CAN ANYONE SAY TREASON???

CAN ANYONE SAY TREASON???


Obama signs 'Monsanto Protection Act' written
by Monsanto-sponsored senator

Published time: March 28, 2013
Edited time: March 30, 2013 04:11

US President Barack Obama (AFP Photo / Brendan Smialowsky)

On Tuesday, Pres. Obama inked his name to H.R. 933, a continuing resolution spending bill approved in Congress days earlier. Buried 78 pages within the bill exists a provision that grossly protects biotech corporations such as the Missouri-based Monsanto Company from litigation.  United States President Barack Obama has signed a bill into law that was written in part by the very billion-dollar corporation that will benefit directly from the legislation.
With the president’s signature, agriculture giants that deal with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds are given the go-ahead to continue to plant and sell man-made crops, even as questions remain largely unanswered about the health risks these types of products pose to consumers.
In light of approval from the House and Senate, more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the president to veto the spending bill over the biotech rider tacked on, an item that has since been widely referred to as the “Monsanto Protection Act.”
“But Obama ignored [the petition],” IB Times’ Connor Sheets writes, “instead choosing to sign a bill that effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of GMO or GE crops and seeds, no matter what health consequences from the consumption of these products may come to light in the future.”
James Brumley, a reporter for Investor Place, explains a little more thoroughly just how dangerous the rider is now that biotech companies are allowed to bypass judicial scrutiny. Up until it was signed, he writes, “the USDA [US Department of Agriculture] oversaw and approved (or denied) the testing of genetically modified seeds, while the federal courts retained the authority to halt the testing or sale of these plants if it felt that public health was being jeopardized. With HR 933 now a law, however, the court system no longer has the right to step in and protect the consumer.”
If the president’s signature isn’t all that surprising, though, consider the genesis of the bill itself. According to an article published Monday in the New York Daily News, US Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Missouri)“worked with Monsanto to craft the language in the bill.”
BELOW IS THE REPUBLICAN THAT SOLD HIS SOUL TO THE DEVIL AND
HAS MADE ARRANGEMENTS FOR YOU AND YOURS TO BE POISONED
VIA MONSANTO


Sen. Blunt defended his bill to the News, shrugging off suggestions that it set a startling precedent that will affect all US agriculture by firing back, “What it says is if you plant a crop that is legal to plant when you plant it, you get to harvest it. But it is only a one-year protection in that bill.”
One year could be all it takes to cause catastrophic damage to the environment by allowing laboratory-produced organisms to be planted into the earth without oversight. Under the Monsanto Protection Act, health concerns that arise in the immediate future involving the planting of GMO crops won’t be able to be heard by a judge. Blunt, a junior senator that has held elected office since the late ‘90s, has good reason to whitewash the very bill he helped craft. The Center for Responsive Politicsnotes that Sen. Blunt received $64,250 from Monsanto to go towards his campaign committee between 2008 and 2012. The Money Monocle website adds that Blunt has been the largest Republican Party recipient of Monsanto funding as of late.
On the lawmaker’s official website, a statement explains a little more as to why he favored HR 933 and the rider within it.
“As the Ranking Member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, Senator Blunt played a vital role in writing the fiscal year 2013 Agriculture Appropriations bill. This legislation maintained vital support for research and extension at land grant universities, capacity building grants for non-land grant colleges of agriculture, and competitive funding under the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI). The bill also included funding for conservation activities, housing and business loan programs for rural communities, domestic and international nutrition programs.”
Nowhere does the senator’s site mention the Monsanto Protection Act by name, although it claims Blunt “supports continued investments in agricultural research and engineering.”
“Did Blunt not realize that Monsanto would stand to gain significantly if section 735 survived and HR 933 was signed into law?” asks Brumley. “Not likely,”
“There’s no way of getting around the fact this is an abusive conflict of interest,” he says.
Clearly isn’t Brumley the only one that feels that way either: Blunt’s Wikipedia page was vandalized this week to read in the first paragraph, “His Senate seat was previously held by Republican Kit Bond, until Bond's retirement, and will be sold by Blunt to Monsanto Corporation upon his retirement.”

Extremely Urgent INFO

This is neither Democrat nor Republican.  This is part of genocide by the US/UN/NWO

Subject: Extremely Urgent INFO

Please watch and SHARE

Environmental Scientists Eugene Franklin Mallove, Juventina Villa Mojica and Dorothy Stang murdered after releasing lab test results linking chemtrails to the mass death of fish, plant and animal life.

Part 1 of 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BNTcdt5YlA

Part 2 of 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB_Q2_3JzLw

This isn't a group that Obama expects to get "push-back from

Excellent short video....

