Category Archives: GMOwar

YES ON 37 REFUSES TO CHALLENGE VOTE FRAUD!

 

YES ON 37 CAMPAIGN REFUSES TO CHALLENGE VOTE FRAUD!

 

by Jon Rappoport

November 10, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

Lying down on the road in front of a truck isn’t the best way to end a political campaign, but that’s what the YES ON 37 forces are doing.

 

In an email sent out on Nov. 9, the PR people for 37 wrote: “They [the leaders of YES ON 37] assume these [millions of uncounted] ballots won’t be in our favor. For this reason the campaign does not want to get involved in the pressuring for counting the remaining votes.”

 

I guess everybody is a vote-projection expert these days. Wow.

 

No need to do the actual count, we already know what the score is.

 

Excuse me while I go out of the room and and scream for a few minutes…

 

And a few minutes more…

 

In that email, we learn the brilliant reasoning behind this abject projection of a defeat. Buckle up: “Our understanding of the situation is that the campaign believes these [millions of uncounted votes] are early ballots that were sent in during the beginning stages of the barrage of opposition commercials [by NO ON 37]. These ballots tended vote against Prop 37. They assume the ballots won’t be in our favor.”

 

I was sure the most insane thing that happened during this fiasco was the early projection of a defeat for 37, by the networks, on election night, with maybe 15 million votes still uncounted. But I was wrong.

 

This analysis by the YES ON 37 people takes the cake.

 

But really, what’s going on here is an incredibly naïve approach to politics. YES ON 37 is playing the game by the rules while their opponents are cheating at every turn.

 

The phrase, “planted the seeds of their own destruction,” comes to mind.

 

We know that NO ON 37 made numerous false statements in their campaign ads. We know they illegally used the seal of the FDA in those ads. That’s a felony. We know the mainstream press torpedoed YES ON 37 in the waning days of the campaign, by diverting the whole issue of GMO labeling into a non-story about whether the FBI had really opened a full-blown investigation into NO ON 37. We know the networks made a criminally early call against 37 on election night. We know millions of votes are still uncounted. We know that computer rigging in vote-counts is easily done.

 

But YES ON 37 is just folding up their tent and going away.

 

They played fair and they got destroyed.

 

This is the time for multi-front attacks. This is the time to bring on the lawyers. This is the time to bring on some real PR people who can fire real bullets. This is the time for a counter-media attack. This is the time for a 24/7 circus. This is the time for the kind of theater that will make NO ON 37 look like the sick joke it is.

 

Instead, we get abject surrender.

 

“Well, folks, be sure you have clean underwear on when you lie down in the street in front of those oncoming trucks. Don’t yell when they rumble over you. Be polite. Make sure your hair is combed. If some of you would like to set yourselves on fire, as a sign of protest, please don’t. Those big trucks are carrying lots of gasoline and they might explode.”

 

Wanting to know whether the food you eat is shot full of insect genes? It isn’t just nice. It’s essential. It’s about survival.

 

But YES ON 37 turns out to be a bunch of rainbow people.

 

They’re doing New Age politics against high-level evil bastards with very deep pockets and major clout.

 

Fraud wins and goody-good loses.

 

I’m going to add a coda, because I know I’m going to get lots of emails asking, “What do we do now?” So I’ll tell you here and now.

 

I’ve been here before. I didn’t like it then and I don’t like it now. In 1993, when the forces for health freedom in America were on the move, trying to get a bill passed, in Congress, that would keep the FDA’s soiled hands away from our nutritional supplements, I sat in on meetings and I told the leaders of the movement:

 

“It’s not enough to get a bill passed in Congress. We have to attack the bad guys. We have to attack the FDA. We have to publicize all their crimes. I have a list of the crimes.

 

“Here is what we need. We need somebody on our side, a guy who has the money to bankroll a real PR agency for the truth. For the long term.

 

“I’m talking about a bunch of real PR tigers who work for us. Who can get the truth out there in the press. Who have connections. We need to do this kind of PR night and day.

 

“The principle is simple. You make the bad guys play defense. You back them up against the wall. You take them out of their game. You destroy them over and over. You show them to be the criminals they are.

 

“This strategy is as old as the hills. Take a page out of a little thing called the Declaration of Independence. Ever read it? It was a bill of particulars against the Crown. It was an attack. It was specific. It didn’t just say, ‘We’re nice so we deserve freedom.’

 

“When we launch this super-PR agency, we also include people who can do theater. People who can use their imaginations. Artists. People who can present the criminals in all their naked horror, and do it in such a way that everybody will see, will become outraged, will point fingers, will laugh.

 

“This PR agency of hungry tigers will not rest. They will be on the move day and night. They will overwhelm the opposition by laying bare scandal after scandal.

 

“Here is the downside. If we don’t do this, we’ll always be the ones who are on defense. We’ll always get ambushed. We’ll always fall back on the pseudo-religious baloney that ‘we’re right and good.’ That doesn’t even get you a token to ride the subway, my friends.”

