Google Invades Privacy By Developing Facebook Rival

July 28, 2010

The Wall Street Journal

By: Amir Efrati

Google Inc. is in talks with several makers of popular online games as it seeks to develop a broader social-networking service that could compete with Facebook Inc., according to people familiar with the matter.

Google has been in discussions with top developers to offer their games on a new service it is building, these people said. Those developers include Playdom Inc., Electronic Arts Inc.’s Playfish and Zynga Game Network Inc.—a company in which Google recently took a financial stake, these people said.

It is unclear when Google may launch the new gaming offering and the plans aren’t finalized, but people briefed on the matter said the games would be part of broader social-networking initiative that is under development by the Mountain View, Calif., company.

In an interview this week, Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt declined to confirm the development of a social-networking service that would incorporate social games, rumored to be called “Google Me.” When asked if Google’s service might resemble Facebook’s, Mr. Schmidt said “the world doesn’t need a copy of the same thing.”

Google’s push into social games represents the latest attempt by the Web-search leader to capture users and advertising dollars that are increasingly flowing to social networking, an area dominated by Facebook, Twitter Inc. and others.

For social-game developers, a successful Google offering would mean they wouldn’t be so heavily dependent on Facebook, where the vast majority of users access the games. Consumers’ appetite for social games is booming— Zynga’s “Farmville” game has more than 60 million active monthly users—and that is attracting bigger players looking to tap new sources of growth. On Tuesday, Walt Disney Co. acquired Playdom for $563.2 million plus up to $200 million more if performance targets are reached. And retailer GameStop Corp. agreed to buy online game distributor Kongregate Inc. for an undisclosed amount.

Disney CEO Robert Iger said Tuesday in an interview that his company views social games as a way to reach consumers in a fragmented media landscape. “People are consuming product in new destinations, on new devices,” Mr. Iger said. “You’ve got to put your product on those devices.”

Social games are less complex than those played on consoles like Microsoft’s Xbox 360 or Sony PlayStation 3. Individuals use the games to interact with online friends in their networks. The developers make money through advertising and by offering users a way to pay for virtual goods in their games that could, for example, help them manage a virtual farm or defeat rival mobsters.

Game developers pay Facebook 30% of the earnings from virtual-good purchases in their games. Google already has an online payment mechanism called Checkout that, in theory, it could use to collect payments for social games on its platform.

A Facebook spokesman said the company wouldn’t speculate about Google’s initiative but said the company expected new social-networking efforts by others and “looks forward to seeing what others have to offer.”

In countries such as China and Japan, social games generate billions of dollars in revenue. In the U.S., social gaming was a $700 million market in 2009, according to estimates by ThinkEquity LLC, a research firm. That figure is supposed to triple by 2012, the firm said.

Google in February made a foray into social networking with its Buzz product, which brings social updates such as photos and Web links into Gmail, though the launch was marred by privacy concerns. The social-networking service being considered would incorporate and go beyond Buzz, according to one person familiar with the matter.

When asked about Google’s partnership with Zynga, Mr. Schmidt said “we haven’t announced it” but “you can expect a partnership with Zynga” in the future. Google’s partnership with Zynga was reported earlier by the blog TechCrunch.

Google also owns Orkut, a social network service that is popular in some countries.

The growth of Facebook and its potential threat to Google is one of the hottest topics being discussed by technology executives and venture capitalists in the Bay Area.

Many users now rely on their friends on Facebook—not just Google—to discover content and products they can purchase on the Internet. And much of the content generated by users on Facebook is generally kept out of view of Google’s search engine.

Over the past year, several former Google executives who ran the company’s core advertising business left to work for Facebook. Facebook, now with over 500 million users, sells advertising on its own site. But speculation is growing that it could launch an advertising network across other sites, rivaling Google’s ad network AdSense.

Google’s Mr. Schmidt argued in an interview that Facebook is good for Google because it brings more users to the Internet, and “Facebook users use more Google products than any other users.”