This isn't a group that Obama expects to get "push-back from.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/9RABZq5IoaQ?feature=player_embedded

How One Lottery Winner Blew Through $10 Million in Less Than 10 Years

How One Lottery Winner Blew Through $10 Million in Less Than 10 Years

By Eamon Murphy Posted 1:00PM 03/25/13

Barry Gray/The Hamilton Spectator

With a $338 million Powerball ticket having been sold in New Jersey -- the fourth-largest jackpot in Powerball history -- it's a good time to remember that the sudden gains of a lottery windfall can be fleeting.

Imagine, for instance, winning $10 million and having almost none of it left less than a decade later.

It happened to Sharon Tirabassi, a 35 year-old resident of Hamilton, Ontario. Nine years ago, The Hamilton Spectator reports, Tirabassi cashed a check from the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. for $10,569,00.10 (Canadian). Today, after spending almost all her winnings -- "big house, fancy cars, designer clothes, lavish parties, exotic trips, handouts to family, loans to friends" -- she's back in the working class: riding the bus, working part-time, living in a rented house.

What remains of her windfall is in trust for her six children; the money will become available when they turn 26.

"The moment I got it, I divided it among my family," Tirabassi told The Spec: $1 million to her parents, and $1.75 million among her four siblings. She was generous with others, too, buying houses and renting them out at low rates, paying people's rent, offering loans for bail and business ventures.

"All of that other stuff was fun in the beginning, now it's like ... back to life."

That other stuff included vacations in Cancun, Florida, Las Vegas, California, and the Caribbean, as well as four cars: a Hummer, a Mustang, a Dodge Charger and a custom Cadillac Escalade.

Tirabassi was a single mother, recently off welfare and newly employed as a personal care provider, when she struck it rich on Easter Weekend in 2004. As a teenager, she had lived in shelters, and all that money didn't come with instructions. Tirabassi didn't hire a financial adviser; she didn't even keep close track of her account balance. Suddenly, with just $750,000 left, Tirabassi woke up: "that was just time for fun to stop and to just go back to life."

Tirabassi's husband, Vinny, who brought three kids of his own to the marriage, shares her stoicism about the couple's lost fortune. He says he lived simply his whole life and is used to not being rich. Recalling the post-winning entreaties of suddenly interested friends, some of whom came asking for favors and then disappeared, Vinny says, "Money doesn't buy you happiness. It caused her a lot of headaches." His wife had a hard time saying no to those she thought of as in need: "That's the way I was brought up," she says. "Help those who can't help themselves."

For the complete story of the couple's financial descent, head over to The Spec.com, and check out the paper's 2007 interview with Tirabassi, when she had already spent half of her winnings.

Tirabassi's experience stands in contrast to that of Sandra Hayes, who pocketed around $6 million when she and a dozen coworkers split a $224 million Powerball jackpot in 2006. (Watch Hayes tell her story in the video below.)

Like Tirabassi, Hayes went on a spending spree -- including a boat, an Escalade and a Mercedes -- but she also paid off her mortgage and student loans, and was leery about handouts to friends and relatives. Today, Hayes lives comfortably but not extravagantly.

"I love a good deal, I'm on a budget, I save my money," she says. "I try not to live above my means." Her warning to the newly rich: "If you're not disciplined, you'll go broke. I don't care how much money you have."

Hayes sounds as though she might have taken lessons from Six Tips on How to Avoid Squandering a Financial Windfall. For more advice, check out these Powerball winners' lessons on how to hang on to your cash, whether you're a millionaire or just trying to make ends meet.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/03/obamacare-in-trouble-exchange-provision-delayed-as-lawmakers-push-to-repeal/

ObamaCare in Trouble? 

 

Exchange provision delayed, as lawmakers push to repeal another

By Jim Angle

Published April 03, 2013

FoxNews.com

·      

·        

o  

ObamaCare beginning to crumble?

o  

ObamaCare's tax surprise

o  

Key piece of ObamaCare set to miss major deadline

 

Parts of ObamaCare are starting to fray, even before full implementation. 

The Obama administration now says a special system of exchanges designed to make it easier for small businesses to provide insurance will be delayed an entire year -- to 2015. 

"Lots of small businesses struggle with providing insurance for their workers so this was supposed to facilitate it and make it easier for small business to do this," said Jim Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center. "It was a huge portion of the sale job. When they passed the law in 2010 there were many senators and members of Congress who were saying 'I am doing this because it's going to help small businesses.'" 

The exchanges were designed to give workers a range of choices supported by dollars from their employers. But now they will have only one choice until 2015, which could mean they can't shop for insurance that includes their current providers. Capretta said the administration is "way" behind schedule. 

Since insurance is more expensive for small businesses, many of which have no obligation under the law to provide coverage, analysts now fear many might just stop trying and let workers go on the soon-to-be-launched state exchanges. 

