California Vote Scandal Blows Up

TruthFact

Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
August 8, 2017

The watchdog group, Judicial Watch, is threatening to file a lawsuit if the state government of California doesn’t clean up its vast voting mess. (twitter version here, and here)

What mess?

Judicial Watch: “…public records obtained…show 11 California counties have more registered voters than voting-age citizens.”

What??

There’s more.

“Los Angeles County officials ‘informed us that the total number of registered voters [in the County] now stands at a number that is a whopping 144% of the total number of resident citizens of voting age.’”

FAR MORE REGISTERED VOTERS THAN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE OF VOTING AGE.

That’s doesn’t work. That’s fraud.

Now add this to the mix. Over a million illegal immigrants (some say far more) have received driver’s licenses in California. All of them (unless they specifically opt out), are automatically registered to vote by the Dept. of Motor Vehicles.

Put all this insanity together, and what do you get? A gigantic number of people who can illegally cast votes. Because, in California, it’s legal to be illegal.

Want to proceed further down the rabbit hole?

It’s probable that many illegal immigrants don’t vote. If someone wanted to vote FOR them, how would that work?

Not one at a time, unless some sinister organization had at least half a million foot soldiers on call, on Election Day.

But here is a possible clue: electronic voting systems.

Back in 2007, the secretary of state of California 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 electronic 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. The fourth system was rejected altogether.

To suppose that, after this top-to-bottom review in 2007, everything was quickly fixed 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-vote numbers.

I read the California Top-to-Bottom Review. The public comments section at the end was illuminating. It contained explosive remarks.

For example, there was 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 indicated that California lacked a method to ensure the source code for voting-machine software actually belonged to software certified by the state.

All in all, there is no guarantee (far from it) that the California voting system is safe or effective or honest.

If someone manipulated the system, and somehow utilized the huge numbers of illegal immigrants who are registered to vote, as a cover for falsified numbers…

Who would use illegal immigrants in that way?

You can answer that question.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

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.

WIN! California to List Glyphosate as a Carcinogen


Source: NaturalSociety.com
Julie Fidler
June 29, 2017

California will add glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s blockbuster herbicide RoundUp, to its list of chemicals known to cause cancer, effective July 7, 2017. [1]

Monsanto promises to fight the listing, required under state law Proposition 65, calling the decision “unwarranted on the basis of science and the law.”

The seeds and chemical company unsuccessfully tried to block the listing in trial court and requests for stay were denied by a state appellate court and the state’s Supreme Court. Monsanto has appealed the trial court decision.

Monsanto is entrenched in legal problems at the moment, including hundreds of lawsuits filed by people who allege glyphosate caused them cancer. The biotech giant and its products have always been controversial, but the company’s problems snowballed after the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) declared the chemical “probably carcinogenic” to humans.

Source: Institute for Responsible Technology

In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) inspector general is currently investigating whether a former staffer colluded with Monsanto to “kill” a study linking glyphosate to cancer.

Scott Partridge, Monsanto’s vice president of global strategy, said:

“This is not the final step in the process, and it has no bearing on the merits of the case. We will continue to aggressively challenge this improper decision.”

Glyphosate’s designation as a carcinogen under Proposition 65 means that companies selling the weed-killing chemical in California would be required to add warning labels to packaging. Additionally, warnings will need to be issued if glyphosate is sprayed at levels deemed harmful by regulators. The majority of glyphosate applicators are landscapers, golf courses, orchards, vineyards, and farms.

Monsanto and other glyphosate manufacturers will have about a year from the listing date to add the warnings to their products or pull them from the market if it is unsuccessful in challenging the decision.

It’s not clear whether RoundUp will receive a warning label. State regulators must still decide if the name brand weed killer contains high enough levels of glyphosate to endanger human health. More than 1,300 public comments have flooded state regulators on the matter. [2]

Sam Delson, a spokesman for California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), said:

“We can’t say for sure. We’re reviewing those comments.”

Glyphosate, an odorless, colorless chemical, was introduced by Monsanto in 1974, and skyrocketed in popularity for its ability to kill weeds without harming other plants. It is sold in 160 countries, and it is applied to 250 types of crops in California alone.

The fight to protect Californians from toxic substances like glyphosate is far from over, says Michael Baum, an attorney who represents more than 300 people who have filed suit against Monsanto, claiming glyphosate caused a loved one to get sick or die due to exposure to RoundUp.

Nathan Donley, a former cancer researcher and senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group, in an emailed statement, echoed similar sentiments. He said:

“California’s decision makes it the national leader in protecting people from cancer-causing pesticides. The U.S. EPA now needs to step up and acknowledge that the world’s most transparent and science-based assessment has linked glyphosate to cancer.” [3]

Sources:

[1] Reuters

[2] ABC News

[3] Newsweek

Institute for Responsible Technology


Read More At: NaturalSociety.com

How CNN Boss Jeff Zucker Helped Elect A US President & A Governor Of California

TruthFact

Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
July 1, 2017

One thing you have to understand about Mr. Zucker. What he does, he does for show. For ratings. If he could get away with claiming Trump met with Putin on the dark side of the moon to concoct a way to beat Hillary Clinton, he would run with it. If he could get away with claiming Arnold Schwarzenegger was the love child of Joseph Stalin and Greta Garbo, he would lead the evening newscast with it. He keeps selling the CNN Trump-Russia “investigation” because he’s (barely) getting away with it and he thinks it’ll keep drawing an audience.

