Monday, December 26, 2011

Video-"Finally, Solo Farmer Fights Monsanto and Wins"

"Monsanto has long been trying to establish control over the seeds of the plants that produce food for the world. 
"They have already patented a number of genetically altered food crops, which can only be grown with proper license, and the seeds for which must be purchased anew each year.
          "But genetically engineered crops cannot be contained.
"And rather than being found guilty of contaminating farmers' property, Monsanto has successfully sued hundreds of farmers for patent infringement.
"Many farmers have subsequently, quite literally, lost their farms.
"Percy Schmeiser of Saskatchewan, Canada, was also a victim of Monsanto's vile ways.
"Schmeiser worked on farming and developing his own seeds for 50 years, and when his fields were contaminated, Monsanto threatened him, intimidated him, and tried to take his land away. 
"But Schmeiser refused to give in, and eventually beat them in court.
          "Percy's story is a classic case of David versus Goliath, and his victory is no doubt momentous."
(Read more...read why Monsanto is banned in other countries...)



Tx. Unions Point Finger of Hypocrisy @ Gov. Perry

Ahhhhhh, the "Plot Thickens" on Rick Perry's Retirement--Here's the "Real" Reason Given That People Are Allegedly Upset--Self-Proclaimed, "Pro-Newt" website, Newsmax.com, published this story over the weekend>>

Perry Criticized for Taking Texas Salary, Pension
Saturday, 24 Dec 2011

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/perry-texas-salary-pension/2011/12/24/id/422069?s=al&promo_code=DCA6-1

Here's the summary statement given in the above article>>

"...The move has angered some of Texas' employee unions.

"Rank-and-file Texas employees can sometimes return to state employment after retirement, but only after a 90-day waiting period and with frozen pensions, Mike Gross, vice president of the 12,000-member Texas State Employees Union, told the Chronicle.

"'Whether the thing’s legal or not, the governor is locked arm in arm with a whole group of conservatives who are attacking our pension fund and then he is taking advantage of a loophole that only he and a few others have access to. It’s outrageous,' he said."

What do you think?  Is he being hypcritcal?  What's your opinion on the controversial topic of  unions? 

Friday, December 16, 2011

Will This Embarrass Rick Perry's Campaign?

Rick Perry ‘retires’ to collect state pension while still governor

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/16/rick-perry-retires-to-collect-state-pension-while-still-governor/

"The Raw Story," By Muriel Kane
Friday, December 16, 2011

"Texas Governor and current Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry appears to have pulled something of a fast one on his state’s taxpayers by officially “retiring” earlier this year so that he could begin collecting an annual pension of $92,376 at the same time as he continues to draw his $150,000 a year salary as governor.

"The arrangement went into effect last January but became public knowledge only this week, when Perry’s presidential campaign filed the personal financial disclosure statement after having previously received two successive delays.

"Perry was asked about the payments during a campaign stop in Iowa on Friday and replied, “That’s been in place for decades … I don’t find that to be out of the ordinary. [The Employee Retirement System] called me and said, ‘Listen you’re eligible to access your retirement now with your military time and your time and service, and I think you would be rather foolish to not access what you’ve earned.’

"As explained by the Austin Statesman, Texas law allows state employees to take retirement once their age plus their years of service add up to 80. The 61 year old Perry has held one position or another with the state since he was employed as agricultural commissioner in 1991, and he filed to start receiving his annuity last January.

"Perry continues to pay 6.5% of his salary as governor into the Employees Retirement System, which will further increase his retirement payment once his term ends in 2015. He will also be eligible for lifetime health care at state expense, as well as Social Security benefits.

"The payments certainly appear to be legal but could prove embarrassing for the governor, who has complained about entitlement programs and has proposed a partial privatization of Social Security as part of his presidential campaign."

Let's see, I believe he called Social Security a "ponzie scheme" in one of his prior debates.  Some might call it "double dipping" -- some will say, "It's his retirement money, let him get it while it's still there to get." Was FDR's retirement funds policy a good policy or not?  Will this be embarrassing for Rick Perry as the above author thinks, or not?  What are your ideas about it?

Monday, December 12, 2011

Alternative news covering health, finance, environment, politics and more

http://www.alternativenews.com/
All guest comments welcome in our blogs, including anonymous comments.  Thanks for sharing your ideas--"ideas never die"--and your thoughts that will be beneficial to many others.

Saturday, December 3, 2011

Differences in Economic Theories--or--How to Avoid Another Depression

John Maynard Keynes, British economist (1883–1946), developed the economic theory that has become predominant in most, if not all, modern economies.  This theory states that during recessions the government should borrow money to use in stimulating economic activity, such as public works and farm subsidies. 

Then when there is an economic upturn, the government should raise taxes to pay down the debt.  The problem has been that the political policy setters have not (with rare exception) raised taxes or cut spending in good times.  In fact, government debt has increased in good times as well.

Part of the complexity comes with the fact that high taxes draw off capital from its creative potential (profit, jobs, etc.) into what seems more and more like a black hole of consumer welfare and sometimes welfare for businesses. 


Keynesian economics warns against the practice of "too much saving" and "not enough spending" (underconsumption vs. consumption) in the economy, and it also supports considerable redistribution of wealth, when needed. Keynesian economics further concludes that there is a pragmatic reason for the massive redistribution of wealth: if the poorer segments of society are given sums of money, they will likely spend it, rather than save it, thus promoting "economic growth."
It was Keynes' "simple explanation" that was the cause of the Great Depression (for which he is most well-known).  His ideas spawned a slew of interventionist economic policiesand was based on a circular flow of money. One person's spending goes towards another’s earnings, and when that person spends her earnings she is, in effect, supporting another’s earnings. This "circle" continues on and helps "support" a "normal" functioning economy.

