Friday, March 28, 2008

The BOSCO Uganda Relief Project

The Bosco Uganda Relief Project


From: Navitor69, 1 year ago




Here, below at "slideshare link" is the page at which you can download the full power point raw data file. To visit the BOSCO homepage just click the title link above, or see the URL described below. Thanks for your support - now back to politics!...T



Here is our presentation for technical, financial, and logistical solutions to areas of the world in crisis: No power, poverty, civil war, these issues are addressed in part by our network, consisting of Wi-Fi long range Internet, VoIP phone service, solar powered batteries and lighting, video camcorders and upload capability 24/7
contact: Ted Pethick @:
tpethick@bosco-uganda.org
or:
http://www.bosco-uganda.org


SlideShare Link


Islamist Ideology Exposed


Radical Islam exposed. No different than Nazism in my mind, except for one frightening realisation: The Nazi's had no fear of God in them, no religious conviction. This is a truly a more dangerous threat than either Fascism or Communism, because they haven't believed it for a few decades, no, but for over one thousand years - and they number in hundreds of millions...T

Thursday, March 27, 2008

CBS Exposes Hillary Clinton Bosnia Trip

Clintonism at it's best - er, worst...T

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

The Long Defeat

Withering attack, and an interesting take coming from the NT Times David Brooks. Let's hope it's finally true: ding, dong, the Bitch is dead...T

Hillary Clinton may not realize it yet, but she’s just endured one of the worst weeks of her campaign.

First, Barack Obama weathered the Rev. Jeremiah Wright affair without serious damage to his nomination prospects. Obama still holds a tiny lead among Democrats nationally in the Gallup tracking poll, just as he did before this whole affair blew up.

Second, Obama’s lawyers successfully prevented re-votes in Florida and Michigan. That means it would be virtually impossible for Clinton to take a lead in either elected delegates or total primary votes.
Third, as Noam Scheiber of The New Republic has reported, most superdelegates have accepted Nancy Pelosi’s judgment that the winner of the elected delegates should get the nomination. Instead of lining up behind Clinton, they’re drifting away. Her lead among them has shrunk by about 60 in the past month, according to Avi Zenilman of Politico.com.

In short, Hillary Clinton’s presidential prospects continue to dim. The door is closing. Night is coming. The end, however, is not near.

Last week, an important Clinton adviser told Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen (also of Politico) that Clinton had no more than a 10 percent chance of getting the nomination. Now, she’s probably down to a 5 percent chance.

Five percent.

Let’s take a look at what she’s going to put her party through for the sake of that 5 percent chance: The Democratic Party is probably going to have to endure another three months of daily sniping. For another three months, we’ll have the Carvilles likening the Obamaites to Judas and former generals accusing Clintonites of McCarthyism. For three months, we’ll have the daily round of résumé padding and sulfurous conference calls. We’ll have campaign aides blurting “blue dress” and only-because-he’s-black references as they let slip their private contempt.

For three more months (maybe more!) the campaign will proceed along in its Verdun-like pattern. There will be a steady rifle fire of character assassination from the underlings, interrupted by the occasional firestorm of artillery when the contest touches upon race, gender or patriotism. The policy debates between the two have been long exhausted, so the only way to get the public really engaged is by poking some raw national wound.

For the sake of that 5 percent, this will be the sourest spring. About a fifth of Clinton and Obama supporters now say they wouldn’t vote for the other candidate in the general election. Meanwhile, on the other side, voters get an unobstructed view of the Republican nominee. John McCain’s approval ratings have soared 11 points. He is now viewed positively by 67 percent of Americans. A month ago, McCain was losing to Obama among independents by double digits in a general election matchup. Now McCain has a lead among this group.

For three more months, Clinton is likely to hurt Obama even more against McCain, without hurting him against herself. And all this is happening so she can preserve that 5 percent chance.

When you step back and think about it, she is amazing. She possesses the audacity of hopelessness.