In April, CNN boss Jeff Zucker told the New York Times, “The idea that politics is sport is undeniable, and we understood that and approached it that way.” The “it” was certainly the 2016 presidential campaign.

Zucker always has understood politics in this corrupt way—and in the process, he helped elect a US president and a California governor.

Who is Trump’s most consistent media enemy now? CNN is right up there.

But Jeff Zucker, CNN’s boss, was the man who launched The Apprentice, starring Donald Trump, at NBC, in 2004.

In other words, Zucker happened to play a major role in electing Donald Trump. There is no getting around it.

Washington Post, October 2, 2016: “Looking for someone specific to hold responsible for the improbable rise of Donald Trump?”

“Although there are many options, you could do worse than to take a hard look at Jeff Zucker, president of CNN Worldwide.”

“It was Zucker, after all, who as the new head of NBC Entertainment gave Trump his start in reality TV with ‘The Apprentice’ and then milked the real estate developer’s uncanny knack for success for all it was worth in ratings and profits.”

“And it succeeded wildly — boosting the network’s ratings, as well as Zucker’s [and Trump’s] meteoric career. In turn, under Zucker, the show gave rise to ‘Celebrity Apprentice,’ another Trump extravaganza. And, in turn, Zucker became the head of NBC overall.”

“The show [The Apprentice] was built as a virtually nonstop advertisement for the Trump empire and lifestyle,” according to the book ‘Trump Revealed,’ by Washington Post journalists Marc Fisher and Michael Kranish.”

“The executive [Jeff Zucker] rode the Trump steed hard. When the reality-TV star was preparing to marry Melania Knauss in 2005, Zucker wanted to broadcast the wedding live. (Trump, uncharacteristically, declined.)”

“But make no mistake: There would be no Trump-the-politician without Trump-the-TV-star. One begot the other.”

POLITICS IS TELEVISION, AND TELEVISION IS POLITICS.

If you’re looking for a person who embodies that fake version of reality most purely, you need look no further than Jeff Zucker.

Despite his network’s present hatred of Trump, Zucker would give Trump his own show right now if he wanted one.

For ratings and ad revenues.

Let’s go back in time and consider another event, one which I’ve analyzed in great detail. It took place on NBC in 2004, when Zucker was the head of the network’s entertainment division. Keep in mind that The Tonight Show, with Jeno Leno, was a prime piece of the entertainment division then. What Leno pulled off in 2004 had to have the OK from Zucker, because it was a highly unusual move, a distinctly unethical move.

What happened when an actor wanted to launch a political career and become a governor? The whole news division of a major network surrendered itself, for one ratings-busting night, to a talk show.

This is how Arnold Schwarzenegger won the California governor’s race. It all came down to his famous appearance on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, where he announced that he was going to run.

I obtained a copy of show, watched it many times, transcribed the dialogue, and noted the audience reactions.

Breaking down the segments revealed what happens when news and entertainment and PR and political advocacy all blur together in a single wave.

The show had been hyped as the moment when Arnold would announce whether he was going to run in the recall election against California Governor Gray Davis.

The public anticipation was sky-high. No one seemed concerned that NBC was turning over its news division, for one night, to its entertainment division. Jeff Zucker, head of NBC entertainment, was all in.

Turning over network news to network entertainment was precisely the subject of the best movie ever made about television, Paddy Chayefsky’s Network. That didn’t register with the national media.

If Arnold decided to run for governor, he wouldn’t be announcing it at a stale press conference at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, after a brief introduction from The Snoozer, LA Mayor Richard Riordan. No, Arnold would obtain a rocket boost from Jay Leno.

Keep in mind that talk shows warm up and prep their studio audiences to act and respond with amphetamine-like enthusiasm.

And then that audience transmits its glow and howling racket to the wider television audience, thereby blowing an artificially enhanced event across the landscape.

On the night of August 6, 2003, Tonight Show host Jay Leno devoted two six-minute segments to The Arnold.

Of course, it was more than an interview. Jay had been touting this night as the occasion for a key revelation in the comic play called The California Recall Election.

Arnold would say yes or Arnold would say no. He would run for governor or he would decline.

Bigger than conventional news, Arnold strode out on to Jay’s stage. A Tonight Show camera picked him up from a grossly complimentary low angle, making him appear even larger and more physically imposing than he is. Jay was positioned standing behind him, applauding, lending an affirmative gloss to the entrance. Already, it looked and felt political.

This was not a beginning; the impression was of something already in motion, a train to catch up with.

As the man of the hour sat down next to Jay, he commented that there was a big audience in the house (“Can you believe all these people here?”) and, capping his first gambit, he stated that every one of them was running for governor of California. Ha-ha. (At one point, there were 135 gubernatorial candidates.)

Quickly, Jay gets down to business. The business of making the evening extra-special: “Now, I don’t think we’ve ever had this much press at The Tonight Show for any—[let’s look at] our press room—normally [the press] sit in the audience.”

