think this is science fiction, think again. It’s already happening. Researchers are madly probing for genes that cause cancer, and their PR people, based on no solid evidence, are trumpeting the “advances.”

Meanwhile, large numbers of people are developing cancer from exposure to pesticides. But the genetic diversion takes the public’s mind away from this fact into a more esoteric area.

As of 2012, people still have the right to enter a detox program aimed at ridding the body of stored pesticide chemicals. But up the line, the day will come when the Obamacare Program will rule that out as a permitted option for all people under the umbrella of the national health insurance plan. Meaning, everybody.

This is precisely what the drug companies want, which is why they participated in crafting Obamacare in the first place.

They want to lock down the population in a pharmaceutical arena and treat them from cradle to grave with their chemical agents.

No, you don’t see the lockdown now, as Obamacare enters the mainstream, but neither did you see drones flying overhead and giant computers recording every email, phone call, and product purchase you make, back in the day when the FBI was occasionally wire-tapping a suspect after obtaining a warrant.

These thing take time, but they happen.

Back when Lyndon Jonson announced an idea called The Great Society, you didn’t see the time when the US government would be spending a trillion dollars a year on means-tested welfare, or that at least half the country would want that sum to go higher without limit.

These things take time, but they happen.

In 1985, as the first word leaked out that corporations were experimenting with genes shot into food crops, you didn’t assume that, 25 years later, the world would be covered with GMO plants and that those genes would be floating and drifting into organic life from Pole to Pole.

These things take time, but they happen.

In the early 1950s, when Ritalin first arrived on the scene, you didn’t see that this highly toxic form of speed would be prescribed by doctors to more than five million children for a condition called ADHD, for which there is no diagnostic test.

These things take time, but they happen.

In the late 1940s, when young children received one vaccine, for smallpox, you didn’t see that the day would come when the CDC would recommend an incredible 55 doses of vaccines by age six, or that no studies would be done to assess the combined toxic effects of this vaccine load, or that the government would be trying to close down exemptions from vaccines.

These things take time, but they happen.

In the 1950s, as psychiatry was beginning to use a drug called Thorazine to treat “psychotic” patients, you didn’t see that the day would come when a bible of psychiatry, called the DSM, would list 297 distinct and separate “mental disorders,” none of which were diagnosed with any physical test. You didn’t see that the federal government would back, in every way possible, the pseudo-science of psychiatry, or that leading politicians and celebrities would endorse mental-disorder diagnosis and treatment with across-the-board toxic drugs. You didn’t see that some of these drugs would push people over the edge into committing murders.

These things take time, but they happen.

The Matrix Revealed

So it will be with Obamacare, as we move ahead. It will be used to lock down the population in a toxic pharmaceutical universe, and to gradually shave away competing forms of alternative healthcare.

This is the road we’re on. If, a few years ago, you didn’t think the freedom to pursue and manage your own health, according to your own desires, was important, you’d better believe it’s important now and in the future.

If you insist on clinging to the notion that Obamacare is a wonderful, wonderful thing, almost a religious sacrament, you don’t understand how history works, how things morph into other things, how agendas control that evolution, how what looked good at one moment turned into a nightmare, later on.

And as GMOs spread and cause disease, Obamacare will function as a steel barrier against doctors diagnosing patients with GMO-caused illnesses.

“You know, when the patient came to me, I was sure he was suffering from a form of autism. But now that I look more closely, I realize it’s the insect genes in the grain he’s eating.”

“Doctor, stop this nonsense. Consult your Obamacare Bible. Nowhere in it does it say there is a disease caused by GMOs. You can’t make that diagnosis. It won’t fly. You won’t get paid if you submit that insurance form. And you’ll get into trouble. Federal agents will visit your office. They’ll put you through the mill. They’ll threaten to cancel your ticket to practice medicine.”

“That’s ridiculous. That would never happen.”

“Oh no? Do you realize that, by statute, I’m required to turn you in? That’s right. I heard you say you wanted to make a diagnosis that wasn’t permitted by the Bible. I’m supposed to call Homeland Security. If I don’t, I’m guilty, too. I’m a co-conspirator.”

Give it time. Give it time.

Or if you don’t care, shut your eyes, and contemplate loving Obamacare, just as Winston Smith finally loved the State in Orwell’s 1984.

See: Dr. Barbara Starfield, “Is US health really the best in the world?” Journal of the American Association, July 26, 2000. Starfield revealed that, every year, the US medical system kills 225,000 people. Of those deaths, 106,000 are the result of FDA-approved drugs. Under Obamacare, these numbers will escalate.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Was the YES ON 37 campaign undermined by its allies?

 

Was the YES ON 37 campaign undermined by its allies?

By Jon Rappoport

November 19, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

Before you decide I’m just making this stuff up, answer this question: do you really think food sellers like Whole Foods wanted to see hundreds, maybe thousands of their store products suddenly say “GENETICALLY ENGINEERED” on them?

 

Are you kidding?

 

Well, that’s exactly what would have happened if YES ON 37 had won.

 

With that prologue, let’s begin.

 

I’m not talking about the workers for the YES ON 37 campaign. There is no doubt the ground game was fought by honest people. But at the top level, a few “suits” relied on advice from professionals who told them there was only one way to win the vote:

 

Focus on the consumers’ right to know what was in their food.

 

That’s it. That was the biggest message.

 

Why?

 

Because the other message would have exposed the natural foods industry. And that other message was:

 

GMOs are horrible. GMO food is destructive to health, to the soil, to farmers…and, by the way:

 

The natural foods industry, which is big business in California, sells tons and tons of GMO food.

 

It’s labeled “natural.” But in a huge number of cases, “natural” contains GMOs.

 

Get it?