When the Great Depression hit, people's natural reaction was to hoard their money. However, under Keynes' theory this stopped the "circular" flow of money, keeping the economy at a standstill.  Keynes' solution to this poor economic state was to prime the pump. By prime the pump, Keynes argued that the government should step in to increase spending, either by increasing the money supply by printing more money, or by actually buying things on the market itself. 

Another analogy for "increased spending" is:  Can a drunk get sober by giving them more alcohol? 

Milton Friedman (1912-2006) was a professor at the Chicago School of Economics (a monetarist school of economics) for many years.  A great deal of his work was positive and promoted the growth of free markets, unfortunately some was negative.  During his early years as a young economist in the Treasury Department he helped design the income withholding tax as a means to increase the flow of government revenue.  His suggestion was accepted and implemented, and thus, we have the federal and state income tax of today.

In contrast, when Thomas Jefferson was president of the United States, he rejected the live-and-let-live type of physiocrat’s idea of a flat-tax on the land.  He advocated that all Americans should be absolutely un-taxed, and instead of having the citizens taxed to defray the costs of government, he implemented a very small import tariff, or tax, to be charged to foreigners to pay the costs of government. This helped promote his concept of a very limited size and scope regarding  government activity, leaving the citizens free to keep all the money they earned and decide what to do with their own money themselves.  This was a great success and contributed to the United States becoming a leader in prosperity.
Proponents of free-market capitalism, which supportes the exclusion of the public sector in the market and teaches that an unfettered market would achieve balance on its own, includes the Austrian School of economic thought, of which one of its earliest founders, Friedrich von Hayek (1899-1922) also lived in England alongside Keynes. The two had a public rivalry for many years because of their opposing thoughts on the role of the state in the economic lives of individuals.

Austrian economics isn't about government planning or statistical models. It's about human beings and the choices they make in the real world.  

“Economics is the study of how real people act to relieve dissatisfaction. For example, dissatisfied with the inconvenience of barter, folks start using more marketable goods for indirect exchange, a practice that eventually results in one or two commodities becoming the preferred medium of exchange, usually gold or silver….

“The 'health-care crisis' is a prime example of how 'the problems resulting from one intervention tend to lead to calls for other interventions to fix those problems.' While the hated HMOs are generally viewed as creatures of capitalism, these 'strange entities' are just a response to the soaring costs arising from the government-instituted system of third party payments.

"'We do not see AMOs in the automobile industry or CMOs in the computer business'...That insight cuts to the core of what is really going on. Auto dealers might also find their professional lives unbearable, just as many physicians do, if AMOs told them how to service their customers. But happily, the disease of third-party payments has only infected health care.

"On the issue of government subsidizing business to build things, the author of Economics for Real People: An Introduction to the Austrian School, Gene Callahan, quotes from a review by Newt Gingrich of a book about the transcontinental railroad, in which the former congressman celebrates the 'public-private partnership' without which 'the railroad could not have been built for another generation.' To which the Callahan responds, 'Gingrich simply assumes that a transcontinental railroad ought to have come before the alternatives that entrepreneurs might have created with those same resources.'" http://mises.org/store/Economics-for-Real-People-An-Introduction-to-the-Austrian-School-2nd-edition-P116C0.aspx

What's YOUR economic theory of how to resolve the $$ problems?  We welcome comments from all guests---as the saying goes, "Ideas never die."

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Romney's Image Expert--for His Hair

Remember the debate on what kind of underwear Clinton wore, boxers or briefs?
Now there’s a debate on Mitt Romney’s hair!  There’s an entire Facebook page about it, a blog devoted to it, plus it is reported that voters along the campaign trail ask about it, and talk-show hosts make comments about it.
Romney fans say his hair looks “presidential,” whereas Romney opponents say his hair looks “too perfect.” 
With all the issues on hand to be concerned with, and the media can only focus on a candidate’s hair.  It would be sad if it wasn’t so disturbing. 
Please, let’s raise the bar from underwear and hair to more important topics!
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/us/politics/romneys-image-expert-the-one-for-his-hair-anyway.html

Monday, November 28, 2011

Bubbles and Other Economic Bunglings

Having enjoyed the first Aftershock book, I am looking forward to its sequel.  The authors, David and Robert Wiedemer with Cindy Spitzer, state there’s an extra chapter in the sequel that could not be included in their first book. 

Here’s an excerpt from my upcoming book that refers to their Aftershock book:

Wiedemer and co-authors list six bubbles:  The real estate bubble; the stock market bubble; the private debt bubble; the discretionary spending bubble; the developing dollar bubble; and the government debt bubble.
The latter two are, according to the authors, yet to fully develop while the first four are not over their downward adjustments. (Their last book was published in 2010.)
These three analysts wrote America’s Bubble Economy, published in 2006, which accurately predicted the popping of the housing bubble, the collapse of the private debt bubble, the fall of the stock market bubble, and the decline of consumer spending.
In that time, the great majority of the experts were saying “all is well, stocks will rise.” …
  Wiedemer’s accurate prediction of an economic downsizing (the worst since the Great Depression of the 1930s) came not because of luck nor because of a perpetual bearish outlook; rather it came through seeing the fundamental underlying patterns.
The authors make a very important point about the difference between an economic bubble and fundamentals, which rest on solid ground.
They said the “facts on the ground did not match the bubbles in the sky.  Highflying asset growth that is not firmly anchored to an underlying real economic driver is not sustainable.” 

