Cyborg | Designer-Babies | Futurism | Futurist | Immortality | Longevity | Nanotechnology | Post-Human | Singularity | Transhuman

Sep 132014

Signing up with an incompetent SEO agency can do considerable harm to your business. If you are not technical, or dont understand the basics of how SEO works, hiring an agency may even be a frightening prospect. Bad SEO can fail to attract traffic to your web site, and even worse, it can make it go down.

Do you suspect that youre currently working with a bad firm? If so, the faster you figure it out, the better. To help you do that, this article will review 12 warning signs that youre dealing with a poor quality firm.

While this post is focused on how to recognize if you the agency you have is a problem, you can use many of these tips to qualify a firm before you start. Either way, dont stay connected with a bad firm. Take action and move on!

1. They Wont Tell You What They Are Doing. This is a clear and immediate indication that what is happening is bad. SEO is a form of marketing. You would never let your PR firm run off and do whatever they felt like doing without telling you, and your SEO firm is no different. Demand that your SEO firm explain everything they are doing, and if they are not willing to do that, then you should fire them on the spot.

This is especially true for any agency you have involved in performing content marketing (or link building) for you. Review every single site where they propose to obtain a link for you, just as you would with your PR agency. This part of SEO is a form of PR, and each place where you publish content, or get written about, is a reflection of your brand. Make sure its a positive image you are creating out there!

This does place a burden on your organization to learn what the SEO firm is doing, but do not try to sidestep this responsibility. If you dont have the resources to do this yet, you should probably hold off on pursuing SEO until you do!

2. You Cant Understand Their Explanation. Closely related to the first warning sign, if the firm does talk to you about what they are doing, but theyre not able to help you understand it, then they are not a match for you. A key value you should look for in any SEO firm is their ability to help you understand why they are doing what they are doing.

In some cases, bad SEO firms will offer explanations to you that make it sound like SEO is some form of voodoo. For example, if someone says Google only likes pages that have 200 to 300 words on it, this should raise an alarm. Google wants to find the highest quality pages possible in relation to each query. For some queries, it may only make sense to have 20 or 30 words to highlight the key features of a particular product, and on other pages, you may want to have 1000 or more words.

Ever since the advent of technology, there has been a huge value to people who can explain to non-technical people how something works, and how to use it. SEO is no different, and you should be willing to pay a premium to get someone who can do this for you.

Link:
12 Warning Signs of a Bad SEO Firm

Many have criticized a message sent around last week by University of California atBerkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks, which spoke about free speech and civility. (See, for instance, the items by Ken White (Popehat) and Greg Lukianoff (FIRE).) I think much of the criticism has merit, and, like many institutional exhortations, the message was mushy enough that it could be used in many different ways, some bad.

But one thing at the heart of the e-mail (which I quote at the end of the post) strikes me as quite right: civility is extremely important to the work of the university as it is to the work of other institutions and it is quite right that universities stress this to incoming students. Universities shouldnt have speech codes restricting uncivil speech; but lots of things that shouldnt be forbidden should nonetheless be spoken out against, especially by institutions whose job is to teach. The skills and habits of civil, productive discourse are worth teaching, just as are other skills and habits related to the acquisition and discussion of knowledge.

If Dirkss message is indeed, as some understandably suspect, a prelude to an attempt to punish supposedly uncivil speech, that would be bad. (I set aside here the proper power of professors to ensure that class discussion is civil by cutting off students who insult other students.) But if it is an attempt to persuade people to act civilly, then this goal strikes me as something that a university chancellor should indeed be trying to promote.

And that civility is hard to precisely define, and that people may disagree about what exactly it means in particular contexts, is hardly a reason to stop urging it. Unsound argument, disingenuosness, and lack of scholarly rigor are hard to define, too, but that doesnt mean that universities shouldnt try to teach students the opposite. It would be a great loss if rejecting civility codes turned into rejecting civility norms and the speech (by chancellors, deans, professors, and others) used to buttress those norms.

Here is how I would have written Dirkss message, using many of his words and trying to keep close to the length of the original. I think this might be pretty close to what Dirks meant to say (in my experience, most scholars of all ideological stripes do care a lot about civility), but in any case, I think its worth saying.

This Fall marks the 50th anniversary of the Free Speech Movement, which made the right to free expression of ideas a signature issue for our campus, and indeed for universities around the world. Free speech is the cornerstone of our nation and society which is precisely why the founders of the country wrote the First Amendment to the Constitution. For a half century now, our University has been a symbol and embodiment of that ideal. We continue to honor it today.

But while protecting free speech is necessary to maintaining an open, democratic society and to the meaningful exchange of ideas that is the universitys mission it is not sufficient. We also need a willingness to listen. We need a willingness to engage in intellectually honest debate rather than in demagoguery. We need commitment to the requirements and disciplines of academic knowledge, so that what we say will be more likely to be factually accurate and logically sound.

And we particularly need civility. Learning, research, and debate are social endeavors, which work best when people engage in them graciously and politely, and which work poorly when people are needlessly rude and disrespectful to each other. When people know that expressing certain views will lead to name-calling and ad hominem arguments, they will be less likely to express those views. When people are treated disrespectfully by some on the other side of a debate, they will be less open to being convinced, and less likely to work hard to convince others. And this is true not just of political speech on Sproul Plaza, but also in our everyday interactions with each other in the classroom, in the office, and in the lab.