 

Without all that “natural” food ringing cash registers, big health-food sellers would go belly up.

 

If YES ON 37 had gone all in on a campaign to educate the people of California about the dangers of GMOs, this would have inevitably revealed that the “natural” food that people were already buying and eating was contaminated to the hilt with GMOs.

 

And that would have been bad for business.

 

There were many people at lower levels of the YES ON 37 campaign who wanted to educate the people of California about the dangers of GMO food. But they were rebuffed.

 

Face it, some big natural food sellers in America have accepted the presence of Monsanto and other GMO crocodiles as permanent fixtures in the landscape. These food sellers reason this way:

 

“We sell organic food, which is free from all but small traces of GMOs. That’s what we offer to those who don’t want GMOs. All our “natural” products? That’s GMO territory, and there is nothing we can do about it.”

 

In any election campaign, you go after the undecided vote. Everybody else has already made up their minds. In California, the undecided people were on the fence because they didn’t know why labeling GMO food was necessary. They needed to be taught.

 

But that wasn’t the major thrust of the YES ON 37 campaign.

 

People needed to know they should want labeling because eating GMO food is dangerous.

 

The people of CA didn’t get that message loud and clear. It wasn’t delivered with great energy and power.

 

And that helped the natural food industry. It helped them a lot.

 

They can continue to sell thousands of food products with “natural” labels on them, and consumers won’t know they’re eating GMOs, and consumers won’t know why that’s a very bad thing.

 

People who already understand the GMO issue and what Monsanto is doing to the planet assume millions of other people know, too. They see the YES ON 37 campaign as the first big wedge into other states and other campaigns.

 

They don’t realize how many Americans don’t have a clue about GMOs and Monsanto.

 

The big-shot suits from the YES ON 37 campaign better take a long hard look at the pollsters and advisers they’re using. When those pollsters tell them, again, in other states, to focus only on “the right to know what’s in your food,” they should stop and ask themselves:

 

Whose side are these pollsters really on?

 

And the non-organic “natural food” sellers? Whose side are they on?

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Why the Prop 37 vote-count is too perfect

 

WHY THE PROP 37 VOTE-COUNT IS TOO PERFECT

by Jon Rappoport

November 17, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

Late yesterday afternoon, I consulted a map of California counties on the secretary of state’s website. You can see it here:

 

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/maps/ballot-measures/prop/37/

 

This page has a summary of the Prop 37 vote-count so far.

 

This is an ongoing figure, because the state of California is still counting votes.

 

In the box, you’ll see YES on 37 has 5,329,994 votes. NO on 37 has 5,869,382 votes.

 

YES on 37 has 47.6% of the vote, while NO has 52.4%.

 

This is vitally important. Why? Because when the networks called the election early, on election night, a couple of hours after the polls closed, this was almost exactly the percentage breakdown they claimed existed then.

 

It’s no different from the vote percentages now: less than one percentage point.

 

Eleven days later, as millions more votes have been counted, and are being counted, these election-night percentages are still holding firm.

 

What are the odds of that happening?

 

Any sane person would demand to know how these percentage splits are being manipulated, created, invented.

 

We are led to believe the projections offered by networks on election night are astonishingly accurate, but this is a fairy tale.

 

It’s especially a fairy tale when, eleven days after Election Tuesday, when millions more votes have been counted, the percentage-splits don’t budge.

 

We know next to nothing about the people who actually make these early projections on election night. That is troubling. They are shaping the perception of the American people, and we don’t know how they operate.

 

We can say, yes, they work for Edison Media Research or the Associated Press, and they hand out early-call projections to media outlets, but beyond that, we have few clues.

 

Yet, as soon as the networks make their calls on who has won an election, everyone folds up his tent and walks away. It’s as if a magic wand has been waved, and everyone obeys.

 

These “projection gurus” do some exit polls and, poof, they predict winners. They pick the moment when they’re going to put the word out to media outlets: “it’s time to say Prop 37 lost.”

 

And then it’s over.

 

And then 11 days later, the percentage splits that existed when the media made the call, on election night, are virtually the same.

 

Only a fool drinks that Kool-Aid.

 

It’s as if these projection gurus were watching horses coming out of the gate in the Kentucky Derby. A hundred yards down the track they call the winner. Not only are they right, but their horse had a two-length lead at a hundred yards and the same two-length lead as he crossed the wire at the finish.

 

When are people going to give up their religious belief in the sanctity of elections? Are they afraid that, if they leave that church, they’re going to Hell?

 

Let’s rework PT Barnum’s famous dictum: “There are 300 million suckers born every election night.”

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Disrupting the flow of matrix virtual reality

 

DISRUPTING THE FLOW OF MATRIX VIRTUAL REALITY

by Jon Rappoport

November 15, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

Election night on planet Earth is an illustration of the virtual reality we live in.

 

A news anchor on a network, who has learned how to impart information as if it is real, who can effortlessly assume a position of earnest authority, who seems to emanate the correct amount of empathy without descending into a cloying familiarity with the audience, who can seamlessly switch from reporting to giving way to other reporters to breaking for commercial, who can listen to instructions in his earpiece while talking at the same time, who can generate exactly the right amount of enthusiasm without straining credulity, who can appear to care about what he is reporting, who can maintain a pose of neutrality:

 

Tells us what the numbers are, and:

 

When the moment is right, makes the projection of the winner and the loser, as if:

 

The information comes through to him from an unimpeachable source.

 

The anchor can hand off to an analyst who explains why the projection is correct, who points to a map to reveal the breakdown.

 

It all passes before us, and the goal is to make us accept, and by accepting, believe.

 

The system is air-tight.

 

The truth has been made known.

 

The predictive power of unseen experts is formidable.

