REVISITING THE OROVILLE DAM STORY ~ the " covert " ...wars ???
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.:
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.:
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:
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:
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:
Mr. V.T. then sent this article, which questions Governor Brown's sense of urgency over the issue:
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:
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":
And
Ms. B.Z. found yet another "conspiracy theory" article here from the
same source that spurred my own high octane speculations:
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:
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".
No comments:
Post a Comment