This is especially so when issues are inherently divisive, controversial, and capable of arousing strong feelings. We will protect peoples rights to freely express themselves on these issues (even when they do so uncivilly), and we strongly encourage people to engage those issues. Indeed, the work of the University and a commitment to intellectual honesty demand that people engage those issues, despite their controversial nature. But nearly every idea that people want to express can be expressed politely and expressing it politely is almost always more persuasive, as well as being more conducive to learning, debate, and the discovery of knowledge.

Finally, the university is a place to learn, and one of the habits and skills we teach is constructive, thoughtful discussion that persuades rather than alienating. You will need these habits and skills as scholars, as professionals, and as participants in civic life. Committing ourselves to civility as well as to free inquiry is an important step for all of us in our continuing education.

View original post here:
Volokh Conspiracy: Free speech and civility at universities

Sep 052014

Maybe you’ve heard of Bitcoinit wants to shake the entire global economy, and has become the financial bubble du jour with a skyrocketing value. It’s online moneyan alternative to dollars and euros. Well what’s that mean? It’s complicated, but we break it down.

Bitcoin is not real money. It’s an online “currency”virtual tokens that can be exchanged for goods and services at places that accept it, the same way you’d give someone a dollar for a cookie. But unlike a dollar, a Bitcoin has no serial number or any possible mechanism that could be used to trace it back to a buyer or seller. This makes it attractive to drug dealers and/or privacy advocates.

In their YouTube manifesto, Bitcoin’s creators say they’re going to revolutionize global finance the way the web changed publishing. So! Kind of a lofty goal, aiming to be a global currency up there with (or replacing) the dollar. Right now, that’s still the pipiest of pipe dreams.

Aside from the software developers who work on new versions of the code that underpins Bitcoin, there’s no Central Bitcoin Bankno virtual Federal Reserve. Bitcoins are backed by no one and nothing and completely unregulated.

When you write your friend a check, money from your account is withdrawn from your bank, and then transferred to her bank, and then she withdraws it as cash (maybe). With BitCoin, there are no middlemen (other than the users that comprise the network itself). Money goes straight from you to whomever, through the BitCoin P2P system, with no intermediary agency passing along the chips.

This is where it starts to get a little weird! Unlike traditional currency, that’s backed up by something, (be it gold, silver, or a central bank), Bitcoins are generated out of thin air. Through a process called “mining,” a little app sits on your computer and slowlyvery slowlycreates new Bitcoins in exchange for providing the computational power to process transactions. When a new batch of coins is ready, they’re distributed in probabilistic accordance to whomever had the highest computing power in the mining process. The system is rigged so that no more than 21 million BitCoins will ever existso the mining process will yield less and less as time goes on, and more people sign up. This makes the whole system a lot sweeter for early adopters.

Compared to “real money,” few places accept Bitcoin at the moment. But that’s quickly changing. There’s decent incentive for small businesses to accept Bitcoinsit’s free to use, and there aren’t any transaction fees. At the moment you can buy the services of a web designer, indie PC games, homemade jewelry, guns, and even cocaine. If the internet is the Wild West, BitCoin is its wampum.

Just like you can trade in yen for dollars, you can swap your BitCoins with other users for several “real world” currencies. And right now, the BitCoin is trading very high! When we first published this post in May 2011, one Bitcoin was worth $7.50. Today it’s over $250. And climbing. And climbing and climbing. Not too shabbythe world is starting to see its first Bitcoin millionaires.

But like any bubbleor perhaps more so than most bubblesthe digital coin rush could collapse at any moment, leaving a lot of people with a lot of virtual nothing.

Visit link:
What Is Bitcoin? – Gizmodo

SAN FRANCISCO – Not only is the National Security Agency scooping up vast troves of data on the American public, it’s also sharing that data with other US government agencies.

The NSA has granted access across “nearly two dozen” agencies to data on “more than 850 billion records” that covers more than 30 different kinds of metadata on phone calls, cell phone locations, faxes, emails, and Internet chats, says a new report in The Intercept. Details were reported by CNET News.Com.

Based on classified documents provided by whistleblower and former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, the planning documents for the search engine, called ICREACH for Intelligence Community Reach, implicate the participation of the Drug Enforcement Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation.

ICREACH was designed, according to the documents, to allow analysts to search for specific attributes, such as a phone number, and receive a list of results of calls made and received over a specific time period, such as a month. Those results could then be used to determine who the targeted person of interest communicated with regularly.

While the database that ICREACH searches covers an enormous swath of communication data, The Intercept story says that does not include information from the NSA’s database that stores information on American’s phone calls and collected under Section 215 of the Patriot Act. The 215 database can only be searched during terrorism investigations and only by a small group of analysts.

It’s not clear from the report how much information crosses over between the databases.

However, Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the New York University School of Law’s Brennan Center for Justice, told The Intercept that ICREACH allowed the government to to circumvent restrictions on retaining data about Americans.

Office of the Director of National Intelligence spokesman Jeffrey Anchukaitis told the Intercept that sharing information was a “a pillar of the post-9/11 intelligence community.”