Sara Teppema of the Society of Actuaries -- which did an exhaustive study of ObamaCare -- said that "even if it's just a small change of people who are leaving the employment-based insurance and coming into the individual insurance market, their costs and their numbers will overwhelm those who are currently uninsured." 

That means costs would increase. 

Meanwhile, 79 senators including several liberal lawmakers recently voted to repeal a new tax on medical devices contained in the health care law following a similar vote in the House. 

"The House and the Senate agreeing? This is a harmonic convergence, it doesn't happen," said former Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh. "But on this it's happened because the adverse consequences to our economy and the quality of health care are so apparent." 

The two separate votes have not become law but show widespread opposition to the 2.3 percent sales tax on medical devices. Critics say the law is unfair to the industry since it's a tax on gross sales -- meaning it adds up to a much bigger percentage of a company's profits. 

But supporters such as Paul Van de Water of the Center for American Progress oppose any repeal. 

"I think that repealing the device tax would be irresponsible. We need the revenue and it's not going to be a job killer," he said. 

The theory was that ObamaCare would insure 30 million more people and that device makers, like pharmaceutical companies, would get lots of new customers and a steady stream of new revenue to make up for the tax. Van de Water predicted that would still happen. 

"These device manufacturers are for the most part going to be getting a large increase in business thanks to health reform, thanks to ObamaCare," he said.  

But the CEO of one company said that's not true for the 7,000 small companies with 400,000 employees who make a wide range of devices. 

Christine Jacobs of Theragenics said: "We make widgets -- hips, knees, stents, pacemakers, and implants, even, for prostate cancer. Those widgets tend to be used by people that are elderly. As the body parts wear out, we're needed." 

But Jacobs notes that most people whose body parts wear out are already on Medicare, so ObamaCare does not provide a new revenue stream for her company -- only financial pain. 

"In the case of a small company, that medical device tax is equal to our R-and-D budget for this year," Jacobs said. 

Bayh said in his own state of Indiana, one company planned to open up to five facilities over the next five years but had to scrap those plans because of the "uncertainty created by this tax." 

Jacobs said the huge multinational device makers might be able to handle the burden but not the small companies. 

"It's just such a disproportionate burden for little guys," she said. "Because we're all being told that it's the little companies that create the jobs. And that's not message that we're getting." 

The tax will even be applied to sutures used on pets that Theragenics developed for the veterinary market. 

She sought FDA approval to demonstrate the quality of her products. But now she said "it's hard for me not to get frosted on this one" -- she explained that whoever wrote the regulations said "if you have FDA approval, you will be taxed."   

President Obama has vowed to veto any repeal of the tax, but Bayh notes that 79 votes in the Senate would be more than enough to override any veto.

·        

Related Video

What to do with the future of Medicaid?

Business fights for religious freedom against ObamaCare

U.S DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HAS TOLD BANKS – IN WRITING – IT MAY INSPECT SAFE DEPOSIT BOXES WITHOUT WARRANT AND SIEZE ANY GOLD, SILVER, GUNS OR OTHER VALUABLES IT FINDS INSIDE THOSE BOXES!