 

But, in fact, we are watching images and listening to voices on television, and what is actually happening in voting booths, what has been happening in voting booths, and what will happen in voting booths is a mystery.

 

However, as long as we are in the flow, we sense things are all right.

 

This virtual flow is a tiny corner of the Matrix in action.

 

What would happen, though, if out of nowhere, on our television screens, we saw an egg cracking and Donald Duck crawling out of it wearing a bright pink suit holding a handful of cash?

 

Right in the middle of an election projection for a senate race in New Jersey.

 

What would happen if the face of the anchor began to drip tears of steel as he was making a call on the presidential race in Ohio?

 

What would happen if we heard the Mormon Tabernacle Choir singing, “Something is happening here, but you don’t know what it is, do you, Mr Jones,” swelling in volume, until the anchor was drowned out and we could only see his mouth working in silence.

 

This is, in fact, the sort of thing that happens when you back up and analyze where the election information is coming from and discover you don’t know.

 

You do know, however, that the channel through which it is expressed is electronic and deploys computers.

 

You know that computers are programmed to deal with millions of crumbs in certain assigned ways.

 

So it occurs to you, like a joke unfolding, that if the situation were right, those machines could spit out anything.

 

They could say Bob Dylan or James Bond had just been elected the next president of the United States. They could.

 

So you wonder how that might be done. Then you wonder how it’s actually done, to produce the name of the winner you automatically accept as genuine and true and authentic. The real-real winner.

 

Then you realize the real-real winner could be no more real than President James Bond.

 

The Matrix is very much like a hall in a painting. You walk into the painting and you’re in the hall. Having arrived in the hall, you look for a room. You find one. There are books on the shelves and a fire in the fireplace. You sit down. A man comes in and tells you it’s raining and the guests for dinner may be a little late.

 

Someone painted a picture and you walked into it and took up residence. You believed.

 

When you stop believing, you can go back into the hall and find your way out of the painting.

 

In this world of ours, exposing “a flow of the virtual Matrix” for what it is can create a domino effect. If the transmission of election results is a mere charade, then what does that imply? What other slices of Matrix flow are fabricated?

 

As you expose one segment of flow, you already sense there are others to expose. Many segments of flow are linked up.

 

If you tell people you’ve just exposed a segment of flow, they may become annoyed. They are comfortably ensconced in the whole continuum of flow, and they want to see the show. They don’t want interruptions.

 

They don’t tell you this, of course. Instead, they reach out for and grab the most convenient story and use it to reject your discovery. It doesn’t matter what that story is. They treat it as holy fact.

 

But basically, they reject what you’re telling them because you’re the Donald Duck in a bright pink suit holding a handful of cash, and they were trying to watch a wholly engrossing news anchor project the next president of the United States.

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

A call to hackers everywhere

 

A CALL TO HACKERS EVERYWHERE: TEST THE PROP 37 VOTE-COUNT

by Jon Rappoport

November 15, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

I’ve now established the most probable truth about the fate of Prop 37 in California. The election was electronically controlled.

 

See my definitive piece here:

 

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/11/14/prop-37-the-top-7-reasons-not-to-believe-the-vote-count/

 

Now, to earn a place in the white-hat hall of fame, a few very talented hackers need to prove that the California election system, the vote-counting apparatus can be hacked.

 

I’m NOT calling for anything illegal. In fact, this only works if it’s done in front of election officials and FBI agents and the FEC. In broad daylight. As it is broadcast to hundreds of millions of people around the world, online.

 

Start, I suppose, with hacking into individual vote machines. Go from there to hacking the information relayed from those machines up the line. Hack larger computers and tabulating machines in the sequence. Hack pieces of the count. Hack the whole count. Reverse election winners. Whatever can be done.

 

In no possible way do I support or countenance just hacking in privately or illegally. I want something definitive accomplished above board. I want everybody who believes we’re living in a real system to see it’s virtual, to know the networks who do the absurd early projections on election night are puppets in a parade.

 

Let’s make something clear. This isn’t some idea I came up with as an original suggestion. I’m not fomenting anything. This has been done before. Every hacker worth his salt already knows about the idea of hacking an election count. Every hacker knows, for example, about the group of Michigan computer scientists who broke into the District of Columbia’s system and reversed the mayoral race winner, fabricated absentee votes, and canceled actual votes. They did this by invitation, to prove it could be achieved.

 

Of course, the implications here go a lot farther than Prop 37. Ultimately, they call into question the whole voting system of America—or anywhere where computers are at the heart of the system.

 

Would California election officials and the FBI and the FEC permit a “teaching moment” like this? Would they cooperate in a grand experiment, publicly carried out by the best of the best?

 

If they refused, that would tell something very valuable. It would tells they’re scared. It would tell us they don’t really want the system tested to the limit.

 

How about it? Let’s cut through the crap. Let’s show what a real hacking test looks like. Let’s have the most talented among you display your stuff.

 

Naturally, certain conditions apply. We have to know this is the real California vote-count system we’re dealing with. Not some phony version. We have to know there are no tricks up anybody’s sleeve. No normal information pathways being blocked off.

 

I say, if Pentagon and Interpol and FBI and NASA systems can be hacked, the California voting system can be cracked like an egg and manipulated, without leaving obvious traces or alerting officials.

 

Right? Wrong?

 

Let’s find out.

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Who are the “experts” promoting the loss of Prop 37?

 

WHO ARE THE “EXPERTS” PROMOTING THE LOSS OF PROP 37?

by Jon Rappoport

November 15, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

You want to go inside the Prop 37 campaign? I can take you there for a peek.

The foot soldiers on the ground are flat broke. They’re exhausted, played out, they’ve spent their own money and in many case they haven’t been reimbursed. Some of them are now without homes. They’ve given everything to the cause, and they’re tapped out—psychologically, physically, emotionally, and in every other way.