Cut to a stark room, shot from above. About 40 reporters doing almost nothing at tables. Obviously, the room was set up for this event.

Jay cracks a couple of jokes about the press gaggle, lowers his voice and turns his full attention to Arnold: “…it’s been weeks…and people going back and forth…taken you awhile, and you said you would come here tonight and tell us your decision. So what is your decision?”

Arnold replies, “Well, Jay, after thinking for a long time, my decision is…”

The sound cuts off, and the TV screen displays an old PLEASE STAND BY notice. Thick white letters against a background of an ancient station test pattern from the 1950s. A mechanical tone plays for several seconds.

The audience laughs. There is applause, too.

Cut back to Jay and Arnold. Arnold says, “That’s why I decided that way.” Big audience laughter.

Jay, going along—as if Arnold had spilled the beans during a momentary technical malfunction—shouts, “Right, good, right! I tell you I am shocked! I can’t believe it! I can’t believe it!”

Jay then starts out from the bottom again. “[Whether you’re going to run has been] in my monologue…it’s been good for, like, a thousand jokes over the last couple of weeks…”

Once more, he gently poses the question. “What are you going to do?” It’s still too early for an answer, and Jay knows it.

Arnold wants another false start. He’s planned it.

“Well, my decision obviously is a very difficult decision to make, you know…it was the [most] difficult decision that I’ve made in my entire life, except the one in 1978 when I decided to get a bikini wax.”

Laughter, applause, whistles.

The studio audience warms to the fact that Arnold glimpses an absurdity about the whole proceeding.

“He’s our Arnie, laughing the way we laugh. Hell, all we’ve got are laughs in this life, and our boy isn’t going to go stuffed-shirt on us.”

Arnold then gives his rehearsed political speech.

He reflects that California was a grand land of opportunity when he arrived in 1968. It was the greatest state in the greatest nation.

However, now the atmosphere in California is “disastrous,” he says. There is a “disconnect” (thank you, pop psych 101) between the people and the politicians.

“The politicians are fiddling, fumbling, and failing.”

Very big applause follows. The audience is doing its job.

Close by, off camera, we hear Jay thumping his own personal hand claps. The host is pumping his studio crowd and giving his seal of approval to a remark whose veracity is supposed to be tested by the recall election itself.

And there is a phalanx of teen-age girls screaming at a very high pitch in the studio. They’re adding a major element of hysterical enthusiasm. Where did they come from? Are they a legitimate Arnold demographic? Were they pulled out of a Valley mall to paper the crowd? Do they migrate from talk show to talk show? From this point forward, they’ll play a huge role in every audience outburst.

Arnold gathers steam. He tells one and all that the people of California are doing their job.

They’re working hard.

Paying their taxes.

Raising their families.

But the politicians are not doing their job.

Now he executes a blend around the far turn: “And the man that is failing the people more than anyone is [Governor] Gray Davis!”

The crowd goes wild. The girls scream as if they’re at a kiddie rock concert in the magic presence of four sixteen-year-old pretty boys. It’s eerie.

And now the audience is suddenly on edge.

They can handle the juice. The longed-for result.

Arnold senses it.

He lets the audience-hysteria roller coaster die down and then, taking it up to heaven, announces that, he, Arnold is…

Yes…

GOING TO RUN FOR GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA.

Boom. Bang. Pow. Zow.

The studio audience cracks the ceiling. Wilder than wild. The girls are shrieking walls of sound way above high C. Undoubtedly, the show is flashing applause signs.

Jay shakes his head and grins like a pro hypster who’s just witnessed a very, very good variation on bait and switch. As if Arnold was supposed to say no, but now he’s saying yes.

The Tonight Show band lays down some heavy chords.

Jay shouts, “There you go! There you go! That woke ‘em up! That woke ‘em up!” We cut to the press room, and sure enough, the reporters are now on phones, typing at their keyboards. The story is live and good to go. A global event is underway.

Amid the roar and the music, Jay, smiling broadly and wisely, shakes his finger at Arnold and says to him, “You know something?”

It seems Jay’s about to utter, “That’s the best damn switcheroo I ever saw!” But he doesn’t do it. Instead, as the noise abates, he says it’s a good time to go to a break.

The band plows into a funk riff, under the applause, and the show cuts to commercial.

The sea has parted. The consecration has been performed.

The ax felled the tree in the forest, and everyone heard it.

Marshall McLuhan rolled over in his grave, sat up, grinned, lit a cigar, and sipped a little brandy.

After the commercials, in the next six-minute segment, Jay and Arnold attain a few more highs of audience madness.

High one: Arnold mentions that 1.6 million Californians have signed the recall petition and are saying, “We are mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore!” Wowee.

No one notices or remembers this line was made massively famous in Network, the bitter satire on news as entertainment.

Is it remotely possible Arnold recalls the 1976 Paddy Chayefsky film and its newsman, Howard Beale, who survives a ratings dive by delivering a delirious populist message on air, and becomes, for a short time, the most revered man in America?

Is it possible Arnold knows the TV network portrayed in the film gave its news division to its entertainment division—exactly what’s transpiring right there, for the moment, on The Tonight Show?

High two: Arnold clarifies his message to all politicians everywhere. “Do your job for the people and do it well, or otherwise you’re out. Hasta la vista, baby!” Zowee.