What do you think about all these economic bubbles?  What are you doing to prepare for the ones these authors, and other economists, are forecasting?  Share your ideas with us here for others to benefit.  Thank you.

Monday, November 21, 2011

Hidden Tax Payer $$ is Fraud--We're Not in Debt After All?

Did you see the headline about a suburb of Detroit, already with a high crime rate, not only turning off their city street lights because they "couldn't pay" their own electricity bill, they also had the lights physically removed out of the ground?  Many cities are cutting back services (fire, police, trash, road repairs, etc.), and states are threatening to cut pensions and social security while they wait for a federal bailout, such as what's happening in Rhode Island.


However, the media's not talking about the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) that all levels of government have--federal, state, local, and even municipalities--and have had since 1946.   It’s never reported on their “budget” or in any other form to the public.   Budgets are about the current year only, whereas CAFR is an accumulation over a period of many years, with institutional funds, enterprise or financial holdings, assets and total investment incomes, for both government and nongovernmental entities, each having their own budget and own account that never get mixed in with public records, and are collected from the tax payer through government fees.  

Wikipedia states, “While a budget may indicate that a specific government or agency has financial trouble and debt as a result of excess spending within the select grouping of "general fund" accounts, the CAFR may indicate that overall the same government entity has many facets possessing large holdings and income considerably greater than what is shown in a budget report or the ‘general fund’ alone.”  Within the government level, it’s considered as a “surplus” that they have already determined can never be refunded (or revealed) to the tax payers for any reason.  When asked about it, there’s denial to the public that it exists, but when presented with evidence that it does exist, then comes the hard-line refusal to refund it with a long line of blatant excuses that are not true.
  • In 2010, Oregon Rep. Bruce Hanna during general session when the floor was discussing what to do about the state's 3.5 billion dollar budget shortfall (fire employees, cut back on services, close state parks), stood up with the cover page from the (Oregon) state CAFR in hand and stated that in less than a few minutes he found $3.5B to satisfy the state shortfall, therefore being no shortfall when comparing the state CAFR and the previous "selective" presentation of the State general purpose operating budget.
Lt. Col. Klatt accidentally learned about the CAFR’s in 1998 and exposed them by going public, including a website titled “The Truth About State and Local Governments Having Excess of Your Tax Dollars They Are Not Using” found here: http://cafrman.com/


What do you think about this well-kept "secret" from all of us, especially during these rough economic times?  Is it for "real" or somebody's mis-interpretation?  If it's for real, why isn't the mainstream media covering it so that the tax payer is protected from fraud?



















 

Monday, November 14, 2011

More $$ If Cities/Businesses Delete Fluoride!

Just received an email update from FAN>>Voters in Amesbury, Massachusetts ended fluoride forever on Nov. 8th last week!  The town of almost 17,000 residents had fluoride started 44 years ago.  And then in 2009 they quit adding it because the fluoride chemicals were clogging up their water plant equipment with "unknown insoluble residue."  Their local Board of Health worked and worked to get fluoride back and finally asked for it to be put on the ballot, giving their recommendation of "3 to 1" to have the public vote "yes" on the ballot.  Instead, the residents educated themselves, and instead of voting it back in, they voted it out completely after 44 years!

Here's another amazing phenomenon!  Retail business owners are now joining the anti-fluoride battle -- here's some success stories:

-In Austin, Texas the owner of Hopdoddy Burgers uses reverse osmosis filters to remove the fluoride from the water they serve to customers and use for cooking.  They advertise this fact locally, and have joined the residents of Austin calling for an end to fluoridation.

-In Watsonville, California Martinelli's apple juice publicly opposes water fluoridation, and uses well water in their juice rather than the local water which is fluoridated.  On their webpage discussing their position on fluoridation, they even urge customers to watch FAN's film, "Professional Perspectives".

-In Portland, Maine the owners of GRO Cafe and Bonobos kicked off a campaign to collect petition signatures to get a referendum vote on fluoridation.  Their motivation was originally a campaign to get restaurants to stop using bottled water, called "Take Back the Tap", but found that the only way to truly take back the tap was to increase the quality of the drinking water by removing fluoride.


Businesses can be very powerful allies in any campaign against fluoridation, and can often add a great deal of influence, media attention, and support for a campaign.  If you live in a fluoridated community, why not ask your favorite restaurant to join the fight.  When you go for a meal, be armed with a petition or official statement for them to sign, like this:
"I am a restaurant owner in Town X.  My customers are asking me to remove fluoride from the water I serve to them and use when cooking their food.  Removing the fluoride with a filtration system would cost my business a lot of money.  It would make more sense for everyone if the city was to stop adding fluoride chemicals to our drinking water. It is not necessary (fluoride works topically not from inside the body), and there are many health concerns. (www.fluoridealert.org)."

Urge the owner(s) to sign it, then put it in an envelope addressed to your city council.  If several restaurants send in these letters, your local council will almost certainly take notice. 

(Go to fluoridegoodorbad.com and download your FREE copy of my book "Fluoridation: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly" -- a vet in a Washington State city looked at it, and said it was a fast read on fluoride facts that needed to be sent out to all vets statewide--this was done in their city, and they won!)

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Call to Action in Utah!