 

Okay?

 

That’s what we have to do.

 

And if anybody out there is ready to write me and say, “But that makes us just as bad as the bad guys, that makes us nasty,” don’t bother writing.

 

There is one thing that distinguishes us from the bad guys. We aren’t bad.

 

Knowing that is our immortal ace in the hole.

 

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

VOTE FRAUD: WHO DESTROYED PROP 37 ON ELECTION NIGHT?

 

VOTE FRAUD: WHO DESTROYED PROP 37 ON ELECTION NIGHT?

By Jon Rappoport

November 9, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

“So look, there are fifteen million votes out there we haven’t counted yet. What do you want to do?”

 

“How long have the polls been closed?”

 

“Let’s see. Two hours.”

 

“The hell with it. Let’s call it a defeat for Prop 37.”

 

“Okay.”

 

This isn’t over.

 

We’re not just looking at how many votes in California are still uncounted. We’re not just guessing how it’ll turn out and making little projections. That’s a sucker’s game.

 

We’re looking at real symptoms of fraud. And fraud has tentacles and arms. You see one piece of fraud, you keep digging for other pieces. You usually find them.

 

Start with the incredibly early projections made by media outlets on election night. Those projections sank Prop 37.

 

When you’re in the middle of a football game and the outcome is still in doubt, if somebody suddenly posts the final score on the scoreboard, that’s called a lie.

 

It isn’t an estimate or a guess or a prediction. It’s a lie.

 

There was once a day in American politics when news networks would wait for conclusive election results. They weren’t greedily bent on reporting projections soon and sooner and soonest.

 

So let’s get that projection-brainwashing out of our heads, all right?

 

The whole business of making early and earlier predictions on election night is a sham. And it has the effect of inducing people to tune out.

 

“Okay, Jones won. That’s that. What percentage of the votes have been counted? One half of one percent? Zero percent? Gee, I guess these prediction guys really know what they’re doing. They must have some fabulous computer models, honey. Let’s watch a CSI rerun…”

 

Here is what happened on election night in California. With many millions of votes still not counted, television stations up and down the state sealed the fate of Prop 37, by saying it had lost.

 

Many of those California votes are still uncounted. Yesterday, by consulting four of the 57 county registrars in the state, I found 1.6 million votes still unprocessed. That was chicken feed.

 

An updated report, as of noon today, November 9, posted at the California Secretary of State’s website, indicates that, for all of California, a boggling 3.3 million votes remain uncounted.

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

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

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

 

So who called the shots? Who made the early and grossly premature projection on election night? Who told all the media outlets that Prop 37 had been defeated?

 

I suspected it was Edison Media Research, an outfit that works for the National Election Pool (NEP). NEP is a media consortium that supplies election-night information to the press. This morning I spoke with a representative of Edison, who told me they didn’t make the projection on Prop 37.

 

If true, that leaves Associated Press (AP) as the leading suspect. AP is part of the National Election Pool as well. AP has awesome resources.

 

I spoke with Erin Madigan White, media relations manager at AP. I asked her whether AP had made the projections for Prop 37 to media outlets.

 

She emailed me the following tidbit. It was not quite an answer to my question, but it was illuminating:

 

“To clarify: AP does not make ‘projections,’ but bases our reporting on counting real votes from every precinct. As our story notes specifically, ‘With all the state’s precincts reporting, Proposition 37 failed 53.1 percent to 46.9 percent.’”

 

When someone gives you this kind of sleight-of-hand maneuver, it’s called a clue. Let’s start with this phrase: “With all the state’s precincts reporting.” The precincts were all reporting PARTIAL results. Even today, there are 3.3 million votes in CA still to be counted.

 

This tells you that AP was lying. That’s right. Let’s call it what it was. They were lying about “all precincts.” It was an intentional con.

 

And what does the phrase “bases our reporting on counting real votes” mean? It certainly means “calling the result of an election.” Because that’s exactly what AP did with Prop 37, based on partial results, on Nov.8. That’s a projection. They say they don’t make projections, but they do. That’s another lie.

 

On election night, I believe AP must have been the entity who passed voting information on Prop 37 to media outlets throughout California.

 

AP will not speak about their business relationships with media outlets. They will not name those outlets. They claim “client confidentiality” on this matter. Why?

 

I believe the answer is obvious. AP, the giant wire service, doesn’t want people to know how much influence they have on what media outlets report. AP doesn’t want the public to know how much of the news, everywhere, comes from AP. And media outlets don’t want their own customers to know how much of what they report is really flat-out or recycled AP material.

 

This powerful AP influence certainly would extend to election-night reporting.

 

Knowing how the National Election Pool basically works, I see no other entity who could have played that information-provider role for all the networks, TV stations, radio stations, websites, and newspapers in California…and in the country, on this past election night, with respect to Prop 37.

 

With millions of votes outstanding and uncounted, I conclude it was AP who provided the data to the networks, who then made the early calls against Prop 37 and sank it.