High three: After telling the crowd they all know Gray Davis can run a dirty campaign “better than anyone”—and that Davis has been selling off pieces of California to special interests—Arnold says with conviction and confidence, “I do not have to bow to any special interests; I have plenty of money; no one can pay me off; trust me, no one.” Audience hysteria. They love that he’s rich.

High four: Arnold says of Davis, “Everyone knows this man has to go!” Huge roar.

High five: Arnold plays a final pun card. “I will pump up Sacramento!” Yet another roar.

The band takes it out with more funk. Jay stands up and goes over and hugs Arnold, in profile, near his desk, and follows him closely toward an exit at stage left. Jay starts to whisper something in Arnold’s ear, but pulls back and smiles and, still on camera, applauds Arnold along with the audience.

It’s show biz in a bottle. Jay, Arnold, the crowd, the band, bouncing off one another and yielding the effect of absolute (synthetic) thrill.

The Tonight Show provided the moment for a globally famous actor to decide to run for office in the same state where the show originates. In the entertainment capital of the world. In front of the clear prime-cut admiration of the host.

And the studio audience, that specialized creature from whose maw instant credibility can be coaxed and birthed in seconds—was very, very ready to go. All along.

Imagine an advance man pre-selling this kind of PR stunt:

“I know a guy who can introduce your message to the softest, wildest, water-cooler crowd this side of paradise.”

“Oh yeah? How big a crowd?”

“Only a thousand or two. But they’re instantly hooked up to, say, ten million people in the target area. It’s as infectious as Ebola.”

“Come on.”

“And that’s not all. I’ve got a host for that softest, wildest audience, and he has the whole world in the palm of his hand. When he exposes your message—for the first time anywhere—and when his audience goes nuts with glee, nothing will stand in your way. Your opponents will go down like bowling pins.”

“Too good to be true.”

“Wrong. And let me point out what I’m saving you from. If you tried to launch your message at a shopping center or a press club or a hotel ballroom or construction site or on a movie-studio sound stage, you could get laughed right out of town. Really. Because, let’s face it, you do have a pretty vapid message when you boil it down. You need a unique venue, where the joke and the camp and the craziness are all folded into the event itself, and the shock and surprise and hoopla are integrated. You need an audience that celebrates bad and good jokes as all good, and the host has the ability to marry up every shred of this bizarre happening and take his crowd to orgasm.”

“And the contagion factor?”

“The audience in the television studio and the viewing audience at home are One. My boy, what stuns and delights the former incorporates itself into the living cells of the latter. The home audience is terrified of being left out. The host and his in-studio crowd give instant universal legitimacy to the moment. Believe me, it’s irresistible.”

“Like that McLuhan thing. The audience becomes the actor.”

“Precisely.”

That is how it happened. That is how Arnold Schwarzenegger obtained his billion-dollar ad on Jay Leno, on August 6, 2003, and that was when he won the recall election. There was no counter-strategy for it.

Governor Gray Davis was left out in the cold.

The announcement of Arnold’s candidacy was the end of the election.

In the aftermath, media pundits did not punch up this piece of mind control with any serious heat; nor did they immediately seek a heavy investigation of NBC’s ethics in allowing the Leno-Arnold event to take place.

The Tonight Show was a perfect killing ground: Arnold, the earnest and powerful and Germanically jolly and occasionally self-deprecating soul, aware of the comic-book component of his success; Jay, the jokester, who can work as a homer and straight man at the drop of a hat; and Jay’s audience, willingly propelled into the late-night nexus of “we’ll laugh so hard at any old damn thing we’ll make a cosmic celebration out of it.”

Something out of nothing.

GE (then the owner of NBC): “We bring good things to life.”

An election campaign message was passed, hand to hand, mind to mind, adrenal gland to adrenal gland, from a concocted, groomed, cultivated, prepackaged television studio audience to every voter-district in California, and out to the whole world.

When people show up in the studio to see Leno in person, they soon understand the game. They’re not just there as happy onlookers. They’re drawn into the process. They’re offered a trade-off.

If they become active shills for the show right there in the studio, they’ll become part of the story. They’ll attain new status. Their laughs and squeals and shrieks and rebound guffaws, their revved-up salvational applause, at those moments when a guest segment or a joke is falling flat, will provide key segue and filler and affirmation and speed candy for the larger audience at home. It’s a group collaboration.

Who cares—except when a fading movie action hero suddenly says he’s going to take over the reins of California?

In the television studio, and in millions of homes, the audience roared and helped Arnold go for his coronation. They experienced a reasonable facsimile of emotional torque and busted a move that showered sparks around Arnold’s head and pushed him through a porthole into an ozone that just might have been the closest thing they’d ever find to immortality.

On October 10, three days after Arnold scored number one in the recall vote count, The NY Times ran a piece by Bill Carter headlined, “NBC Supports the Politically Partisan Leno.”

But Carter’s story was merely about Jay, on the night of October 7, taking the stage in Los Angeles to introduce Arnold as the recall election winner.

THIS was the issue? This was the barrier that Leno had crossed? Carter mentioned nothing about those 12 minutes on August 6th, on The Tonight Show, when Arnold announced he was running and thereby sewed up the election.