They went for it in a way few people can understand. Now they see the vote projections and numbers, and they throw up their hands. If they can even think straight, after a battle like this, it’s a miracle.

Well, this is what happens in a long campaign. It’s not pretty at the end.

Thanks should go out to these people, these grassroots people who ran straight at the wall because they believed in their cause, and then finally hit the wall.

They gave their all.

But far above them, within the ranks of Prop 37, there are others who controlled the action. They’re not sweating things too badly right now. They bankrolled the campaign, in some cases. They called the shots. Most importantly, they hired the pollsters many months ago who decided how the campaign would be run.

Now we’re getting to the heart of things. These big shots hired pollsters who told them, “There is one and only one way to win Prop 37. Focus on people’s right to know what’s in their food. That’s it. Don’t focus on anything else.”

That might sound right, on the surface, but there was one very serious problem. The foot soldiers, the people who made up most of the 37 campaign, had a different view. They wanted more.

They wanted to show people how genetically modified food could injure people’s health. They wanted to educate the people of California about the whole deal. They were right to want that.

Lots and lots of people don’t know why they need to know about GMOs.

So the YES ON 37 ground troops were alienated.

They waited out in the rain while the big shots decided how the 37 campaign would be done. And those big shots are now saying—because they’ve consulted with their pollsters and other pros—that the election is lost. The numbers are impossible to reverse. “Nothing to see here, move along.”

I’ve proven how wrong that is.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/11/14/prop-37-the-top-7-reasons-not-to-believe-the-vote-count/

Right now, we’re dealing with a smokescreen that is being launched to make people believe Prop 37 is over, it’s lost, and there is no chance of it winning, as California counts the outstanding votes this month.

This smokescreen is filled with projections and numbers and percentages. “If YES ON 37 gets 62% of the remaining votes, but is trailing by 600,000 votes right now, there is no chance…”

Blah-blah.

My previous article, “Prop 37: The top 7 reasons not to believe the vote-count,” explains how this election could easily have been stolen, electronically, and why there was every reason to do it.

The “smokescreen articles” all share a common feature.

They take the votes that remain to be counted (2.3 million at my last count) and project what percentage of those votes would have to go to YES ON 37, in order to secure a victory.

Then they conclude: 66%, or 70%, or 75% of the uncounted votes would have to go YES, and they confidently say this will never happen.

They entirely miss the point. These people are entirely ignorant about electronic vote fraud.

I’ll say this for the hundredth time: the fraud isn’t simply about the votes that remain to be counted.

This is about the votes that have already been counted.

May I repeat that? Fraud is about the votes that have already been counted.

It’s about the votes that have already been counted, that are now being counted, that will be counted.

The fraud would be electronic. It’s computer fraud. It invents vote-counts. From the get-go, it invents votes and changes vote totals.

It’s virtual invented reality for the masses.

As I explained in my previous article, this kind of fraud was already an obvious possibility and, in fact, a reality in California elections. That’s why the secretary of state of CA, in 2007, ordered a “top-to-bottom” review of all electronic voting systems currently in use in the state.

And that’s why the review was done, and that’s why the review showed that four different electronic voting systems had fatal flaws.

So all this nonsense about “how many votes remain to be counted” in the Prop 37 election, and “what percentage of those votes would have to say YES ON 37”…all that is misguided and foolish and wrong-headed and irrelevant.

Of course, the people who are writing these “expert” articles and making these “expert” projections are quite sure they understand the voting game. They believe they are right on top of things.

They want to accept the premise that vote-counts and elections are on the up-and-up and honest. They are dedicated to that premise.

There are some very talented hackers out there who are laughing so hard they’re falling off their chairs.

The YES ON 37 leaders’ fatal flaw? They believed in the sanctity of the voting system. The experts who were advising them and are still advising them are guiding them in exactly the wrong direction.

When you walk into the mouth of the dragon holding a flashlight and a pint of water, to put out the fire in his mouth, there is something wrong with your premise.

The dragon is all the people and all the force that wants GMO food to reign supreme on planet Earth. Labeling food so people can know whether it’s genetically engineered could deal a powerful body blow to those forces.

Any sane person knows these forces would do anything to stop the tide of anti-GMO conviction spreading across the world. An election? Electronically rigging a vote? Of course. Just another day at the office.

Electronic vote fraud has absolutely nothing to do with conventional projections of how votes will turn out or percentages or predictions. All that is based on an honest system.

Face it, from the time the first crooked high priest lied to his sheep about his divine mandate; to the machine pol in New York buying votes and sending out goons to beat up opposition voters; all the way to the present computer takeover of the election process, the watchword has been: corruption.

If you can’t understand and accept that, you need a very serious reality check.

Let me say it plainly: the people who think of themselves as experts and are assuring you that the numbers rule out a victory for Prop 37…those people are dead wrong.

Remember Orwell’s 1984? At the end, we learn the whole objective of the leaders is to make rebels love the State. Not just accept it. Love it.

I detect this now. Love the election system. Don’t just assume it’s above board. Love it.

People have a hard time giving up something they think they love.

But they need to. They need to do it now.

“But…but you see, with two million votes still uncounted, if we get 60% of the vote, we still lose. Even 65%…we still don’t make it. We lose. We have to heal and move on. We have to live to fight another day…even with 70%, let me check those numbers again…yes, we still lose…it’s…we have no chance…just let it go…”

Go ahead, drink the Kool-Aid if you want to.

But instead I invite you to wake up. If you can.

The YES ON 37 leaders are listening to their pros, their pollsters, their experts. Again, that’s their fatal error.

And they’re in danger of making the same mistake as they move on to the state of Washington, to mount a new campaign to label GMO food. Don’t think the election there can be electronically manipulated? You’re dreaming.