 

After I wrote the original article yesterday, which exposed the big lie about Prop 37 early projections, I received many emails. You can read that article here:

 

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/11/09/did-peop-37-really-lose-or-was-it-vote-fraud/

 

Most of the emailers stated they were glad to get the information. A few people questioned my report. They said, “Well, a hundred percent of voting precincts have already sent their vote-counts to the Secretary of State of California.”

 

Wrong. A hundred percent of precincts have sent PARTIAL vote-counts to the Secretary of State.

 

A few people said, “Well, the counties in California, who are in charge of counting all votes in their districts, have several weeks to wrap up the count. That happens in every election. Nothing new there.”

 

I know that. My attack is leveled at the early call against Prop 37 given to the media, on election night, when so many votes were still uncounted, when there was no way to know the final outcome.

 

A few people said, “Well, of the votes that remain to be counted in California, about two-thirds would have to go YES ON 37 to swing 37 over into victory. That won’t happen.”

 

Let’s leave that question to the actual vote-count. But we’re not only talking about the odds of getting a victory through counting the rest of the votes. With these horrendous early projections, we’re looking at a symptom of huge fraud here. The smoke in front of the fire:

 

Who can guarantee that the votes already tallied in California were done faithfully and honestly? Who can guarantee that the voting machines were accurately recording votes?

 

Given AP’s replies to me, and their policy of secrecy about their media clients, who wants to trust that news giant?

 

Concerning machine vote-fraud, wake up and smell the coffee. See Bev Harris’ work at blackboxvoting.org and also Victoria Collier’s important articles on this subject. Read up on the 2000 Bush-Gore fiasco and the 2004 Bush-Kerry voting nightmare (especially in Ohio).

 

Many people have emailed me to ask, “What can we do now?” First of all, the YES ON 37 people have to forget about their concession of defeat. They need to get busy and look into vote fraud.

 

They have to come back to the playing field.

 

To return to the football analogy, if you’re in the middle of the game and somebody suddenly posts the final score on the scoreboard, do you hang your head and walk off and accept the loss? Is that what you do?

 

Do you bow down to the system, because you’re afraid that, if you object, people will label you “sour grapes” and crazy? Or do you become more relentless?

 

YES ON 37 needs to demand to look at the voting machines, the software used in the vote-count. YES ON 37 needs to probe, with all they have, into what AP did on election night. And that’s just for starters. Bring on the lawyers. Make some real waves. Shake people up.

 

Think about this as well. Why was Prop 37 launched in California? Why not Arkansas or Louisiana?

 

Because it’s well-known that California, historically and presently, is the core of the natural health movement in America. CA is where it really took hold and spread. CA is where everybody and his brother want gluten-free bicycles and organic streetlamps and raw unpasteurized sunglasses and GMO-free underwear.

 

The sentiment for Prop 37 was overwhelming a couple of months ago. Then, boom. Everything went the other way. It wasn’t just the NO ON 37 ads. It wasn’t just the massive spending by the NO ON 37 forces.

 

The real specter of vote fraud is here, whether you like it or not.

 

If, indeed, AP made the early reports or projections or suggestions or advices of defeat for 37 to media outlets, let’s see their data and their models of interpretation. Did they do exit polls? I’ve never heard of AP conducting exit polls.

 

If as AP claims, they don’t do projections, are we supposed to believe they sent out nothing more than raw-vote counts to a few thousand media outlets in California, and each and every one of those outlets decided, on their own, through their own analysis, that Prop 37 was a lost cause early on election night?

 

Don’t believe that for a second. These local TV stations and newspapers aren’t independent enough to do that kind of projecting on their own. They were taking advice from somewhere. They were all falling into line. They were merely mouthpieces for someone’s projection.

 

This should trouble you. It should trouble you greatly. Unless you’re so enamored of projections and computer modeling and data interpretation and honest and honorable vote machines that you’re sure everything is just fine and dandy.

 

Early dismissive projections on election night are part and parcel of the Big Con. They are wands waved that put people to sleep and elections to bed.

 

So, no, Virginia. No. Everything is not okay.

 

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

DID PROP 37 REALLY LOSE OR WAS IT VOTE FRAUD?

 

DID PROP 37 REALLY LOSE OR WAS IT VOTE FRAUD?

By Jon Rappoport

November 8, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

Hold your horses.

 

On election night, not long after the polls closed in California, the announcement came out: Prop 37 was losing. A little while later, it was all over. 37 had gone down to defeat.

 

But is that the whole story? No.

 

As of 2:30PM today, Thursday, November 8th, two days after the election, many votes in California remain uncounted.

 

I tried to find out how many.

 

It turns out that the Secretary of State of CA, responsible for elections in the state, doesn’t know.

 

I was told all counties in California have been asked, not ordered, to report in with those figures. It’s voluntary.