View original post here:
NSA Scoops Up Data On American Public, Shares With Other US Agencies

Coordinates: 505234.16N 42519.24E / 50.8761556N 4.4220111E / 50.8761556; 4.4220111

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO; pron.: /neto/ NAY-toh; French: Organisation du trait de l’Atlantique Nord (OTAN)), also called the (North) Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty which was signed on 4April 1949. The organization constitutes a system of collective defence whereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party. NATO’s headquarters are in Brussels, Belgium, one of the 28 member states across North America and Europe, the newest of which, Albania and Croatia, joined in April 2009. An additional 22countries participate in NATO’s “Partnership for Peace”, with 15other countries involved in institutionalized dialogue programs. The combined military spending of all NATO members constitutes over 70% of the world’s defence spending.[3]

For its first few years, NATO was not much more than a political association. However, the Korean War galvanized the member states, and an integrated military structure was built up under the direction of two US supreme commanders. The course of the Cold War led to a rivalry with nations of the Warsaw Pact, which formed in 1955. The first NATO Secretary General, Lord Ismay, stated in 1949 that the organization’s goal was “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” Doubts over the strength of the relationship between the European states and the United States ebbed and flowed, along with doubts over the credibility of the NATO defence against a prospective Soviet invasiondoubts that led to the development of the independent French nuclear deterrent and the withdrawal of the French from NATO’s military structure in 1966.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the organization became drawn into the breakup of Yugoslavia, and conducted their first military interventions in Bosnia from 1992 to 1995 and later Yugoslavia in 1999. Politically, the organization sought better relations with former Cold War rivals, which culminated with several former Warsaw Pact states joining the alliance in 1999 and 2004. The September 2001 attacks signalled the only occasion in NATO’s history that Article5 of the North Atlantic treaty has been invoked as an attack on all NATO members.[5] After the attack, troops were deployed to Afghanistan under the NATO-led ISAF, and the organization continues to operate in a range of roles, including sending trainers to Iraq, assisting in counter-piracy operations[6] and most recently in 2011 enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1973. The less potent Article 4, which merely invokes consultation among NATO members has been invoked three times, and only by Turkey: once in 2003 over the Second Iraq War, and twice in 2012 over the Syrian civil war after the downing of an unarmed Turkish F-4 reconnaissance jet and after a mortar was fired at Turkey from Syria.[7]

The Treaty of Brussels, signed on 17March 1948 by Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, and the United Kingdom, is considered the precursor to the NATO agreement. The treaty and the Soviet Berlin Blockade led to the creation of the Western European Union’s Defence Organization in September 1948. However, participation of the United States was thought necessary both to counter the military power of the USSR and to prevent the revival of nationalist militarism, so talks for a new military alliance began almost immediately resulting in the North Atlantic Treaty, which was signed in Washington, D.C. on 4April 1949. It included the five Treaty of Brussels states plus the United States, Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland.[9] Popular support for the Treaty was not unanimous, and some Icelanders participated in a pro-neutrality, anti-membership riot in March 1949.

The members agreed that an armed attack against any one of them in Europe or North America would be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agreed that, if an armed attack occurred, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence, would assist the member being attacked, taking such action as it deemed necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. The treaty does not require members to respond with military action against an aggressor. Although obliged to respond, they maintain the freedom to choose the method by which they do so. This differs from ArticleIV of the Treaty of Brussels, which clearly states that the response will be military in nature. It is nonetheless assumed that NATO members will aid the attacked member militarily. The treaty was later clarified to include both the member’s territory and their “vessels, forces or aircraft” above the Tropic of Cancer, including some Overseas departments of France.[10]

The creation of NATO brought about some standardization of allied military terminology, procedures, and technology, which in many cases meant European countries adopting U.S. practices. The roughly 1300Standardization Agreements codified many of the common practices that NATO has achieved. Hence, the 7.6251 NATO rifle cartridge was introduced in the 1950s as a standard firearm cartridge among many NATO countries. Fabrique Nationale de Herstal’s FAL became the most popular 7.62 NATO rifle in Europe and served into the early 1990s.[citation needed] Also, aircraft marshalling signals were standardized, so that any NATO aircraft could land at any NATO base. Other standards such as the NATO phonetic alphabet have made their way beyond NATO into civilian use.

The outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950 was crucial for NATO as it raised the apparent threat of all Communist countries working together, and forced the alliance to develop concrete military plans. SHAPE, the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, was formed as a consolidated command structure, and began work under Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower in January 1951.[12] The 1952 Lisbon conference, seeking to provide the forces necessary for NATO’s Long-Term Defence Plan, called for an expansion to ninety-six divisions. However this requirement was dropped the following year to roughly thirty-five divisions with heavier use to be made of nuclear weapons. At this time, NATO could call on about fifteen ready divisions in Central Europe, and another ten in Italy and Scandinavia. Also at Lisbon, the post of Secretary General of NATO as the organization’s chief civilian was created, and Lord Ismay was eventually appointed to the post.[15]

In September 1952, the first major NATO maritime exercises began; Exercise Mainbrace brought together 200 ships and over 50,000 personnel to practice the defence of Denmark and Norway.[16] Other major exercises that followed included Exercise Grand Slam and Exercise Longstep, naval and amphibious exercises in the Mediterranean Sea,[17] Italic Weld, a combined air-naval-ground exercise in northern Italy, Grand Repulse, involving the British Army on the Rhine (BAOR), the Netherlands Corps and Allied Air Forces Central Europe (AAFCE), Monte Carlo, a simulated atomic air-ground exercise involving the Central Army Group, and Weldfast, a combined amphibious landing exercise in the Mediterranean Sea involving British, Greek, Italian, Turkish, and U.S. naval forces.[citation needed]

Greece and Turkey also joined the alliance in 1952, forcing a series of controversial negotiations, in which the United States and Britain were the primary disputants, over how to bring the two countries into the military command structure.[12] While this overt military preparation was going on, covert stay-behind arrangements initially made by the Western European Union to continue resistance after a successful Soviet invasion, including Operation Gladio, were transferred to NATO control.[citation needed] Ultimately unofficial bonds began to grow between NATO’s armed forces, such as the NATO Tiger Association and competitions such as the Canadian Army Trophy for tank gunnery.[citation needed]

Visit link:
North Atlantic Treaty Organization: Definition from …

May 232014

A while back I wrote a piece outlining 78 of my favorite SEO resources. It was fairly well received and based on some of the questions I received I thought it wise to do a few articles outlining how I use some of the features of these tools.