It's amazing!  A little over 2.5 million people have stopped having fluoride added to their drinking water in 30 communities, and this was only during one year--October 2010 through October 2011!  It's past time for Utah to do the same -- what's YOUR thoughts about the dangers of fluoride in our tap water?  I'm starting the process of another mass mailing to all our State and Health Dept. Representatives, as well as the media, to inform them once again about the dangers of fluoridation in our Utah drinking water.  Some of the above 30 communities had hearings about it on the city level, and the facts convinced the individual city councils to vote it out.  Others in the 30 communities went through the process of getting it put on the ballot, as it was done in Tooele when residents voted it down for the 3rd time (or was it 4th time) in 2005?  What would YOU like to do?  What would YOU like to tell them in this mass mailing?  Please comment below or contact our Orem office, 801-765-1995.  Thank you. 
Ken Howard


Oct. 31 -- Lakeshore, Ontario (33,000)
Oct. 25 -- Palmer, Alaska (8,400)
Oct. 18 -- Lawrenceburg, Tennessee (11,000)
Oct. 16 -- Churchill, Manitoba (1,000)
Oct. 13 -- New Plymouth, New Zealand (50,000)
Oct. 4 -- Pinellas County, Florida (700,000)
Sept. 30 -- Spencer, Indiana/ BPP Water (10,500)
Sept. 22 -- College Station, Texas (100,000)
Sept. 12 -- Slave Lake, Alberta (7,000)
Sept. 6 -- Hohenwald, Tennessee (4,000)
Aug. 16 -- Pottstown, Pennsylvania (15,500)
Aug. 15 -- Spring Hill, Tennessee (30,000)
Aug. 8 -- Philomath, Oregon (4,500)
July 20 -- Taber, Alberta (6,500)
July 4 -- Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan (5,000)
June 30 -- Taumarunui, New Zealand (5,000)
June 6 -- Fairbanks, Alaska (30,500)
May 18 -- Naples Village, New York (1,070)
May 16 -- Mount Clemons, Michigan (17,300)
April 21 -- Lago Vista, Texas (6,500)
Mar. 17 -- Marcellus, Michigan (1,100)
Feb. 16 -- Independence, Virginia (1,000)
Feb. 8 -- Calgary, Alberta (1,300,000)
Feb. 7 -- Yellow Springs, Ohio (3,200)
Feb. 7 -- Vercheres, Quebec (5,240)
Jan. 19 -- Schuylkill Haven, Pennsylvania (5,500)
Nov. 15, 2010 -- Sparta, North Carolina (2,000)
Nov. 4, 2010 -- Tellico, Tennessee (900)
Oct. 25, 2010 -- Waterloo, St. Jacobs, and Elmira, Ontario (103,000)
Total: 2,571,500 people (www.fluorideaction.net)

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Who Do You Think Will Be the 2012 Presidential Winner?

Celente Picks 2012 Presidential WinnerBy Gerald Celente
10-4-11
Gerald Celente, publisher for Trends Journal, forcasts the 2012 election to be a "Presidential Reality Show" with whoever does the best job on stage will win since it's not really politics but show business this time.


The CNN debate "...was a star-spangled, made-for-TV-spectacle appropriating the lowest common denominator elements of the World Wrestling Federation, the Miss America Pageant and American Idol.  The American Idol winner (a.k.a. The President of the United States) will be the best performer."Couldn't help but notice how much detail Celente put into describing how Obama matches his American Idol image!

Celente forcasts that Rick Perry has made too many mistakes, Mitt Romney's RomneyCare is worse than ObamaCare, plus nobody will want to vote for a Mormon, and Michelle Bachmann has lowered herself in the media to the ditzy image of Sarah Palin when she didn't know Elvis' birthday and many other likeable goofups. He doesn't even mention Herman Cain or any of the others in the Republican lineup.

Celente forcasts that if any of those win the GOP nomination, Obama will win in spite of his low approval ratings.  The only threat to his re-election, the same way Clinton was re-elected a second term in spite of his low approval ratings, would be if Jon Huntsman or Ron Paul move forward as the favorite dark horse.  

"Over the long haul in the run for the nomination, the attacks launched by the three current frontrunners could succeed in discrediting them all. Under such circumstances it is not impossible that one or the other of the dark horses could win the race. Should that be the case, either one would have a better chance of beating Obama than Romney, Perry or Bachmann."

What's your take on Celente's forcast?  If people won't want to vote for a Mormon, how does he explain the other Mormon being the dark horse favorite?  Maybe you're not old enough to remember, but the same was said about JFK, that "nobody will want to vote for a Catholic."

Sound off with what you think!

Is America Under Attack?

The Coming Church-State Wars

Recently by Patrick J. Buchanan: The Conquest of the West
Buchanan reports that it was a college professor who filed complaints, not the Muslim students, against the Catholic University for descrimination and wanting prayer rooms without Catholic symbols.  He asks what this means, which is, "...That there are anti-Catholic bigots whose stock-in-trade is exploiting civil rights laws to smear the church and her institutions, and drive wedges between Catholics and other faiths."

Is America Disintegrating?

Buchanan reports that, "What was morally repellent – promiscuity, homosexuality, abortion – is now seen by perhaps half the nation as natural, normal, healthy and progressive...There was a time not so long ago when the nation was united on a common faith, morality, history, heroes, holidays, holy days, language and literature. Now we fight over them all."   
These comments by Buchanan coincide with my latest book "The Dynamic Influence of Christianity" and my upcoming new book "America, Is it Under Attack?"
What's your thoughts?   

Thursday, October 13, 2011

CA Gov mandates Gardasil vaccine without parental knowledge or consent

Jerry Brown legalizes 12-year-old children giving 'consent' to Gardasil vaccine injections, but bans tanning beds for those under 18

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/033831_Jerry_Brown_Gardasil.html#ixzz1ahDvvrcN
 
Merck Bankrolled Anti-Parent Bill?
 
