xiao77
Rapidshare Gamez: PopCap Bejeweled 2 Deluxe
xiao77 发表于 2009-07-02 00:05:58
Get all this when you download Bejeweled 2
Game Connexion: Bejeweled 2
Swap adjacent gems to create rows of 3 or more identical gems! Match 4 in a row for a Power Gem, or 5 in a row for a Hyper Cube. Bejeweled 2 is more wildly
Free Download PC , PSP, PS2, PS3, XBox Games: PopCap Bejeweled 2
Free Download Games PC, PSP, PS2, PS3, Xbod, Wii, Nintendo.
LinkTweak: Bejeweled 2-PSP
Bejeweled 2-PSP. http://rapidshare.com/files/112641472/Bej2Del.rar. at 11:12 PM Posted by smknbubs. 0 comments: Post a Comment · Newer Post Older Post Home
Bejeweled 2 Download Instructions
Bejeweled 2 Game This game is easy to learn, it's fun and it's addicting. If you have never played it before, you're in for a gem-swaping treat.Rapidshare Gamez: PopCap Bejeweled 2 Deluxe
Flexcin has worked wonders for my constant joint pain
xiao77 发表于 2009-07-02 00:03:17
Flexcin is an amazing joint pain relief formulation that has received rave reviews from many of its users worldwide. If you're suffering from joint pain and looking for a natural pain relief product, then Flexcin could be your best solution to end your pain. Flexcin is especially effective against the following
Flexcin is a little known product with CM8 which has actually been around for years. Its special properties have only recently been acknowledged but there impact on arthritis and the problems of pain and non flexibility associated with it are noteworthy to say the least. Information on this amazing product and its special ingredient that sets it apart from the rest can now be found online. It has CM8, a natural compound that works as an anti-inflammatory and pain reliever, and it also is an immune system modulator.
I know they are a bunch of big fancy words, but if you know anyone suffering from arthritis pain or stiffness from an injury, I highly recommend this product. This is definately going to bring you much needed relief just like has for me.
Click Here to Get more Amazing facts about Flexcin with CM8
Flexcin has worked wonders for my constant joint pain
Home Rainwater Collection Calculator
xiao77 发表于 2009-07-02 00:02:00
My pops would like this one, we were discussing the viability of roof water collecting on the new house and working out how much you could collect versus how much you could use. As a supplementary source (for uses other then drinking) we worked out that the roof was just about large enough to provide a standard families usage. The only reason we didn't install a tank then and there was that the relative rarity of large tanks in the USA meant that it would have been too costly.
"Let’s take a look at a hypothetical example to see just how much water we can collect from rainfall. If you have 1,000 square feet of roof on your house, and it rains just 1 inch, you can collect 600 gallons of water to be used in your garden, for washing your car, or just for drop irrigation around your property. That’s 600 less gallons you have to pay for and use from your town water supply! So how can you do the math for your own roof? Just multiple the square footage of roof space you have available X 0.6 gallons per square foot per inch of rain, and you can see how much water you can collect from each inch of rain that falls.
So if you have 2,500 square feet of roof available for water catchment, and a single inch of rain falls one day, we see that:
2,500 X 0.6 = 1,500 gallons of water can be harvested for future use…from only one inch of rainfall!
On average, Americans use about 69 gallons of water per person per day for bathing, cooking, cleaning and flushing toilets - and is just for indoor water use and does not account for any watering/car washing going on outside. That amounts to about 2,100 gallons a month for each person - or only slightly more than you might be able to collect off your roof in a single rainstorm. Sure, you might not want to use that water for your showers or drinking water, but it can be done…and many people are putting cisterns in their yard and systems in their house to be able to do so. But if you are not interested in doing that and just wanted to use it outside, using a rain barrel or two under your downspouts can make a big difference in your monthly water usage and bill. Let’s take a look at one more example to see how much of a difference collecting rainwater can make - If you live in Boston, Massachusetts, which gets an average of 42.53 inches of rain per year, and you live in a house with 1,000 square feet of roof space…
1,000 X 0.6 X 42.53 = 25,518 gallons of water collected each year in Boston, MA.
That’s a lot of water that you can save (and money!) by hooking up and using rainwater catchment systems at your house. It’s a big return for a very small investment, and I bet you will hear something different the next time the weatherperson says “X city received an inch of rain today”!"
