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

May 262014

United Islands: Katarzia
Slovensk zpvaka Katarzia podporuje United Islands v Kinskho zahrad na! Podpote i vy, dkujeme!

By: United Islands

Original post:
United Islands: Katarzia – Video

A civil society delegate from the United States has released a prelude statement for the SIDS Final Preparatory Committee Meeting in June 2014 at United Nations Department of Sustainable Development regarding …

See original here:
Civil Society Delegate Makes Remarks on Missions for Economic Development in the Caribbean and Pacific Islands

Democrats Want To Repeal The First Amendment Ted Cruz
Sen. Ted Cruz at the FRC's Watchmen on the Wall 2014 event in Washington, D.C. “This year, I'm sorry to tell you, the United States Senate is going to be vot…

By: wakesheep

Democrats Want To Repeal The First Amendment Ted Cruz – Video

Romania: America needs NATO because of Russian aggression – Biden
VideoID: 20140520-023 SOT Joe Biden, Vice President of the United States (English): “So I'm here to say on behalf of the President, what I hope you already know: you can count on us. Period….

By: RuptlyTV

Excerpt from:

Romania: America needs NATO because of Russian aggression – Biden – Video

Whistleblower Row over WikiLeaks threat to name NSA targetted country
Despite warnings that doing so “could lead to increased violence” and potentially deaths, anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks says it plans to publish the name of a country targeted by a massive United…

By: TheGetjiggy

Read more from the original source:

Whistleblower Row over WikiLeaks threat to name NSA targetted country – Video

A new report from the advocacy group Citizens for Tax Justice finds that 301 Fortune 500 companies hold a combined $2 trillion offshore, collectively avoiding $550 billion in U.S. corporate income taxes, while a contrasting report from the Tax Foundation found that U.S. multinational corporations reported paying more than $128 billion in corporate taxes to foreign countries on $470 billion of taxable income in 2010an effective rate of 27.2 percent before also paying U.S. taxes.

The CTJ report examines companies 2013 Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The report identified 28 corporations, including Apple, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Microsoft, Nike and others, that disclosed the U.S. corporate income tax rate they would pay if they repatriated their profits.

The report also found 243 companies that disclosed permanently reinvested income but do not report how much corporate income tax they would pay if they repatriated their profits. Twenty-eight of the companies admitted using tax havens, according to the group, and the companies 2013 financial filings reveal hundreds more likely do the same.

Its time to have a conversation about the corporate income tax that goes beyond calls to lower the U.S. corporate income tax rate, said CTJ director Robert McIntyre in a statement.

Multinational corporations have been abusing the U.S. tax system at the expense of ordinary taxpayers, and they should not be rewarded for their bad behavior.

In addition to Apple and Microsoft , a diverse array of companies are using offshore tax havens, including U.S. Steel, the pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly, the clothing manufacturer Nike, the supermarket chain Safeway, the financial firm American Express, and banking giants Bank of America and Wells Fargo, according to CTJ.

A total of 301 companies reported holding nearly $2 trillion offshore. Most corporations do not report what they would pay in U.S. taxes if their profits were officially brought to the United States, but if corporations that do disclose are representative, then the Fortune 500 as a group is saving $550 billion by holding profits offshore, according to the report. The report recommends that Congress should pass a law to end deferral, the rule allowing American corporations to indefinitely avoid paying U.S. income tax on profits officially earned offshore until these profits are repatriated. Ending deferral would mean that all profits of U.S. corporations, whether generated in the United States or abroad, would be taxed by the U.S. in the year they are earned.

On Tuesday, a group of Democrats in the House and Senate introduced legislation to end the practice of corporate inversions that allow U.S.-based companies to avoid U.S. taxes by combining with a smaller foreign business and moving their tax domicile overseas. (see Congress Introduces Bill to Restrict Corporate Tax Inversions). CTJ noted that use of tax havens is an important issue right now because some companies with the most reported offshore profits, such as Pfizer, are currently pursuing inversions that would effectively make the companies residents of other countries for tax purposes and would make it easier for these companies to never pay U.S. taxes on the $2 trillion they officially hold offshore.

Tax Foundation Report In contrast, a report from the Tax Foundation, a tax policy research organization found that U.S. multinationals are paying an effective tax rate of 27.2 percent before also paying U.S. taxes.

The Tax Foundation report noted that the U.S.s worldwide system of corporate taxation requires multinational corporations to pay taxes twice, first to the foreign country in which they do business and then to the IRS after they repatriate their profits. Multinational corporations reported paying $128 billion in corporate taxes to foreign countries on $470 billion of taxable income in 2010, according to the most recent IRS data.