This post will look at how to build links around industry hubs using Majestic SEO’s Clique Hunter. For those who are more familiar with Ahrefs, Majestic’s Clique Hunter is similar to the Domain Comparison tool (in their Labs section).

I use a wide variety of tools ranging from free add-ons like SEO Quake to custom developed tools for more specific needs. However, Majestic has been one of the core paid tools we rely on for some time now because they have a sizable index of links, and in this case at least, size matters a lot! The bigger it is, the better you can use it.

So let’s get to it. Here’s how you can use Majestic SEO’s Clique Hunter to find hubs and secure links.

Before we get into how to use the tool we should probably cover why. Let’s think about what the Clique Hunter produces and what it represents.

By following the steps outlined below you’ll be provided with a list of domains that link to multiple top-ranking competitors for a specific term. So let’s think about that for a moment. A domain linking to 5 of the top 5 ranking sites, that does not link to you, is likely:

Now, it has to be noted in advance that simply because a site appears in Clique Hunter doesn’t mean it’s good. In a world where we fight for every link and where relevancy and context are increasingly important, every mechanism to increase the odds of a solid lead on a link is welcome. We’ll discuss this more later on, but for now let’s cover the steps required to pull some great backlink leads out of the data provided by Majestic SEO.

OK, log yourself into Majestic SEO and the follow these steps.

Because I don’t want to list off anything that might be competitive for our readers (or let’s face facts, myself or one of our clients) I’m going to go with “seo blog”. The top five ranking URLs in the results are:

View post:
Hub Link Building With Majestic SEO

In this post, we cover the basics of negative search engine optimization (SEO) and look at what you can do to fight negative SEO link spam. This being a hot topic in the industry, I encourage readers to comment at the end of the article.

First, lets take a moment to define negative SEO. Negative SEO is the act of performing some type of action that damages competitors organic search rankings.

There are many ways negative SEO can be done. Someone could hack a website and riddle the code with HTML hyperlinks or inject malware. Even making multiple duplicate copies of a website or stealing a websites content could result in decreased rankings for that site, which could be seen as a method of negative SEO. Anything that hurts a websites rankings, which is done intentionally, could fall into this category.

For the purposes of this article, we are simply referring to someone (usually a competitor or black hat SEO company) building low quality links which point at the website they are trying to get penalized.

The first step in discovering if you are the target of negative SEO from links is reviewing your backlink profile. In most cases, it is a good idea to do this once a week or once a month, depending on how concerned you are and how cutthroat and competitive your industry is.

You can view the links to your site report in Google Webmaster Tools to get a decent high-level view of the links Google is seeing and utilizing as authority indicators when reviewing your site.

There are also other excellent tools out there, such as Majestic SEO, Opensite Explorer and Ahrefs, that can often surface additional inbound links not listed in the Google Webmaster Tools report. We do know that you can get a manual action for links not listed in Webmaster Tools, so its a good idea to get as much information as possible.

When you review these links, keep an eye out for the following:

Outside of just looking at the links, it is also a good idea to occasionally check to see if you have a manual action.

Go here to see the original:
Negative SEO From Links What Can You Do If Youre Hit?

This post is aimed squarely at people who are not SEO practitioners yet but want to learn a little about Search Engine Optimization, as well as to those who feel a bit mystified over how to do link building and, (more to the point) what you are and arent allowed to do.

Lately, link building has become an increasingly volatile mine field, so the first step is to make sure you are knowwhat constitutes bad when it comes to link building. And then we can talk about how to do it the right way.

If youre talking about link building you are probably talking about SEO and building links in order to improve your rankings on Google (and other search engines of course!). Over the years the practice of link building has included several different strategies which Google has ruled to be spammy and has killed off one way or another.

You do of course have the right to build links to your website in whatever way you want. But if you want to rank well in Google, then youre going to have to play by their rules. So heres a quick run-down of the less favorable options.

Submitting to things like directories, article sites, and anywhere where its more about volume than quality is pretty much a no-no. There are arguably some directories (maybe threeout of several thousand) which still have a little value, but in my opinion these arent worth worrying about.

If you want to submit to directories and similar sorts of sites, ensure they have a very strict editorial criteria. DMOZ is arguably the only directory that matters, and here is a post on Slamdot explaining why.

Regardless of what you call it, paying for links is advertising, and when used for advertising purposes thats great. But if you are paying someone to link to your site for the purposes of improving search engine results you are in a bad territory.

If you want to pay for advertising, thats fine, but links should be nofollowed if you want to keep Google happy (and like it or not, you do). Furthermore, depending on where you live you may be legally required to declare to visitors that a link is paid for.

Excerpt from:
For the Non-SEO: What is Bad Link Building? by @Think_Traffic

This post is sponsored by DIA.