Jeff Zucker, then the head of entertainment at NBC (NOW THE BOSS AT CNN), told Carter he was aware Jay was going to introduce Arnold at the victory celebration. “I did not and do not have a problem with it,” he said.

Zucker noted that Jay was a private citizen with all the accruing rights of same.

Not a word from Zucker either, about the propriety of Leno hosting Arnold’s campaign launch on August 6, on The Tonight Show.

The Studio Audience, on the night of August 6, 2003, fingered and chose and elected a governor of California.

Jay Leno has gone on to thousands of other jokes.

But he’ll never forget that one.

And neither will Zucker.

He helped elect Arnold. And he made Trump a global star of the first magnitude on The Apprentice, and thereby helped him win the presidency.

If you like interesting coincidences, both the Leno Moment and launch of The Apprentice happened in 2004. And when Donald Trump left The Apprentice in 2015, who took over as the host?

Arnold Schwarzenegger, of course.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

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

California Senate Passes Bill Banning Drug Company Gifts to Doctors

California doctors receive $1.4 billion in gifts each year

Source: NaturalSociety.com
Mike Barret
May 25, 2017

On May 18, the California Senate passed a bill that would ban pharmaceutical companies from giving gifts to doctors. The Senate voted 23-13 in favor of sending the bill to the Assembly. [1]

For the bill, SB 790, California lawmakers used a similar 2009 Vermont law enacted in 2009 as a template.

If the bill is signed into law, doctors would no longer be able to receive perks, such as airline tickets and lavish meals, from drug companies. According to Sen. Mike McGuire, the bill would lower healthcare costs, in part because doctors who receive gifts are more likely to prescribe costly drugs. [2]

Drug companies unload more than $1.4 billion a year on California doctors in the hopes they will promote and prescribe their products, said McGuire, a Democrat who represents a district west of Sacramento.

McGuire said that in 2014, doctors in his state received more gifts and payments from pharmaceutical companies than in doctors any other state. [3]

“While we have witnessed the cost of drugs rise over the past decade, industry profits have also grown significantly. We should be all standing for seniors and taxpayers to drive down the cost of prescription drugs.” [1]

According to a recent study by researchers at UC San Francisco, doctors who receive gifts from drug companies are 2 to 3 times more likely to prescribe name-brand drugs over cheaper, generic drugs. [2]

An even more recent study found that doctors at teaching hospitals are more likely to prescribe generic drugs when pharma reps are kept at bay.

Source: Pro Publica

Others have a different take on SB 790. State Sen. Ted Gaines argued that drug company gifts “provide the funding for research, for cures.”

He added:

“Why would we do anything to diminish the ability of pharma companies to be successful in providing these new products?” [3]

Senate minority leader Patricia Bates said the bill would discourage physicians from participating in clinical trials or restrict California’s access to experimental drugs.

However, the bill would still permit doctors to receive salaries for participating in clinical trials, and would allow for the payment of meals up to $250 per year for individual doctors.

The bill is headed to the state Assembly, the California lower Legislature, for consideration.

Read More At: NaturalSociety.com

Sources:

[1] Associated Press

[2] Daily Health Post

[3] RT

Pro Publica

Victory for clean water advocates in California

Source: RT
April 25, 2017

California is planning to set a maximum contaminant level for a toxic chemical known as 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP). For 25 years, state regulators have considered TCP a cancer-causing agent, yet it remained unregulated and the water sources of millions of homes are contaminated. RT America’s Brigida Santos reports.

Public health nightmare: Lead poisoning in Fresno, CA

Source: RT
April 4, 2017

Children in Fresno, California, are suffering from lead poisoning at levels nearly three times higher than their counterparts in infamous Flint, Michigan. Their elevated blood-lead levels are due not to the water supply, but to outdated homes coated in lead-based paint. RT America’s Brigida Santos reports.

CA tries to legislate fake news with scary, Orwellian bill

Source: RT
April 3, 2017

A.B. 1104 read: “It is unlawful for a person to knowingly and willingly make, publish or circulate on an Internet Web site, or cause to be made, published, or circulated in any writing posted on an Internet Web site, a false or deceptive statement designed to influence the vote on either of the following: Any issue submitted to voters at an election, and Any candidate for election to public office.” Luckily, it just got killed. The Resident discusses.

California government buried the truth about cell phone radiation causing brain cancer… FULL TEXT of once-secret document reveals how EMFs penetrate “deeper into a child’s brain”

Image: California government buried the truth about cell phone radiation causing brain cancer… FULL TEXT of once-secret document reveals how EMFs penetrate “deeper into a child’s brain”
Source: Mike Adams
NaturalNews.com
March 4, 2017

A once-secret document detailing links between cell phones and brain cancer has been released by order of a California court. Entitled, “Cell Phones and Health,” the document was demanded in a lawsuit filed by Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., director of the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health.

Click here to read the full document, copied to Natural News servers.

“I would like this document to see the light of day because it will inform the public that there is concern within the California Department of Public Health that cellphone radiation is a risk, and it will provide them with some information about how to reduce those risks,” Moskowitz told a local CBS affiliate.