 

Did Merck buy off California legislators who voted to pass AB499 vaccination consent bill?

Wednesday, October 12, 2011 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

Assemblywoman Toni Atkins (D-San Diego), who sponsored the anti-parent bill, just so happens to have received a generous campaign donation from Merck prior to endorsing it -- and she later lied about this fact when confronted about it (http://maplight.org/california/legi...).

According to CalWatchdog, a California-based government accountability group, 25 of the California senators and assemblymen that voted in favor of the bill also received campaign contributions from Merck that collectively totaled nearly $40,000 (http://www.calwatchdog.com/2011/09/...).

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/033848_Merck_legislators.html#ixzz1ahGPGGPJ

NY Proposes Repeal of 1st Amendment to Stop Cyberbullying

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111001/00002316160/ny-state-senators-say-weve-got-too-much-free-speech-introduce-bill-to-fix-that.shtml
"Proponents of a more refined First Amendment argue that this freedom should be treated not as a right but as a privilege — a special entitlement granted by the state on a conditional basis that can be revoked if it is ever abused or maltreated.
"It suggests, by its very nature, that the government possesses the right to grant the "privilege" of free speech to citizens... and thus the right to revoke it. That's an astonishingly dangerous path, and one that should not be taken seriously. Of course, given their right to speak freely, state senators Jeff Klein, Diane Savino, David Carlucci and David Valesky have every right to put forth that argument...

"LEAVING IMPROPER MESSAGES ON ONLINE MESSAGE BOARDS OR SENDING HURTFUL AND DAMAGING MESSAGES TO OTHERS;
“FLAMING” (HURTFUL, CRUEL, AND OFTENTIMES INTIMIDATING MESSAGES INTENDED TO INFLAME, INSIGHT, OR ENRAGE);
“HAPPY SLAPPING” (RECORDING PHYSICAL ASSAULTS ON MOBILE PHONES OR DIGITAL CAMERAS, THEN DISTRIBUTING THEM TO OTHERS);
"TROLLING” (DELIBERATELY AND DECEITFULLY POSTING INFORMATION TO ENTICE GENUINELY HELPFUL PEOPLE TO RESPOND (OFTEN EMOTIONALLY), OFTEN DONE TO PROVOKE OTHERS);
"EXCLUSION (INTENTIONALLY AND CRUELLY EXCLUDING SOMEONE FROM AN ONLINE GROUP).
"...The plan is to extend two existing areas of law: "stalking in the third degree" will now include cyberbullying, and "manslaughter in the second degree" will be expanded to "include the emerging problem of bullycide...If I say something to someone and they then go commit suicide, should I be guilty of manslaughter? Do the folks behind this not realize that this doesn't help prevent suicides, but it encourages them in giving people who are upset by something someone said extra incentive to kill themselves to "get back" at the person who was mean to them...It does not require that the person accused of cyberstalking initiate the activity, it does not require intent to harm or frighten, and a single message can be a cause of action. Think about that for a second. Someone could send you a message, you could do a single reply with no ill will or bad intent... and be guilty of the crime of cyberstalking...If we don't let you into the club, it's now a form of cyberbullying? It makes you wonder what happened to these particular Senators when they were kids...Do the folks writing this bill not realize how widely this will be abused?" 
Read the full report of the proposed NY law here: 
http://www.nysenate.gov/files/pdfs/final%20cyberbullying_report_september_2011.pdf
"You can also contact each of the Senators involved in creating it and proposing the corresponding legislation: 
 
Jeff Klein (D-Bronx/Westchester)
Tel: 518.455.3595
Email: jdklein@senate.state.ny.us

Diane Savino (D-Staten Island/Brooklyn)
Tel: 518.455.2437
Email: savino@senate.state.ny.us

David Carlucci (D-Rockland/Orange)
Tel: 518.455.2991
Email: carlucci@nysenate.gov

David Valesky (D-Oneida)
Tel: 518.455.2838
Email: valesky@senate.state.ny.us

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/033846_Free_Speech_censorship.html#ixzz1ahBcKefA

Brave Dentists Speak Out Against Water Fluoridation

More than 3,790 professionals, 324 of which are dentists, have already signed FAN's Call for an End to Water Fluoridation, which you can view here:  http://www.fluoridealert.org/

 
"When I graduated from University, we weren't given any information about where [fluoride] came from," says Dentist Caree Alexander, a former Navy practitioner who also had a private dental practice for 20 years, in the documentary FIRE WATER: Australia's Industrial Fluoridation Disgrace. "We all assumed it was [pharmaceutical-grade] calcium fluoride."  You can watch the full-length documentary for free here:       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfiCP3HYxFg

 
Other prominent dentists that have spoken out against fluoride include Dr. Thomas Connelly from New York City; Dr. Andrew Harms, former president of the Australian Dental Association; Dentist Hardy Limeback, PhD, from the University of Toronto's Department of Preventive Dentistry; Dentist Bill Osmunson from the Fluoride Action Network (FAN); and Dentist David Kennedy from the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology (IAOMT), just to name a few.

"My [published] work showed that fluoride accumulates in the human pineal gland and lowers melatonin production in animals," says Dentist Jennifer Luke, PhD. "I find it extraordinary that no government promoting fluoridation has chosen to pursue these worrying findings."
 