Regenerative medicines and the latest regulatory issues surrounding them will be a hot topic for discussion at the DIA 2014 50th Annual Meeting. This years Annual Meeting will be in San Diego from June 15 to 19 and will feature a session titled Pioneering Regenerative Medicine: Trends in Regulations for New Therapy, under the Nonclinical and Translational Development/Early Phase Clinical Development track.

The session, to be held on June 16 from 8:30-10:00 AM, will introduce the first clinical research of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cell products in Japan and review the current regulatory status and governmental efforts surrounding regenerative medicine. Speakers will also identify issues in the application of the new technology and discuss possible solutions.

iPS cells hold great promise in the field of regenerative medicine because they can propagate indefinitely, as well as give rise to every other cell type in the body such as neurons, heart, pancreatic, and liver cells, and therefore represent a single source of cells that could be used to replace those lost to damage or disease. iPS cell technology was pioneered by Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto, Japan, who was awarded the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize for the discovery alongside Sir John Gurdon.

The session will be chaired by Shinji Miyake, PhD, Professor of the Center for Clinical Research at Keio University School of Medicine in Japan.

The DIA 2014 50th Annual Meeting: Celebrate the Past Invent the Future is the largest multidisciplinary event that brings together a community of life sciences professionals at all levels and across all disciplines involved in the discovery, development, and life cycle management of medical products all with a common goal to foster innovation that will lead to the development of safe and effective medical products and therapies to patients.

This years event celebrates DIAs 50th Anniversary and will feature 260+ educational offerings over 21 tracks, 450+ exhibiting companies, over 125 representatives from global regulatory agencies, and much more. The meeting provides participants with a valuable opportunity to network with professionals from around the world, share knowledge, and build new relationships.

Find out more about DIA 2014 50th Annual Meeting at http://www.diahome.org/DIA2014.

Get our daily newsletter or follow us.

Please enter your email below:

See the article here:
Introducing pioneering regenerative medicine



Nixon Resigns 1974, Ethiopia's Creeping Coup Begins: Illuminati Targets Selassie African Unity
Nixon Resigns, Selassie's Ethiopia is Betrayed: 1974 Creeping Coup Watergate Hoax RT LIKE, POST SHARE! WATCH [VIDEO] SUBSCRIBE, JOIN OUR SOCIAL MEDIA NETWORKING, Click http://RastafariGrounda…

By: RastafariSabbathical

Read the original:
Nixon Resigns 1974, Ethiopia’s Creeping Coup Begins: Illuminati Targets Selassie & African Unity – Video

By now, we all know that Beyonc is part of the Illuminati or is she?

When video footage of Beys sister Solange kicking Jay Z was released, conspiracy theorists everywhere had the new fodder theyve been looking for: An opportunity to make up morerumors about whats reallygoing on in Beyoncs life.

Beyonc is no stranger to thesenutty theories.In fact, there are so many out-there ones that weve gathered together the most popular and sprinkled in our owncompletely made-up, baseless rumorsabout Queen B. Warning to all the gossipmongers out there: Nothing below istrue. (Probably.)

One rumor from each group of three is false. Guess which ones EW made up, then scroll to the bottom of the post to see how well you know your Beyonc rumors.

1. A)Beyoncs alter ego, Sasha Fierce, is based on her estranged twin sister, who was shunned by the Knowles family B) Beyonc had an affair with President Obama C) Beyoncappeared to be onstage throughout her 2013 Super Bowl performance, but a hologram actually stood in for her during part of it

2. A)Kelly Rowland is Beyoncs sister B) Beyonc was born in Canada, not Houston where she claims she was born and raised C)Beyonc isnt 32, the age she claims to be

3. A)An editor from Harpers Bazaarfound out that Beyonc was actually caring for the baby her father had with his mistress. Beyoncdidnt want anyone to know that, so she traded a cover story with a revealing focus on her pregnancy for a deal that they wouldnt run the story about raising her fathers child C) Beyonc only agreed to be on the cover ofShapemagazine in 2013 because the magazines parent company had attained photos of her deceased former bodyguard pleasuring himself to Beys photo. She didnt want the picturegetting out, so she traded a cover for a deal that they wouldnt run theimage C)Solange is actually Beyoncs daughter, not her little sister

4. A) The Illuminati killed Aaliyah because theywanted her out of the organization, and they wanted Beyonc to replace her B) Whitney Houston was murdered by the Illuminati as a sacrifice so that Beyoncs child, Blue Ivy, could live C) Illuminati memberTupac was murdered by the Illuminati in 1996, the same year Destinys Child was signed by Columbia Records, because they wanted Beyonc but knew she wouldnt join if Tupac was involved, due to a family-related feud

5. A) Beyoncwas never pregnant with her daughter, Blue Ivy B) Destiny Childs member Michelle Williams was Beyoncs surrogate C) Blue Ivy is the spawn of satan

6. A) Beyonc is trying to rid society of their memory of Jesus so she can replace him B)Beyonc is possessed by a demonic entity C)Beyonc was excommunicated from her familys church in 2008 under suspicionof satanic activity

Follow this link:
Which Beyonce rumors did we make up? QUIZ

During the past three years I have managed SEO projects for small and mid-sized businesses. My failures have taught me many valuable lessons. I am the perfectperson to explain mistakes to avoid, because Im pretty sure I have made them all.

If you manage SEO projects, this post is for you. Theseare the most crucial SEO mistakes you should avoid making. Follow my advice, and you willlikelysee your retention rates improve.

I am not talking about a situation where a month passes and you are worried because you havefailed to achieve SERP domination. Normally, thats impossible.

