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”.

“Gunpocalypse” Gun Control Laws In California Are Here

[Editor’s Note]

For those that want more comprehensive details on the laws just passed and the ones vetoed, please read this.
_________________________________________________________________
Source: GunsAndGearChannel
July 5, 2016

I go over some of the new laws in California commonly known as “Gunpocalypse”

Coping With California’s Six New Gun and Magazine Ban Laws

QuestionEverything2
Source: SurvivalBlog.com
James Wesley Rawles
July 4, 2016

This year’s Independence Day celebrations have been muted by news of the enactment of six tyrannical new gun, ammunition, and magazine laws in California.

California’s leftist legislature in now crowing about how they “did something” in response to the Islamic terror attack in San Bernadino last year. Six of 10 new “Gunmeggddon” laws that they passed were just signed into law by Democrat Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown.

Courtesy of the NRA-ILA, here is a summary of Governor Brown’s actions:

SIGNED BOTHAssembly Bill 1135 and Senate Bill 880 will make changes of monumental scale to California’s firearm laws by reclassifying hundreds of thousands of legally owned semi-automatic rifles as “assault weapons”. This legislation effectively outlaws magazine locking devices, more commonly known as “bullet buttons”. These are constitutionally protected firearms that have no association with crime. These changes would happen quickly with great individual costs to many gun owners and without public notice. Governor Brown vetoed similar legislation in 2013.

SIGNED Assembly Bill 1511 effectively ends the long-standing practice of temporarily loaning a firearm for lawful purposes. Under this legislation, the ability to loan a firearm to anyone other than a family member would now be prohibited unless conducted through a dealer, absent very narrow and limited exceptions. A simple loan to a trusted friend for a few days would take almost a month to complete from loan to return, requiring two background checks, two 10-day waiting periods, two fees, and multiple trips to a gun dealer. The result of the misguided legislation will turn otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals simply for borrowing or storing a firearm with a friend.

VETOEDAssembly Bill 1673 would have expanded the definition of “firearm” to include unfinished frames and/or receivers that are “clearly identifiable as being used exclusively as part of a functional weapon”. Depending on how this vague terminology is interpreted, AB 1673 would have treated pieces of metal as firearms, subjecting them to California’s exhaustive regulations and restrictions currently applicable to firearms.

VETOEDAssembly Bill 1674 would have expanded the existing one handgun a month law to include ALL guns, including those acquired through a private party transfer. AB 1674 will have no impact on criminal access to firearms and instead significantly hamper law abiding individuals, causing increased costs, time and paperwork to purchase multiple firearms. Criminals will continue to ignore this law purchasing firearms illegally, ignoring this burdensome and ineffective restriction.

SIGNEDAssembly Bill 1695 will create a 10-year firearm prohibition for someone convicted of falsely reporting a lost or stolen firearm. The NRA does not oppose making it a misdemeanor to knowingly file a false lost or stolen report to law enforcement. Our reason for opposition is related to the restriction of a constitutional right for the conviction of a misdemeanor offense.

VETOEDAssembly Bill 2607 would have expanded the class of individuals who could seek a Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO).” The NRA opposes the current GVRO procedures because they provide a mechanism for an individual to lose the right to keep and bear arms with no due process of law. AB 2607 would compound these problems by significantly expanding the classes of individuals who could seek a GVRO. This expansion would now include employers, coworkers, mental health workers, and employees of secondary and post-secondary schools.

VETOEDSenate Bill 894 would have required a victim of a crime to report to local Law Enforcement the theft of a firearm within an arbitrary time requirement of five days and the recovery of the firearm within 48 hours. Governor Brown has twice vetoed similar legislation stating, “I was not convinced that criminalizing the failure to report a lost or stolen firearm would improve identification of gun traffickers or help law enforcement disarm people prohibited from possessing guns. I continue to believe that responsible people report the loss or theft of a firearm and irresponsible people do not.