 

So I picked out a few of the biggest counties and called their voter registrar offices. Here are the boggling results:

 

Santa Clara County: 180,000 votes remain uncounted.

 

Orange County: 241,336 votes remain uncounted.

 

San Diego County: 475,000 votes remain uncounted.

 

LA County: 782,658 votes remain uncounted.

 

In just those four counties, 1.6 million votes remain uncounted.

 

The California Secretary of State’s website indicates that Prop 37 is behind by 559,776 votes.

 

So in the four counties I looked into, there are roughly three times as many uncounted votes as the margin of Prop 37’s defeat.

 

And as I say, I checked the numbers in only four counties. There are 54 other counties in the state. Who knows how many votes they still need to process?

 

So why is anyone saying Prop 37 lost?

 

People will say, “Well, it’s all about projections. There are experts. They know what they’re doing. They made a prediction…”

 

Really? Who are those experts? I have yet to find them.

 

For big elections, the television networks rely on a private consortium called the National Election Pool (NEP). NEP does projections and predictions. Did NEP make the premature call on Prop 37? So far I see no evidence one way or the other.

 

NEP makes some calls for the television networks, but NEP is composed of CBS, CNN, FOX, NBC, ABC, and AP. It could hardly be called an independent source of information for those networks.

 

NEP has AP (Associated Press) do the actual vote tabulating, and NEP also contracts work out to Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International to do exit polls and projections based on those polls.

 

Edison Media Research did the exit polls in the state of Washington for this election. How? They surveyed 1493 people by phone. Based on that, I assume they made all the projections for elections in that state, even though there is no in-person voting in Washington, and voters can submit their ballots by mail, postmarked no later than election Tuesday. So how could Edison know anything worth knowing or projecting on election night?

 

Both Edison Research and Mitofsky were involved in the 2004 election scandal (Kerry-Bush), in which their exit polls confounded network news anchors, because the poll results were so far off from the incoming vote-counts.

 

Edison and Mitofsky issued a later report explaining how the disparity could have occurred; they tried to validate their own exit-poll data and the vote-count, which was like explaining a sudden shift in ocean tides by saying clouds covered the moon. It made no sense.

 

So if NEP did the premature Prop 37 projections that handed 37 a resounding loss, there is little reason to accept their word.

 

We’re faced with a scandal here. An early unwarranted projection against Prop 37 was made, when so many votes were still uncounted.

 

Those votes are still uncounted.

 

Why should we believe anything that comes next?

 

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

THE FORCES OF EVIL PREPARE TO STRIKE DOWN PROP 37

 

THE FORCES OF EVIL PREPARE TO STRIKE DOWN PROP 37

by Jon Rappoport

November 5, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

You can go into a market and pick out organic vegetables and fruit. This isn’t something you do through magic or secret divination with a special wand. There are labels that tell you the food is organic.

 

“Experts” claim organic food is no better or safer than food drenched with pesticides. But still, you can choose organic.

 

You have a right to know. And then, knowing, you have a right to make your choice.

 

You can go into a market, pick out a food product, and read a list of its ingredients as long as your arm. But you’ll find no mention of whether someone shot insect genes into it.

 

For some reason, you have no right to know about that.

 

It’s no accident. The powers-that-be want it that way.

 

On Tuesday, the voters of California will cast the die on Prop 37. Yes on 37 means GMO food will henceforth be labeled.

 

The idea behind 37 is simple. If you’re eating food, you have a right to know what’s in it and what’s been done to it. Government scientists and corporate scientists can claim GMO food is “the same in all aspects” as non-GMO, but you still have a right to know.

 

Monsanto and it allies claim that you knowing is unfair, because you might be swayed, by your own prejudice, to leave that GMO food on the market shelf, when in fact there is no reason to leave it there.

 

They are telling you the companies who are selling you food are more important than your own judgment about what to put in your body.

 

You would be impeding commerce if you believe GMO food is bad for you, and in order to protect GMO companies and the economy, you must go into a market blind, to keep things “honest.”

 

That’s what they think of you: you’re an idiot. You can’t make reasonable judgments. Therefore, you need to be blind.

 

Let me draw an exact parallel. Let’s suppose you were part of a group that was rallying for a particular political cause, and the government had planted an FBI agent in your midst.

 

Now, if exposed and questioned, this FBI plant would say, “I wasn’t there to disrupt or influence the group in any way. I was merely trying to protect good Americans. I was there to observe, nothing more.”

 

Would you nevertheless have the right to know he was there? Would you have the right to decide whether you wanted him there? Or are you too stupid to know that he should be there because America is in danger and we need people like him to spy on us without our knowing, to keep us safe?

 

It’s the same situation. They tell you the genes planted in your food are neutral in every sense. They affect nothing. They’re good genes and they do good work. But because you might not think so, because you’re too stupid to know the truth, you have to be blind about what’s in your food when you choose it and buy it and eat it.

 

That’s the argument.

 

YES ON 37=you have a right to know.