Via [ The Good Human ]
An Article 9 Event in Toronto
xiao77 发表于 2009-07-01 23:53:11
"Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution: Bringing Peace into Today's World"
Date and Time: 6:30 - 9:30 PM, May 15, 2009
Location: Room OI 2212
OISE (Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto)
252 Bloor Street West (St. George Subway)
Event Programme:
- Screening of "Japan's Peace Constitution" (John Junkerman, Dir.; 2005. 78 min.) Followed by
- Short presentations, discussion and Q&A's with;
- Songs for Peace and Storytelling "May 15, 1972" Yusuke Tanaka, Writer
RSVP before May 12 by email to event@peacephilosophy.com with your name and number of people attending.
Admission free (Donations toward expenses appreciated)
Light refreshments will be served.
Organized by: Toronto Article 9 Event Committee(Koko Kikuchi, David McIntosh, Satoko Norimatsu, Tomoe Otsuki,and Yusuke Tanaka)
Co-sponsored by: Department of Sociology and Equity Studies in Education/OISE
Supporting organizations:
Vancouver Save Article 9
Peace Philosophy Centre
More about this Event:
May 2009 marks the 62nd anniversary of the enforcement of the Constitution of Japan, which includes the war-renouncing clause, Article9. It reads:"Aspiring sincerely to an international peace and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized."
Japan's current constitution was adopted after war in Asia and the Pacific came to an end in August, 1945, after taking the lives of over20 million people. While Article 9 stands as a symbolic expression of Japan's remorse for its aggressive past, particularly against the neighbouring peoples of Asia, it has also effectively prevented Japan from resorting to violence in international disputes for the last 62years. There has been, however, constant pressure from successive conservative-led governments to revise Article 9 and diminish its substance by enacting laws that would allow dispatch of the SDF (Self Defense Force) to other countries. In the mean time, a nationwide citizens' movement has arisen to protect the soul of the Constitution,Article 9. Today there are more than 7,000 "Save Article 9"organizations across Japan and several outside of Japan. One of these,Vancouver Save Article 9 was founded in 2005 and now has 200 members strong.
In this event, the first of such nature in Toronto, we will watch John Junkerman's acclaimed documentary film, "Japan's Peace Constitution," in which the international significance of Article 9 is discussed by scholars, activists and citizens around the world, including U.S. media critic Noam Chomsky and Chinese filmmaker Ban Zhongyi. After the film,author Joy Kogawa and Hiroshima survivor Setsuko Thurlow will share her insights about war, peace and Article 9. Dr. Peter Kuznick will talk about his work of helping Americans face their past crimes, particularly the use of atomic-bombs against Japan,and the implication of Article 9 for a nuclear-free world, with reference to the recent commitment by President Obama to pursue serious initiatives toward reducing and eventually eliminating all nuclear weapons in the world. Satoko Norimatsu and David McIntosh will moderate the event and also talk about some of the activities and experiences of the pro-Article 9 movement in Vancouver.
The event date, May 15, happens to be the 37th anniversary of Okinawa's reversion to Japan, so we will also discuss the meaning of Article 9 as it relates to Okinawa. Okinawa was one of the deadliest battlefields in the Pacific War and, after the war, became home to 75%of the U.S. military facilities in Japan. Yusuke Tanaka will dedicate songs for peace and tell a story, "May 15, 1972," to commemorate this milestone. We look forward to seeing you at the event.
Please feel free to forward this announcement to your network of friends and colleagues. It is our sincere hope that this event will contribute one small stride to our common walk toward peace.
Toronto Article 9 Event Committee
contact: event@peacephilosophy.com
Profiles of Speakers/Moderators/Performers
Joy Kogawa
Joy Kogawa, born in Vancouver B.C., in 1935, is a writer living in Toronto. She is best known for her novel "Obasan." Her most recent book is a children's story, "Naomi's Tree." Her present work-in-progress is entitled, "Gently to Nagasaki." She is a Member of the Order of Canada and the Order of British Columbia and has been awarded seven honorary doctorates and numerous prizes for her writing.