The document says that “long-term cell phone use may increase the risk of brain cancer and other health problems” and admits that “cell phone EMFs can affect nearby cells and tissues.” In a special warning section about children, it also explains that “EMFs can pass deeper into a child’s brain than an adult’s.”

EMF stands for ElectroMagnetic Field. Follow more news about EMF at EMF.news. According to the document, there’s no evidence that EMF blocking devices for cell phones actually work, by the way. (I haven’t personally tested any in my lab, so I can’t say whether this is true or false, but from a commonsense scientific point of view, if they really blocked EMF signals from the phone, the phone would no longer be able to make calls because it couldn’t communicate with cell towers.)

California government deliberately hid this information from the public

The California government actively hid this document from the public for at least seven years, likely under pressure from industry lobbyists who have long sought to conceal the evidence of harm caused by cell phone radiation. In the same way that biotech companies seek to conceal the harm of GMOs… and pesticides manufacturers conceal the harm of pesticides… and vaccine promoters conceal the harm of mercury in vaccines, the cell phone industry doesn’t want any evidence linking EMFs and brain cancer to see the light of day.

In truth, your brain is under a massive chemical, electromagnetic and propaganda assault on a daily basis. Some of the many attacks on your brain include:

– Brain-damaging fluoride in the public water supply

– Mercury preservatives in flu shots

– Pesticides in non-organic food products

– EMFs from mobile phones

– WiFi broadcast signals

– Fake news media propaganda

– Brain-altering medications such as antidepressants

Follow more news about brain health at Brain.news.

Read the full text of the once-secret California document on cell phones and EMFs

Here’s the full text of the California document, now posted at Natural News:

http://www.naturalnews.com/files/CDPH-Cell-Phone-April-2014.pdf

Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control / California Department of Public Health

Cell Phones and Health

Cell phones, like other electronic devices, emit a kind of energy called radiofrequency EMFs (electromagnetic fields). Health officials are concerned about possible health effects from cell phone EMFs because some recent studies suggest that long-term cell phone use may increase the risk of brain cancer and other health problems. For those concerned about possible health problems, this fact sheet provides information about how to lower exposure to EMFs from cell phones.

What do we know about cell phones and health?

Several studies have found that people with certain kinds of brain cancer were more likely to have used cell phones for 10 years or more. Most of the cancers were on the same side of the head that people usually held their phones. Although the chance of developing brain cancer is very small, these studies suggest that regular cell phone use increases the risk of developing some kinds of brain cancer. Some studies have also linked exposure to EMFs from cell phones to fertility problems. As more studies are done and we learn more about possible risks for cancer and other health problems linked to cell phone use, the recommendations on this fact sheet may change.

What are EMFs?

EMFs are types of radiation. They are created by all electronic devices. Some devices, such as watches, create weak EMFs that are considered harmless. Others, like X-ray machines, generate very strong EMFs that can damage cells and tissues, and cause cancer and other health effects. This is why we try to only use X-rays when necessary. Cell phones make relatively weak EMFs, somewhat less than those from microwave ovens, but because they are used frequently and kept close to the head and body, cell phone EMFs can affect nearby cells and tissues.

EMF exposure from cell phones

Your exposure to cell phone EMFs depends mostly on your distance from the phone, the strength of the EMF, and how long and how often you use the phone. The farther away the phone is from your body, the lower the exposure. Your cell phone produces stronger EMFs at the start of a call, when it is trying to connect to a cell tower, and also when only one or two bars are showing. Your phone also emits stronger EMFs when used in a moving car, bus, or train, as the phone switches connections from one cell tower to another. Finally, some phones produce stronger EMFs than others.

What can I do to reduce my exposures to EMFs from cell phones?

To lower your exposure to EMFs from cell phones:

Increase the distance between you and your phone by:

  • Using the speaker phone.
  • Sending text messages.
  • Use a headset and carry your phone away from your body. EMFs from wireless (Bluetooth) and wired headsets are usually weaker than those from a cell phone.
  • Keep your phone away from your body. A cell phone that is on can emit EMFs even when it is not being used. Do not sleep with your cell phone near you or carry it in a pocket or directly on your body unless the phone is turned off.

Limit your cell phone use when reception is weak or increase the distance between you and the phone. When your phone shows only one or two bars, it is emitting stronger EMFs than when three, four, or five bars are showing.

Reduce the amount of time spent talking on a cell phone.

  • Keep cell phone calls short, even when using a wireless or wired headset.
  • Use speaker phone mode or a corded phone for longer conversations.

Corded phones produce very weak EMFs.

Take off your headset when you’re not on a call. Wireless and wired headsets emit EMFs even when you are not using your phone.

Do not rely on devices that claim to shield or neutralize EMFs from cell phones. These devices have not been shown to reduce exposures.

What about cell phone EMFs and children?

EMFs can pass deeper into a child’s brain than an adult’s. Also, the brain is still developing through the teen years, which may make children and teens more sensitive to EMF exposures. For these reasons, parents may want to limit their child’s cell phone use to texting, important calls, and emergencies. Pregnant women, children, and teens can also follow the tips for reducing exposure listed above.

Where can I get more information?