 

NO ON 37=you need to be protected against your own stupidity.

 

According to this logic, the NO ON 37 people have a right, even a moral duty, to lie to you, to say whatever they need to, in order to move you in the direction of giving up your right to know. They should lie, they have to lie, since their “truth” wasn’t doing the job.

 

And they have lied.

 

http://www.carighttoknow.org/documented_deceptions

 

In other words, they’re looking at you as if you were a leading suspect in a criminal case. The cops can put you in a room, they can falsely say they have a witness who saw you at the scene of the murder, who saw you dump the gun in a garbage can. They can falsely say they have you on video committing the murder. They can lie about all this non-existent evidence.

 

The Supreme Court has ruled this is legal in criminal cases. The cops can do this to get a confession from a suspect.

 

In the same way, the NO ON 37 people can tell you anything, can lie to you about anything, because it’s assumed their cause is just.

 

Your inherent right to know is a threat to the established order. It must be taken away.

 

The government is trying to make the same argument about vaccines. They want to close down all possible exemptions that would allow you to refuse a vaccine for yourself or your child. Why? Because, they say, only a moron would refuse a vaccine. Therefore, the CDC can make all sorts of false statements about dire disease threats and pandemics that aren’t pandemics, in order to scare you into taking a vaccine. It doesn’t matter what they say, as long as it results in you getting the vaccine.

 

And since you’re too stupid to realize the country is under constant threat from terrorists and, therefore, the government has to spy on you 24/7, they spy on you without a warrant. Secretly. Otherwise, you might object.

 

All these examples of preempting your right to know the truth are connected. They are the strategy of the corporate-government complex that runs America.

 

They claim to have a monopoly on truth. To impose the truth, they need to lie.

 

The massive push to defeat Prop 37 in California tomorrow is the latest illustration.

 

Cops need to lie, the FBI needs to lie, the CDC needs to lie, Homeland Security needs to lie, so NO ON 37 needs to lie.

 

Does it make you feel warm and safe?

 

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

DEPT. OF JUSTICE LYING TO DEFEAT PROP 37

 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE LYING TO DEFEAT PROP 37

By Jon Rappoport

November 4, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

The vote is two days away. In California, Prop 37 is on the ballot. It states that all GMO food should be labeled as such, so the consumer can decide whether to buy it and eat it.

 

The NO ON 37 forces have been caught in a deception. They used the official seal of the FDA in a mailer, and above that seal they attributed a quote to the FDA which was never made by that agency.

 

The quote was: “The US Food and Drug Administration says a labeling policy like Prop 37 would be ‘inherently misleading.’”

 

The FDA told KPBS they “never made such statements with respect to Prop 37.”

 

Here’s the capper. After receiving a complaint about all this, the US Attorney in Sacramento, who works for the US Dept. of Justice, said he would refer the whole matter to the FDA.

 

What?

 

The question of whether NO ON 37 committed a crime is not up to the FDA. It’s up to the Dept. of Justice. Its their investigation.

 

The FDA isn’t going to arrest anyone at NO ON 37 for stealing its seal or making a false statement over that seal.

 

If you issued a pronouncement on Dept. of Commerce letterhead under the seal of that agency, would employees of Commerce arrest you? Of course not. The FBI (as an agency under the DOJ) would arrest you.

 

The US Attorney in Sacramento is essentially lying when he implies the FDA should handle the matter of its own seal being used without federal authority. There is no reason for the DOJ to refer this matter to the FDA. The DOJ should investigate NO ON 37. It’s their job.

 

Two days ago, the YES ON 37 people held what turned out to be an infamous press conference. As I’ve previously reported (see this and this), the whole thing degenerated into a hair-splitting argument, when reporters for major outlets like the LA Times and the NY Times demanded to know whether the DOJ had really launched an investigation into possible crimes committed by the NO ON 37 forces.

 

This distraction torpedoed the press conference.

 

These brain-addled reporters should have been asking why the DOJ didn’t launch a full-blown investigation and instead referred the matter to the FDA.

 

The headline on their subsequent stories should have read: DOJ REFUSES TO INVESTIGATE NO ON 37; REFERS INVESTIGATION TO WRONG AGENCY.

 

But truth isn’t the mission of these quacking ducks.

 

At the end of All the President’s Men, Ben Bradlee, the editor of the Washington Post, tells his two cub reporters, Woodward and Bernstein: “We’re under a lot of pressure, you know…Nothing’s riding on this except the, uh, first amendment to the Constitution, freedom of the press and maybe the future of the country…”

 

In this case, nothing is riding on the vote on Prop 37 except the future health of the country, the hidden destructive effects of GMO food, the capture of the food supply by Monsanto and its government allies, and the killing of small family farms.

 

So let’s stall and cover the wrong story, let’s ignore the underlying issues, let’s let the Dept. of Justice off the hook, let’s allow big pesticide and GMO companies, with their deep pockets, to swing Tuesday’s vote in their favor, let’s subvert the role of a free and vigorous press, let’s fiddle and faddle and take a hands-off attitude and do nothing.

