http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=grassroots Sun, 26 May 2013 02:07:33 -0400 Liveleak http://edge.liveleak.com/80281E/u/u/ll2/logo.gif http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=grassroots Thu, 23 May 2013 11:45:26 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cdf_1369323834 cajunmojo The Senate will finally confront one of the architects of the subprime mortgage crisis today, hauling a tax-dodging, union-busting, bank-breaking, billionaire member of the "one percent" before the Senate Commerce Committee... to consider her confirmation as Secretary of Commerce in President Barack Obama's Cabinet.In the same week that the Senate grilled the CEO of Apple, Inc. about the low taxes it pays due to maintaining large cash deposits overseas, the Senate will roll out a warm welcome to Chicago heiress Penny Pritzker, who runs what Forbes called "one of the grandest and most successful family tax-avoidance schemes ever." Instead of being lectured about her patriotism, Pritzker is being praised to the heavens, with fellow Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) claiming that the heiress to the Hyatt hotel fortune "has broken through the glass ceiling with her extraordinary intelligence and business acumen." The enthusiasm is bipartisan; fellow Illinoisan Mark Kirk is also on board . Pritzker has a rather dubious record of public service, most recently serving on the board of the Chicago Public Schools, which just yesterday approved plans to close forty-nine failing schools. Her most notable public "contribution" has involved raising and bundling millions of dollars for President Obama's lavish political campaigns. Unions dislike Pritzker as well, and at least one has opposed Pritzker's nomination based on its many battles with the Hyatt hotel chain regarding working conditions and wages. The left grassroots is also visibly irritated by the choice, seeing Pritzker's nomination to Commerce as the pay-to-play, Chicago cronyism that it is. But the fix is in. When future generations look back at this moment and wonder how Washington failed to hold Wall Street--or itself--accountable for the subprime crisis, they will understand that Washington never really cared about anything but its own political prerogatives. With the right political friends, you can get away with anything. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cdf_1369323834 cajunmojo TAX-DODGING, UNION-BUSTING, SUBPRIME MORTGAGE BANKER HAULED BEFORE CONGRESS Penny Pritzker, Senate Commerce Committee, democrats, liberals Tue, 21 May 2013 09:11:51 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=674_1369141687 th1sf8te First it was rebel members of parliament, now business leaders have waded into the debate over Britain's membership of the European Union. Top industry figures have signed a letter in the British Independent newspaper, saying the economic case to stay in Europe is "overwhelming." Virgin founder Richard Branson is among them.The leaders say the UK stands to lose up to 108 billion euros a year if it goes it alone. It comes as British Prime Minister David Cameron is accused of "losing control" of his Conservative party, amid internal divisions over Europe. He has recently been forced to back a new bill that would enshrine an in-out referendum pledge in law. Cameron's problems have been made worse by claims that an unidentified, close aide described Conservative grassroots Eurosceptics as "mad swivel-eyed loons." The comments have been denied by Downing Street. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=674_1369141687 th1sf8te Economic case for UK to stay in Europe is 'overwhelming' Economic case for UK to stay in Europe is 'overwhelming' Wed, 15 May 2013 21:21:53 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cab_1368666389 MAKMAK Around $900 billion in assets across the globe are managed by Islamic banks that operate according to sharia, an interpretation of Islamic law. In recent years, so-called Islamic finance has been growing at a rate of 15-20 per cent a year, and proved remarkably resilient to the financial crisis. Proponents of the relatively new sector point to its back-to-basics financial structures, which have made it popular with a number of non-Mulsim clients who have little appetite for risk. Critics, though, say the restrictions it comes with-prohibitions, for example, on paying interest and investing in anything that involves porn, pork or booze-are archaic and unworkable. Canada, with its 1.3 million Muslims, has lagged behind countries like the U.K. and the U.S. in embracing sharia-compliant financial products. None of the country's big banks currently offer sharia-compliant services, though some smaller players do. Toronto-based UM Financial Inc., which issued home mortgages conforming to Islamic law, filed for bankruptcy last year, leaving 170 Muslim borrowers in limbo, and opening a legal can of worms. Is the firm's failure evidence that Canada should steer clear of Islamic finance; or proof that the country needs more of it-i.e. that the banks and policymakers need to bring the practice into the mainstream, with tighter rules and better oversight? We asked the experts to chime in. Tarek Fatah is the founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, a liberal-minded grassroots organization. He is also the author of Chasing a Mirage: The Tragic lllusion of an Islamic State, among other works. Walid Hejazi is associate professor of international business at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management, where he is currently teaching an MBA course on Islamic finance. What is Islamic finance? Fatah: In the words of one New York Muslim banker, Islamic finance is little more than "a $300 billion deception." According to Muhammad Saleem, former president and CEO of Park Avenue Bank, "Islamic banks do not practise what they preach: they all charge interest, but disguised in Islamic garb." In fact, Islamic finance is just one more front in the worldwide Islamist movement's attempt to depict all things Western as essentially inimical to Islam. Its foundational doctrine comes from the writings of two people: Abul Ala Maudoodi of the Jamaat-e-Islami movement in Pakistan and Hassan al-Banna of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. While these two pillars of the Pan-Islamist movement propagated jihad and war against the West, they also recognized the role international financial institutions could play in carrying out their political objectives. The theory was put into practice when the Islamist Pakistani military dictator General Zia-ul-Haq established sharia law in Pakistan, forcing the country's public-sector banks to run their operations based on Islamic principles and without the role of interest. As professor Timur Kuran, who taught Islamic thought at the University of Southern California, notes in his brilliant book Islam and Mammon: The Economic Predicaments of Islamism, "There is no distinctly Islamic way to build a ship, or defend a territory, or cure an epidemic, or forecast the weather." Hejazi: Islamic Finance allows individuals or companies to invest in conformity with the principles of Islam. In the aftermath of the financial crisis, though, Islamic finance has been extending its appeal to a wide range of clients-regardless of religion-because it relies on rather conservative and low-risk banking practices. It is critical to emphasize that sharia-compliant or Islamic financial products can be made available to anyone-not just Muslims. There are five key elements that must be avoided in Islamic finance: interest (riba); speculation (maisir); uncertainty (gharar); unjust enrichment/unfair exploitation; and unethical purpose. I will focus on the most well-known-and, I would argue, the least understood-dimension of Islamic finance: the ban on interest. Many interpret this ban to mean that money can be borrowed for free. This is not the case. Rather, it implies that the investor must have a stake in the underlying asset. What does this mean in practice? Here's an example (in which I am abstracting from differences that can arise in risk and administrative costs): Suppose you purchase a home for $300,000. Under a conventional mortgage, you may opt for a five-year, fixed-rate mortgage, say at five per cent, and amortized over 25 years. Your monthly payment would be about $1,745. Assuming that interest rates stay at five per cent, the amount that you would have to pay over the 25 year amortization period would be $1,744.81*300 months over 25 years = $523,443.00. In total, the homeowner will have repaid the $300,000 in principal plus $223,443.00 in interest. In reality, though, interest rates would vary and the mortgage would be renewed at whatever the prevailing rate is upon maturity of the mortgage. With one form of sharia-compliant mortgage, the bank would buy the home on behalf of the customer for $300,000 and then sell it to the customer for $523,443.00. It means that over the 25-year period, the customer pays the fixed payment of $1,744.81, but unlike in the case of a conventional mortgage, there are no changes in these payments over the duration of the mortgage. A second difference is that late penalties are not allowed-the bank cannot charge punitive fees if a homeowner, for example, is laid off and has difficulty making some of the payments. It all goes back to the key principles above around partnership, fairness and eliminating uncertainty. Should Canada embrace Islamic finance? Hejazi: It is in the interest of Canadians to embrace Islamic finance, both on the retail and the commercial side. On the retail side, Statistics Canada estimates that Muslims will be about seven per cent of the Canadian population by 2031. A recent study prepared for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation reported evidence indicating that the demand for sharia-compliant mortgages currently exceeds supply. This demand will only increase. We need to bring these Canadians into the financial mainstream and give them better access to a type of financing that is consistent with their religious principles. Doing so is entirely consistent with fundamental Canadian values and our proud history. These sharia-compliant mortgages would be profitable and self-financing-they would impose no