Google for years has allowed developers to create basic social games for a service called iGoogle, which allows users to customize and add features to their Google.com home page. But the games haven’t been widely promoted and few have gained a large following.

Some media companies are increasingly targeting developers for acquisition. Last November, Electronic Arts paid $400 million for Playfish.

For Disney, the purchase of Playdom is its second foray into social games. Disney earlier this month acquired Tapulous Inc., a maker of music-related social games for mobile devices including iPhones.

click here to read full article

Doomsday Shelters Are Slowly Making A Comeback

Hodge bought into the first of a proposed nationwide group of 20 fortified, underground shelters — the Vivos shelter network — that are intended to protect those inside for up to a year from catastrophes such as a nuclear attack, killer asteroids or tsunamis, according to the project’s developers.

“It’s an investment in life,” says Hodge, a Teamsters union representative. “I want to make sure I have a place I can take me and my family if that worst-case scenario were to happen.”

There are signs that underground shelters, almost-forgotten relics of the Cold War era, are making a comeback.

The Vivos network, which offers partial ownerships similar to a timeshare in underground shelter communities, is one of several ventures touting escape from a surface-level calamity.

Radius Engineering in Terrell, Texas, has built underground shelters for more than three decades, and business has never been better, says Walton McCarthy, company president.

The company sells fiberglass shelters that can accommodate 10 to 2,000 adults to live underground for one to five years with power, food, water and filtered air, McCarthy says.

The shelters range from $400,000 to a $41 million facility Radius built and installed underground that is suitable for 750 people, McCarthy says. He declined to disclose the client or location of the shelter.

“We’ve doubled sales every year for five years,” he says.Other shelter manufacturers include Hardened Structures of Colorado and Utah Shelter Systems, which also report increased sales.

The shelters have their critics. Ken Rose, a history professor at California State University-Chico and author of One Nation Underground: The Fallout Shelter in American Culture, says underground shelters were a bad idea a half-century ago and they’re a bad idea now.

“A terrorist with a nuke in a suitcase pales in comparison to what the Cold War had to offer in the 1950s and ’60s, which was the potential annihilation of the human race,” he says.

Steve Davis, president of Maryland-based All Hands Global Emergency Management Consulting, also is skeptical.

All Hands has helped more than 100 public and private sector clients with emergency management and homeland security services, according to its website.

The types of cataclysms envisioned by some shelter manufacturers “are highly unlikely compared to what we know is going to happen,” Davis says.

“We know there is going to be a major earthquake someday on the West Coast. We know a hurricane is going to hit Florida, the Gulf Coast, the East Coast,” he says. “We support reasonable preparedness. We don’t think it’s necessary to burrow into the desert.”

The Vivos network is the idea of Del Mar, Calif., developer Robert Vicino.

Vicino, who launched the Vivos project last December, says he seeks buyers willing to pay $50,000 for adults and $25,000 for children.

The company is starting with a 13,000-square-foot refurbished underground shelter formerly operated by the U.S. government at an undisclosed location near Barstow, Calif., that will have room for 134 people, he says.

Vicino puts the average cost for a shelter at $10 million.

Vivos plans for facilities as large as 100,000 square feet, says real estate broker Dan Hotes of Seattle, who over the past four years has collaborated with Vicino on a project involving partial ownership of high-priced luxury homes and is now involved with Vivos.

Catastrophe shelters today may appeal to those who seek to bring order to a world full of risk and uncertainty, says Alexander Riley, an associate professor of sociology at Bucknell University in Lewisburg, Pa.

“They’re saying, ‘I can control everything,’ ” Riley says. ” ‘With the right amount of rational planning, I can even survive an asteroid hitting the Earth that causes a dust cloud like the kind we believe wiped the dinosaurs out.’ ”

The Vivos website features a clock counting down to Dec. 21, 2012, the date when the ancient Mayan “Long Count” calendar marks the end of a 5,126-year era, at which time some people expect an unknown apocalypse.