 

And they call these people reporters.

 

They’re pernicious scum who bring a boomer indifference and smirking sense of entitlement to their work, which is no work at all. They’re not good enough to sharpen pencils or clean computer screens in the office of a real newspaper…if one existed.

 

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

DYING NY TIMES NOW TWEETING THE “NEWS” ON PROP 37

 

DYING NY TIMES NOW TWEETING THE ‘NEWS’ ON PROP 37

by Jon Rappoport

November 3, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

The latest reporter to dismiss the crimes of the NO ON 37 forces is Stephanie Strom of the NY Times. She’s tweeting. That’s right. The Times has hit rock bottom. Why don’t they just close their doors and fumigate the building?

 

Strom’s tweets are posted at her Muck Rack page:

 

http://muckrack.com/ssstrom

 

In yesterday’s YES ON 37 press conference, the right of California citizens to know whether their food is genetically engineered was undermined by reporters who kept whining and complaining about whether the DOJ was really investigating the NO ON 37 forces for fraud.

 

Was it an investigation or only a modest concern? Was it an inquiry? Was it just a returned phone call? Can six million angels dance on the head of a pin or only 5,999,999?

 

At the press conference, the YES ON 37 people raised legitimate concerns about fraud and felonies in the NO ON 37 ads. Among the concerns: NO ON 37 was illegally using the FDA seal to impart a false legitimacy to false statements.

 

But the reporters at the press conference didn’t care about that complaint. It wasn’t interesting to them. They only cared about whether the DOJ had opened an official investigation of NO ON 37.

 

So here is NY Times reporter Stephanie Strom tweeting the word of God yesterday.

 

Tweet One: “Yes on Prop 37 folks say they’ve heard the DOJ is pursuing a ‘criminal investigation’ of complaints.”

 

Tweet Two: “Oops—Yes on 37 say DOJ in [sic] investigating use of FDA seal by No on 37. It’s been a long week.”

 

Tweet Three: “So it’s not an ‘investigation’ at all. Beware of hyperbole.”

 

Well, that takes care of that. No official investigation, so who cares? No story there at all.

 

Doesn’t matter that NO ON 37 people are lying in their ads, are using the FDA seal illegally, which is a felony. Doesn’t matter that NO ON 37 people lied to voters in the California Voter’s Guide by making intentionally false statements, another felony. Doesn’t matter that NO ON 37 people attributed statements to organizations which those organizations say they never made. Who cares?

 

That’s not a story. The only story is whether the DOJ has opened a criminal investigation into NO ON 37.

 

That’s on the order of: “Look, the Justice Department denies Nixon was covering up anything, so there’s no story.”

 

“Eric Holder, the Attorney General, says the DOJ didn’t do anything wrong in Operation Fast&Furious, so forget about the story.”

 

“Janet Reno, the Attorney General, says every possible caution was taken at the Waco compound, so that’s that. End of story.”

 

Here’s what happened. Joe Sandler, lawyer for YES ON 37, got a phone call from an FBI agent, Jason Jones, a few days ago. Jones was following up on a complaint that had been lodged with the DOJ. The complaint laid out, chapter and verse, the lies the NO ON 37 forces had engaged in.

 

Sandler took this as a sign that the DOJ was investigating. But technically speaking, he was a bit off the mark. Who cares? Sandler basically had it right.

 

However, for eminent reporters, like Stephanie Strom, this was the end of it. No story. Move along, nothing to see. “Beware of hyperbole,” she writes.

 

I’m afraid not. “Beware of the NY Times. Beware of reporters for the Times who can’t see past their Twitter accounts.”

 

You can read my piece on the whole YES ON 37 press-conference fiasco here. It’s a bit more substantive than a tweet.

 

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/11/03/breaking-elite-media-try-to-destroy-yes-on-37-press-conference/

 

But I can tweet, too. How about this? “DOJ should open full-blown criminal probe into NO ON 37 but refuses to.”

 

Or “DOJ fails again. NO ON 37 criminals free as birds.”

 

Or “NO ON 37 forces steal FDA seal to lie in their ads. It’s a felony.”

 

I didn’t attend journalism school and I don’t write for the NY Times. Therefore, I know my tweets signal a much bigger story than “YES ON 37 said DOJ started an investigation but that was sort of wrong.”

 

Here is a link re the complaint against NO ON 37 filed with the DOJ:

 

http://www.carighttoknow.org/documented_deceptions

 

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

BREAKING! ELITE MEDIA TRY TO DESTROY “YES ON 37” PRESS CONFERENCE

BREAKING: MAJOR MEDIA TRY TO DESTROY “YES ON 37” PRESS CONFERENCE

by Jon Rappoport

November 3, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

No, this wasn’t a group of street thugs breaking into a liquor store. This was a string of reporters trying to destroy the truth about a subject that threatens the health and future of the planet’s population: GMO food.