extra cost to the institutions offering them or the Canadian government. In addition, these mortgages would be available to all Canadians, who feel that the structure of the mortgage better fits their personal risk and financial profile. Perhaps more important, though, is the commercial side. As my research has documented, Canada needs more foreign investment and our country has been slipping behind in terms of its attractiveness to foreign investors. Now, the Gulf region has a tremendous amount of excess liquidity-upwards of a trillion dollars! However, investors from that region often require their investments be sharia-compliant. The Rotman School, in conjunction with Deloitte, Bennet Jones, Torys, and King and Spalding have developed case studies in which we looked at whether sharia-compliant financial structures would be more costly than conventional ones in the context of three major Canadian projects. Our analysis found that the costs associated with a sharia financing structure were similar to those of the conventional financing structure. Having a capability within Canada to undertake these transactions will make Canada more attractive to foreign investment, and this will help grow the economy and enhance the prosperity of all Canadians. Fatah: Canadian banks and financial institutions are already flirting with the idea. Can we blame them? Who wouldn't want gullible consumers who demand zero interest on their deposits but are willing to pay more on their monthly mortgage payments, all in the name of Islam and avoiding eternal hellfire. Islamists are lining up with such icons of global capitalism as Citibank NA, HSBC Holdings PLC, and Barclays PLC, which have all endorsed sharia banking and started offering Islamic financing products to a vulnerable Muslim population. Promoting these products, of course, are a number of prominent Muslim corporate lawyers and bankers. This push from Muslim banking executives working inside the corporate world has had some success. While the Royal Bank of Canada didn't find enough market interest for a sharia finance product it tested a few years ago, other Canadian banks are smelling easy pickings and lining up to wear the Islamic mantle. Scotiabank and Toronto-Dominion Bank have been quietly considering whether to start offering sharia-compliant products as part of the big banks' strategy to reach out to a growing "immigrant population," a politically correct way of labeling Muslims. Canada should not permit this charade of lies and deception posing as multicultural banking to segregate its Muslim population from the rest of society. If it does, there will be a huge cost to our values and to our future as well as to vulnerable Muslim-Canadians who are being blackmailed into paying more and receiving less for their banking needs. Suppose mainstream Canadian institutions started offering Islamic financial instruments, making them widely available throughout the country. How would this affect, if at all, the integration of Canada's Muslim minority? Fatah: The question assumes there is one Muslim community. I suggest there are many and they will react in different manner. My cursory study of the clients of now-bankrupt mortgage lender UM Financial shows that the company appeals mostly to customers from the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent and Caucasian converts to Islam, with Arab-Canadians and Iranian-Canadians virtually absent. Thus the integration of Canada's Muslims into the rest of society has very little to do with the success or failure of Islamic banking; it has everything to do with the failed policies of multiculturalism that encourage segregation and make it difficult to propagate Canadian values that have crystallized over 400 years of Western civilization and are the core of who we are as a country. Charlatans attempting to squeeze money out of an already marginalized minority community should be an affront to all of us-Muslim and non-Muslim alike. Hejazi: If the mainstream financial institutions offered sharia-compliant financial instruments, such as mortgages, savings accounts, mutual funds, and so on, this would go a long way towards integrating conservative Muslims into mainstream financial markets and keeping our financial system strong and sound. At present sharia-compliant financial securities are not available in the mainstream; hence conservative Muslims who feel they must use sharia-complaint financial instruments are forced to deal with smaller, less well-known, less well-funded, and likely less well-managed financial institutions. Providing these Muslim-Canadians with this option does not come with any negatives. Who opts for sharia-based financial instruments? To whom does this model appeal? Hejazi: The Financial Times reports that the assets within the Islamic finance sector have now reached US$900 billion, double what they amounted to in 2006. This growth is remarkable given that it occurred during the global financial crisis. A recent report by the International Monetary Fund attributes the growth in Islamic finance to three factors: increasing demand from the growing number of Muslims living in Western countries; growing oil wealth among the Islamic members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries; and the attractiveness of sharia-compliant financial products and services to non-Muslims seeking ethical investments or fair financial products, as well as lower-risk, back-to-basics banking. Fatah: The primary movers and shakers of sharia-based financial instruments are the rulers of the petro-dollar states of the Persian Gulf. In the working class neighborhoods of Karachi, Jakarta, Cairo or Tehran, no one buys into this "paying more and receiving less" model. They may vote for Islamist parties, but when it comes to their hard-earned money, they trust their banks and credit unions, not the mullahs bearing tickets to paradise. Even in Pakistan, which has played a pioneering role in Islamic finance, few have embraced the Islamic banking institutions. Even in Saudi Arabia, home of the Islamic Development Bank, no-interest sharia banks did not find favour with the country's monetary agency, SAMA. In fact, as pious a leader as the late King Faisal allowed SAMA to place its surplus funds in interest-bearing accounts during the country's cash-strapped years in the 1950s and 60s. One thing is for sure: Muslims have voted with their feet and their chequebooks. UM Financial, a Canada-based Islamic financial institution, recently went belly up. What lessons does the bankruptcy hold for Islamic finance in Canada? Hejazi: At present, Canadians seeking sharia-compliant mortgages and other financial products are forced to turn to institutions which operate at the periphery of the financial system, such as UM Financial, because these services are not offered through mainstream financial institutions. As is now well known, Canada's financial markets are among the most stable and well-managed globally. A collapse such as that at UM Financial is not consistent with Canada's image, nor should such institutions be able to put so many Canadian homeowners at risk. Canada needs the financial mainstream to offer these products. It is mainstream institutions that should be reaping a profit from these instruments. The demise of UM Financial makes the case for bringing Islamic finance into the mainstream even stronger. Besides, as more Canadian institutions enter the Islamic finance market, competition will force the cost of sharia-banking products down to the level of their conventional equivalents. As noted in a recent CMHC study, in Canada, sharia-compliant mortgages currently cost between one and three per cent more than comparable conventional mortgages due to their modest supply and firms' relative inexperience with these products, as well as a lack of access to funding. In contrast, sharia-compliant mortgages in the U.S. cost only 0.4 to one per cent more than their conventional counterparts. Fatah: The bankruptcy of UM Financial tells a simple truth: most Muslims would not want anything to do with financial institutions that promise a path to Paradise while enriching the pockets of those who sell Islamic indulgences. Court documents reveal that, just a few days before UM Financial went into receivership, its Sharia Advisory Board invoiced it for $2.1 million. This amount was ostensibly the fee charged for providing advice to UM Financial on the compliance of its products and services to sharia law. In a scene that could have come straight out of a Bollywood crime thriller, UM Financial CEO Omar Kalair made this payment in gold and silver bullion at a Rexdale Parking lot, late into the night. The recipient, Joseph Adam, the finance manager of Multicultural Consultancy Canada, is said to have later flown to Egypt and is now reported missing-along with the gold. Canada has no room for charlatans who bring the medieval values of the pre-industrial era into the twenty-first century. Enough of this please. (original article by Erica Alini for Macleans magazine) Here's an interesting website listing some of the institutions which fund terrorism:https://moneyjihad.wordpress.com/2013/01/07/sharia-banks-that-fund-terrorism/ http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cab_1368666389 MAKMAK Does Islamic finance have a place in Canada? islamic finance, global, currency, markets, stocks, stock market, dow, NASDAQ, Wall Street, TSX, Canada, MAKMAK Sun, 12 May 2013 11:45:07 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e70_1368372631 Detroit Iron During a speech at the Iowa GOP's annual Lincoln Dinner, Sen. Rand Paul challenged possible 2016 Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton on her record as secretary of state during the deadly Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, saying it showed a "dereliction of duty and should preclude her from holding higher office." By Michael O'Brien, Political Reporter, NBC NewsCEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa - Presidential elections start in Iowa. On Friday, Sen. Rand Paul put his stake in the ground for a possible run in 2016 by mocking the Obama administration and delivering a blistering critique of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's handling of the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. The administration has been criticized for failing to provide security during the attack and for its characterization of the incident afterward. Speaking at the Iowa GOP's annual Lincoln Dinner, Paul questioned the initial response to the attacks and asked, "First question to Hillary Clinton: Where in the hell were the Marines?" "It was inexcusable, it was a dereliction of duty, and it should preclude her from holding higher office," the Kentucky Republican added to loud applause. Republicans' search for a candidate to deliver their first victory in a presidential election since 2004 began as Paul used the plum speaking slot to plant the seeds for his own possible bid. And he won his biggest applause by taking on Clinton, who's seen as the early front-runner for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Barack Obama. Paul was just elected to the Senate in 2010 and is perhaps best known as the son of the former Texas Congressman Ron Paul, whose two campaigns for president attracted a fervent, grassroots following that might translate to his son. But the Kentucky senator has been far from shy about stoking speculation about his own play for the Republican nomination in 2016. He told reporters earlier Friday that he had not made up his mind and would not decide until 2014. The fundraiser on Friday had unmistakable overtones of a presidential campaign, though the last one ended just six months ago. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, captured that sentiment best in his speech preceding Paul's: "The process of selecting the next leader of the free world begins in Iowa, and it's already begun." Paul's speech doubled at times as a comedy scene, as he seemed at ease before the crowd, stepping away from the podium, microphone in hand, to project a casual demeanor. He rattled off jokes about absurd pork-barrel projects, recalling the campaign style of Arizona Sen. John McCain as he ran for president in 2008. But Paul also used his closely watched speech to offer his own prescriptions about the path forward for the Republican Party, which has been suffering from somewhat of an identity crisis since Mitt Romney lost to Obama in last fall's election. On no issue is that crisis more clear than immigration. A bipartisan bill has advanced in the Senate to allow undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship, but King and Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, both railed against the proposal in their speeches before Paul's. Paul has spoken in favor of some kind of immigration reform, a dicey topic before this Republican crowd, and he acknowledged those disagreements. But he also tried to align himself with King and Grassley - two of the most stalwart opponents of immigration reform. "I'm also with Sen. Grassley and Congressman King on the fact that I think we were hoodwinked in 1968," he said, referencing the last time Congress passed a major immigration overhaul. "We were promised security, and it never came." But Paul also said there's a "chance could vote for the bill" if he can add amendments strengthening its border security measures. Paul also spoke about broadening the party's appeal, namely to Latinos, African Americans and young voters. "We're an increasingly diverse nation, and I think we do need to reach out to other people that aren't like us, don't look like us, don't wear the same clothes, that aren't exactly who we are," he said. "We're going to have to do something." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/11/18183010-rand-paul-challenges-hillary-clinton-in-key-iowa-speech?lite http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e70_1368372631 Detroit Iron Rand Paul challenges Hillary Clinton in key Iowa speech Sen. Rand Paul, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Sat, 11 May 2013 15:57:34 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a34_1368302115 aranger45 UPDATE 2:03 p.m. ET - The story has taken yet another weird turn. The IRS in an attempt to explain itself released the following statement : Between 2010 and 2012, the IRS saw the number of applications for section 501(c)(4) status double. As a result, local career employees in Cincinnati sought to centralize work and assign cases to designated employees in an effort to promote consistency and quality. This approach has worked in other areas. However, the IRS recognizes we should have done a better job of handling the influx of advocacy applications. While centralizing cases for consistency made sense, the way we initially centralized them did not. Mistakes were made initially, but they were in no way due to any political or partisan rationale. We fixed the situation last year and have made significant progress in moving the centralized cases through our system. To date, more than half of the cases have been approved or withdrawn. It is important to recognize that all centralized applications received the same, even-handed treatment, and the majority of cases centralized were not based on a specific name . In addition, new procedures also were implemented last year to ensure that these mistakes won't be made in the future. The IRS also stresses that our employees - all career civil servants - will continue to be guided by tax law and not partisan issues . However, this clearly contradicts Lerner's earlier claim that the IRS looked for groups that included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax-exempt status. So what's really going on? If this was just some sort of bureaucratic hiccup (as the IRS statement claims it was), then what, exactly, was Lerner talking about? Also, you can't say that this was entirely "nonpartisan" when Lerner - a top ranking official - specifically stated that they were flagging groups that used "patriot" and "tea party" in their applications. Someone needs to get their story straight. UPDATE 1:43 p.m. ET - In case you were wondering why the IRS hadn't mentioned or addressed this issue until today, here's your "answer": #bbpBox_332905213600096256 a { text-decoration:none; color:#1F98C7; }#bbpBox_332905213600096256 a:hover { text-decoration:underline; } IRS says no apology before today because no one ever asked.May 10, 2013 1:09pm via web Reply Retweet Favorite @ktumultyKaren Tumulty UPDATE 1:38 p.m. ET - House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Subcommittee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio.) on Friday issued the following statement: The fact that Americans were targeted by the IRS because of their political beliefs is unconscionable. The Committee will aggressively follow up on the IG report and hold responsible officials accountable for this political retaliation. UPDATE 1:28 p.m. ET - The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on Friday released the following statement: Even the appearance of playing partisan politics with the tax code is about as constitutionally troubling as it gets. With the recent push to grant federal agencies broad new powers to mandate donor disclosure for advocacy groups on both the left and the right, there must be clear checks in place to prevent this from ever happening again. UPDATE 1:16 p.m. ET - The IRS spokeswoman has clarified what she meant when she responded to questions about disciplinary action: #bbpBox_332905640953516032 a { text-decoration:none; color:#1F98C7; }#bbpBox_332905640953516032 a:hover { text-decoration:underline; } IRS clarifies: when they said "no" to question about disciplinary action, meant they aren't going to answer that question.May 10, 2013 1:11pm via web Reply Retweet Favorite @ktumultyKaren Tumulty UPDATE 1:07 p.m. ET - An IRS spokeswoman said Friday that no disciplinary action has been taken against agency employees. She added that about 200 employees at the Cincinnati office were involved in the process. Also, Lerner in her remarks noted that 75 of the 300 groups targeted for additional reviews were conservative. She claims none of them lost their tax-exempt status. When asked later about this number, the IRS spokeswoman referred to the 75 conservative groups as "a quarter" of the total. When it was noted that this was incorrect, she replied: " I'm not good at math ." UPDATE 12:30 p.m. ET - Shortly after Lerner's comments made national headlines, Jenny Beth Martin, National Coordinator for Tea Party Patriots, issued the following statement: The IRS has demonstrated the most disturbing, illegal and outrageous abuse of government power. This deliberate targeting and harassment of tea party groups reaches a new low in illegal government activity and overreach. It is suspicious that the activity of these "low-level workers" was unknown to IRS leadership at the time it occurred. President Obama must also apologize for his administration ignoring repeated complaints by these broad grassroots organizations of harassment by the IRS in 2012, and make concrete and transparent steps today to ensure this never happens again. We reject a simple apology that does nothing to alleviate the danger of this happening again. Only immediate and public actions on the part of the IRS and the president will suffice. We demand the immediate resignation of all complicit in this activity and insist Congress investigate. - The Internal Revenue Service "inappropriately flagged" conservative political groups during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status, a top IRS official said Friday. Organizations were singled out because they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax-exempt status, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups. In some cases, groups were asked for their list of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said. "That was wrong. That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That's not how we go about selecting cases for further review," Lerner said at a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association. "The IRS would like to apologize for that," she added. It's important to remember that IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman - a Bush appointee whose 6-year term ended in November - told Congress in March 2012 that the IRS was not targeting groups based on their political views. "There's absolutely no targeting. This is the kind of back and forth that happens to people" who