For more background history on fluoride, go to http://www.abundantlivinginfo.com/ and obtain a copy of my book, "Fluoridation:  The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly" --   My book explains how good intentions and "the money trail" combined to distort research. It has taken time for the health damage to appear.  The Belgium Health Ministry calls fluoride a "slithering poison" as the toxic poison builds up in the body.  (159 pages)

US Supreme Court - upholds state and lower court's refusal of "2 daddys" on same-sex adoption birth certificate!

Liberty Counsel - Restoring the Culture by Advancing Religious Freedom, the Sanctity of Human Life, and the Family  www.libertyaction.org/

Supreme Court Allows Important Natural Marriage and Family Case to Stand
Oct 12, 2011
The U.S. Supreme Court refused to review an important case involving natural marriage and family, thus allowing the federal court of appeals decision to stand... (go to their website to read more)

Texas School District Fully Vindicates Christian Student After Wrongful Suspension
Oct 11, 2011
The Fort Worth Independent School District has issued a letter to Liberty Counsel fully vindicating high school freshman, Dakota Ary, who was given in-school suspension for telling another student that he believes homosexuality is wrong because of his Christian faith...(go to their website to read more)

(Check out my book, "The Dynamic Influence of Christianity," to read more about the cultural war against Christian values at http://www.abundantlivinginfo.com/)




 

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Rising Hostility Against Religion Worldwide - Deseret News & Pew Research Center

Rising hostility against religion worldwide

Published: Saturday, Aug. 27, 2011 1:03 a.m. MDT
By Michael De Groote, Deseret News

1615 L Street, NW Suite 700   Washington, DC 20036-5610   T: 202.419.4550   F: 202.419.4559
The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life is a project of the Pew Research Center, a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts.

Rising Restrictions on Religion

One-third of the world's population experiences an increase

This book reveals how and why countries most influenced by Chrsitianity have led the way to human progress in:
  • Modern science
  • Technology
  • Economic productivity
  • Individual and political freedom
My book includes discussions on:
  • Political-Economic ideologies and capitalism
  • Evolution, tolerance, charity, values
  • Christian influence on music, literature, art, and the pioneering of public education and the first universities
In many of our schools and universities there is a slighting, even a demeaning, of Christianity and our political and cultural foundations.  We have seen a revising of our history and an ignoring of the roots of Western civilization.

"The Dynamic Influence of Christianity" was written to counteract efforts to demean and eradicate
Christian influence in our lives.

My book examines modern America--what shapes or influences prevalent beliefs, concepts, attitudes, and actions.  It looks at the influence of Christian doctrines--their impact on the self-worth of the individual and the ability to live an abundant life.




Citizens for Health - Letter to FDA to Leave DSHEA Alone

James Gormley on October 11th, 2011

October 6, 2011
Division of Dockets Management
(HFA-305)
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
5630 Fishers Lane
Room 1061
Rockville, MD 20852

Re: Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0376, “Draft Guidance for Industry: Dietary Supplements: New Dietary Ingredient Notifications and Related Issues”

Dear Commissioner Hamburg:
Citizens for Health (CFH) is hereby submitting its organizational comments on the “Draft Guidance for Industry: Dietary Supplements: New Dietary Ingredient Notifications and Related Issues.”
CFH and its over 100,000 supporters call on your Agency to summarily withdraw this Draft Guidance and go on the record stating that the FDA will not, now or ever, review, consider, surveil or engage in enforcement activities according to the re-interpretation of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) evident in this document but, instead, will honor the law that the American people gave to your Agency to uphold via regulation according to both the spirit and letter of DSHEA...."

Above written by:

James S. Turner, Esq.
Chair
Citizens for Health
jim@swankin-turner.com

James J. Gormley
Vice President and Sr. Policy Advisor
Citizens for Health
jamesgormley01@gmail.com


TO READ MORE OF THEIR LETTER, GO HERE>> http://www.citizens.org/

(Visit us at http://www.abundantlivinginfo.com/ to be up-to-speed about the 1994 DSHEA history)

Prominent Dentists Say Drinking NYC's Fluoridated Water is Risky

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/prominent-dentists-say-drinking-nycs-fluoridated-water-is-risky-131137168.html