For more information about EMF exposures and cell phones, please send an email to: cellinfo@cdph.ca.gov

Document released pursuant to Moskowitz v. CDPH, Sac. Super. Ct. No. 34-2016-80002358

Read More At: NaturalNews,.com

Revisiting The Oroville Dam Story

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
February 21, 2017

In spite of the fact that many readers of this website reside in California, I was quite surprised at the amount of feedback I had after my blog about the Oroville dam in northern California. In fact, so many people sent so many articles that I decided today’s blog would largely consist of the various articles people sent me, with as minimum commentary as possible. As the reader might recall, I indulged my usual high octane speculation on that story, pointing out that the spillway damage when viewed in the context of other strange, very deliberate attacks in and around the Bay area in recent years, takes on a rather different look. In short, I was arguing that perhaps the dam difficulties were in part deliberate and intended. Some people bombarded me for even suggesting such a possibility. How dare I? The dam was in disrepair. There was subsidence under the spillway due to years of drought; when the rains came that only exacerbated the situation. Well and good, but my point was not to advance a sole theory to the exclusion of others. If one deliberately wants to damage a dam, then prior subsidence will certainly aid the effort.

But as soon as those articles and theories were advanced, I began to get a flood – no pun intended – of other articles raising some prickly questions about Governor Moon Beam, and his cohort of crazies from Bersekley and San Franfreakshow, and most of them from Californians themselves who were asking “questions.” So, as I said, I decided to marshal all of these together – or at least significant representatives of these articles – and let the reader himself decide what the heck is going on. (Please note, some of the links would not link properly so you will have to copy and paste the address into your browser).

The first category of theory concerns the maintenance of the Oroville dam, which does indeed appear not to have been maintained at the highest level. Here’s one such version, shared by Mr. V.T.:

Who Will be Blamed if the Oroville Dam Fails?

Then there’s another version, which implicates the state governor in some activity displacing local sheriffs and their responses to the situation, again shared by Mr. V.T.:

Worsening Oroville Dam Crisis: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly

Ms. D.S. spotted this article, where Governor Moon Beam is – you guessed it – blaming the potential failure of the dam on “global warming,” not poor maintenance and certainly not on “deliberate action” of other types:

https://conservativedailypost.com/ca-governor-brown-will-not-face-charges-dam-disaster-blamed-instead-global-warming/

This article, from the Sacramento Bee, another find by Mr. V.T., points out that the dam’s maintenance manual is outdated, and based on weather patterns from fifty years ago:

Oroville Dam’s flood-control manual hasn’t been updated for half a century

Now things start to turn a bit murkier. The following two articles were shared by Ms. K.F. The first, an LA Times article, points out the governor allegedly had state officials investigate the oil drilling potential on some of his personal property in northern California, which the second link, a private post, alleges is near the dam:

Gov. Jerry Brown had state workers research oil on family ranch

Gov. Jerry Brown had state workers research oil on family ranch, can you guess where it is, a short drive to Oroville

Mr. V.T. then sent this article, which questions Governor Brown’s sense of urgency over the issue:

The Oroville Dam Crisis Is Not Over- Gov Brown Demonstrates Lack of Concern for Citizen Welfare

Mr. V.T. also discovered this article stating that the dam has been operating under temporary licenses for twelve years, implying that there were structural problems known to authorities for quite some time:

Oroville Dam running on temporary licenses; mandatory evacuations still in place

Mr. A. found this article, which is a “conspiracy theory” view of the disaster, complete with fifty-dollar bill folding exercise to “prove” its “case”:

Oroville Dam Update! Down the Rabbit Hole & Who Is Orchestrating This Event and 50 Dollar Bill

And Ms. B.Z. found yet another “conspiracy theory” article here from the same source that spurred my own high octane speculations:

Oroville Dam sabotage aimed at destroying Californian economy

This video link provided by Mr. G.L.R. suggests that the damaged area of the main spillway was known to state officials back in 2013:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQxVmKnBgvc

So, what does all this add up to? Well, clearly, many people have detected something vaguely malodorous about the whole affair: the governor allegedly directing state employees to conduct mineral deposit investigations on his private property which happens to be close to the dam. Add to this the apparent known subsidence beneath the spillways, and damage apparently known for some time, outdated operation manuals, and so on, and one does have to wonder just what the heck is going on here. I have no doubt that subsidence was and is a contributory factor here, for with the drought the state has experienced in recent years, it would be irrational not to suspect this. But this does not rule out my prior speculations: subsidence could be exacerbated by carefully chosen and placed sabotage. One doesn’t need a bomb. A pick axe and some elbow grease at a properly chosen location will do: create a hole, and let the water do the rest. Again, I find the previous stories of sabotage – clearly deliberate – in northern California a peculiar context from which potentially to view this disaster. I am not saying that this is what happened, but merely that I view it as a possibility, simply because many Californians, caught in the drought and watching the once lush agriculture of the southern San Joaquin valley disappear, have been alleged that this, too, is a deliberately policy and ploy to pick up rich land on the cheap.

