Breaking: vote fraud in Oregon sinks GMO labeling
by Jon Rappoport
December 12, 2014
Ban, not label.
But I’m also not a fan of vote fraud. Which is what just happened in Oregon, where a recount of a very close election turned into a criminal act.
In November, Prop 92, which would have mandated labeling GMO food products in the state, went down to defeat by 800 votes.
That razor-thin margin triggered an automatic recount, by law.
During the recount, 4600 ballots were thrown out, because the signatures on those ballots didn’t match the signatures on the voters’ registration cards.
Oregon does elections by mail, so matching signatures is the way to prevent cheating.
When the 4600 ballots were rejected, lawyers for Prop 92 went to court to protest. They stated that some of these rejected voters never received notification that they had to provide new signatures. Other voters might have been out of town and never knew what was going on. And in general, voters were never informed that their signatures had to match.
Judge Kantor denied the assertions and allowed the recount to continue, minus the 4600 ballots.
The Prop 92 people just conceded the election.
The key, and the basis of the fraud is: Oregon voters, all of them, have never been warned, in uncompromising terms, that the signature on their ballot must match the signature on their voter-registration cards. The fact is, many people don’t always execute their signatures in the same way. If they knew, in this case, they had to, they would.
There is more than fraud at work here, however. Lawyers for Prop 92 can still challenge the election, in which case there is a significant opportunity to set that election aside and hold a new one, from scratch.
So why did the lawyers back down and fold up their tents? Why didn’t they keep up the fight?
Why won’t they file new motions and blow this up into a national and international story for the next year, as the case gains new legs?
Isn’t whole objective of these labeling measures the launching of a PR campaign about GMOs? Here’s the perfect chance.
But once again, “nice” wins the day, and, therefore, so does Monsanto. Yes, let’s be polite. Let’s not shock anyone. Let’s not make waves. Let’s not scare off the moms shopping at Whole Foods, for whom a no-holds-barred public battle is “unseemly.” Those moms do want GMO labeling; they just want it to happen in an orderly fashion.
Rainbows and marshmallows all the way.
There was once a day when a few lawyers, like Gerry Spence and Bill Kunstler, larger than life, could stride like lions into town and into a case, open their mouths to roar, and see a phalanx of reporters eager to quote their thunderous proclamations. They could also argue a case from sixteen different angles in court.
Now it appears, the lawyers are technicians.
They don’t see or care about the joined-at-the-hip connection between the law and publicity. They don’t see how media exposure and controversy and public outrage and raising hell can influence a case, when it’s done right.
They’re afraid to offend judges.
The Oregon case should just be getting started. What’s happened so far was phase one. Fraud won. Monsanto won. Criminals won. So be it.
Now, a new phase should begin. And in the process, there would be ample opportunity to highlight the chemical-warfare poison called Roundup and the insane unpredictable GMO technology that threatens the human race.
You have to know how to turn losses into victories. You can’t be a goody-good who thinks a decision by the authorities is the end of the battle. It’s fuel for the fire. You make hay out of it. You use it to arouse the public. The people who own the people who make laws don’t care about justice or fairness. So why should you, when you’re up against them? Many good causes have sunk below the waves because the ‘warriors’ were living in a fantasy world.
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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.