apply for tax-exempt status, Shulman told a House Ways and Means subcommittee. But after her talk, Lerner seemed to defend Shulman's comments, telling an Associated Press reporter that no high level IRS officials knew about the practice. She did not say when they found out. "It's the line people that did it without talking to managers," Lerner said. "They're IRS workers, they're revenue agents." Lerner stressed during her talk that the practice was not motivated by political bias. But that's not how many conservative groups saw it. TheBlaze in February 2012 received emails from several Tea Party groups alleging partisan and almost thuggish behavior on the part of the IRS. Ohio Liberty Council Corp. President Tom Zawistokowski, for example, posted a letter on the group's website detailing their extraordinary experiences with the IRS. Zawistokowski writes: My own Portage County TEA Party has been waiting for over a year just to get a response from the IRS so we can file our 2010 tax return! In the attached PDF I share with you, the "Additional Information Requested" of the Ohio Liberty Council from our June 30th, 2010 application which we just received on January 30, 2012. Yes, they took a year and a half to respond to our application and they are giving us two weeks to respond back. As you will see, this is no simple request. Here's what the IRS demanded of the group: A hard copy printout of the website - A PDF file emailed to the IRS will not suffice (and this is the high-tech Administration) List all Social Media outlets being used (Facebook, Twitter, etc) and include hard copy printouts of every posting A narrative description of every activity of your organization since June 30, 2010 (filing date) - And they do not want a mere description of the event, but full details - including; who conducted it, their qualifications, who was allowed to take part in the activities and how they were selected, was there a fee? (how much) The IRS also wants to know about the members of the group and their roles and more, asking specifically for the "name, address, and corporate federal ID of all organizations that are members of our organization" Public events are also under scrutiny with the IRS demanding to know the time, location and content schedule of each event. Copies of any and all handouts must be included. Names and credentials of all instructors and copies of any workshop materials used. All speakers must be identified and copies of every speech must be included. By March, several Republican senators and The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) were starting to ask questions about the IRS' treatment of Tea Party groups. "This appears to be a coordinated attempt to intimidate Tea Party organizations by demanding information that is outside the scope of legitimate inquiry and violates the First Amendment," said ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow in a statement , adding that the IRS asked questions that violate groups' association rights. "These organizations have followed the law and applied for tax exempt status for their activities as Americans have done for decades," the statement notes. Later, 12 GOP senators sent a letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas Schulman questioning the nature of the relationship between the IRS and Tea Party groups. "It is critical that the public have confidence that federal tax compliance efforts are pursued in a fair, even-handed, and transparent manner - without regard to politics of any kind," wrote the Senators, referring specifically to the Kentucky 9/12 Project's claim of IRS intimidation. "It is imperative that organizations applying for tax-exempt status are able to rely on a consistent and foreseeable review structure from the IRS. "Any significant changes to the IRS review process should be implemented only after appropriate notice and opportunity for comment from the public and affected parties," the letter adds. The letter was spearheaded by Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch and Ohio Sen. Rob Portman, joined by Senators Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), John Cornyn (Texas), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), John Thune (R-S.D.), and Rand Paul (R-Ky.). More than a year later, Lerner's comments show that the harassed conservative grassroots groups - and their defenders - were actually on to something. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a34_1368302115 aranger45 IRS Admits to Targeting Conservative Groups During 2012 Election, Apologizes IRS, Admits, to, Targeting, Conservative, Groups, During, 2012 Election, Apologizes, Liberalism Fri, 10 May 2013 22:04:28 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=eea_1368237468 AntiPropagaanda New Congressional Sanctions Push Aimed at Killing Iran Diplomacy by Jamal Abdi The notion that U.S. sanctions on Iran are supposed to act as diplomatic leverage to get a nuclear deal may be dispelled once and for all by a new Congressional action now in the works. The House is poised to move ahead with a new round of Iran sanctions, and a slew of new sanctions proposals are set to be introduced in the Senate, even as a host of current and former senior U.S. officials - including Secretary of State John Kerry - have warned the body to hold off on new sanctions at the risk of imperiling a diplomatic resolution to the nuclear standoff. For some in Congress, this seems to be precisely the point. Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL) is circulating a draft measure that would make regime change, not a negotiated solution, the official U.S. policy. Kirk promises to introduce that measure shortly, but first will introduce two smaller sanction measures to cut off Iran's foreign exchange and block its natural gas deals, all building up to the grand finale. The first was introduced this week, S.892, which is designed to cut off Iranian access to euros. It would sanction any foreign entity that converts currency held by Iran's Central Bank or other sanctioned Iranian entities into non-local currency. Blocking Iranian access to euros will of course make it more difficult for Iran to purchase Western medicines and exacerbate the reported sanctions-induced medicine shortage now plaguing Iran. Sen. Kirk hopes to attach these smaller bills to another sanctions package in the House before formally introducing his regime change bill. That bill will mandate that sanctions be kept in place until Iran transitions to a democratic government - a preposterous notion given the disastrous effect sanctions are having on Iran's civil society and democracy movement. The bill would echo the Iraq Liberation Act, which was passed and signed by President Clinton in 1998 and cemented regime change as the official policy toward Saddam Hussein. That measure all but guaranteed Saddam would not comply with sanctions - what was the point if they would never be lifted? - and was cited by Congress as the basis for authorizing war with Iraq four years later. In the meantime, the House is considering H.R.850, a measure that would sanction U.S. allies that conduct commercial transactions with Iran. Despite existing humanitarian waivers, this could affect transactions that include food and medicine as commercial entities and banks are becoming increasingly fearful of conducting any business transaction with Iran for fear of being penalized by the United States. Congress attempted to pass a similar measure last year as part of a previous sanctions package, but removed it at the last minute after intervention by the Obama Administration. A Congressional aide told Congressional Quarterly at the time that the measure "would be impossible to enforce and only make our allies really angry. They would have endangered their cooperation with the sanctions we have now." Nevertheless, the House Foreign Affairs Committee is looking to move H.R.850 in a matter of weeks. Next Wednesday, the committee will hold a hearing with Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman, the top U.S. negotiator conducting multilateral talks with Iran, and Treasury Under Secretary for Financial Intelligence and Terrorism David Cohen, who is in charge of implementing the Iran sanctions. Committee Chairman Ed Royce ominously said the hearing was "a chance to press the Administration on critical questions surrounding U.S. participation in the P5+1 negotiations and its implications for the enforcement of sanctions." The implication being that the U.S. could be implementing more sanctions if pesky diplomacy wasn't getting in the way. The next step would be to move the sanctions bill. Regardless of what Sherman and Cohen tell the chamber, it may make no difference. Secretary of State John Kerry implored the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April to hold off on further sanctions and to not interfere with diplomatic efforts to little effect. Congress has become increasingly bold in dismissing the White House's requests when it comes to Iran. Congress has also thus far ignored reports from senior former officials like Tom Pickering, Dick Lugar, Ann Marie Slaughter warning that sanctions were outpacing negotiations and threatening to upend the diplomatic process. The Kirk measure on foreign exchange introduced this week, in fact, circumvents the White House and doesn't even require the President's signature. It pronounces that, regardless of when the bill would actually be passed, the sanctions on foreign exchange would go into effect starting May 9. This means the U.S. will retroactively issue sanctions against any bank conducting a transaction after this date, so long as the bill passes at some point. It is essentially sanctions by Congressional decree. The threat of sanctions from the Hill is now so great that they do not even need to be passed to have a chilling effect. It is a stunning display of impunity by Iran hawks in Congress and groups like AIPAC and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies that are supporting these measures. It's little wonder, then, that the narrative in Tehran is that even if Iran complies with U.S. demands on its nuclear program, the sanctions will continue and the President can't do a thing about it. While Kirk's Iraq Liberation Act for Iran may not yet be introduced, he may not have to get his final bill passed in order to lock in the sanctions as regime change policy. The dominant narrative in Tehran is already that, much like with Saddam's Iraq, the sanctions on Iran will never be lifted. The President has no mechanism to formally lift many of the hardest hitting sanctions - he is dependent on Congress. And Congressional hawks have indicated that if Iran compromises, it will be proof the sanctions are working and instead of easing them in a quid pro quo, more sanctions should be passed. Tehran's narrative is being reinforced by Congress, and unless the U.S. can convey that there is an offramp from sanctions, Iran's nuclear program will likely continue apace. - Jamal Abdi is the Policy Director of the National Iranian American Council, the largest grassroots organization representing the Iranian-American community in the US. He previously worked in Congress as a Policy Advisor on foreign affairs issues. Follow Jamal on Twitter: @jabdi Photo: The Central Bank building in Tehran, Iran. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=eea_1368237468 AntiPropagaanda New Congressional Sanctions Push Aimed at Killing Iran Diplomacy Iran, Sanctions, Iraq, Sanction, War, Neocon, Israel, America, Broken, Economy Fri, 10 May 2013 18:01:59 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fe5_1368223030 waterlawman I'm Tired of this shit. Tyrants, Oligarchies, Fascism, Communism, Neo-Con's, Luciferians. Who Are the Evil One's? What Chance do we have? TRUTH it's the New Hate Speech..."During times of Universal Deceit, Telling the Truth becomes a Revolutionary Act." George Orwell The story has taken yet another weird turn. The IRS in an attempt to explain itself released the following statement : Between 2010 and 2012, the IRS saw the number of applications for section 501(c)(4) status double. As a result, local career employees in Cincinnati sought to centralize work and assign cases to designated employees in an effort to promote consistency and quality. This approach has worked in other areas. However, the IRS recognizes we should have done a better job of handling the influx of advocacy applications. While centralizing cases for consistency made sense, the way we initially centralized them did not. Mistakes were made initially, but they were in no way due to any political or partisan rationale. We fixed the situation last year and have made significant progress in moving the centralized cases through our system. To date, more than half of the cases have been approved or withdrawn. It is important to recognize that all centralized applications received the same, even-handed treatment, and the majority of cases centralized were not based on a specific name. In addition, new procedures also were implemented last year to ensure that these mistakes won't be made in the future. The IRS also stresses that our employees - all career civil servants - will continue to be guided by tax law and not partisan issues . However, this clearly contradicts Lerner's earlier claim that the IRS looked for groups that included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax-exempt status. So what's really going on? If this was just some sort of bureaucratic hiccup (as the IRS statement claims it was), then what, exactly, was Lerner talking about? Also, you can't say that this was entirely "nonpartisan" when Lerner - a top ranking official - specifically stated that they were flagging groups that used "patriot" and "tea party" in their applications. Someone needs to get their story straight. UPDATE 1:43 p.m. ET - In case you were wondering why the IRS hadn't mentioned or addressed this issue until today, here's your "answer": IRS says no apology before today because no one ever asked.about 4 hours ago via web Reply Retweet Favorite @ktumultyKaren Tumulty UPDATE 1:38 p.m. ET - House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Subcommittee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio.) on Friday issued the following statement: The fact that Americans were targeted by the IRS because of their political beliefs is unconscionable. The Committee will aggressively follow up on the IG report and hold responsible officials accountable for this political retaliation. UPDATE 1:28 p.m. ET - The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on Friday released the following statement: Even the appearance of playing partisan politics with the tax code is about as constitutionally troubling as it gets. With the recent push to grant federal agencies broad new powers to mandate donor disclosure for advocacy groups on both the left and the right, there must be clear checks in place to prevent this from ever happening again. UPDATE 1:16 p.m. ET - The IRS spokeswoman has clarified what she meant when she responded to questions about disciplinary action: IRS clarifies: when they said "no" to question about disciplinary action, meant they aren't going to answer that question.about 4 hours ago via web Reply Retweet Favorite @ktumultyKaren Tumulty UPDATE 1:07 p.m. ET - An IRS spokeswoman said Friday that no disciplinary action has been taken against agency employees. She added that about 200 employees at the Cincinnati office were involved in the process. Also, Lerner in her remarks noted that 75 of the 300 groups targeted for additional reviews were conservative. She claims none of them lost their tax-exempt status. When asked later about this number, the IRS spokeswoman referred to the 75 conservative groups as "a quarter" of the total. When it was noted that this was incorrect, she replied: " I'm not good at math ." UPDATE 12:30 p.m. ET - Shortly after Lerner's comments made national headlines, Jenny Beth Martin, National Coordinator for Tea Party Patriots, issued the following statement: The IRS has demonstrated the most disturbing, illegal and outrageous abuse of government power. This deliberate targeting and harassment of tea party groups reaches a new low in illegal government activity and overreach. It is suspicious that the activity of these "low-level workers" was unknown to IRS leadership at the time it occurred. President Obama must also apologize for his administration ignoring repeated complaints by these broad grassroots organizations of harassment by the IRS in 2012, and make concrete and transparent steps today to ensure this never happens again. We reject a simple apology that does nothing to alleviate the danger of this happening again. Only immediate and public actions on the part of the IRS and the president will suffice. We demand the immediate resignation of all complicit in this activity and insist Congress investigate. - The Internal Revenue Service "inappropriately flagged" conservative political groups during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status, a top IRS official said Friday. Organizations were singled out because they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax-exempt status, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups. In some cases, groups were asked for their list of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said. "That was wrong. That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That's not how we go about selecting cases for further review," Lerner said at a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association. "The IRS would like to apologize for that," she added. It's important to remember that IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman - a Bush appointee whose 6-year term ended in November - told Congress in March 2012 that the IRS was not targeting groups based on their political views. "There's absolutely no targeting. This is the kind of back and forth that happens to people" who apply for tax-exempt status, Shulman told a House Ways and Means subcommittee. But after her talk, Lerner seemed to defend Shulman's comments, telling an Associated Press reporter that no high level IRS officials knew about the practice. She did not say when they found out. "It's the line people that did it without talking to managers," Lerner said. "They're IRS workers, they're revenue agents." Lerner stressed during her talk that the practice was not motivated by political bias. But that's not how many conservative groups saw it. TheBlaze in February 2012 received emails from several Tea Party groups alleging partisan and almost thuggish behavior on the part of the IRS. Ohio Liberty Council Corp. President Tom Zawistokowski, for example, posted a letter on the group's website detailing their extraordinary experiences with the IRS. Zawistokowski writes: My own Portage County TEA Party has been waiting for over a year just to get a response from the IRS so we can file our 2010 tax return! In the attached PDF I share with you, the "Additional Information Requested" of the Ohio Liberty Council from our June 30th, 2010 application which we just received on January 30, 2012. Yes, they took a year and a half to respond to our application and they are giving us two weeks to respond back. As you will see, this is no simple request. Here's what the IRS demanded of the group: A hard copy printout of the website - A PDF file emailed to the IRS will not suffice (and this is the high-tech Administration) List all Social Media outlets being used (Facebook, Twitter, etc) and include hard copy printouts of every posting A narrative description of every activity of your organization since June 30, 2010 (filing date) - And they do not want a mere description of the event, but full details - including; who conducted it, their qualifications, who was allowed to take part in the activities and how they were selected, was there a fee? (how much) The IRS also wants to know about the members of the group and their roles and more, asking specifically for the "name, address, and corporate federal ID of all organizations that are members of our organization" Public events are also under scrutiny with the IRS demanding to know the time, location and content schedule of each event. Copies of any and all handouts must be included. Names and credentials of all instructors and copies of any workshop materials used. All speakers must be identified and copies of every speech must be included. By March, several Republican senators and The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) were