SIGNEDSenate Bill 1235 will place unjustified and burdensome restrictions on the purchase of ammunition and would require the attorney general to keep records of purchases. This legislation would further require any online ammunition sales to be conducted through a licensed vendor. First and foremost, the reporting of ammunition sales has already been tried – and failed – at the federal level. Throughout the 1980s, Congress considered repeal of a federal ammunition regulation package that required, among other things, reporting of ammunition sales. In 1986, the director of the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms supported eliminating the reporting requirement, stating: “The Bureau and the [Treasury] Department have recognized that current record keeping requirements for ammunition have no substantial law enforcement value.” As a result, the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 repealed the ammunition restrictions, with little opposition to the removal of that requirement. SB 1235 will similarly fail to reduce violent crime, as a law requiring the registration of ammunition purchases by honest citizens will not deter criminals. Governor Brown has twice vetoed similar legislation.

SIGNEDSenate Bill 1446 bans the simple possession of ammunition feeding devices/magazines that are capable of holding more than 10 cartridges. The federal “large-ammunition feeding device” ban of 1994-2004 was allowed to sunset due in part to its ineffectiveness. Yet, California anti-gun legislators still are persisting with this ban knowing that the congressionally-mandated study concluded that “the banned guns were never used in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders” before the ban and the bans 10-round limit on new magazines was not a factor in multiple-victim or multiple-wound crimes.

o o o

Hundreds of thousands of guns that were previously legal will become contraband. Magazines numbering at least in the hundreds of thousands and probably in the millions will become contraband, with hefty fines for possession. (See: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/15-16/bill/sen/sb_1401-1450/sb_1446_bill_20160701_chaptered.htm) Also, ammunition sales will be sharply curtailed, with background check requirements and registration of purchases! This is clearly collective insanity, but it is becoming the law of the land in the People’s Republic of California.

The Ammo Sales/Purchase Bans

California’s new ammunition purchase restrictions (Senate Bill 1235) are complicated, and part of the new law hinges on the outcome of a November ballot initiative. See: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1235. If it goes fully into effect, then:

Variously starting either on January 1, 2018, or January 1, 2019, (under penalty of a $1,000 fine):

  • Mail order or Internet purchases from out of state will be banned unless it is delivered by an in-state dealer, with a background check.
  • Transport of ammunition bought out of state will be banned, with an exception of just 50 rounds under some circumstances.
  • Only a licensed ammunition vendor will be be able to sell ammunition.
  • Background checks and a permanent registry record will be required for in-state ammunition purchases.

The absurdity of creating a registry for an expendable commodity was apparently lost on California’s idiotic legislators.

Note: There will be huge loopholes in the law for law enforcement, for the privileged few who hold concealed carry permits in California, and for anyone who is moving into the state. But the net effect is that the cost of buying ammunition in California will probably skyrocket (since the competitive pricing of nationwide sales choices will be gone), and sales will become tracked to the buyer.

Since the database of ammo purchases is cumulative, shooters who expend large quantities of ammunition (such as competitive target shooters) will likely become increasingly suspect, making it appear that they are stockpiling ammo that they are actually expending on the range.

The new law is silent on any restrictions on components for handloaders, but presumably anyone who “manufactures” (assembles) ammunition would fall under some sections of the law.

The Dreaded Magazine Ban: Senate Bill No. 1446

California’s new magazine ban (Senate Bill 1446) goes into effect on July 1, 2017. The law quite bluntly demands:

(c) A person who, prior to July 1, 2017, legally possesses a large-capacity magazine shall dispose of that magazine by any of the following means:

(1) Remove the large-capacity magazine from the state.

(2) Prior to July 1, 2017, sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed firearms dealer.

(3) Destroy the large-capacity magazine.

(4) Surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law enforcement agency for destruction.

Note: There are some exceptions for law enforcement agencies, currently-serving officers, retired officers, museums, movie prop companies, and the executors of wills or trustees settling estates. But otherwise, this is a “blanket” ban with no grandfather clause. As such, this ban will likely be challenged in the courts as a “taking” without compensation.

One oddity is that the new law is silent about belted or linked ammunition for belt-fed guns, but based on existing magazine restrictions in California, it is safe to assume that belts holding 11+ rounds could no longer be possessed. (This might have to be clarified by the courts.)