NEW YORK, Oct. 5, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Breaking away from dental school dogma, more dentists are speaking out against fluoridation because fluoride chemicals, added to NYC's water supply intending to reduce tooth decay, are actually a money-wasting health risk, reports the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF).
Seven NYC Council Members sponsored legislation (1) and residents are petitioning Mayor Bloomberg to stop fluoridation, to preserve money and health. Join them: http://www.change.org/petitions/stop-fluoridation-in-new-york-city
Hydrofluosilicic acid, a lead- and arsenic-laced chemical (2) left-over from making phosphate fertilizer (3) is NYC's fluoride chemical of choice.  Fluoridation cost NYC approximately $25 million in 2008.(4)
Dentist Caree Alexander, a former Navy practitioner, then a private practice dentist for 20 years, says fluoridation is "totally ineffective and actually damaging as well."(5)
Dr. Alexander says, "When I graduated from University, we weren't given any information about where [fluoride] came from. We all assumed it was [pharmaceutical-grade] calcium fluoride."
Prominent NYC dentist and Huffington Post Contributor, Dr. Thomas Connelly, writes, "I do not see the good in fluoridating our drinking water ... To me, the 'bad' it can (potentially) do outweighs the good."(6)
Dr. Andrew Harms, former President, Australian Dental Association, who once supported fluoridation, says, "I deeply regret this ... when I did read the science about 10 years ago, I started to get serious concerns."
Dr. Harms says, "To my amazement, when I tried to raise the issue with the [Australian] Dental Association, whom I thought were interested in the science and ... integrity, there was no interest. In fact there was a lot of pressure against me to say anything at all. There was a great concern about upsetting our principle sponsors, the toothpaste manufacturers, who heavily compromise our University," says Harms in a video documentary, Firewater. (7)
Dentist Hardy Limeback, Ph.D., University of Toronto Professor and Head, Preventive Dentistry, apologized for promoting fluoridation because toxicology research shows the purported benefits no longer outweigh the risks.(8)
Dentist Bill Osmunson, Fluoride Action Network spokesperson, promoted fluoridation for 25 years until his patients persuaded him to read the science, "It [was] like a knee in the gut," he says. "Science has turned against fluoridation and we must stop adding fluoride to water."(9)
Dentist David Kennedy, International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology (IAOMT), past president and Fluoride Information Officer, says, "Water fluoridation delivers a drug to infants at a level which would be gross malpractice if prescribed by a physician or dentist." (10)  IAOMT is a network of dental, medical and research professionals which supports the effort to inform consumers about health risks from water fluoridation.
Over 3,790 professionals, including 324 dentists, signed a statement opposing water fluoridation. See statement: http://www.fluoridealert.org/professionals-statement.aspx
Attorney Paul Beeber, NYSCOF President, says, "The National Research Council reported that fluoride, even at levels used for fluoridation, can damage bones and teeth, disrupt thyroid function, be harmful to kidney patients and that studies linking fluoride to lowered IQ and cancer are plausible."
Dentist Jennifer Luke, Ph.D., says, "My [published] work showed that fluoride accumulates in the human pineal gland and lowers melatonin production in animals. I find it extraordinary that no government promoting fluoridation has chosen to pursue these worrying findings."(11)
Dentist and Doctor of Medical Science, Elise Bassin, published unrefuted scientific evidence showing that fluoride can increase the risk of osteosarcoma (a type of bone cancer) in boys and young men.(12)
About 250 communities have stopped fluoridation in recent years.(13)
"All New York State communities should stop fluoridation as soon as possible," says Beeber.
Contact: Paul Beeber, President, NYSCOF, 516-433-8882 nyscof@aol.com
Or
Bill Osmunson, DDS bill@teachingsmiles.com 425.466.0100 (Pacific Time)

(Visit http://www.abundantlivinginfo.com/ for more articles on fluoride history)

ABC News Video - Interview on Secret Panel Kill List

Interview Video>> http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/todays-qs-for-os-wh-9302011/

ABC News >> http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/white-house-wont-comment-on-reuters-story-about-secret-panel-that-can-put-americans-on-kill-list/

ACLU:  After Al-Aulaqi's Killing, Why Due Process Matters
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/after-al-aulaqis-killing-why-due-process-matters

David Shipler of The Shipler Report writes about why due process — even for terrorism suspects who have admitted to plotting against the U.S. — is important:
So, why bother to bring the guilty man in for a fair trial? For thorough truth-finding, one could say, or to uphold the pageantry of constitutional justice, which is a crown jewel of our democracy. To lend unquestioned legitimacy to the ultimate sentence, even if it is death, so the world does not look upon America with repugnance. To keep the trappings of civilized order so that we do not become a vigilante state. To stop ourselves from taking a step down a long slope whose ends might be oppression very different from anything we can now imagine…
Shipler also calls for the Obama administration to reveal the standards under which Americans are placed on the CIA's "kill lists," information we seek in our Predator Drone Freedom of Information Act request and lawsuit. But the government has mostly stonewalled our attempts to uncover basic information about targeted killings.  The CIA refuses to confirm or deny whether it has any records at all relating to targeted killings using drones, even though the CIA’s involvement in the drone program is widely acknowledged.  And other government agencies flatly refuse to release documents explaining the government’s asserted legal basis for conducting targeted killings — including against U.S. citizens — using drones.
This morning, Glenn Greenwald noted in Salon that ABC News' Jake Tapper asked White House spokesman Jay Carney if the Obama administration will release the evidence that justified the assassination of al-Aulaqi, who was a U.S. citizen.
You have to see the (ABC) video to believe it, but in a word, the answer is: "No."  (Video link is above)

How Does the President Have the Right to Target for Killing a U.S. Citizen? >>
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/how-does-the-president-have-the-right-to-target-for-killing-a-us-citizen/

"Writing in Salon today, Glenn Greenwald writes, “What’s most striking about this is not that the U.S. Government has seized and exercised exactly the power the Fifth Amendment was designed to bar (‘No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law’), and did so in a way that almost certainly violates core First Amendment protections (questions that will now never be decided in a court of law). What’s most amazing is that its citizens will not merely refrain from objecting, but will stand and cheer the U.S. Government’s new power to assassinate their fellow citizens, far from any battlefield, literally without a shred of due process from the U.S. Government. Many will celebrate the strong, decisive, Tough President’s ability to eradicate the life of Anwar al-Awlaki — including many who just so righteously condemned those Republican audience members as so terribly barbaric and crass for cheering Governor Perry’s execution of scores of serial murderers and rapists — criminals who were at least given a trial and appeals and the other trappings of due process before being killed.”