starting to ask questions about the IRS' treatment of Tea Party groups. "This appears to be a coordinated attempt to intimidate Tea Party organizations by demanding information that is outside the scope of legitimate inquiry and violates the First Amendment," said ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow in a statement , adding that the IRS asked questions that violate groups' association rights. "These organizations have followed the law and applied for tax exempt status for their activities as Americans have done for decades," the statement notes. Later, 12 GOP senators sent a letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas Schulman questioning the nature of the relationship between the IRS and Tea Party groups. "It is critical that the public have confidence that federal tax compliance efforts are pursued in a fair, even-handed, and transparent manner - without regard to politics of any kind," wrote the Senators, referring specifically to the Kentucky 9/12 Project's claim of IRS intimidation. "It is imperative that organizations applying for tax-exempt status are able to rely on a consistent and foreseeable review structure from the IRS. "Any significant changes to the IRS review process should be implemented only after appropriate notice and opportunity for comment from the public and affected parties," the letter adds. The letter was spearheaded by Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch and Ohio Sen. Rob Portman, joined by Senators Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), John Cornyn (Texas), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), John Thune (R-S.D.), and Rand Paul (R-Ky.). More than a year later, Lerner's comments show that the harassed conservative grassroots groups - and their defenders - were actually on to something. This article was taken from the blaze.com under-permission from Glen Beck. He give's his Blessing is on getting the word out. I'm just passing it on along. I do not take responsibility for the content nor context. Federal law allows citizens to reproduce, distribute or exhibit portions of copyright motion pictures, video tapes, or video disks under certain circumstances without authorization of the copyright holder. This infringement of copyright is called fair use and is allowed for purposes of criticism, news reporting, teaching and parody. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fe5_1368223030 waterlawman IRS Admits to Targeting Conservative Groups During 2012 Election, Apologizes Tyrants, Oligarchies, Fascism, Communism, Luciferians, msnbc, cnn, abc, cbs, democrat, liberal, dnc, irs, internal-revenue-service, liars,government,politics Tue, 07 May 2013 17:49:21 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4cb_1367962896 aydeo Before Iran became Israel's No. 1 archenemy, thousands of Israelis stationed in Tehran lived quite the life there. Dan Shadur's film "Before the Revolution," premiering at the Docaviv Film Festival in Tel Aviv this week, takes an insider's look at this dolce vita that came to an abrupt end in 1979, when under threat to their lives, Israelis were forced to evacuate Iranian territory. Shadur, who spent his childhood years in Tehran, where his parents served as envoys, tracked down many of their old friends and acquaintances - among them former Mossad agents, diplomats, contractors and security guards. Their shared recollections, letters, photographs and home movies bring back to life this almost-forgotten pre-revolutionary period when Israelis and Iranians wined and dined together, engaged in business dealings and exchanged intelligence secrets. Shadur's 80-minute documentary, with English subtitles, opens with a former security guard recounting the incredulous scene of hundreds of Iranians gathered on the streets to watch a film about Israel's famed Entebbe raid being projected on the outside wall of the embassy. At the part where Israeli soldiers storm the Ugandan airport, he recalls, the Iranians burst into wild applause. But later on, when the Israeli commando leader Yoni Netanyahu (Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's brother) is gunned down, they collectively erupt into tears. Who could have imagined, he asks, that just a few months later, he and other once-admired Israelis would be forced out of the country "with our tails between our legs"? Shadur's deceased mother, the filmmaker recalls, once described those years in Iran as the best period in their lives. A husband and wife, former kibbutzniks and old friends of his parents, talk about their initial amazement at being assigned a maid who "washed all our clothes by hand." Salaries were so high and the cost of living so low, other members of this former Israeli expat community testify, that they were eventually able to save enough money during their stints in Iran to purchase spacious apartments in Tel Aviv with no need to take out mortgages. All this may explain why many preferred to ignore the increasingly evident signs around them of a grassroots uprising against the Shah and to live in their "bubble," as one woman described it, making their way out of the country, often clandestinely, in just the nick of time. As an Israeli passenger on one of the last flights to leave Iran recalls, the plane "absolutely shook" from all the celebratory jumping and clapping that took place when it safely entered Turkish airspace. http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/once-upon-a-time-in-iran-and-other-israeli-tales-1.518632 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4cb_1367962896 aydeo The day when the Iranians cheered the IDF special forces in Entebbe... Before the Revolution,Tehran,Israelis,Relations,Entebbe Mon, 06 May 2013 22:30:59 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6f1_1367893537 Baldrick NaturalNews.com BREAKING: European Commission to criminalize nearly all seeds and plants not registered with government A new law proposed by the European Commission would make it illegal to "grow, reproduce or trade" any vegetable seeds that have not been "tested, approved and accepted" by a new EU bureaucracy named the "EU Plant Variety Agency." It's called the Plant Reproductive Material Law , and it attempts to put the government in charge of virtually all plants and seeds. Home gardeners who grow their own plants from non-regulated seeds would be considered criminals under this law. The draft text of the law, which has already been amended several times due to a huge backlash from gardeners, is viewable here. "This law will immediately stop the professional development of vegetable varieties for home gardeners, organic growers, and small-scale market farmers," said Ben Gabel, vegetable breeder and director of The Real Seed Catalogue . "Home gardeners have really different needs - for example they grow by hand, not machine, and can't or don't want to use such powerful chemical sprays. There's no way to register the varieties suitable for home use as they don't meet the strict criteria of the Plant Variety Agency, which is only concerned about approving the sort of seed used by industrial farmers." Virtually all plants, vegetable seeds and gardeners to eventually be registered by government. All governments are, of course, infatuated with the idea of registering everybody and everything. Under Title IV of the proposed EU law: Title IV Registration of varieties in national and Union registers The varieties, in order to be made available on the market throughout the Union, shall be included in a national register or in the Union register via direct application procedure to the CVPO. Gardeners must also pay fees to the EU bureaucracy for the registration of their seeds . From the proposed law text: The competent authorities and the CPVO should charge fees for the processing of applications, the formal and technical examinations including audits, variety denomination, and the maintenance of the varieties for each year for the duration of the registration . While this law may initially only be targeted at commercial gardeners, it sets a precedent to sooner or later go after home gardeners and require them to abide by the same insane regulations. Government bureaucracy gone insane"This is an instance of bureaucracy out of control," says Ben Gabel. "All this new law does is create a whole new raft of EU civil servants being paid to move mountains of papers round all day, while killing off the seed supply to home gardeners and interfering with the right of farmers to grow what they want. It also very worrying that they have given themselves the power to regulate and licence any plant species of any sort at all in the future - not just agricultural plants , but grasses, mosses, flowers, anything at all - without having to bring it back to the Council for a vote." As a hint of the level of insane bureaucracy that gardeners and vegetable growers will be subject to under this EU law, check out this language from the proposed EU law : Specific provisions are set out on the registration in the Union variety register and with regard to the possibility for the applicant to launch an appeal against a CPVO decision. Such provisions are not laid down for the registration in the national variety registers, because they are subject to national administrative procedures. A new obligation for each national variety examination centre to be audited by the CPVO will be introduced with the aim to ensure the quality and harmonisation of the variety registration process in the Union. The examination centre of the professional operators will be audited and approved by the national competent authorities. In case of direct application to the CPVO it will audit and approve the examination centres it uses for variety examination. Such language is, of course, Orwellian bureaucraticspeak that means only one thing: All gardeners should prepare to be subjected to total government insanity over seeds, vegetables and home gardens. RealSeeds.co.uk warns about any attempt to actually try to understand the law by reading it: You cannot just read the first 5 pages or so that are an 'executive summary', and think you know what this law is about. The executive summary is NOT what will become the law. It is the actual Articles themselves that become law, the Summary has no legal