Peter Kuznick
The author of Beyond the Laboratory: Scientists as Political Activists in 1930s America and coeditor of Rethinking Cold War Culture, Peter Kuznick is currently writing a book exploring how the belief that nuclear war could end all life on the planet has shaped the behavior and views of military strategists, policymakers, writers and filmmakers, and the public. He is also writing a 10-part documentary film series with Oliver Stone. As director of American University’s award winning Nuclear Studies Institute, he takes students on an annual study abroad trip to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He spearheaded the Committee for a National Discussion of Nuclear History and Current Policy in response to the Smithsonian’s latest Enola Gay exhibit and co-founded the Nuclear Education Project. He writes often and lectures frequently about nuclear issues in general and the atomic bombings in particular. He regularly provides commentary to the media on a broad range of subjects and was selected Organization of American Historians Distinguished Lecturer 2004-2007 and 2007-2010.
Setsuko Thurlow
Born in Hiroshima, Setsuko graduated from Hiroshima Jogakuin in 1954. She received further education in Social Work in Virginia, USA and at the University of Toronto. She married a Canadian and became a permanent resident of Toronto in 1962. She worked until retirement as a social worker in educational, clinical and women's organizations. She was the founder of Japanese Family Services (now Japanese Social Services) and did extensive community organization work in East Asian communities in Toronto. In 1974 she established a group called Hiroshima-Nagasaki Relived dedicated to public education regarding the threat of nuclear war, and this led to an extensive anti-nuclear weapon campaign world-wide. She was the recipient of membership in the Order of Canada in 2007.
Yusuke Tanaka
Born in Sapporo, Japan in 1951, Yusuke Tanaka moved to Tokyo and studied sociology at Waseda University. He immigrated to Canada in 1986 and he has been the Japanese editor of Toronto-based Nikkei Voice newspaper since 1989. He has been leading Katari Japanese Storytellers since 1994, writing and telling his own stories and folklore both in English and Japanese.
Satoko Norimatsu
Satoko Norimatsu is Director of Peace Philosophy Centre, a Vancouver-based organization that promotes education for peace and sustainability. She is also a founding member of Vancouver Save Article 9, and an instructor at UBC Centre for Intercultural Communication. Satoko speaks at conferences and organizes peace events, including “Peace Philosophy Salon,” in which she brings young people together to learn from history and create a peaceful future. Satoko can be contacted at info@peacephilosophy.com , and more information about her activities can be found at http://www.peacephilosophy.com/.
David McIntosh
David McIntosh was born 1960 in Toronto and raised in Osaka, Japan as son of missionaries among Koreans in Japan. A lazy student at school, David learned much of his history through stories of Koreans who were displace from their homeland, forced to labour for their imperial conquerors, then discriminated in many ways after their “emancipation” in 1945. David has been active in a variety of community groups advocating for historical honesty, justice and peace. He is a founding member of Vancouver Save Article 9 and Vancouver 9/11 Truth Society and currently works as a professional interpreter and translator.
An Article 9 Event in Toronto
Pulling the Plug on CBAT
xiao77 发表于 2009-07-01 22:39:25
In the Global War on Terror, one fact has become abundantly clear for the U.S. Air Force: The days when airmen remained hunkered down inside an airbase perimeter are over.
Journalists embedded with combat forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have been surprised to see a growing number of airmen "outside the wire," performing such functions as security, convoy operations, explosive ordnance disposal (EOD), repair of civilian infrastructure and more.
True, the number of airmen operating in the field remains relatively small (at least compared to the Army and Marine Corps), but their ranks are growing. And they've won praise from their counterparts in other services. Air Force officers and NCOs leading convoys in Iraq compiled an enviable record, and platoon leaders in the 82nd Airborne told their superiors during the recent troops surge that they actually preferred USAF EOD techs for clearing operations.
Recognizing that more its members would find themselves in ground combat operations, the USAF developed elaborate plans to train airmen in required skills. Know as Common Battlefield Airmen Training, or CBAT, the program called for a month-long course at a specially-designed training facility. Bases under consideration to host CBAT included Barksdale AFB, Louisiana; Moody AFB, Georgia and Arnold AFB, Tennessee.
By one estimate, the CBAT effort would train up to 14,000 airmen a year, during a series of 25-day classes. The program would be supported by a 800-member staff and millions of dollars in new facilities. As you might imagine, Congressional delegations (and local officials) were competing eagerly to bring CBAT to their local Air Force installation.
But a funny thing happened on the way to implementation. The Air Force announced today that the planned training program--once deemed a priority--has been scrapped. As the Shelbyville (TN) Times-Gazette reports:
The U.S. Air Force has cancelled plans for the Common Battlefield Airmen Training (CBAT) program, which Arnold Air Force Base had been under consideration to host.