The fines start at $100 for the first offense, $250 for the 2nd offense, and $500 for the 3rd or subsequent offense. So a forgotten box of magazines in the back of a closet could potentially become a very expensive thing! Thankfully, violations of this law are considered infractions.

Your Response to the New Laws: Voting With Your Feet!

If you live in California, then I recommend that you immediately make plans to relocate your family to a more firearms-friendly state, and do so before 2017. Vote with your feet, folks! Relocating will serve two purposes: 1) It will maintain your firearms freedom, and 2) It will remove you from the California tax rolls, depriving the state of your revenue. (Starve the beast!)

If for some reason you cannot leave California before the new laws go into effect, then at least make arrangements with an out-state friend, a FFL, or a storage company to get your banned guns and magazines out of the State before the various effective dates of the new laws. But regardless, do not make the mistake of turning in your magazines in to the police “for destruction”. (Odds are, since the police are exempt from the law, some officers will simply take many of the surrendered magazines home for their own use or re-sell them out of state for a profit.)

The wording of SB 880 an AB 1135 are incredibly convoluted and require careful study. But most of their terms go into effect on January 1, 2017. That is the key date to remember and plan for.

A Limited Boycott

California’s misguided legislators need to get the message: Anti-gun owner tyranny is not unacceptable! I recommend that we institute a limited boycott of California. Those of us living in other states should NOT schedule or attend any conferences or conventions in California. Also, limit your vacation travel to California as much as possible. But please don’t boycott produce from California, since California’s rural and largely conservative fruit, vegetable, and nut growers don’t deserve to be punished for something that was not their doing! Please also continue to do business with California’s gun-related companies, but encourage them to relocate to a free state.

A Helping Hand

Sadly, California is now a legislative lost cause. The voices of its rural gun-owning minority have been drowned out by the statist/leftist urban majority. The chances of Californians salvaging their liberty is slim. Writing letters to your assemblymen in Sacramento or to the editor of your local newspaper just won’t work. You will be ignored. Firearms freedom is now just about dead in California, and the six newly-enacted gun laws were simply the last nails in the coffin lid. Face it, folks: The time has come to flee the tyranny.

Those of us living in free states should now do our best to help Californians escape the anti-gun tyrants. Please first help California’s gun law refugees store their banned guns and magazines, and then help the refugees get re-settled, to find jobs, make a fresh start, and feel welcome. That is the least we can do for them. – JWR

Read More At: SurvivalBlog.com

California Gov. Signs Minimum Wage Hike: Admits It “Doesn’t Make Economic Sense” As Locals Flee For Texas

Source: ZeroHedge.com
April 5, 2016

As we discussed previously states such as California are saying to hell with economics in their efforts to appease their voting base. Yesterday, both New York and California signed legislation to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. New York will phase in the $6 an hour increase over three years, and California will phase in their $5 an hour increase over the next six years.

The irony of the situation, which will most certainly go under reported, is that even California’s Governor Brown knows that it’s not the right decision to make economically. Regarding the actual economic impact, California’s Governor Brown was quoted as saying that “economically, minimum wages may not make sense.”

This is clear.

As we noted before, it is even clear to the locals businesses owners like the Marmalade Café which has seven locations. “First, you have to raise prices, otherwise you’ll be out of business,” owner Selwyn Yosslowitz told the Times. So higher prices for diners. That’s “first.” We imagine you can guess what’s “second.” “We will try to re-engineer the labor force,” Yosslowitz said. “Maybe try to reduce the number of bus boys and ask servers to bus tables.” In other words: “Maybe” we’ll fire some folks and the people who keep their jobs will have to be more efficient. 

Yosslowitz also worries about the dynamic we’ve discussed over the course of documenting Wal-Mart’s experience with wage hikes: namely that you have to preserve the wage hierarchy. You can’t hike wages for the lowest paid workers and then expect those further up the pay ladder to be satisfied with what they made before. “The other big worry [is] that employees already making $15 an hour will demand a raise as well”, Yosslowitz said. “It’s a chain reaction.”

Continue Reading At: ZeroHedge.com