They did it in serial fashion over the phone, on a press-conference call organized by supporters of YES ON 37. The California ballot measure that would force sellers to label their GMO food “genetically engineered,” to allow consumers the right to know and choose.

I was on the call, and I was stunned by the parade of morons from the press who were obscuring the main issue and complaining and whining about the definition of word “investigation.”

It was miles and miles through the looking-glass.

To begin with, Joe Sandler and Andy Kimbrell, lawyers supporting Proposition 37, laid out a convincing case for fraud on the part of the NO ON 37 group, who are funded by pesticide and biotech interests.

The charges: NO ON 37 had used, in their ads, the official seal of the FDA, a felony. They attributed statements to the FDA, Stanford University, the World Health Organization, the National Academy of Sciences, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics which those organizations had never made; statements that would convince voters to turn down Prop 37.

Sandler, Kimbrell, and others from the YES ON 37 camp further stated that these organizations had gone on the record denying they had ever made those statements.

Finally, the YES ON 37 representatives clearly asserted that the NO ON 37 forces had made false assertions in the California Voter Guide, which is sent to voters to help them understand arguments for and against ballot propositions. This would be another felony.

You can read the specific NO ON 37 deceptions here:

http://www.carighttoknow.org/documented_deceptions

Then came the time for questions. Suddenly, the mood changed. It changed because the press-conference organizers had publicized the event by claiming the FBI had opened an investigation into the NO ON 37 forces.

Reporters wanted to know whether there was really an FBI investigation. Joe Sandler and Andy Kimbrell explained there was. Sandler remarked that he had received a call from an FBI agent, Jason Jones, after a complaint had been sent to the Dept. of Justice.

The complaint detailed the false assertions in ads and in the Voter Guide. The FBI agent gave the impression that the FDA would be consulted, to see if they knew their official seal had been used by the NO ON 37 organizers.

But, whined a reporter, is that really really an investigation? One by one, reporters from the LA Times, the NY Times, and other papers wanted to get into a Talmudic hair-splitting conversation about the use of the word “investigation.” LA and NY Times reporters stated they had contacted the Dept. of Justice and learned no investigation had been launched.

Sandler said: look, a complaint was filed; an FBI agent followed up on it; the agent said the matter would be looked into.

The reporters were not assuaged. They kept chewing on the word “investigation.”

What shall we call it? An investigation, an inquiry, a preliminary fact-gathering expedition, an active concern, a mission to Mars, a ham sandwich, a kick in the ass? Who cares?

The YES ON 37 people had just exposed grievous and explosive lies and crimes by the forces who don’t want consumers to know whether the food they’re eating is engineered or GM-free.

That’s not a good enough story for the LA Times or the NY Times? That’s not a page-one ripper?

No, it’s not. It’s not because the reporters would actually have to THINK, and God forbid, COMPARE, in order to carry the ball themselves. They’d have to compare the statements made by NO ON 37 people against the truth, and they’d have to write more than: “FBI opens investigation.”

This is how these dancing monkeys operate. With the least possible amount of work.

They had a hook for their story in mind before they went on the press-conference call. It was, again: “FBI opens investigation.” If that hook wouldn’t technically hold up, they had no story. They had no more ideas. They had no more interest. They had no more active brain cells. They had no more balls. They had no more concern about GMO food or human health or the real issues involved.

And this is just on Level One. On Level Two, we would look into the preconceived media bias in favor of GMO food and no labeling.

But here, I’m just giving you the details of the press conference and the idiots who make up the press, the press that is dying, day by day, as the pages of their papers shrink and their ad revenues dry up and their jobs go away and their fate opens up an abyss before their eyes.

The reporter for the NY Times went so far as to suggest that the YES ON 37 PEOPLE really had no right to call the NO ON 37 people deceptive because there was a deception about, yes, THE FBI INVESTIGATION. It wasn’t actually an official investigation.

This is on the order of: “I drove all the way here to get your pastrami sandwich on a roll and I find out your menu actually says it comes on rye bread.”

To which the proper reply should be: “Your brain is made out of hamburger, so what difference does it make what I say to you? You’re a public nuisance. Get lost.”

This is exactly why the public loses faith in major media. This is why major media has no leg to stand on.

Here is another obvious fact the addled reporters didn’t think about: the NO ON 37 people, with their deep pockets, don’t care that they’re lying. The election is next Tuesday, and if they face some fines after that, it’s chump change to them. They want to sink Prop 37. That’s what they’re focused on.

The press, the fabled Fourth Estate, which is there to protect the public interest, put on quite a display at this press conference. They whined, they wheedled, they accused, they split hairs, they complained, they obfuscated, they distracted, they diverted, they came across like entitled high-school sophomores who’d just been given their first assignment for the school paper.

Meanwhile, Prop 37 is on the line. The right to know whether you’re eating food that has been injected with insect genes is on the line. A whole lot is on the line. But the press doesn’t care. They’re too busy failing in their mission and mandate.