standing and is just tacked on as an aid to the public and legislators, it is supposed to give background information and set the proposed legislation in context so people know what is going on and why. The problem with this law has always been that the Summary says lots of nice fluffy things about preserving biodiversity, simplifying legislation, making things easier etc - things we all would love - but the Articles of the law actually do completely the opposite. And the Summary is not what becomes the law. For example, the Summary of drafts 1, 2 & 3 talked about making things easier for 'Amateur' varieties. But the entire class of Amateur vegetables - which we have spent 5 years working with DEFRA to register - was actually abolished entirely in the Articles right from the start. Yet the Summary , and press releases based on it, still talked about how it will help preserve Amateur varieties! The Summary is completely bogus. Do not base your views of the law on it! So, be warned. By all means, read it yourself. But you have the ignore the Summary as that is not the Law, and does not reflect what is in the Law. As you might suspect, this move is the "final solution" of Monsanto, DuPont and other seed-domination corporations who have long admitted their goal is the complete domination of all seeds and crops grown on the planet. By criminalizing the private growing of vegetables -- thereby turning gardeners into criminals -- EU bureaucrats can finally hand over full control of the food supply to powerful corporations like Monsanto. Most heirloom seeds to be criminalized Nearly all varieties of heirloom vegetable seeds will be criminalized under this proposed EU law. This means the act of saving seeds from one generation to the next -- a cornerstone of sustainable living -- will become a criminal act . In addition, as Gabel explains, this law "...effectively kills off development of home-garden seeds in the EU." This is the ultimate wish of all governments, of course: To criminalize any act of self-reliance and make the population completely dependent on monopolistic corporations for their very survival. This is true both in the USA and the EU. This is what governments do: They seize control, one sector at a time , year after year, until you are living as nothing more than a total slave under a globalist dictatorial regime. An online petition has already been started on this issue and has garnered nearly 25,000 signatures so far. NOAH'S ARK and 240 other organizations from 40 European countries have also initiated an "open letter" appealing to Brussels bureaucrats to stop the insanity. Click here for a translated version of their petition . I saw this comingBy the way, I am on the record predicting this exact scenario . Read Chapter Three of my fiction book, "Freedom Chronicles 2026." (Read it FREE, online.) It depicts a seed smuggler living in a time when seeds are criminalized and people earn a living as professional seed smugglers. In my book, a woman uses a specially-crafted breast prosthesis to smuggle seeds to "underground gardeners" in full defiance of laws crafted by Monsanto. A vast underground network of grassroots gardeners and scientists manage to put together a "seed weapon" to destroy GMOs and take back the food supply from evil corporations. Mark my words: Seeds are about to become contraband . Anyone who grows their own food is about to be targeted as a criminal. The governments of the world, conspiring with corporations like Monsanto, do not want any individual to be able to grow their own food. This is about total domination of the food supply and the criminalizing of gardeners. And this is what big government always does after centralizing sufficient power. All governments inherently seek total control over the lives of everyone, and if you don't set boundaries and limits for government (i.e. the Bill of Rights), it eventually runs roughshod over all freedoms and liberties, including the freedom to grow your own food. Additional sources: http://open-seeds.org/bad-seed-law/ http://www.realseeds.co.uk/seedlaw.html http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6f1_1367893537 Baldrick European Bollux ALERT! - Home Gardening to be banned Gardening,vegetables,eu,europe,union,lunatics Mon, 06 May 2013 20:09:58 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=280_1367885278 marc1921 A new law proposed by the European Commission would make it illegal to "grow, reproduce or trade" any vegetable seeds that have not been "tested, approved and accepted" by a new EU bureaucracy named the "EU Plant Variety Agency." It's called the Plant Reproductive Material Law , and it attempts to put the government in charge of virtually all plants and seeds. Home gardeners who grow their own plants from non-regulated seeds would be considered criminals under this law. The draft text of the law, which has already been amended several times due to a huge backlash from gardeners, is viewable here. "This law will immediately stop the professional development of vegetable varieties for home gardeners, organic growers, and small-scale market farmers," said Ben Gabel, vegetable breeder and director of The Real Seed Catalogue . "Home gardeners have really different needs - for example they grow by hand, not machine, and can't or don't want to use such powerful chemical sprays. There's no way to register the varieties suitable for home use as they don't meet the strict criteria of the Plant Variety Agency, which is only concerned about approving the sort of seed used by industrial farmers."Virtually all plants, vegetable seeds and gardeners to eventually be registered by governmentAll governments are, of course, infatuated with the idea of registering everybody and everything. Under Title IV of the proposed EU law: Title IV Registration of varieties in national and Union registers The varieties, in order to be made available on the market throughout the Union, shall be included in a national register or in the Union register via direct application procedure to the CVPO. Gardeners must also pay fees to the EU bureaucracy for the registration of their seeds . From the proposed law text: The competent authorities and the CPVO should charge fees for the processing of applications, the formal and technical examinations including audits, variety denomination, and the maintenance of the varieties for each year for the duration of the registration . While this law may initially only be targeted at commercial gardeners, it sets a precedent to sooner or later go after home gardeners and require them to abide by the same insane regulations.Government bureaucracy gone insane"This is an instance of bureaucracy out of control," says Ben Gabel. "All this new law does is create a whole new raft of EU civil servants being paid to move mountains of papers round all day, while killing off the seed supply to home gardeners and interfering with the right of farmers to grow what they want. It also very worrying that they have given themselves the power to regulate and licence any plant species of any sort at all in the future - not just agricultural plants , but grasses, mosses, flowers, anything at all - without having to bring it back to the Council for a vote." As a hint of the level of insane bureaucracy that gardeners and vegetable growers will be subject to under this EU law, check out this language from the proposed EU law : Specific provisions are set out on the registration in the Union variety register and with regard to the possibility for the applicant to launch an appeal against a CPVO decision. Such provisions are not laid down for the registration in the national variety registers, because they are subject to national administrative procedures. A new obligation for each national variety examination centre to be audited by the CPVO will be introduced with the aim to ensure the quality and harmonisation of the variety registration process in the Union. The examination centre of the professional operators will be audited and approved by the national competent authorities. In case of direct application to the CPVO it will audit and approve the examination centres it uses for variety examination. Such language is, of course, Orwellian bureaucraticspeak that means only one thing: All gardeners should prepare to be subjected to total government insanity over seeds, vegetables and home gardens. RealSeeds.co.uk warns about any attempt to actually try to understand the law by reading it: You cannot just read the first 5 pages or so that are an 'executive summary', and think you know what this law is about. The executive summary is NOT what will become the law. It is the actual Articles themselves that become law, the Summary has no legal standing and is just tacked on as an aid to the public and legislators, it is supposed to give background information and set the proposed legislation in context so people know what is going on and why. The problem with this law has always been that the Summary says lots of nice fluffy things about preserving biodiversity, simplifying legislation, making things easier etc - things we all would love - but the Articles of the law actually do completely the opposite. And the Summary is not what becomes the law. For example, the Summary of drafts 1, 2 & 3 talked about making things easier for 'Amateur' varieties. But the entire class of Amateur vegetables - which we have spent 5 years working with DEFRA to register - was actually abolished entirely in the Articles right from the start. Yet the Summary , and press releases based on it, still talked about how it will help preserve Amateur varieties! The Summary is completely bogus. Do not base your views of the law on it! So, be warned. By all means, read it yourself. But you have the ignore the Summary as that is not the Law, and does not reflect what is in the Law. As you might suspect, this move is the "final solution" of Monsanto, DuPont and other seed-domination corporations who have long admitted their goal is the complete domination of all seeds and crops grown on the planet. By criminalizing the private growing of vegetables -- thereby turning gardeners into criminals -- EU bureaucrats can finally hand over full control of the food supply to powerful corporations like Monsanto.Most heirloom seeds to be criminalizedNearly