Read more from the original source:
Reports Present Opposing Views on Corporate Tax Avoidance

LONDON, United Kingdom — via PRWEB – Aging Analytics & The London Regenerative Medicine Network have co-published 'Investing in Regenerative Medicine: Technology Analysis & Market Outlook', a 106 page …

Read the original:
Live Long & Prosper? A New Report Highlights Economic & Health Benefits of A Growing Regenerative Medicine Sector

RIP Privacy: US judge rules NSA program legal
A United States federal judge said Friday that the National Security Agency's controversial bulk phone data collection program doesn't violate the law. That …A federal judge in New York ruled…

By: Laurie Madden

See the article here:

RIP Privacy: US judge rules NSA program legal – Video

U.S. states take lead in writing bitcoin rules
Numerous companies in the United States enable customers to pay for goods and services in virtual currencies. But since bitcoins are not regulated by the federal government, users face a maze…

By: travell

Read the original post:

U.S. states take lead in writing bitcoin rules – Video

Nidji Liberty and Victory (Manchester United Anthem)
Ndji avec la participation Wayne Rooney, Shinji Kagawa, Chicharito, Valencia et Sir Alex Ferguson Regardez aussi: VICTORY (Manchester United Song) ind…

By: Hernani France Jr.

Follow this link:
Nidji Liberty and Victory (Manchester United Anthem) – Video

Political Commentator T.J. O'Hara on the U.S. Constitution and Free Speech Zones
The United States Constitution and free speech zones. Think about that. We have to have free speech zones in this country? Isn't the entire nation a free spe…

By: The Daily Ledger

Read this article:
Political Commentator T.J. O’Hara on the U.S. Constitution and Free Speech Zones – Video

The Senate report is called National Security Agency Surveillance Affecting Americans, and describes the results of its investigation into NSAs electronic surveillance practices and capabilities, especially involving American citizens, groups, and organizations.

Among its findings are:

Project MINARET, in which the NSA intercepted and disseminated international communications of U.S. citizens and groups whose names were supplied by other agencies and put on a watch list. Those listed were supposed to be linked to concerns about narcotics, domestic violence and antiwar activities.

It was part of an attempt to discover if there was a foreign influence on them, according to the Senate report. NSA personnel were instructed to keep the agencys name off any distributed reports in order to restrict the knowledge that NSA was collecting such information, the report said.

Operation SHAMROCK involved the collection of millions of international telegrams sent to, from or transiting the United States provided to NSA by the three major international telegraph companies. In some years NSA analysts reviewed 150,000 telegrams a month, according to the committee. What began at the end of World War II as an Army Signals Security Agency project to get access to foreign government messaging morphed into collecting calls from a watch list of Americans whose names were supplied by the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs.

The CIA, the FBI and others joined in. Over one four-year period when the list had 1,200 names the committee said NSA distributed approximately 2,000 reports [the texts or summaries of intercepted messages] to the various requesting agencies as the result of inclusion of American names on the watch lists.

Any of this sound familiar?

This was the 1976 report, one of 14 from the Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, chaired by then-Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho). One direct result of the Church committees activities, which began as a probe into domestic CIA activities in the 1960s and 1970s, was the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). President Jimmy Carter signed the bill into law in 1978.

That law, amended several times, has provided a legal foundation for NSAs operations. It also added judicial and congressional oversight of NSA with the establishment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and the House and Senate intelligence committees. At the same time, it continued secrecy for operations necessary to carry out electronic surveillance to protect national security. It allowed intercepts abroad of foreign entities and individuals without a warrant when collecting foreign intelligence. When the target became a U.S. citizen or someone known to be in the United States, a warrant was required within 72 hours.

History does at times seem to repeat itself.

The rest is here:

This NSA history has a familiar ring to it

United States Coast Guardsmen patrol beaches throughout the United States with th…HD Stock Footage
Link to order this clip: Histori…

By: CriticalPast

See original here:
United States Coast Guardsmen patrol beaches throughout the United States with th…HD Stock Footage – Video

We Have Rights! An Animation On The Second Amendment
As citizens of the United States we have personal rights that are defined in our constitution. This animation takes a look at the second amendment of the Bil…

By: Sara Moutrane

Read more here:
We Have Rights! An Animation On The Second Amendment – Video

The consequences of eliminating Fourth Amendment protections for all international communication with foreigners


The U.S. government concedes that it needs a warrant to eavesdrop on phone calls between Americans, or to read the body of their emails to one another. Everyone agrees that these communications are protected by the Fourth Amendment. But the government also argues that Fourth Amendment protections don’t apply when an American calls or writes to a foreigner in another country.