The kind of pre-election “vote-fraud” analysis you’ve been doing, to head off fraud at the pass? Useless. You’re using people who aren’t talented enough. You need to bring in the heavyweights, the people who can hack into anything.

Publicly, with FBI and other law-enforcement types present, and with the press there, you have to show that the election system can be hacked. Demonstrate it.

Come into the 21st century.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Prop 37: The top 7 reasons not to believe the vote-count

PROP 37: THE TOP 7 REASONS NOT TO BELIEVE THE VOTE COUNT

by Jon Rappoport

November 14, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

The verdict is in. You would be a fool to accept the vote-count in the California Prop 37 election. I’ll show you why.

Apparently, the CA secretary of state’s office has been getting hit by a lot of calls. People are asking them about the ongoing Prop 37 vote-count. As of last night (11/13/2012), there were still 2,304,250 votes uncounted.

Update: As of 11/14/2012, 5:00pm PT, the number of uncounted ballots stands at 1,891,719.

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/unprocessed-ballots-status/

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/2012-elections/nov-general/pdf/unprocessed-ballots-report.pdf

I received a call from Shannan Velayas, who works in media relations at the California Secretary of State’s office. She left a message, emphasizing several points.

Among them: The vote-count is open and transparent, and anyone from the public can observe it.

This fact has been used by reporters and “experts” to assure the public that an election can’t be stolen.

They’re absolutely wrong.

So the first reason you shouldn’t believe the Prop 37 vote? The means do, in fact, exist to steal an election.

Here is my challenge. Can I see how the touch-screen voting machines operate? Can I go inside them and check them for tampering, anywhere in the state of California?

Can I see exactly how information flows from each voting machine to successive computers? Can I check to make sure the flow of information is not being intercepted and changed?

Can I see how the tabulating machines absorb and tally vote-count information? Can I examine closely the software and the codes that allow these tabulating machines to do their work?

Can I get inside any of the main-frame computers that collect vote-numbers and examine their software, source-code, and working parts?

Of course, the answer to all these questions is no.

Therefore, I could hire an army of observers, and they would not be able to tell me that the vote-count was done correctly. The secretary of state couldn’t swear to it either.

Some brain-deficient people think these objections are over the top. They think I’m nitpicking.

If I remind them that a team of computer scientists from Michigan went to Washington DC and demonstrated that they could hack into the voting system and reverse the result of mayoral race there, these brain-deficient people would dismiss that as irrelevant, too.

I suggest watching the documentary Hacking Democracy, directed by Simon Ardizzone and Russell Michaels, starring Bev Harris. Then tell me elections can’t be hacked and reversed.

Remember Jonathan James, who at the age of 16 put a back-door into DOD’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency’s server, and stole software from NASA computers that set temperature and humidity at the International Space Station?

Recall Adrian Lamo, who hacked into security systems at B of A, Citigroup, and Cingular?

Keven Poulsen, who hacked into federal computers that record wiretaps?

Tsuromu Shimura, who used a simple cell phone to to hack into phone calls all over Capitol Hill?

The 18-year-old Greek boy, “n-splitter,” who was arrested for hacking into systems at Interpol, the Pentagon, the FBI, and the NSA?

I won’t even bother mentioning hackers who are hired by the NSA and other agencies.

But no, the 2012 California Prop 37 election couldn’t have been hacked. Of course not. Those computer systems are absolutely impregnable. They’re programmed by advanced ETs from the Rainbow Galaxy.

The media and secretaries of state throw out rhetoric aimed at assuring the public that elections are fair and square. That’s their job.

Pollsters and those hilarious clowns like Chuck Todd (NBC), John King (CNN), Michael Barone (The Examiner), Karl Rove, and Dick Morris are making a living from doing analysis and predictions of elections. They would defend, to the death, the honesty of elections. Of course they would, because if the opposite were shown to be true, they would be out of work.

The Associated Press feeds projections, although they deny it, to media outlets all over America on election night. They, too, would look ridiculous if it turned out that vote-counts had been hijacked.

Then we have professionals who work for candidates and ballot measures and offer their projections to their clients. They, of course, assume all elections are fair and square, because if that weren’t so, they would look like fools.

Worse than fools. Right now, professionals are telling the YES ON 37 people their cause is lost. If they’re wrong, if the election has been electronically stolen, they are giving their clients monumentally bad and destructive advice.

Oh but that’s right, elections can’t be stolen. It doesn’t happen.

Even though every single ballot, whether touch-screen or paper, is eventually turned into a digital record, nothing can go wrong.

I’m saving the best for last.

In 2007, the secretary of state of CA ordered a “Top-to-Bottom Review” of all electronic voting systems currently in use in California elections.

In other words, up to that time, these systems had been considered a very fine way to run the vote count. The systems obviously had been tested and re-tested and checked and approved. They were already being used in the state of California.

However, astoundingly, all the following systems were found to contain fatal flaws: Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold); Hart InterCivic; Sequoia Voting Systems; Election Systems and Software.

The first three systems were disqualified from further use…and then conditionally re-approved, presumably after fixes were done. The fourth system was rejected altogether on Aug. 3, 2007.

What, indeed, does that say about those elections in which these flawed systems had been used?

To suppose that, after this top-to-bottom review in 2007, everything was fixed and perfected is a leap only the foolish and unwary would take—particularly when we are talking about extremely talented hackers who could be employed to change election votes.

You can read the top-to-bottom review here.

http://www.sos.ca.gov/voting-systems/oversight/ttbr/individuals/individuals.pdf

Be sure to go through the comments section at the end. It contains some explosive remarks. For example, there is a discussion of vendors pretending to sell certain voting machines to the state of California…but actually selling other machines…machines that were not certified for use.