Posted By: Watchman
Date: Sunday, 31-Mar-2013 20:14:35

U.S DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HAS TOLD BANKS – IN WRITING – IT MAY INSPECT SAFE DEPOSIT BOXES WITHOUT WARRANT AND SIEZE ANY GOLD, SILVER, GUNS OR OTHER VALUABLES IT FINDS INSIDE THOSE BOXES! According to in-house memos now circulating, the DHS has issued orders to banks across America which announce to them that “under the Patriot Act” the DHS has the absolute right to seize, without any warrant whatsoever, any and all customer bank accounts, to make “periodic and unannounced” visits to any bank to open and inspect the contents of “selected safe deposit boxes.” Further, the DHS “shall, at the discretion of the agent supervising the search, remove, photograph or seize as evidence” any of the following items “bar gold, gold coins, firearms of any kind unless manufactured prior to 1878, documents such as passports or foreign bank account records, pornography or any material that, in the opinion of the agent, shall be deemed of to be of a contraband nature.” DHS memos also state that banks are informed that any bank employee, on any level, that releases “improper” “classified DHS Security information” to any member of the public, to include the customers whose boxes have been clandestinely opened and inspected and “any other party, to include members of the media” and further “that the posting of any such information on the internet will be grounds for the immediate termination of the said employee or employees and their prosecution under the Patriot Act.” Safety deposit box holders and depositors are not given advanced notice when failed banks shut their doors. If people have their emergency money in a safe deposit box or an account in a bank that closes, they will not be allowed into the bank to get it out. They can knock on the door and beg to get in but the sheriff’s department or whoever is handling the closure will simply say “no” because they are just following orders. Deposit box and account holders are not warned of the hazards of banking when they sign up. It is not until they need to get their cash or valuables out in a hurry that they find themselves in trouble. Rules governing access to safe deposit boxes and money held in accounts are written into the charter of each bank. The charter is the statement of policy under which the bank is allowed by the government to do business. These rules are subject to change at any time by faceless bureaucrats who are answerable to no one. They can be changed without notice, without the agreement of the people, and against their will. People can complain but no one will care because this is small potatoes compared to the complaints that will be voiced when the executive order that governs national emergencies is enforced. That order allows the suspension of habeas corpus and all rights guaranteed under the Bill of Rights. A look at the fine print of the contract signed when a safety deposit box is opened reveals that in essence the signer has given to the bank whatever property he has put into that deposit box. When times are good people will be allowed open access to their safe deposit box and the property that is in it. This also applies to their bank accounts. But when times get really bad, many may find that the funds they have placed on deposit and the property they thought was secured in the safe deposit box now belong to the bank, not to them. Although this was probably not explained to them when they signed their signature card, this is what they were agreeing to. During the Great Depression in the early 1930’s people thought that many banks were going to fail. They were afraid they would lose their money so they went in mass to take it out, in what is known as a run on the banks. The government closed the banks to protect them from angry depositors who wanted their money back. Throughout history, governments have acted to protect the interests of banks and the wealthy people who own them, not the interests of depositors or box holders. In a time of emergency, people will have no recourse if access to their safe deposit box and bank accounts is denied. If they are keeping money in a bank that would be needed in an emergency or in a time when credit is no longer free flowing, they may not be able to get it out of the bank. The emergency may occur at night or on a weekend or holiday when the bank is closed. The solution is to take emergency cash or valuables out of the safe deposit box or bank account and secure them somewhere else, like in a home safe. An even better idea may be to close the safe deposit box account completely, letting someone else entertain the illusion of safety. Americans have learned a few things since the Great Depression. They now have the FDIC to liquidate any failed banks. The FDIC promises to set up a series of dates and times when safe deposit box renters can access their boxes by appointment to remove their property and surrender their keys. The FDIC also promises to mail bank customers an announcement of the dates for such events and include a question and answer page that addresses safe deposit box access. The people have the FDIC to give them back the money they had on deposit that they were unable to get out of any failed bank that carries FDIC insurance. Sheila Bair, head of the FDIC, promises that depositor`s money will be available in 24 hours or less. But people should remember that the FDIC is just another bureaucracy, and it`s probably best not to rely on a bureaucracy in an emergency. THE SAME HOLDS TRUE FOR STORAGE FACILITIES DON’T PUT ANYTHING VALUABLE AND/OR NON-REPLACEABLE IN ANY BANK OR STORAGE FACILITY Read more: http://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/52464-do-not-use-safety-deposit-boxes/#ixzz2P8YE4ocE  Also: Time travel and more . .   KVOS Webster Reports: The Extraordinary Equation of George Van Tassel https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wZbFsFWk__c

An Extraterrestrial Message - Chuck Missler

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QdUhNY6DnY

Sample Chemtrail Courtesy Notice

Sample Chemtrail Courtesy Notice

http://americankabuki.blogspot.com/2013/04/sample-chemtrail-courtesy-notice.html

Two North Korean Submarines "Disappeared"

Two North Korean Submarines "Disappeared"

Posted By: Susoni [Send E-Mail]
Date: Thursday, 4-Apr-2013 19:16:17

The scripted 'Plot' thickens!!!! .... Chosun TV is reporting that South Korean military have lost contact with two North Korean submarines that left their naval base in Hwanghae Province a few days ago. There has obviously been a lot of changes between last week and now and South Korean military officials suggested that while maneuvers in February were nothing meaningful, now it is provocation. The two 'torpedo' subs are small 130-ton, 30-meter, 10-man machines that can stay submerged for three-to-four days. in Korean... http://news.tv.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2013/04/03/2013040390156.html In English http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-03/two-north-korean-submarines-disappeared   http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=273336

New video from James Rink "Pre-Announcement Intel"

New video from James Rink "Pre-Announcement Intel"

Posted By: Mr.Ed [Send E-Mail]
Date: Thursday, 4-Apr-2013 18:32:43

New video from James Rink "Pre-Announcement Intel" James interviews a friend "Doug" with info on NESARA and how lawyers are really traitors when they take the Bar and they know it. Much is covered and all should see this message. I disagree with the part about Obama a White Knight / good guy. James Rink feels the same way and posted a disclaimer for that reason. Mr.Ed Freedom Council with James Rink - TONA, NESARA, Saint Germain - March 30, 2013 - YouTube Freedom Council with James Rink - TONA, NESARA, Saint Germain - March 30, 2013 - YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iVE32fN361Q (40 min)

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=273334