(Visit http://www.abundantlivinginfo.com/ or http://www.alinfo.org/ for more articles on economy and politics)

Secret Panel Can Put Americans on Kill List (Reuters)


WASHINGTON | Wed Oct 5, 2011 7:59pm EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House's National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.
The panel was behind the decision to add Awlaki, a U.S.-born militant preacher with alleged al Qaeda connections, to the target list. He was killed by a CIA drone strike in Yemen late last month.
The role of the president in ordering or ratifying a decision to target a citizen is fuzzy. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to discuss anything about the process.
Current and former officials said that to the best of their knowledge, Awlaki, who the White House said was a key figure in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al Qaeda's Yemen-based affiliate, had been the only American put on a government list targeting people for capture or death due to their alleged involvement with militants.
The White House is portraying the killing of Awlaki as a demonstration of President Barack Obama's toughness toward militants who threaten the United States. But the process that led to Awlaki's killing has drawn fierce criticism from both the political left and right.
In an ironic turn, Obama, who ran for president denouncing predecessor George W. Bush's expansive use of executive power in his "war on terrorism," is being attacked in some quarters for using similar tactics. They include secret legal justifications and undisclosed intelligence assessments.
Liberals criticized the drone attack on an American citizen as extra-judicial murder.
Conservatives criticized Obama for refusing to release a Justice Department legal opinion that reportedly justified killing Awlaki. They accuse Obama of hypocrisy, noting his administration insisted on publishing Bush-era administration legal memos justifying the use of interrogation techniques many equate with torture, but refused to make public its rationale for killing a citizen without due process.
Some details about how the administration went about targeting Awlaki emerged on Tuesday when the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Dutch Ruppersberger, was asked by reporters about the killing.
The process involves "going through the National Security Council, then it eventually goes to the president, but the National Security Council does the investigation, they have lawyers, they review, they look at the situation, you have input from the military, and also, we make sure that we follow international law," Ruppersberger said.
LAWYERS CONSULTED
Other officials said the role of the president in the process was murkier than what Ruppersberger described.
They said targeting recommendations are drawn up by a committee of mid-level National Security Council and agency officials. Their recommendations are then sent to the panel of NSC "principals," meaning Cabinet secretaries and intelligence unit chiefs, for approval. The panel of principals could have different memberships when considering different operational issues, they said.
The officials insisted on anonymity to discuss sensitive information.
They confirmed that lawyers, including those in the Justice Department, were consulted before Awlaki's name was added to the target list.
Two principal legal theories were advanced, an official said: first, that the actions were permitted by Congress when it authorized the use of military forces against militants in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001; and they are permitted under international law if a country is defending itself.
Several officials said that when Awlaki became the first American put on the target list, Obama was not required personally to approve the targeting of a person. But one official said Obama would be notified of the principals' decision. If he objected, the decision would be nullified, the official said.
A former official said one of the reasons for making senior officials principally responsible for nominating Americans for the target list was to "protect" the president.
Officials confirmed that a second American, Samir Khan, was killed in the drone attack that killed Awlaki. Khan had served as editor of Inspire, a glossy English-language magazine used by AQAP as a propaganda and recruitment vehicle.
But rather than being specifically targeted by drone operators, Khan was in the wrong place at the wrong time, officials said. Ruppersberger appeared to confirm that, saying Khan's death was "collateral," meaning he was not an intentional target of the drone strike.
When the name of a foreign, rather than American, militant is added to targeting lists, the decision is made within the intelligence community and normally does not require approval by high-level NSC officials.
'FROM INSPIRATIONAL TO OPERATIONAL'
Officials said Awlaki, whose fierce sermons were widely circulated on English-language militant websites, was targeted because Washington accumulated information his role in AQAP had gone "from inspirational to operational." That meant that instead of just propagandizing in favor of al Qaeda objectives, Awlaki allegedly began to participate directly in plots against American targets.
"Let me underscore, Awlaki is no mere messenger but someone integrally involved in lethal terrorist activities," Daniel Benjamin, top counterterrorism official at the State Department, warned last spring.
The Obama administration has not made public an accounting of the classified evidence that Awlaki was operationally involved in planning terrorist attacks.
But officials acknowledged that some of the intelligence purporting to show Awlaki's hands-on role in plotting attacks was patchy.
For instance, one plot in which authorities have said Awlaki was involved Nigerian-born Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, accused of trying to blow up a Detroit-bound U.S. airliner on Christmas Day 2009 with a bomb hidden in his underpants.
There is no doubt Abdulmutallab was an admirer or follower of Awlaki, since he admitted that to U.S. investigators. When he appeared in a Detroit courtroom earlier this week for the start of his trial on bomb-plot charges, he proclaimed, "Anwar is alive."
But at the time the White House was considering putting Awlaki on the U.S. target list, intelligence connecting Awlaki specifically to Abdulmutallab and his alleged bomb plot was partial. Officials said at the time the United States had voice intercepts involving a phone known to have been used by Awlaki and someone who they believed, but were not positive, was Abdulmutallab.
Awlaki was also implicated in a case in which a British Airways employee was imprisoned for plotting to blow up a U.S.-bound plane. E-mails retrieved by authorities from the employee's computer showed what an investigator described as " operational contact" between Britain and Yemen.
Authorities believe the contacts were mainly between the U.K.-based suspect and his brother. But there was a strong suspicion Awlaki was at the brother's side when the messages were dispatched. British media reported that in one message, the person on the Yemeni end supposedly said, "Our highest priority is the US ... With the people you have, is it possible to get a package or a person with a package on board a flight heading to the US?"
U.S. officials contrast intelligence suggesting Awlaki's involvement in specific plots with the activities of Adam Gadahn, an American citizen who became a principal English-language propagandist for the core al Qaeda network formerly led by Osama bin Laden.
While Gadahn appeared in angry videos calling for attacks on the United States, officials said he had not been specifically targeted for capture or killing by U.S. forces because he was regarded as a loudmouth not directly involved in plotting attacks.