Why does she go on like this? Does Clinton privately believe that Obama is so incompetent that only she can deliver the policies they both support? Is she simply selfish, and willing to put her party through agony for the sake of her slender chance? Are leading Democrats so narcissistic that they would create bitter stagnation even if they were granted one-party rule?

The better answer is that Clinton’s long rear-guard action is the logical extension of her relentlessly political life.

For nearly 20 years, she has been encased in the apparatus of political celebrity. Look at her schedule as first lady and ever since. Think of the thousands of staged events, the tens of thousands of times she has pretended to be delighted to see someone she doesn’t know, the hundreds of thousands times she has recited empty clichés and exhortatory banalities, the millions of photos she has posed for in which she is supposed to appear empathetic or tough, the billions of politically opportune half-truths that have bounced around her head.

No wonder the Clinton campaign feels impersonal. It’s like a machine for the production of politics. It plows ahead from event to event following its own iron logic. The only question is whether Clinton herself can step outside the apparatus long enough to turn it off and withdraw voluntarily or whether she will force the rest of her party to intervene and jam the gears.

If she does the former, she would surprise everybody with a display of self-sacrifice. Her campaign would cruise along at a lower register until North Carolina, then use that as an occasion to withdraw. If she does not, she would soldier on doggedly, taking down as many allies as necessary.
Full Article - New Window

Monday, March 17, 2008

The Real Hillary

Now I recognise her!...wait till you see who created this - very Orwellian (hah!)...T

View in new window

Hillary's Inner Monster

The bride of Chucky? Naw, the real deal!...T

Staggering Numbers

Keeping in mind that Hillary – in her own "two for the price of one" pronouncement – told the nation that she would be sharing the presidency with her husband, it would beg the imaginations of even her most fervent acolytes that the tsunami of scandals that inundated the Clinton tenure somehow escaped either the notice or personal involvement of Hillary herself.


To see the shocking Scandal Index of the Clinton years, as compiled by the liberal Progressive Review (http://prorev.com) is to appreciate the Clinton's 24/7/365 belief that any progress in their leftist domestic and foreign affairs agenda could only be realized through the most nefarious activity – much of which fit neatly into the criminal category. Under the listing of "Records Set'" by the Clinton administration (read: co-presidency), Progressive Review cites the following, of which I will only list a sampling:


▪ Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates.


▪ Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation.


▪ Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify.


▪ Most number of witnesses to die suddenly.


▪ First president sued for sexual harassment.


▪ First president accused of rape.


▪ First president to be held in contempt of court.


▪ First president to be impeached for personal malfeasance.


▪ First first lady to come under criminal investigation.


▪ Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign-contribution case.


▪ Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions.


▪ Number of Starr-Ray investigation convictions or guilty pleas to date: one governor, one associate attorney general and two Clinton business partners: 14.


▪ Number of Cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 5.


▪ Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine that were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47.


▪ Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33.


▪ Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61.


▪ Number of congressional witnesses who pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122.


▪ Guilty pleas and convictions obtained by Donald Smaltz in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses: 15; acquitted or overturned cases (including Espy): 6.


▪ Clinton machine crimes for which convictions were obtained: drug trafficking, 3; racketeering, extortion, bribery, 4; tax evasion, kickbacks, embezzlement, 2; fraud, 12; conspiracy, 5; fraudulent loans, illegal gifts, 1; illegal campaign contributions, 5; money laundering, 6; perjury, et al.


▪ Number of times that Clinton figures who testified in court or before Congress said that they didn't remember, didn't know, or something similar: Bill Kennedy, 116; Harold Ickes, 148; Ricki Seidman, 160; Bruce Lindsey, 161; Bill Burton, 191; Mark Gearan, 221; Mack McLarty, 233; Neil Egglseston, 250; John Podesta, 264; Jennifer O'Connor, 343; Dwight Holton 348; Patsy Thomasson, 420; Jeff Eller, 697; and Hillary Clinton, 250.


Believe it or not, this exhaustive list omits even lengthier lists – on public record – of crimes investigated, public officials and reporters intimidated, threatened and muzzled, and the raft of dead people associated with the Clintons who died by guns, knives, alleged suicides, etc. See http://members.tripod.com/~rcjustice/pres.html and http://prorev.com/legacy.htm.