Let’s say, for example, that the head of the NAACP writes an email to a veteran of the South African civil-rights struggle asking for advice about an anti-racism campaign; or that Hillary Clinton fields a call from a friend in Australia whose daughter was raped; or that Jeb Bush uses Skype to discuss with David Cameron whether he should seek the 2016 presidential nomination for the Republican Party. Under the Obama administration’s logic, these Americans have no reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to these conversations, and it is lawful and legitimate for the NSA to eavesdrop on, record, and store everything that is said.

The arguments Team Obama uses to justify these conclusions are sweeping and worrisome, as the ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer capturesin his analysis of the relevant legal briefs:

… the government contends that Americans who make phone calls or send emails to people abroad have a diminished expectation of privacy because the people with whom they are communicatingnon-Americans abroad, that isare not protected by the Constitution. The government also argues that Americans’ privacy rights are further diminished in this context because the NSA has a “paramount” interest in examining information that crosses international borders.

… the government even argues that Americans can’t reasonably expect that their international communications will be private from the NSA when the intelligence services of so many other countries … might be monitoring those communications, too. The government’s argument is not simply that the NSA has broad authority to monitor Americans’ international communications. The US government is arguing that the NSA’s authority is unlimited in this respect. If the government is right, nothing in the Constitution bars the NSA from monitoring a phone call between a journalist in New York City and his source in London. For that matter, nothing bars the NSA from monitoring every call and email between Americans in the United States and their non-American friends, relatives, and colleagues overseas.

All I’d add is that the Obama administration’s encroachments on the Fourth Amendment disparately affect naturalized citizens of the United States, almost all of whom still have friends or family members living in their countries of origin. When I call my parents, email my sister, or text my best friend, my private communications are theoretically protected by the Bill of Rights. In contrast, immigrants contacting loved ones often do so with the expectation that every word they say or write can be legally recorded and stored forever on a server somewhere.

Xenophobia is one factor driving this double-standard. It does real harm to immigrants whose speech is chilled, as is clear to anyone who has made an effort to speak with them.

Yet there has been little backlash against the Obama administration for affording zero constitutional protections to Americans engaged in speech with foreigners, and little sympathy for the innocent Americans, many of them immigrants, who are hurt by the approach Obama and many in Congress endorse.

Go here to see the original:

NSA Spying Has a Disproportionate Effect on Immigrants

Freedom Memorial dedicated in Sandy

By Alex Cabrero

May 16th, 2014 @ 10:48pm

SANDY Though many things may divide Americans, on a pleasant Friday evening in Sandy, a memorial brought many people back together.

“There’s no politics here. There’s no Democrat, no Republican. This is American, Tony Galvez, one of the speakers during the dedication, said.

If anyone knows what being an American means, it’s Galvez.

His son, Adam, was killed while serving in the United States Marines Corps in Iraq in 2006.

When he was asked to speak at Friday nights dedication for the Utah Freedom Memorial, he was simply happy that people still remembered.

“I couldn’t be a more proud father than I am of my son, Galvez said.

But remembering sacrifices is only a part of what this memorial is about.

View original post here:
Freedom Memorial dedicated in Sandy

Vid of the day: Small shirt haul:0
Today's video deals with the attack on free speech in the United States, and what we can do to-ah forget it, let's just do a shirt haul….. Join me on Facebook, won't you:…

By: ResaleRookie

Read the original post:
Vid of the day: Small shirt haul:0 – Video

WASHINGTON Key appellate judges will chew over a reheated dispute about meat labels and free speech.

And the place will be packed.

On Monday, 12 judges on whats called the nations second-highest court will gather in an unusual session to consider claims that country-of-origin label requirements violate U.S. meat producers First Amendment rights. Its a case with global implications.

A lot of folks are watching, Patty Lovera, assistant director of Food and Water Watch, a consumer advocacy group, said in an interview Friday. There are a lot of eyes on it.

Led by the American Meat Institute, ranchers, packers and others are challenging U.S. Department of Agriculture rules that govern country of origin labels. In particular, they dislike a sweeping requirement to identify where the source animal was born, raised and slaughtered.