Business owners want to feel good about the investment that theyve made right from the start, and the best way for you to ensure that is to start working as soon as they pay, and keep them updated on that work via emails or phone calls.

Here are some specific ways to start slow that I have been guilty of:

In 2014, you wont be very effective for a client without getting their input and feedback regarding content, goals, other marketing efforts, etc. Staying in close contact with your client from the beginning should occur naturally.

Countless times Ive made the mistake of having an SEO Ego and thinking I dont need to listen to the client, they need to listen to ME!. Needless to say, this is not a productive mindset.

Yes, I do have more knowledge about SEO than the client, but you know what I have not a clue about? Their business.

It is critical that you not only ask your client the right questions, but also actively listen to their responses, particularly during the initial stages of the project. The client will be able to tell if your SEO ego is showing, and that harms your ability to establish trust.

For all of my clients, I now provide a formal, customized monthly report which communicates to the client three primary items:

See more here:
SEO Client Retention Tips: 7 Mistakes Ive Made That You Shouldnt by @mchuckgreen



U.S. POSTAL SERVICE to Consider using BITCOIN Could BITCOIN Save the Post Office?
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE to Consider using BITCOIN Could BITCOIN Save the Post Office? videos.. Please click here to subscribe to my channel.. The world is changing any day, and just powerful people…

By: David Balls

Go here to read the rest:

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE to Consider using BITCOIN Could BITCOIN Save the Post Office? – Video

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

(CNN) — Free speech has consequences — especially when business interests are involved.

That’s a lesson most recently learned by real estate professionals David and Jason Benham, who lost the HGTV show they were scheduled to host after a recording of David Benham’s anti-homosexuality views emerged.

Should the Benham brothers have lost their HGTV show?

After the site Right Wing Watch published a post about the pair and posted a recording of Benham talking to a talk show host about “homosexuality and its agenda that is attacking the nation,” HGTV dropped their planned show, called “Flip It Forward.”

“HGTV has decided not to move forward with the Benham Brothers’ series,” the network tweeted after the post went public.

The Benhams aren’t the first ones to lose work over their words. Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling was banned for life from the team’s day-to-day operations and facilities — and fined $2.5 million — for racist comments that were recorded and posted online. Paula Deen became an ex-Food Network host after she admitted to using a racial slur. “Duck Dynasty’s” Phil Robertson was suspended after his controversial comments on homosexuals were published, though the A&E show has stayed on the air.

Opinion: What happened to Sterling was morally wrong

Regardless of the platform, the personal, political and corporate have ways of getting entangled with one another these days — particularly when corporations try to maintain very public reputations of welcoming diversity and inclusiveness, says crisis management consultant Eric Dezenhall.

“I defy you to go to a corporate meeting and not hear words incanted over and over again: ‘diversity,’ ‘inclusiveness,’ ‘transparency,’ ‘corporate social responsibility,’ ‘sustainability,’ et cetera,” he says. “If you step out of the narrow margins on some of these issues, there’s going to be a problem.”

Go here to read the rest:
Underneath all the speech controversies, it's just business

There are countless posts published on SEO blogs declaring search engine rank checking is dead, and ranking reports should no longer be shared as a KPI. While I wholeheartedly agree that rank tracking should not be the primary metric one uses to determine SEO success or failure, rankings reports still play an important part in the role of an SEO.

In my own role, I no longer see the benefit of frequent rank checking on a mass scale, but I do conduct many manual queries to better understand who is ranking on some of my favorite keywords. In this post, I will share four ways I get accurate international rankings for free.

Obviously, the goal in creating any piece of web contentprovided of course that it is exposed to search enginesis to generate organic search traffic. Without checking rankings, there is no way to be certain that any piece has been correctly targeted for the desired terms. Certainly, you can look at organic traffic in your analytics software, but with Google not sharing keyword data you wouldnt know whether the traffic is coming from the intended terms. Webmaster Tools will tell you some of the story, but the keyword report often lags and is subject to account personalization.

Automated and manual rank checking in the US is very simple as you can type your queries into a search box or use a variety of software solutions. The real rank checking challenge is to understand how you are doing on non-US Google searches. Discovering how you rank in the UK is not nearly as simple as going to google.co.uk from an incognito window. Even though your personalized data is not included in Googles query processing to understand the query intent, you are still physically located in the US (or whatever country) and this is going to bias the results away from what an actual in-country searcher would see.

Additionally, international SEO presents some very complex challenges for someone who does not know the language they might be targeting in an SEO campaign, so knowing precise search engine rankings becomes even more important. You wont be as familiar with your list of target keywords as you are with the keywords in your own language, and you wont have as strong of a grasp of the keyword modifiers and synonyms that you should also be targeting.

Much like domestic SEO, looking into your analytics software to see how much traffic you are receiving is not going to be that helpful. You can, for example, see traffic is increasing in a target country, but you wont have very much insight into whether branded or non-brand queries are driving the traffic. Also, if you are in the beginning stages of an international campaign and just need to prove the value of a new piece of non-English content, you will not have the data you need to prove a desired ROI.

Luckily, there are a few ways to check Google rankings for free or almost free that will show you search results just like any in-country user.

Adwords Preview Tool screenshot 4/29/2014

Google Parameters in Search Screenshot 4/29/2014

The first part https://www.google.pt shows that you are conducting a search on Google.pt Googles Portuguese TLD. The next section search?q= is your actual query. After that is where you would append gl which is your Google location. Google uses the two-letter ISO country code for this parameter. (Find the full list here). In my query, I am searching in the UK, which uses the ISO code of GB.