And while normally I do not report private stories on this website, again, this one is significant enough to pass along merely to see if anyone else noticed the same thing: one reader of this website emailed me to state that she had watched various videos and examined various pictures of the spillway damage, and could detect no rebar in the spillway concrete, an allegation that left me dumbfounded, for the imagination boggles at the idea of constructing a dam spillway without such rebar, given the enormous pressures and strains such spillways undergo when water is cascading down them. Indeed, she pointed out in her email that rebar was considered essential in all dam spillway construction; one simply would not construct a spillway without it. So then the question becomes, what happened to the rebar? If her allegations are true, the mind boggles.

By the way… she closed her email with an answer to that last question. Perhaps, she said, the rebar was simply “dustified,” borrowing the term from Dr. Judy Wood.

Whatever one makes of these stories, for my part, there’s enough smoke here to suggest a fire. But this is also a case of “you tell me”.[Bold Emphasis added throughout]

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

More Strangeness In California: The Oroville Dam

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
February 14, 2017

Every now and then an article is emailed to me that is so off-the-beaten-track that I simply have to talk about it. Regular readers here will know why: I simply cannot resist an opportunity for high octane speculation. This is one such story, for Mr. V.Z. sent me story that I wasn’t even aware of: not even the so-called alternative me has covered this one, except in one lowly article that is ostensibly about Trump appointing a “judge” to stop those “destroying America,” but the bulk of which is curiously about a dam in northern California.

Yes, you read that correctly: a dam in northern California. Before we get to that article however, I want to stress that today’s high octane speculation is probably better qualified as overboard groundless suspicion, since I haven’t been able to find any confirmation of today’s main article’s speculations, except for some interesting “suggestive” comments from an article appearing in the Sacramento Bee. Nonetheless, the Bee’s coverage of the story raises certain questions, which makes it important to at least communicate and entertain today’s overboard groundless suspicion.

Here’s how the Sacramento Bee first reported this story on February 7:

Engineers begin inspections at damaged Oroville Dam

Ok… so it’s just a story about a big earthen dam with a big erosion problem in its major spillway.

But then, the next day the Bee is reporting this:

Oroville Dam officials find new damage after water releases, as reservoir level climbs

Now before we move on to the article that Mr. V.Z. shared, there are a number of things about this last article I want to draw to your attention;  note these statements:

State engineers have found new damage to the Oroville Dam spillway, although not as much as they’d feared, after conducting two test releases to see how much water the scarred facility could handle, the state said Thursday. Meanwhile, reservoir levels continued to climb behind the critical flood-control structure.

The gash that was discovered Tuesday grew by another 50 feet after engineers released water for a combined six hours Wednesday and early Thursday, according to Department of Water Resources spokesman Doug Carlson. “They found additional damage to the spillway, which was predicted,” Carlson said. “It wasn’t as bad as they thought it might be.”

OK, fine: they tested a release in the spillway after discovering it was damaged to see how it would function. But later in the article, we read this:

Croyle, DWR’s acting director, said it was not yet clear what caused the crater to form. Three recent inspection reports for the dam – one from 2014 and two from 2015 – noted no visible signs of deficiencies along the chute.

Gary Leese and his girlfriend, Beth Bello, were among the first people this week to see that something was seriously wrong. On Tuesday morning, they hiked down the hillside adjacent to the spillway, something they’d done many times over the years. Leese said he knew something was amiss when they came upon a giant, angry splash of water instead of the normal gentle waterfall that runs down the sloping structure.

“I knew there was something up just because of the load roar it was making,” Leese said. “That’s when we walked a little closer and saw the plume of water coming up in the air, and we kept seeing the fragments of concrete shooting up in the air.”

The couple soon was asked to leave by state employees. (Emphasis added)

Now, this is where it begins – to my mind – to get more than a little suspicious. There was no evidence that the spillway was damaged to the extent that would cause the massive erosion beneath it. Moreover, while I’m obviously not familiar with “routine dam operations,” I find it difficult to believe that no regular inspections are performed prior to major releases of water. Big holes in the middle of a spillway are probably going to be rather obvious to whomever is running the dam at the moment and pushing buttons and turning wheels to release major amounts of water. In this case, the damaged spillway was causing a plume of water to shoot up, containing chucks of concrete that were being ripped from the spillway by rushing water. The couple who discovered the damage are then asked to leave. But there are a number of unasked and unanswered questions here: did the couple call the dam authorities to alert them of the damage? Or did they discover it themselves? And if so, when?

With these questions in mind, we at last come to Mr. V.Z.’s submission:

Trump appoints judge to stop those attempting to destroy America

http://tapnewswire.com/2017/02/trump-appoints-judge-to-stop-those-attempting-to-destroy-america/embed/#?secret=dA3jOPIOu0

Now, as the link above indicates, there’s very little here about Mr. Trump, judges, and saving America, and a great deal about the Oroville Dam damage. Obviously, in reading the last article, the author or authoress, “Tapestry”, has a “point of view” about California, subversives, Communists, and so on, and believes that the state government is intentionally trying to destroy California’s once prosperous agriculture. On a personal note, I can honestly say that on a recent trip through California’s San Joaquin valley with friends, including friend and colleague Walter Bosley, I was utterly dumbfounded and shocked at what I saw: the southern valley was a wasteland… the once lush and rich farms and orchards had almost been completely denuded. It was as if western Iowa had been turned into a vast desert wasteland. So I do suspect there is truth to “Tapestry’s” allegations. Where…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.