Vicino, whose terravivos.com website lists 11 global catastrophes ranging from nuclear war to solar flares to comets, bristles at the notion he’s profiting from people’s fears.

“You don’t think of the person who sells you a fire extinguisher as taking advantage of your fear,” he says. “The fact that you may never use that fire extinguisher doesn’t make it a waste or bad.

“We’re not creating the fear; the fear is already out there. We’re creating a solution.”

click here to read full article

FBI Defends Guidelines For Domestic Surveillance

July 28, 2010

My Way News

By: Pete Yost

Under fire from civil liberties groups, the FBI is defending domestic surveillance guidelines that critics fear could unfairly target innocent Muslims in terrorism and other criminal investigations.

“It’s quite an invasive data collection system,” said Farhana Khera, executive director of the nonprofit group Muslim Advocates. “It’s based on generalized suspicion and fear on the part of law enforcement, not on individualized evidence of criminal activity.”

Khera spoke in an interview on the eve of a Capitol Hill appearance by FBI Director Robert Mueller, who was scheduled to testify Wednesday to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In a statement, the bureau said its procedures are designed to ensure that FBI probes don’t zero in on anyone on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion or the exercise of any other constitutional right.

The FBI said its Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide equips agents with lawful and appropriate tools so the agency can transform itself into an intelligence-driven organization that investigates genuine criminal and national security threats.

Last September, the FBI disclosed an edited version of the guide as a result of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The manual was approved in December 2008, during the final days of the George W. Bush administration, and establishes policy that guides all the FBI’s domestic operations, including counterterrorism, counterintelligence, crime and cyber crime.

On Tuesday, the American Civil Liberties Union also weighed in against the guide. The group asked FBI field offices in 29 states and Washington, D.C., to turn over records related to the bureau’s collection of data on race and ethnicity.

According to the ACLU, the FBI’s operations guide gives agents the authority to create maps of ethnic-oriented businesses, behaviors, lifestyle characteristics and cultural traditions in communities with concentrated ethnic populations.

While some racial and ethnic data collection by some agencies might be helpful in lessening discrimination, the FBI’s attempt to collect and map demographic data using race-based criteria invites unconstitutional racial profiling by law enforcement, according to the ACLU.

Khera said the FBI has lowered the bar for sending undercover agents or informants into mosques and has enabled the gathering of data about Muslims’ charitable giving practices, financial transactions and jobs.

The FBI is still refusing to make public portions of the guide that deal with sending agents or informants into houses of worship and political gatherings.

The bureau has previously stated it would only go into a mosque if it had some reason to believe there was criminal activity, said Khera. If that is the standard, the FBI should have no problem actually disclosing that section of the document, she said.

click here to read full article

Al Qaeda No. 2 Threatens More US Attacks

July 28, 2010

ABC News

By: Megan Chuchmach

Al Qaeda’s second in command Ayman Al-Zawahiri has surfaced again, this time threatening more attacks against the U.S. and the West.

“Oh American people&We offered you a peace plan, and mutual benefit; but your governments were proud and haughty, and so the attacks against you followed one after another, everywhere  from Indonesia to Times Square, by way of Madrid and London. And the attacks are ongoing, and more will come one after another,” said Zawahiri, according to a transcript provided by the Middle East Media Research Institute, based in Washington, DC.

Zawahiri also continued his promise of near victory in Iraq and Afghanistan, among other issues.

Former White House national security official Richard Clarke, now an ABC News consultant, said that up until this point, there haven’t been any correlations between Zawahiri’s past threats and any attacks actually occurring.

“U.S. government and counterterrorism officials are not going to increase their alert based on Zawahiri’s statement, because of his previous track record,” Clarke said. “But they’re on relatively high alert already because of the increase in homegrown terrorist threats related to al Qaeda.”

The 47-minute audio message, a eulogy for Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid, was posted on jihadist websites July 27 by al Qaeda’s media arm Al-Sahab.