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

Meet Monsanto’s number one lobbyist: Barack Obama

by Jon Rappoport

September 24, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

During his 2008 campaign for president, Barack Obama transmitted signals that he understood the GMO issue. Several key anti-GMO activists were impressed. They thought Obama, once in the White House, would listen to their concerns and act on them.

These activists weren’t just reading tea leaves. On the campaign trail, Obama said:

“Let folks know when their food is genetically modified, because Americans have a right to know what they’re buying.”

Making the distinction between GMO and non-GMO was certainly an indication that Obama, unlike the FDA and USDA, saw there was an important line to draw in the sand.

Beyond that, Obama was promising a new era of transparency in government. He was adamant in promising that, if elected, his administration wouldn’t do business in “the old way.” He would be “responsive to people’s needs.”

Then came the reality.

After the election, and during Obama’s term as president, people who had been working to label GMO food and warn the public of its huge dangers were shocked to the core. They saw Obama had been pulling a bait and switch.

The new president filled key posts with Monsanto people, in federal agencies that wield tremendous force in food issues, the USDA and the FDA:

At the USDA, as the director of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Roger Beachy, former director of the Monsanto Danforth Center.

As deputy commissioner of the FDA, the new food-safety-issues czar, the infamous Michael Taylor, former vice-president for public policy for Monsanto. Taylor had been instrumental in getting approval for Monsanto’s genetically engineered bovine growth hormone.

As commissioner of the USDA, Iowa governor, Tom Vilsack. Vilsack had set up a national group, the Governors’ Biotechnology Partnership, and had been given a Governor of the Year Award by the Biotechnology Industry Organization, whose members include Monsanto.

As the new Agriculture Trade Representative, who would push GMOs for export, Islam Siddiqui, a former Monsanto lobbyist.

As the new counsel for the USDA, Ramona Romero, who had been corporate counsel for another biotech giant, DuPont.

As the new head of the USAID, Rajiv Shah, who had preciously worked in key positions for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a major funder of GMO agriculture research.

We should also remember that Obama’s secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, once worked for the Rose law firm. That firm was counsel to Monsanto.

Obama nominated Elena Kagan to the US Supreme Court. Kagan, as federal solicitor general, had previously argued for Monsanto in the Monsanto v. Geertson seed case before the Supreme Court.

The deck was stacked. Obama hadn’t simply made honest mistakes. Obama hadn’t just failed to exercise proper oversight in selecting appointees. He wasn’t just experiencing a failure of short-term memory. He was staking out territory on behalf of Monsanto and other GMO corporate giants.

And now let us look at what key Obama appointees have wrought for their true bosses. Let’s see what GMO crops have walked through the open door of the Obama presidency.

Monsanto GMO alfalfa.

Monsanto GMO sugar beets.

Monsanto GMO Bt soybean.

Coming soon: Monsanto’s GMO sweet corn.

Syngenta GMO corn for ethanol.

Syngenta GMO stacked corn.

Pioneer GMO soybean.

Syngenta GMO Bt cotton.

Bayer GMO cotton.

ATryn, an anti-clotting agent from the milk of transgenic goats.

A GMO papaya strain.

And perhaps, soon, genetically engineered salmon and apples.

The Matrix Revealed

This is an extraordinary parade. It, in fact, makes Barack Obama the most GMO-dedicated politician in America.

You don’t attain that position through errors or oversights. Obama was, all along, a stealth operative on behalf of Monsanto, biotech, GMOs, and corporate control of the future of agriculture.

From this perspective, Michelle Obama’s campaign for home gardens and clean nutritious food suddenly looks like a diversion, a cover story floated to obscure what her husband has actually been doing.

Nor does it seem coincidental that two of the Obama’s biggest supporters, Bill Gates and George Soros, purchased 900,000 and 500,000 shares of Monsanto, respectively, in 2010.

Because this is an election season, people will say, “But what about Romney? Is he any better?” I see no indication that he is. The point, however, is that we are talking about a sitting president here, a president who presented himself, and was believed by many to be, an extraordinary departure from politics as usual.

Not only was that a wrong assessment, Obama was lying all along. He was, and he still is, Monsanto’s man in Washington.

To those people who fight for GMO labeling, and against the decimation of the food supply and the destruction of human health, but still believe Obama is a beacon in bleak times:

Wake up.

Sources:

http://redgreenandblue.org/2012/02/02/monsanto-employees-in-the-halls-of-government-part-2/

http://redgreenandblue.org/2011/02/09/monsanto-employees-in-the-halls-of-government/

http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2011/10/fda-labeling-gmo-genetically-modified-foods

http://fooddemocracynow.org/blog/2011/feb/15/update-obama-goes-rogue-gmos-tell-him-say-no-monsa/

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/food/genetically-engineered-foods/

http://news.yahoo.com/not-altruistic-truth-behind-obamas-global-food-security-174700462.html

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 OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.