all varieties of heirloom vegetable seeds will be criminalized under this proposed EU law. This means the act of saving seeds from one generation to the next -- a cornerstone of sustainable living -- will become a criminal act . In addition, as Gabel explains, this law "...effectively kills off development of home-garden seeds in the EU." This is the ultimate wish of all governments, of course: To criminalize any act of self-reliance and make the population completely dependent on monopolistic corporations for their very survival. This is true both in the USA and the EU. This is what governments do: They seize control, one sector at a time , year after year, until you are living as nothing more than a total slave under a globalist dictatorial regime. An online petition has already been started on this issue and has garnered nearly 25,000 signatures so far. NOAH'S ARK and 240 other organizations from 40 European countries have also initiated an "open letter" appealing to Brussels bureaucrats to stop the insanity. Click here for a translated version of their petition .I saw this comingBy the way, I am on the record predicting this exact scenario . Read Chapter Three of my fiction book, "Freedom Chronicles 2026." (Read it FREE, online.) It depicts a seed smuggler living in a time when seeds are criminalized and people earn a living as professional seed smugglers. In my book, a woman uses a specially-crafted breast prosthesis to smuggle seeds to "underground gardeners" in full defiance of laws crafted by Monsanto. A vast underground network of grassroots gardeners and scientists manage to put together a "seed weapon" to destroy GMOs and take back the food supply from evil corporations. Mark my words: Seeds are about to become contraband . Anyone who grows their own food is about to be targeted as a criminal. The governments of the world, conspiring with corporations like Monsanto, do not want any individual to be able to grow their own food. This is about total domination of the food supply and the criminalizing of gardeners. And this is what big government always does after centralizing sufficient power. All governments inherently seek total control over the lives of everyone, and if you don't set boundaries and limits for government (i.e. the Bill of Rights), it eventually runs roughshod over all freedoms and liberties, including the freedom to grow your own food. http://www.naturalnews.com/040214_seeds_European_Commission_registration.html#ixzz2SYnNq2IR http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=280_1367885278 marc1921 European Commission to criminalize nearly all seeds and plants not registered with government eu wants to control food production Tue, 23 Apr 2013 23:55:00 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=346_1366775346 Fine_Just_Fine Five U.S. gun control groups have received almost $7 million combined from liberal billionaire George Soros, including the most prominent one, the Brady Campaign. The Soros contributions to these five groups total an astounding $6,727,966 between 2000 and 2011. The American Bar Association, a liberal group of lawyers, received $4,093,946 from Soros. According to their site , "the ABA believes that lawyers share a special responsibility to help create a just and secure society in which firearms are well-regulated." President Laurel Bellows urged for more than just background checks back in January , including "full integration of state and local mental heal records into the National Instant Check System" and supported an assault weapons ban. The most renowned gun control group, The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence , the legal arm of the better know Brady Campaign, received $50,000 in Soros funding. The Brady Center helps those involved in legal matters through their separate 501c(3) organization, as opposed to The Brady Campaign that deals at the grassroots level. The Children's Defense Fund, whose mission is "to ensure every child a Health Start, a Head Start, a Fair Start, a Safe Start, and a Moral Start," received $550,000 from Soros. In their " Protect Children, Not Guns " campaign, CDF links back to gun control partners, including The Brady Campaign. The League of Women Voters received a staggering $2,028,020. LWV is not concerned solely with gun control. On their website, they also show to be against the XL Pipeline, Voter ID laws, and encourage their members to "tell your Senators to pass sensible gun laws." And finally, Physicians for Social Responsibility received $5,000 from Soros. PSR is the "medical and public health voice" against nuclear power and weapons and for supposed "safe" energy. They push for "the strongest possible legislative and regulatory approaches" in regards to firearms. Since the Newtown massacre in Dec. 2012, there have been a few new gun control groups formed. Most notably, former Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords formed the new PAC Americans for Responsible Solutions . Another group, Moms Demand Action , was also formed for "gun sense" in America. It's too soon to know whether these new groups are getting Soros funding, as well. Soros has made his support of gun control clear. In "The Bubble of American Supremacy: The Costs of Bush's War in Iraq," Soros complained about the Bush presidency hindering gun control. "He has aggressively infringed the rights of states to legislate and enforce provisions on issues such as gun control and medical marijuana," Soros wrote. Soros's donations go to fund an extensive network of liberal media outlets, which have received more than $52 million . Those operations include a wide range of liberal news operations as well as the infrastructure of news - journalism schools, investigative journalism and even industry organizations. Since 2000, Soros has given away more than $550 million to liberal organizations in the United States through his Open Society Foundations. Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/liz-thatcher/2013/04/23/soros-spends-nearly-7-million-push-gun-control#ixzz2RLie265H http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=346_1366775346 Fine_Just_Fine Soros Spends Nearly $7 Million to Push Gun Control george soros, evil, leftist, tyrant, democrats, gun grabbers Mon, 22 Apr 2013 17:17:57 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=236_1366665233 LostRothschild Source: http://www.examiner.com/article/enra...re-next-attack Gun rights advocates understandably celebrated Wednesday after the Senate failed to approve any gun control legislation. It's hard to say what is more gratifying--the defeat of even the " universal background checks " legislation (once thought to be unstoppable, especially with ostensibly "pro-gun" Republican Senator Pat Toomey on board), or the fact that Senator Dianne Feinstein's (D-CA) bill to ban so-called " assault weapons " went down by a bipartisan supermajority . It was indeed a victory worth celebrating, but there is no more time for partying. Now it's time to get back to work fending off the next wave. And there will be a "next wave." Rabidly anti-gun billionaire and New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg has already telegraphed his intention to pump additional millions into both pressuring perceived "swing votes" in the Senate, and unseating any senators who do not succumb to that pressure. Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), no longer bothering to try to maintain the "pro-gun" facade he has hidden behind all these years, vows to take another shot at passing S. 649, with the apparent strategy of again amending the bill to soften the details of the background check language just enough to change the minds of five of the senators perceived to be susceptible to the pressure the anti-gun groups, the Obama administration and the mass media have never stopped putting on them since well before last week's vote. Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) is already the target of a new ad campaign , although not a particularly competent one, claiming to quote a poll commissioned by "Mayors For Illegal Guns." Of course, what the gun prohibitionist lobby cannot buy with all the money they pour into "gun control" (while, simultaneously, whining , and whining and whining about all the money the "gun lobby" spends) is real grassroots activism--something they're aware of , and hope desperately to change. The good news for them is that they hav e succeeded in recruiting a few enraged "activists." The bad news is that some of these recruits cannot rein in their hatred, and even desire for violence. Meet David Stachelski , who left this charming message on U.S. Senator Heidi Heitkamp's (D-ND) Facebook page: Senator, May you live to see one of your family gunned down in front of you while you watch the life pour out of them onto the street. You are a coward and you disgust me! Stachelski is far from alone in his expression of hatred for senators who vote in accordance to the Constitution, and thus against his wishes (Sen. Heitkamp, by the way, has been targeted by the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence for months, and should really hear some support from our side on Facebook and Twitter ). Another is Patricia Maisch, something of a hero in "gun control" circles . Maisch, after being ejected from the Senate chamber for creating a disturbance after the vote, expressed her real opinion about the Senators who thwarted her forcible citizen disarmament agenda. From the Washington Post (bold emphasis added): "They are an embarrassment to this country, that they don't have any compassion or care for people who have been taken brutally from their families," Maisch said as officers attempted to remove her from the building. " I hate them ," she said of the senators. The gun prohibitionist lobby has always claimed to be motivated by a desire to end violence, and by love of humanity. Some, apparently, are now taking that phony mask off. In so doing, they are also demonstrating the wisdom of gun rights advocates being at all times prepared to defend ourselves. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=236_1366665233 LostRothschild Enraged 'gun control' advocates unleash their hate, prepare next attack 2, 2nd, second, amendment, gun, firearm, rights, constitution, tyranny, freedom