Yazid, who was referred to by American officials as al Qaeda’s No. 3 leader behind Osama bin Laden and Zawahiri, is believed to have been killed in the last half of May by an American missile strike in Pakistan’s tribal areas. He was of Egyptian descent and was considered a top financial officer and al Qaeda’s leader in Afghanistan.

Zawahiri was last heard from July 19, when an audio recording produced by Al-Sahab and posted on jihadist websites promised imminent victory in Afghanistan. He has released only a handful of videos this year, and terrorism experts believe the two messages released this month were likely transported out at the same time.

Also on July 19, an audio message from radical Muslim cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki was posted online, taunting President Obama and the U.S. military.

“Imperial hubris is leading America to its fate: a war of attrition, a continuous hemorrhage that would end with the fall and splintering of the United States of America,” Awlaki said in the message, which featured a picture of him juxtaposed with those of Fort Hood massacre suspect Major Nidal Hasan and suspected Christmas Day bomber Omar Farouq Abdulmutallab.

Awlaki Believed to be Hiding in Yemen

Awlaki, who is American born and educated, also called on Muslims in the U.S. to do as he did in waging jihad against America. He has been on the run since late last year when he was linked with both Hassan and Abdulmutallab.

Awlaki is believed to be hiding in Yemen. U.S. officials have told ABC News and other news agencies that President Obama approved efforts to target Awlaki with a missile strike there.

click here to read full article

You Can Eliminate Those Unwanted Addictions Today

Addiction to sodas, like Coca-Cola and Pepsi, seems to be a standard in America these days.  I get so many emails and calls asking how to get off these products.  I do not believe the addiction is to the soda itself, it’s the high-fructose corn syrup.  You see, high-fructose corn syrup comes from a genetically modified, genetically engineered product.  These companies specifically add in chemicals like high-fructose corn syrup and Aspartame, to get people physically addicted to the product.

So, what’s the solution?

If you want to get rid of the addiction completely, I would start with the McCombs Plan.  That will clear out the Candida, which will then get rid of the cravings.

Another thing I would do to get rid of the cravings is the Roger Callahan Techniques.  Every time you get a craving just use those techniques and usually within a few days or weeks, it’ll knock your cravings out 100%.

The other thing I would suggest is the Be Pure Cleanse, because when you get the toxins out of your body you will eliminate cravings more effectively.

Folks, were coming up to August.  For those of you that have broken your New Year’s Resolution promises.  Maybe that promise hasn’t been kept the last couple years, trust me, it’s tough.  Just remember, it’s never too late until it’s too late.

Yours in Health,

- KT

The Kevin Trudeau Show: 7-27-10

Today, LIVE from a Top Secret location, Kevin explains why he feels happy when he witnesses parents feeding their children junk food and why government officials are experts at saying absolutely nothing!

Self Help:
Loss Weight Now
Natural Remedies
Invest In Gold
Vitamin D3 Miracle
Make Money Now
Have Dinner with Kevin

Health:
Swine Flu Hoax of 2009 Falls Apart At The Seams
515 Deadly Chemicals Women Wear
A Threat To The Profit of Drug Company
Three New Companies Jump on The Anti-Obesity Drug Bandwagon
Fish Oil May Slow Genetic Aging In Heart Patients
Antidepressants No More Effective Than Placebos
Nearsightedness on the Rise

NWO:
Obama Declares He Will Rule By Authoritarian Decree
Climategate Affecting BBC Weather Computer
Accusations Surface That Blackwater Defrauded the U.S. For Years
NASA May Be Hiding Climate Data

Wealth:
Foreign Demand For Treasury Securities Falls

Everything Kevin:
Become An Insider!
Support Kevin!
Kevin is on YouTube!
Sign Up For Kevin’s FREE Podcast
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Become Kevin’s Friend on Facebook
Kevin’s Film Club
Kevin’s Book Club

Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!


Click BELOW to watch The Kevin Trudeau Show LIVE!

We No Longer Have The Freedom To Chose What We Eat

July 27, 2010

Los Angeles Times

By: P.J. Huffstutter

With no warning one weekday morning, investigators entered an organic grocery with a search warrant and ordered the hemp-clad workers to put down their buckets of mashed coconut cream and to step away from the nuts.