Another comment indicates that California lacked a method to ensure the source code for voting-machine software actually belonged to software certified by the state.

So: reason number one to doubt the vote-count on Prop 37? An election can be hacked. It most certainly can be hacked.

Reason Two: The networks made an early, premature, and highly suspect call of defeat for Prop 37 on election night. Roughly six million votes were outstanding at the time, and Prop 37 was coming back from a huge deficit, which had been created by the early vote-count. (Where exactly did those early votes come from?)

Reason Three: The enemy in the Prop 37 campaign was Monsanto and its allies. If Monsanto is ready, willing, and able to patent all foods on the planet and own the food supply, choke populations with its pesticides, and enable the sale of nutrient-deficient GMO food to billions of people, only a moron would refuse to believe it would corrupt an election.

Reason Four: The NO on 37 forces lied consistently in their ads running up to the election. They lied in the California Voter’s Guide, which is a felony. They used the seal of the FDA in those ads, which is another felony. Given the opportunity, what else would they have done?

http://www.appetiteforprofit.com/2012/11/07/lies-dirty-tricks-and-45-million-kill-gmo-labeling-in-california/

Reason Five: A few days before the election, YES ON 37 held a press conference, during which they were mercilessly attacked by mainstream reporters on an entirely irrelevant issue: did the FBI actually open an investigation of NO ON 37, or was it an inquiry or a mild expression of interest? YES ON 37, in the press conference, was exposing the particulars of NO ON 37’s lies and crimes, but the reporters didn’t care at all. In the next few days, their stories instead turned the tables on YES ON 37 for “erroneously” suggesting that DOJ was “investigating” NO ON 37. This had all the signs of a coordinated media torpedo. It made YES ON 37 look like a bunch of “sour grapes” losers.

Reason Six: NO ON 37 stealing the FDA seal in its ads? Surrendering its own responsibility, DOJ referred the matter of the stolen FDA seal to the FDA for adjudication. This is cause for investigating the DOJ itself. The FDA has nothing to do with deciding what action should be taken against NO ON 37. The FDA deals with food and drugs, not misappropriated federal-agency seals. The DOJ effectively shelved any action until after the election. The DOJ prevented a public outcry against NO ON 37.

Reason Seven: The DOJ operates under the authority of the president of the United States. Barack Obama is the most powerful supporter of Monsanto in America.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/09/24/meet-monsantos-number-one-lobbyist-barack-obama/

For these reasons, the most careful scrutiny possible must be applied to the past, present, and future vote-count on Prop 37, including the now 2,304,250 outstanding votes.

Demands must be made to undertake a complete review—an independent review—of all electronic voting procedures in the state of California.

And then, in full view of the public and the press, the most talented hackers on the planet must be offered a chance to hack into the California vote and steal an election.

“We lost” is not a credible comeback to that.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

“Yes on 37” says Rappoport is “disrupting the healing”

by Jon Rappoport

November 13, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

An email sent to one person from a significant member of the YES ON 37 campaign thinks I’m getting in the way.

“I find John’s [sic] article to be disrupting to the healing that has to take place.” That’s the quote.

Healing? You’re kidding, right?

Whose healing? The staff of the YES ON 37 campaign? The people of California, who won’t be able to tell whether the food they’re eating is genetically modified?

Does this healing involve whiskey, ice cream, yoga, campfires, moonshine, grief counselors, walks on the beach?

Much more importantly, this YES ON 37 leader writes:

“The reports of voter fraud are, to date, urban/internet legends created by folks who don’t understand the system.”

Really? What is the system?

To enlighten us, the author of this email offers a link to the California Secretary of State’s website, where we learn that vote counts always continue long after election night.

Well, of course they do. I never disputed that. However, the Secretary of State’s general statement refers to “hundreds of thousands of votes” that, typically, have to be counted after election Tuesday.

The actual figure, as of 11/13/2012 5:00 p.m. PT, is 2.3 million uncounted votes.

That’s quite different than “hundreds of thousands of [uncounted] votes”.

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/unprocessed-ballots-status/

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/2012-elections/nov-general/pdf/unprocessed-ballots-report.pdf

As of 11/13/2012 5:00 p.m. PT, the unprocessed vote count stands at 2,304,250:


Prop 37 has not yet been defeated.

So excuse me if I’m interrupting the healing, but the fight isn’t over yet.

Furthermore, anyone who cares to investigate “the system” can see that the opportunities for vote-fraud are everywhere. It’s not an urban legend. For starters, go to blackboxvoting and read everything you can find.

Here’s a clue. The “experts” who are advising YES ON 37 make their living by accepting all vote-counts as real and honest and correct.

Otherwise, they couldn’t make wise predictions. They couldn’t make a living. These “experts” have to believe in the system and support it. When it comes to multiple avenues of fraud, they’re lost. They’re in the dark. So they have to pooh-pooh the possibility of fraud. Get it?

I’d really like to meet the experts who are advising YES ON 37. I really would. Here’s a thought. I’ll bring my vote-fraud researchers to the party, and we can have a debate. I know a great radio show that has about 700,000 listeners. We can lay it all out. Fraud vs. no-fraud. Let’s get it on the table. Feel free to accept my invitation.

This email correspondence from a YES ON 37 leader goes on: “I think it’s time for us to acknowledge that we did not get the votes we hoped to due to a lack of funding and ability to get the word out. We need to accept it, move through all the stages if [of] grief and then turn that anger into more action. We are regrouping and not stopping.”

Stages of grief? Was I just rocketed into an Elisabeth Kubler-Ross seminar?

How about the stages of challenging the forces of evil?

This is not over. The absurdly early call against Prop 37 on election night was a fraud. At the time it was made, there were perhaps six million votes uncounted. Maybe more.