“The amazing thing about [Hillary],” Goldberg says, “is that she's so unappealing. Even liberals don't like what they see…at every turn, [her] Zelig-like public persona has been a fabrication – either by her fans, her enemies or herself…”


All of which may explain a recent CNN-Gallup poll in which 51 percent of respondents said they definitely would “not vote” for Hillary in a presidential race.
Full article - new window

Sunday, March 09, 2008

The Great Global Warming Swindle


In case any of you had trouble with the DivX version, this one is for you. Sorry for the redundant posting, but it fits in tandem with the most recent post, below, which is a must read. Enjoy, on this day at the (hopefully) tail end of the coldest winter, worldwide, in 100 years! To download this video and/or get a different embed code and player, click here - Veoh view and download - or click here - Brightcove view and embed - to access the embed code for this video...T


As suggested by the apt title, this program — essential viewing for politicians, teachers, motorists and the entire transport sector, grass roots environmentalists and all 'True Believers' in man-made climate change — will reveal and confirm:
- How the Sun is an overwhelming influence on continuous climate change over decades and centuries (there is no way for taxation or lifestyle fascism to alter the Sun's eruptivity and irradiance)
- How carbon dioxide levels are predominantly an effect and not a cause of climate change (a very inconvenient truth)
- Why politicians have been so enthusiastic about embracing the fallacy of human impact on global climate (trojan horses aren't a protected species)
- What lies behind the green industry (courtesy of a founding member and former leader of Greenpeace)
- How forecasts of warming and its impacts are grossly exaggerated, with stasis and cooling ahead, and therefore why the UN IPCC needs urgent fundamental reform - or abolishing completely
View in new window

Climate dissent grows hotter as chill deepens

Further evidence of what the global warming alarmists really are: global socialists - they seek to impose upon us all what the liberals, the greens, the euro-socialists, and most importantly, the communists, could not: the death of capitalism (necessary to achieve the proposed reductions in CO2 emissions), which could not be forcibly imposed on us by the Red Army, nor at the ballot box. The statistics cannot be denied - 2007-2008 was the coldest winter worldwide in 100 years..T

Last week, virtually unreported in Britain, the extraordinary winter weather of 2008 elsewhere in the world continued. In the USA, there were blizzards as far south as Texas and Arkansas, while in northern states and Canada what they are calling "the winter from hell" has continued to break records going back in some cases to 1873. Meanwhile in Asia more details emerged of the catastrophe caused by the northern hemisphere's greatest snow cover since 1966.

In Afghanistan, where they have lost 300,000 cattle, the human death toll has risen above 1,500. In China, the havoc created by what its media call "the Winter Snow Disaster" has continued, not least in Tibet, where six months of snow and record low temperatures have killed 500,000 animals, leaving 3 million people on the edge of starvation.

It might have seemed timely that in New York an array of leading climatologists and other experts should have gathered for the most high-powered international conference yet to question the "consensus" on global warming. After three days of what the chairman called "the kind of free-spirited debate that is virtually absent from the global warming alarmist camp", the 500 delegates issued the Manhattan Declaration, stating that attempts by governments to reduce CO2 emissions would "markedly diminish further prosperity" while having "no appreciable impact" on the Earth's warming.

This inevitably attracted the kind of hysterical abuse that has become so familiar from warmist fanatics, tellingly contrasting with the measured arguments put forward by the scientists present. One was Anthony Watts, the meteorologist who last year famously forced Nasa's Goddard Institute to correct a fundamental error in its data on US surface temperatures, to show that the hottest decade of the 20th century was not the 1990s but the 1930s.
Full article - New window

Friday, March 07, 2008

Doc Severinsen


Man he could really play that thing - what a volume of sound, with such finesse and range...T
View in new window

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Wicked Bitch

The true Hillary...come on, Obama, you can't take the Clinton's out with a stake through the heart! No, you may want to consider a tall hill, two large wooden crosses, lots of straw, gasoline, and a few lit matches...T
View in new window