Then, guns drawn, four officers fanned out across Rawesome Foods in Venice. Skirting past the arugula and peering under crates of zucchini, they found the raid’s target inside a walk-in refrigerator: unmarked jugs of raw milk.

“I still can’t believe they took our yogurt,” said Rawesome volunteer Sea J. Jones, a few days after the raid. “There’s a medical marijuana shop a couple miles away, and they’re raiding us because we’re selling raw dairy products?”

Cartons of raw goat and cow milk and blocks of unpasteurized goat cheese were among the groceries seized in the June 30 raid by federal, state and local authorities — the latest salvo in the heated food fight over what people can put in their mouths.

On one side are government regulators, who say they are enforcing rules designed to protect consumers from unsafe foods and to provide a level playing field for producers. On the other side are ” healthy food” consumers — a faction of foodies who challenge government science and seek food in its most pure form.

They want almonds cracked fresh from the shell, not those run through a federally mandated pasteurization process that uses either heat or a chemical to kill off salmonella and other possible contaminants. They hunger for meat slaughtered on the farm. And they’re willing to pay a premium — $6, $8 or more — for a gallon of milk straight from the cow.

So despite research outlining the dangers of consuming raw milk and other unprocessed foods, they’re finding ways to circumnavigate federal, state and local laws that seek to control what they can serve at the dinner table. Such defiance, they said, comes from growing distrust of a food sector that has become more industrialized and consolidated — and whose products have been at the root of some of the country’s deadliest food contamination cases.

“This is about control and profit, not our health,” said Aajonus Vonderplanitz, co-founder of Rawesome Foods. “How can we not have the freedom to choose what we eat?”

Scientists and regulators point to epidemiological evidence linking disease outbreaks to raw milk: The milk can transmit bacteria such as E. coli O157:H7, salmonella, campylobacter and listeria, which can result in diarrhea, kidney failure or death.

“This is not about restricting the public’s rights,” said Nicole Neeser, program manager for dairy, meat and poultry inspection at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. “This is about making sure people are safe.”

Demand for all manner of raw foods — including honey, nuts and meat — has been growing, spurred by heightened interest in the way food is produced. But raw milk in particular has drawn a lot of regulatory scrutiny, largely because the politically powerful dairy industry has pressed the government to act.

It is legal for licensed dairies to sell raw milk at retail outlets in California and 10 other states, according to research by the National Conference of State Legislatures. Twenty states allow people to buy unpasteurized milk directly from farms, or take part in a “cow sharing” program (in which a person buys part ownership of an animal and gets some of its milk).

But in the case of Rawesome, regulators allege that the group broke the law by failing to have the proper permits to sell food to the public. While the raid was happening at Rawesome, another went down at one of its suppliers, Healthy Family Farms in Ventura County. California agriculture officials said farm owner Sharon Palmer’s processing plant had not met standards to obtain a license. Palmer could not be reached for comment.

Rawesome’s fans, though, shrugged off such concerns.

“I always had problems with my stomach and digestion with normal milk,” said Darin Nellis, 41, who runs a nonprofit production company in Culver City and has been a member of Rawesome for three months. “I like how raw goat milk tastes, and I feel better.”

Such sentiments exasperate officials at the Food and Drug Administration, which bans interstate sales of raw milk and advises that both milk and honey should be pasteurized.

The debate has boiled at the state level for years. Alta Dena Dairy founder Harold J.J. Stueve fought for decades to help keep raw milk sales legal in California. This year, Wisconsin legislators approved a bill aimed largely at allowing the state’s struggling small farmers to sell more raw milk products. But Gov. Jim Doyle vetoed that bill under pressure from large producers. In neighboring Minnesota, whose official state drink is milk, authorities recently raided a private club similar to Rawesome in south Minneapolis.