And given who is behind NO ON 37—corporations who want to own the food supply of the planet—why should we assume the past, present, and future votes in this campaign are true and honestly recorded?

Disruptive is exactly what we need to be.

And when the count is finished, in several weeks, a recount must be done. To guarantee we’ll get an honest number? No. To provide a chance (maybe) to spot a piece of fraud that could lead to another piece of fraud. And to cause a good piece of trouble. To stir the pot. To see what rises to the surface.

Here is another quote from the YES ON 37 email: “…do you really think that if we thought fraud was going on, we would not investigate it?”

YES ON 37 obviously does not think there is vote fraud here, but they should.

Many, many elections are called early by the television networks. YES ON 37 isn’t the only one. But that doesn’t mean those calls are honest. That doesn’t mean we should lie down and take it.

On election night, shortly after the polls closed in the state of Washington, the networks started making early calls on various winners. But in that state, no one goes to the polls and votes in-person anymore. All votes are sent in by mail. To qualify, they must be postmarked no later than election day. So how the hell did a network make an early projection about anything?

There is rampant fraud in America’s election system. Prop 37 is an example. A week ago, media outlets sent 37 crashing down to defeat with their projections. Yet, days later, there are still 3.3 million votes uncounted. Does that make sense? Does that lead us to feel warm and comfortable about the votes that have already been counted?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but on election night, after the polls closed in California, the networks began to report very big leads for NO ON 37. Boom, right out of the gate. Where did those votes come from? We need to know. Were they absentee ballots? If so, had they been sent in from overseas? Were they, yes, ghost votes that just jumped up on machines out of nowhere?

Because as the night continued, YES ON 37 started catching up. Bit by bit, that big lead eroded. And then, when YES ON 37 was at 47%, bang, it was over. The networks called the race against Prop 37.

YES ON 37 is obviously relying on someone to give them expert advice on the vote-count, and whoever that is, he/she has told them they’re toast.

In a previous article, I reported on another email sent out by a YES ON 37 worker. It stated that the fight was over because, get this, the votes that were still uncounted were “early votes” that most probably had been cast when the NO ON 37 forces were swinging into gear with their negative ads. Therefore, those early as-yet uncounted votes had probably succumbed to the NO ON 37 propaganda.

Man, if that is expert advice, an ant is piloting a rocket ship to Mars.

The Organic Consumer’s Association has just released a statement that they are monitoring the vote-count and may choose to challenge it when it’s done.

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2012/11/12

I urge them to not to accept the numbers we’ve been given so far. Don’t simply take what the state of California feeds us as the current count or the final count.

I’ve said this time after time, but some people just don’t get it. I guess they haven’t gone through the stages of understanding, which are: wake up; wake up; wake up; wake up.

Do NOT assume the Prop 37 vote-count so far is true. The problem is more than the uncounted votes. It’s all the votes. It’s the votes that have already been reported, the votes that are being counted now, and the votes that will be counted.

People have been told that “election observers from both sides” guarantee the vote-count is honest. That’s nonsense. When fraud is done electronically, observers see nothing. There is nothing to see.

People have also been told that, with the current difference between the YES votes on 37 and the NO votes, YES can’t possibly win. Counting the rest of the votes won’t swing the election over to YES. But you see, that assumes the current difference is true and factual. It assumes that YES ON 37 is currently trailing by about 600,000 votes. Don’t accept that. Don’t assume that’s true.

I can’t believe the naivete of some people. They’re stepping into a lion’s den where the lions are corporations like Monsanto, who would do anything to win an election, and yet these fantasists assume “the system is working.”

“Oh, yes, the vote-count is honest. Of course it’s honest. We fought the good fight and we lost. We have to grieve and move on and regroup and mount another campaign. We lost the vote. Just look at the reported numbers. There’s no way we can win. We played fair, everybody played fair, and we went down to defeat.”

Do you think this is a picnic and a game of softball in the park? Do you think everybody is nice and nicer and nicest and plays by the rules?

“Yes, we entered the system to do battle against the most evil force on the planet. In this sacred system, we played fair. And so did they. You see, they are evil every day in every way, but when they get into an election, they are magically transformed. It’s wonderful. They are suddenly honorable. And they won, fair and square. We lost. It was a beautiful thing. The system worked. This is America. It may have its flaws, but it’s the best system ever devised in the history of the world. I learned that in fifth grade. Bush didn’t cheat when he ran against Gore. Bush didn’t cheat when he ran against Kerry. That was just a fairy tale. And Chicago? No one has ever cheated in a Chicago election. And the television networks, who make early projections of winners before you can even blink? They would never cheat or lie. Of course not. The media lie every day when they report the news. But on election night a little fairy descends on them and they become righteous and good. We know we’re trailing by 600,000 votes because that’s what we were told, and we always believe what we’re told. We’ve done the math, based on what we’ve been told, and so we know we’ve lost. Our experts have assured us we have no chance of winning now, in this fair and honest system.”

Over the years, I’ve met some of these experts.

“Look, see what the figures are here? You’re behind by half a million votes. Now, if you calculate the percentages on the votes still to be counted and divide by six and multiply by eight, you get half the age of my mother. Then add six and it all comes clear. Your chance of winning is less than two percent.”

To which I say: “Why should I assume I’m really behind by half a million votes? Why should I assume the count was honest.”

And he says, “Because my job and my paycheck depend on everybody believing the vote-count is real and not fake.”

Figuring out the details of a particular fraud needs pros. Real ones. Not fake ones.

YES ON 37 has apparently finished with its work on 37. The baton is passing.