Read more:
International Rank Checking: Four Ways To Get Results for Free by @5le



Hagel: Ukraine Crisis Highlights NATO Defense Spending Problem
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said on Friday that Russia's actions in Ukraine have shattered the myth of European security in the post-Cold War era and under…

By: WochitGeneralNews

Read this article:

Hagel: Ukraine Crisis Highlights NATO Defense Spending Problem – Video

Home > News > world-news

New York, May 3 : The United Nations is marking World Press Freedom Day on Saturday with an appeal to all States, societies and individuals to actively defend press freedom as a fundamental right and as a critical contribution to achieving and sustaining the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

This call was made in a joint message by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and Irina Bokova, Director-General of UN Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), who said UN bodies are already working together and with other partners under UNESCO’s leadership to create a free and safe environment for journalists and media workers around the world.

Their message goes on to stress that this year, the international community has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to prepare a long-term agenda for sustainable development to succeed the MDGs when they end in 2015.

“Successfully implementing that agenda will require that all populations enjoy the fundamental rights of freedom of opinion and expression, the officials said, underscoring that those rights are essential to democracy, transparency, accountability and the rule of law. “They are vital for human dignity, social progress and inclusive development.”

World Press Freedom Day, which was designated as May 3rd in 1993 by the UN General Assembly, is being marked in about 100 countries and UNESCO is holding an international conference entitled “Media Freedom For a Better Future: Shaping the Post-2015 Development Agenda” from 5 to 6 May in Paris.

Also marking the Day, 31 specialists from the largest body of independent experts in the UN Human Rights system called on all Governments to promote and protect the rights to freedom of expression and information, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association and public participation.

Protection of these fundamental freedoms is essential for full realization of all human rights for all and for the achievement of related development goals. “States must develop more inclusive political processes and allow the media to play a key role in guaranteeing the right of everyone…to freely access information and engage in meaningful development related discourse.”

The experts, known as Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council, comprise the Organization’s largest body of independent fact-finding and monitoring mechanisms that address either specific country situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world.

“Without free media to advocate for and monitor the implementation of the new set of post-2015 targets, there can be no real development for all marginalized, vulnerable or discriminated against. Not now, not ever,” declared the experts.

The rest is here:
UN cites press freedom as critical to reaching development goals



RasTafari News, African Tribal Wars 2014: Illuminati Black-On-Black UN Crimes, more Afri-Con Games
African NWO Tribalism: 2014 Afri-Con Game Illuminati Black On Black UN Crimes RT LIKE, POST SHARE! WATCH [VIDEO] SUBSCRIBE, JOIN OUR SOCIAL MEDIA NETWORKING, Click http://RastafariGroundation…

By: RastafariSabbathical

Here is the original post:
RasTafari News, African Tribal Wars 2014: Illuminati Black-On-Black UN Crimes, more Afri-Con Games – Video

This weekend, a shadowy leftist group named Democracy Alliance will meet in Chicago to figure out a way to thwart conservative rivals.

As the old adage goes, imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.

While top liberal organizations blast the right for accepting dark money, the Alliance’s entire business model is based on maintaining secrecy akin to the Illuminati.

“Like a lot of elite groups, we fly beneath the radar,” Oakland lawyer and Alliance donor Guy Saperstein told the Washington Post in 2006, a year after the group was formed. “We are not so stupid though (to) deny our existence.”

The group requires some hefty financial backing. It costs $25,000 just to join, yearly dues of $30,000 and an additional $200,000 donation to Alliance causes. Donation recipients must sign confidentiality agreements, the Post reported.

The Alliance was founded by a group of billionaires, including George Soros and philanthropist Peter B. Lewis, as a result of George W. Bush’s re-election. Its goal was to fund think tanks and media organizations to move societal change toward a more socialist agenda. But the focus changed to funding political endeavors after

Vice President Joe Biden asked for help in 2011 for the upcoming election.

Obama’s campaign and his umbrella activist group Organizing for Action have received millions from Democracy Alliance members.

Click for more from Watchdog.org.

Daily must-read stories from the biggest name in politics

Originally posted here:
Taking a look inside the secret leftist billionaire's club

Coordinates: 505234.16N 42519.24E / 50.8761556N 4.4220111E / 50.8761556; 4.4220111

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO; //; French: Organisation du trait de l’Atlantique Nord (OTAN)), also called the (North) Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty which was signed on 4April 1949. The organization constitutes a system of collective defence whereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party. NATO’s headquarters are in Brussels, Belgium, one of the 28 member states across North America and Europe, the newest of which, Albania and Croatia, joined in April 2009. An additional 22countries participate in NATO’s Partnership for Peace program, with 15other countries involved in institutionalized dialogue programmes. The combined military spending of all NATO members constitutes over 70% of the global total.[4] Members’ defense spending is supposed to amount to 2% of GDP.[5]

NATO was little more than a political association until the Korean War galvanized the organization’s member states, and an integrated military structure was built up under the direction of two U.S. supreme commanders. The course of the Cold War led to a rivalry with nations of the Warsaw Pact, which formed in 1955. Doubts over the strength of the relationship between the European states and the United States ebbed and flowed, along with doubts over the credibility of the NATO defence against a prospective Soviet invasiondoubts that led to the development of the independent French nuclear deterrent and the withdrawal of the French from NATO’s military structure in 1966 for 30 years. After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the organization was drawn into the breakup of Yugoslavia, and conducted its first military interventions in Bosnia from 1992 to 1995 and later Yugoslavia in 1999. Politically, the organization sought better relations with former Warsaw Pact countries, several of which joined the alliance in 1999 and 2004.