Such battles have had a chilling effect on some retailers. Whole Foods Market used to carry raw milk and raw milk products in California and three other states. But in March, the chain pulled all but a few cheeses off its shelves. Part of the reason, it said in a statement, was “the realities of the very high additional costs for liability insurance … because of the potential risks from selling unpasteurized milk and milk products.”

Rawesome was born of consumer frustration. In 1998, James Stewart — a vegetarian who drank raw milk — couldn’t find the stuff in Southern California grocery stores. So he started making road trips to dairies in northern California and to Whole Foods in San Jose, which at the time carried raw milk. Word spread. Family and friends wanted it too.

So Stewart and Vonderplanitz created a private food club where, for a $25 annual fee, members “lease” the land and livestock directly from a farmer. Then, members pay an additional service fee attached to each grocery item, which they say covers the cost of transporting each food item from the farm to Venice.

The pair reasoned that they didn’t need to obtain a license from state or local agencies because they weren’t technically retailers. In 2004, Rawesome opened on Rose Avenue in Venice. “We’re just a place where people come to pick up the products they already own,” Vonderplanitz said.

The L.A. County Public Health Department didn’t see it that way. Vonderplanitz said that in 2005 the agency told Rawesome staff they needed a food-business license. Vonderplanitz said that he objected in a letter, and that the county never replied or followed up. (County officials declined to comment.)

Five years passed. Rawesome now boasts 1,600 members, who battle for street parking every Wednesday and Saturday when the club is open.

Squeezed between a coffee shop and a vintage guitar store, Rawesome looks from the outside like a forgotten storage unit. A tiny club sign hangs on the 10-foot-tall corrugated fence that hides the windowless storefront.

But inside, the shop is bright and airy, a bohemian farmers market surrounded by burnt-orange walls and a white tarp roof to keep out the rain. Boxes of coconuts and ginger from Hawaii sit nestled next to crates of California squash. Labels identify where each bite of produce was grown: onions from the Viva Tierra farm in Harlingen, Texas, and King’s Crown Organic farm in King Hill, Idaho.

The members — a mix of tattooed young people and middle-aged executives in Italian shoes — chat as they head to the walk-in cooler in the back. It is jam-packed with meat and dairy. Ziploc bags are filled with chicken, beef and pork. Many don’t have an expiration date. The other side is stocked with Amish buttermilk ($7.95 a quart), Amish cream cheese ($12.75 a pound) and whole milk ($8.59 per half-gallon).

Agencies that participated in the raid on Rawesome included the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office, the California Department of Food and Agriculture, the FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Investigators confiscated the club’s computer and 17 coolers packed with, among other things, 24 bottles of organic honey, 10 gallons of raw whole milk and two bottles of raw cane syrup. Stewart said the health department slapped a closure notice on the club’s front door that said it was “operating a food facility without a valid public health permit.”

The health department, district attorney’s office and the FDA declined to comment, citing the pending investigation. The state Department of Food and Agriculture, which was the agency of record on the search warrant, said it continues to work with the district attorney’s office.

Co-op members are undeterred. Four days after the raid, Rawesome reopened its doors. The shelves were restocked. They have remained so ever since.

On a recent Wednesday afternoon, the line stretched halfway down the block. A stern young man in baggy cargo pants and sunglasses guarded the entrance, checking drivers’ licenses. Lela Buttery, a Rawesome volunteer and professional biologist, handed out legal waivers to sign.

One woman, digging into her green grocery bag for a pen, asked, “You guys got shut down last week?”

“Yes,” Buttery said.

“That’s nuts,” the woman replied. “You’re not going to stop, right?”

Buttery grinned. “Can I see your membership card?”

click here to read full article

Government Is Daring To Keep Children On Drugs

July 27, 2010

HeraldTribune

By: Tom Lyons

Big Government Now Makes Collecting Rain Water Illegal

July 27, 2010

Natural News

By: Mike Adams

Many of the freedoms we enjoy here in the U.S. are quickly eroding as the nation transforms from the land of the free into the land of the enslaved, but what I’m about to share with you takes the assault on our freedoms to a whole new level. You may not be aware of this, but many Western states, including Utah, Washington and Colorado, have long outlawed individuals from collecting rainwater on their own properties because, according to officials, that rain belongs to someone else.