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

PROP 37 VOTE-FRAUD UPDATE: 3.3 MILLION VOTES STILL UNCOUNTED

PROP 37 VOTE FRAUD UPDATE: 3.3 MILLION VOTES STILL UNCOUNTED

by Jon Rappoport

November 11, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

When the networks and other media outlets made the early call on election night, claiming Prop 37 had gone down to defeat, there were millions of votes still uncounted.

I just checked the California Secretary of State’s website, which is the official center for vote results, and there are 3,334,495 votes that remain unprocessed.

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/unprocessed-ballots-status/

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/2012-elections/nov-general/pdf/unprocessed-ballots-report.pdf

As of 11/9/2012 5:00 p.m. PT, the unprocessed vote count stands at 3,334,495:

Updated: 11/9/2012 5:00 p.m. PT

Reading the county-by-county reports, the last date any of them reported in with numbers was November 8, three days ago.

Why is it taking so long for California to count all its votes? Why do so many remain uncounted at this late date?

Yes, some of them are what’s called provisional votes. That basically means they were turned in with errors, and those errors need to be tracked down and corrected. That takes time.

But large numbers of uncounted votes must be electronic. What’s the hold-up?

Looking at the most recent report on the Prop 37 results, Prop 37 is trailing by 585,464 votes.

Of the 3.3 million votes that remain uncounted, how many people voted on Prop 37, one way or the other? I don’t know.

We can fiddle with estimates and projections and try to figure out how many people would have to vote YES on 37 for a victory, but—and this is very important—a larger specter looms over all this.

I really hope you get this.

When the absurdly early call against Prop 37 was made on election night, that was a clue. It was a red flag. It was a loud siren:

“Something is very wrong here.” That was the message.

From the moment that clue sprang forth, from the moment that siren went off, we had two choices. We could say, “Well, the TV networks are insane. They’re crooked. So we need to get all the votes counted, to see what the real result is.”

Or we could say: “This early call against 37 suggests more criminality. Other crimes. How can we rely on the vote count at all? How can we assume, even when the other votes are counted, we’re going to get a true result?”

The second conclusion is the correct one. This is what I’ve been saying for the past several days.

Many people naively believe that the early call against Prop 37 was the only problem. They assume the entire vote count, when it’s finished, will be true and honest.

Let’s say you’re investigating a jewel theft. And you see a guy walking down the street and he has part of a big necklace hanging out of his pocket. Do you assume the necklace is the only stolen item he’s carrying? Or do you infer the guy is loaded with other items from the theft?

Here are two sources you can consult. The first is an extensive article by Victoria Collier about general vote-count fraud. The second is the California Secretary of State’s own 2007 “Top-to-Bottom-Review” of voting machines used in elections. This report is a mind-blower. It reveals massive opportunities for vote fraud. Should we blithely assume California has fixed all those problems?

http://truth-out.org/news/item/12213-americas-media-just-made-vote-rigging-easier

http://www.sos.ca.gov/voting-systems/oversight/top-to-bottom-review.htm

Recently, a team at the Argonne National Lab showed how a voting machine could be hacked and controlled, using a small device that costs between $10-$26.

There was the famous 2010 experiment, in which a team from Ann Arbor, Michigan, offered to hack the District of Columbia’s voting system. They broke in and reversed the count in the mayoral election. They also fabricated absentee votes from overseas and canceled out the real votes.

In my second article on the Prop 37 scandal, I tracked the early media call against Prop 37, on election night, to its most probable source, the Associated Press (AP).

AP, the giant wire service, is officially a non-profit owned by 1400 member newspapers, who use its services and also contribute articles. However, as everyone knows, the newspaper business in America is dying. Its bottom line is sitting in a lake of red ink, and the lake is sitting in an ocean of red ink.

That means these newspapers, and the corporations who own them, have been re-financing their very existence with loans, and loans to pay off earlier loans. That means banks.

Now you’re getting into the oligarchy that owns this country.

Does this sound too far-fetched? Too remote? Can we really say that “the powers-that-be” defeated Prop 37?

Well, remember that YES ON 37 was a wedge against the assault of GMO food. It was the first of a number of dominoes that could fall against Monsanto and other GMO companies. Why? Because once consumers could see, labeled on the food they bought, whether it was GMO, they could make a choice.

And surveys indicate that huge numbers of people don’t want to eat GMO food or are at least suspicious of it.

Imagine what would happen if millions and millions of Americans, starting in California, rejected GMO food at the market.

Is that a threat to the mega-GMO-corporations who want to own the patents on all food crops on the planet? Is the Pope Catholic?

We also have more down-to-earth fiddling with Prop 37. An instant classic press conference was held a few days before the election, by the YES ON 37 forces.

I was on that phone call. One by one, I heard reporters from major media outlets confuse and divert the whole issue of crimes committed by NO ON 37 forces. These reporters channeled the discussion into an irrelevant nit-picking question: Has the FBI really opened a full-blown investigation into NO ON 37, or is it really just an inquiry or a mild expression of interest?

This theater-of-the-absurd crashed the intent of the press conference, and in the ensuing days, just as election day loomed, sure enough, stories appeared in the press. The gist of these stories was: “no real FBI investigation”; “YES ON 37 had it wrong”; “who’s really deceiving who.”

What started out as an effort to expose very obvious lies and crimes committed by the NO ON 37 forces boomeranged completely.

So, all in all, there is substantial evidence that, in the run-up to election day, and in the criminally insane early call against Prop 37, on election night, very heavy hitters didn’t want Prop 37 to pass.

Therefore, do we foolishly assume the ongoing vote-count in California is going to be honest?

Do we assume the votes that have already been counted and reported in California are true and honest?

Do we accept that Prop 37 is now trailing by 585,464 votes?

No, no, and no.

Many people would like to think we can assume honesty in these matters. It would be nice to believe in the system. But it would a fatal error.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com