Article5 of the North Atlantic treaty, requiring member states to come to the aid of any member state subject to an armed attack, was invoked for the first and only time after the 11 September 2001 attacks,[6] after which troops were deployed to Afghanistan under the NATO-led ISAF. The organization has operated a range of additional roles since then, including sending trainers to Iraq, assisting in counter-piracy operations[7] and in 2011 enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya in accordance with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973. The less potent Article 4, which merely invokes consultation among NATO members, has been invoked four times: by Turkey in 2003 over the Iraq War, twice in 2012 by Turkey over the Syrian Civil War after the downing of an unarmed Turkish F-4 reconnaissance jet and after a mortar was fired at Turkey from Syria[8] and by Poland in 2014 following the Russian intervention in Crimea.[9]

The Treaty of Brussels, signed on 17March 1948 by Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, and the United Kingdom, is considered the precursor to the NATO agreement. The treaty and the Soviet Berlin Blockade led to the creation of the Western European Union’s Defence Organization in September 1948. However, participation of the United States was thought necessary both to counter the military power of the USSR and to prevent the revival of nationalist militarism, so talks for a new military alliance began almost immediately resulting in the North Atlantic Treaty, which was signed in Washington, D.C. on 4April 1949. It included the five Treaty of Brussels states plus the United States, Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland.[11] The first NATO Secretary General, Lord Ismay, stated in 1949 that the organization’s goal was “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” Popular support for the Treaty was not unanimous, and some Icelanders participated in a pro-neutrality, anti-membership riot in March 1949. The creation of NATO can be seen as the primary institutional consequence of a school of thought called Atlanticism which stressed the importance of trans-Atlantic cooperation.[13]

The members agreed that an armed attack against any one of them in Europe or North America would be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agreed that, if an armed attack occurred, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence, would assist the member being attacked, taking such action as it deemed necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. The treaty does not require members to respond with military action against an aggressor. Although obliged to respond, they maintain the freedom to choose the method by which they do so. This differs from ArticleIV of the Treaty of Brussels, which clearly states that the response will be military in nature. It is nonetheless assumed that NATO members will aid the attacked member militarily. The treaty was later clarified to include both the member’s territory and their “vessels, forces or aircraft” above the Tropic of Cancer, including some Overseas departments of France.[14]

The creation of NATO brought about some standardization of allied military terminology, procedures, and technology, which in many cases meant European countries adopting U.S. practices. The roughly 1300Standardization Agreements (STANAG) codified many of the common practices that NATO has achieved. Hence, the 7.6251 NATO rifle cartridge was introduced in the 1950s as a standard firearm cartridge among many NATO countries. Fabrique Nationale de Herstal’s FAL, which used 7.62 NATO cartridge, was adopted by 75 countries, including many outside of NATO. Also, aircraft marshalling signals were standardized, so that any NATO aircraft could land at any NATO base. Other standards such as the NATO phonetic alphabet have made their way beyond NATO into civilian use.

The outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950 was crucial for NATO as it raised the apparent threat of all Communist countries working together, and forced the alliance to develop concrete military plans. SHAPE, the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, was formed as a consolidated command structure, and began work under Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower in January 1951.[17] The 1952 Lisbon conference, seeking to provide the forces necessary for NATO’s Long-Term Defence Plan, called for an expansion to ninety-six divisions. However this requirement was dropped the following year to roughly thirty-five divisions with heavier use to be made of nuclear weapons. At this time, NATO could call on about fifteen ready divisions in Central Europe, and another ten in Italy and Scandinavia. Also at Lisbon, the post of Secretary General of NATO as the organization’s chief civilian was created, and Lord Ismay was eventually appointed to the post.[20]

In September 1952, the first major NATO maritime exercises began; Exercise Mainbrace brought together 200 ships and over 50,000 personnel to practice the defence of Denmark and Norway.[21] Other major exercises that followed included Exercise Grand Slam and Exercise Longstep, naval and amphibious exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, Italic Weld, a combined air-naval-ground exercise in northern Italy, Grand Repulse, involving the British Army on the Rhine (BAOR), the Netherlands Corps and Allied Air Forces Central Europe (AAFCE), Monte Carlo, a simulated atomic air-ground exercise involving the Central Army Group, and Weldfast, a combined amphibious landing exercise in the Mediterranean Sea involving British, Greek, Italian, Turkish, and U.S. naval forces.[22]

Greece and Turkey also joined the alliance in 1952, forcing a series of controversial negotiations, in which the United States and Britain were the primary disputants, over how to bring the two countries into the military command structure.[17] While this overt military preparation was going on, covert stay-behind arrangements initially made by the Western European Union to continue resistance after a successful Soviet invasion, including Operation Gladio, were transferred to NATO control. Ultimately unofficial bonds began to grow between NATO’s armed forces, such as the NATO Tiger Association and competitions such as the Canadian Army Trophy for tank gunnery.[23][24]

Link:

NATO – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



FireFox! Start Your Own Web Hosting Company
Web Hosting Advertise Here $10 a Month Affordable web-hosting
Pierre Teilhard De Chardin




Designer Children | Prometheism | Euvolution | Transhumanism

Sign up below for the Prometheism / Designer Children Discussion Forum

Subscribe to prometheism-pgroup

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com