As bizarre as it sounds, laws restricting property owners from “diverting” water that falls on their own homes and land have been on the books for quite some time in many Western states. Only recently, as droughts and renewed interest in water conservation methods have become more common, have individuals and business owners started butting heads with law enforcement over the practice of collecting rainwater for personal use.

Check out this YouTube video of a news report out of Salt Lake City, Utah, about the issue. It’s illegal in Utah to divert rainwater without a valid water right, and Mark Miller of Mark Miller Toyota, found this out the hard way.

After constructing a large rainwater collection system at his new dealership to use for washing new cars, Miller found out that the project was actually an “unlawful diversion of rainwater.” Even though it makes logical conservation sense to collect rainwater for this type of use since rain is scarce in Utah, it’s still considered a violation of water rights which apparently belong exclusively to Utah’s various government bodies.

“Utah’s the second driest state in the nation. Our laws probably ought to catch up with that,” explained Miller in response to the state’s ridiculous rainwater collection ban.

Salt Lake City officials worked out a compromise with Miller and are now permitting him to use “their” rainwater, but the fact that individuals like Miller don’t actually own the rainwater that falls on their property is a true indicator of what little freedom we actually have here in the U.S. (Access to the rainwater that falls on your own property seems to be a basic right, wouldn’t you agree?)

Outlawing rainwater collection in other states

Utah isn’t the only state with rainwater collection bans, either. Colorado and Washington also have rainwater collection restrictions that limit the free use of rainwater, but these restrictions vary among different areas of the states and legislators have passed some laws to help ease the restrictions.

In Colorado, two new laws were recently passed that exempt certain small-scale rainwater collection systems, like the kind people might install on their homes, from collection restrictions.

Prior to the passage of these laws, Douglas County, Colorado, conducted a study on how rainwater collection affects aquifer and groundwater supplies. The study revealed that letting people collect rainwater on their properties actually reduces demand from water facilities and improves conservation.

Personally, I don’t think a study was even necessary to come to this obvious conclusion. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that using rainwater instead of tap water is a smart and useful way to conserve this valuable resource, especially in areas like the West where drought is a major concern.

Additionally, the study revealed that only about three percent of Douglas County’s precipitation ended up in the streams and rivers that are supposedly being robbed from by rainwater collectors. The other 97 percent either evaporated or seeped into the ground to be used by plants.

This hints at why bureaucrats can’t really use the argument that collecting rainwater prevents that water from getting to where it was intended to go. So little of it actually makes it to the final destination that virtually every household could collect many rain barrels worth of rainwater and it would have practically no effect on the amount that ends up in streams and rivers.

It’s all about control, really

As long as people remain unaware and uninformed about important issues, the government will continue to chip away at the freedoms we enjoy. The only reason these water restrictions are finally starting to change for the better is because people started to notice and they worked to do something to reverse the law.

Even though these laws restricting water collection have been on the books for more than 100 years in some cases, they’re slowly being reversed thanks to efforts by citizens who have decided that enough is enough.

Because if we can’t even freely collect the rain that falls all around us, then what, exactly, can we freely do? The rainwater issue highlights a serious overall problem in America today: diminishing freedom and increased government control.

Today, we’ve basically been reprogrammed to think that we need permission from the government to exercise our inalienable rights, when in fact the government is supposed to derive its power from us. The American Republic was designed so that government would serve the People to protect and uphold freedom and liberty. But increasingly, our own government is restricting people from their rights to engage in commonsense, fundamental actions such as collecting rainwater or buying raw milk from the farmer next door.

Today, we are living under a government that has slowly siphoned off our freedoms, only to occasionally grant us back a few limited ones under the pretense that they’re doing us a benevolent favor.