In Seattle, for example, a pack of steaks might be labeled, Born and raised in Canada, slaughtered in the United States, the American Meat Institute noted in a legal brief. And in Texas, a tray of T-bones might be labeled, Born in Mexico, raised and slaughtered in the United States.

As meat industry attorney Catherine E. Stetson noted in her brief, it was not ever thus. In fact, the hourlong oral argument coming Monday has been a long time stewing. Congress first imposed country-of-origin label requirements in a 2002 farm bill. Two years later, lawmakers reconsidered and blocked the labels.

In a 2008 farm bill, Congress tried again. The subsequent USDA rules initially allowed relatively simple labels; a steak, for instance, was Product of the United States and Mexico. The label requirement doesnt apply to meat sold in restaurants or to processed food, such as the meat in a can of chili.

Mexico and Canada successfully argued to the World Trade Organization that the label requirements were an unfair trade barrier. The USDA then cooked up new requirements that included the more specific information covering each phase of production.

A federal judge declined last year to block the label rules from taking effect.

See the article here:
Meat labeling vs. free speech: A fine meal for judges

May 162014

WASHINGTON The crisis in eastern Ukraine has forced NATO for the first time since the collapse of the Berlin Wall to increase its ability to defend the territorial integrity of its 28-member states. The measures taken include sending 600 American troops for military exercises in the Baltic States and Poland. In addition, the United States has dispatched 12 F-16 fighter jets to Poland. Washington has also approved an aid package for Ukraine which includes $8 million dollars in non-lethal supplies such as bomb detection equipment and hand-held radios. It comes as part of reaction from the West to Russian backing of the annexation of Crimea and its support of separatists spreading mayhem in eastern Ukraine. NATO measures not enough But Stephen Blank, Russia expert with the American Foreign Policy Council, said the NATO measures are not enough. I dont think it sends much of a message at all. Its a reassurance message for the Poles and the Baltic States. It does not deter [Russian President Vladimir] Putin at all, Blank said. What would deter Putin is if NATO sent ground and air forces and air defenses to Ukraine at the request of the Ukrainian government. That would register in Moscow, but they are not going to do that. Ian Brzezinski, a senior fellow with the Atlantic Council, said there are several other steps NATO can take to help Ukraine. These would include first and foremost providing military assistance to the Ukrainians that goes beyond non-lethal assistance, he said. I would include anti-tank weapons, surface-to-air missiles, things that would really complicate Russian military operations in Ukraine. Second, I would encourage the West, ideally NATO, but perhaps a coalition of European and North American countries, to deploy intelligence assets – platforms, ISR platforms – intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance platforms in Ukraine and trainers, Brzezinski said. NATO’s collective defense policy NATOs 28-members are committed to the notion of collective defense, contained in Article 5 of the NATO Treaty. But Ohio Wesleyan University Russia expert Sean Kay, said Article 5 is not an automatic security guarantee. If you look carefully at Article 5, it says that an attack on one will be considered as if its an attack on all and that the allies will meet and consult on the appropriate response, including military, he said. The way that was made automatic during the Cold War, was through the forward deployment of major U.S. troops at the inner-German border. Today, our policy is one of reinforcement and symbolic forward presence, now with those rotational exercises [in the Baltic States and Poland]. Kay said he does not believe the Western alliance will deploy a huge number of troops in NATO-member east European countries, even if the crisis between Ukraine and Russia intensifies. We would have to be very careful about that, because we might think even if the United States wants to do that, we would not get consensus among the NATO allies for something like that, Kay said. And we have to do that in a way that keeps that consensus going too, because NATO could break apart politically if pushed too hard on that question.” Ukraine crisis not yet Cold War Charles Kupchan, with Georgetown University, said by annexing Crimea and attempting to destabilize eastern Ukraine, Russia has bared its teeth in a way that it has not done since the Cold War era. Many people are now saying we now need to deal with Russia with both eyes wide open. We need now to take out of the closet NATOs plans for defense of its eastern frontier, he said. We need to contemplate a set of political and economic steps for response should Putin go into eastern Ukraine and continue to stir up trouble. Kupchan said the current crisis falls short of a new Cold War, but he said it does have the potential to go in a worrisome direction, depending on the Kremlins next moves.

Go here to read the rest:

NATO Benefit to Ukraine in Question

Brazil, EU to circumvent NSA spying with undersea cable 2014 Brazil and the European Union are joining forces against the National Security Agency and spying by the United States. Brazil and the EU announced…

By: American News Videos

Read the rest here:

Brazil, EU to circumvent NSA spying with undersea cable 2014 – Video

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