Fight back against enslavement

As long as people believe their rights stem from the government (and not the other way around), they will always be enslaved. And whatever rights and freedoms we think we still have will be quickly eroded by a system of bureaucratic power that seeks only to expand its control.

Because the same argument that’s now being used to restrict rainwater collection could, of course, be used to declare that you have no right to the air you breathe, either. After all, governments could declare that air to be somebody else’s air, and then they could charge you an “air tax” or an “air royalty” and demand you pay money for every breath that keeps you alive.

Think it couldn’t happen? Just give it time. The government already claims it owns your land and house, effectively. If you really think you own your home, just stop paying property taxes and see how long you still “own” it. Your county or city will seize it and then sell it to pay off your “tax debt.” That proves who really owns it in the first place… and it’s not you!

How about the question of who owns your body? According to the U.S. Patent & Trademark office, U.S. corporations and universities already own 20% of your genetic code. Your own body, they claim, is partially the property of someone else.

So if they own your land, your water and your body, how long before they claim to own your air, your mind and even your soul?

Unless we stand up against this tyranny, it will creep upon us, day after day, until we find ourselves totally enslaved by a world of corporate-government collusion where everything of value is owned by powerful corporations — all enforced at gunpoint by local law enforcement.

click here to read full article

1/3 Of Cancer Deaths Are Preventable Through Diet Changes

July 27, 2010

Natural News

By: Sherry Baker

Here’s good news for both you and your best friend: one out of three cancer deaths in humans as well as dogs can be prevented by simple, natural diet changes. That’s the conclusion of research just presented by Demian Dressler, DVM, at the 2010 Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) Annual Meeting & Food Expo in Chicago, Illinois.

So how could so many fatal cancers be stopped? Dr. Dressler, known as the “dog cancer vet” because of his work in unraveling the intricacies of canine cancer, said the key is severely limiting snack foods for humans and dogs that contain ingredients rich in omega-6 fatty acids. Omega-3s (found in cold water fish such as salmon and other foods including flax oil and walnuts) and omega-6s (found in meats and some widely used vegetable oils such as corn oil) are essential fatty acids (EFAs) that must be consumed for the body to function properly. Omega-6 fatty acids tend to increase inflammation, blood clotting and cell proliferation, while omega-3 fatty acids decrease those functions of the immune system. The problem is that the typical American diet — for people as well as their pets — tends to be overloaded with omega-6s and deficient in omega-3s.

In fact, the American Institute for Cancer Research reports that the current ratio of omega-6 fatty acids to omega-3 fatty acids eaten by most Americans is about 15-to-1; however, a healthy ratio is closer to 4-to-1. This is a serious problem because, as NaturalNews has previously reported, scientists have linked this imbalance to autoimmunity, allergy, heart disease, arthritis, asthma and cancer (http://www.naturalnews.com/026383_h…).

The glut of omega-6s comes mostly from vegetable oils, such as soy oil, which are used in most of the snack foods, cookies, crackers, sweets, fast foods and — in the case of dogs’ diets — doggie treats and many commercial dog foods. The result is an eating pattern that promotes inflammation. That, Dr. Dressler stated, creates an environment conducive to cancer in dogs and people.

Another important way to reduce fatal cancers in humans and their canine companions is to keep weight at a healthy level. Dr. Dressler noted studies show obesity in both dogs and humans limits the production of a hormone dubbed adiponectin that inhibits the growth of cancer cells. He recommended reducing calories and especially staying away from sugar — not only because it contributes to obesity, but also because it is now known to feed cancer cells and spur their growth.

A panel meeting at the 2010 IFT Annual Meeting & Food Expo panel encouraged pet food manufacturers to consider the health implications of their products in order to improve animals’ health. According to the media statement, Kelly S. Swanson, associate professor in the Department of Animal Sciences at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, suggested the ideal blend of fiber for dog food is about 75 to 80 percent insoluble and 20 to 25 percent soluble. What’s more, adding quality prebiotics to pet foods could also enhance dogs’ health.

« Previous Page — Next Page »