[snip]
Arnold AFB is the home of Arnold Engineering Development Center, a collection of facilities including wind tunnels and rocket engine and satellite test cells. But the Arnold AFB reservation has a large amount of unused land and had been one of three Air Force bases -- along with Moody AFB near Valdosta, Ga., and Barksdale AFB in Bossier City, La. -- competing to host the CBAT program. Environmental studies had been conducted for each of the three locations, but the selection process had been delayed for months.
In a press release, the USAF claimed the program was no longer necessary:
"After a thorough review, we have determined that creating a new program to teach combat skills is not the best solution for our Airmen or the Combatant Commanders we support. The best way forward is to optimize our existing training venues.
"Foundational and specialized training for our Airmen is in place and meets the needs of the warfighter. We are focused on delivering the right training at the right time...."
Needless to say, the Air Force decision has left a lot of people scratching their heads. After spending months--and hundreds of thousands of dollars--developing CBAT, the service has decided to use "existing training venues" to prepare its airmen for combat.
The decision makes sense--but only to a point. Specialized instruction for airmen who are most likely to operate outside a base perimeter--think pararescue specialists, combat controllers, security forces, EOD, tactical air control parties and transporters--has already been incorporated into existing tech schools and other training forums.
Additionally, the Air Force has expanded basic training from six to eight and one-half weeks, adding more blocks of instruction on marksmanship, emergency medical skills and convoy operations.
But, as anyone who's been through Lackland will tell you, the level of instruction at basic training is, well....basic. A few more hours on the rifle range or learning to apply tourniquets is no substitute for the kind of intense training that CBAT would have provided.
Beyond that, there's the issue of standardization. With the current hodge-podge of courses, it's hard to see how every airman will be trained to the same level of proficiency. Besides, we thought the Air Force learned long ago that one of the best ways to ensure standardization is to create a schoolhouse, staffed by experts, and providing the same level of training to all who need it.
That's one reason the USAF created its survival school at Fairchild AFB, Washington. Earlier, piecemeal attempts at teaching skills in survival, evasion, resistance and escape (SERE) were unsuccessful, so the service centralized its training and created a cadre of professional experts.
Thanks to the Fairchild program (and similar efforts run by the other branches of service), military aircrew members--and other personnel--receive standardized SERE training before they enter combat, and many receive more advanced instruction at the Washington base and other locations.
CBAT offered a similar opportunity for the legions of airmen who will operate outside base perimeters in current and future conflicts. But, in an era of tight Pentagon budgets--and costly efforts to recapitalize the Air Force fleet--we're guessing that the service saw an opportunity to save a few million by scrapping the ground combat training program.
Was it a wise decision? The obvious answer is "no." While the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have provided valuable training for many airmen, there is a real need to capture the lessons learned and institutionalize them for future generations of Air Force personnel. CBAT offered an ideal venue for doing just that.
Without a centralized CBAT program, there are also legitimate concerns about whether those lessons learned will reach all personnel. In places like Iraq, a wide range of airmen--including medics, engineers and even public affairs personnel--could find themselves in a ground engagement. Will two more weeks at Lackland (and follow-on training) at home station be enough to given them the survival skills they need? Only time will tell, but in our estimation, the Air Force is taking a calculated--and unnecessary--risk.
Labels: TN, USAF; CBAT program; Arnold AFB
posted by Spook86 at
1:19 PM
Comments:
The problem is management and it is going to take a long time to fix.
Comments:
They will just use more CBTs, computer based training. I hope they put a stop to all the CBTs too.
Comments:
Might be a good point, or might not. In reality (that's an assumption of correctness, which should cause immediate awareness by the reader), most AF folks will fill technical roles not only within "the wire" but within the CONUS. Those who deploy, admittedly an increasingly larger proportion, will still largely be removed from the field operations.
That means it is reasonable to not train universally throughout the service. Note that the conclusion was that training should be emphasized in existing venues.
I'm admittedly a bit out of date, but there are a number of AF specialties that operate beyond the wire. Even fast-mover operators like moi, found himself on one tour of duty as an Air Liaison Officer embedded in an Army Brigade and moving in the zone to forward operating locations of artillery observers, FACs and battalion/company areas. I got additional training in a specialized venue for that. Anything I would have gotten in my primary officer training or even operational course would have been inadequate and long forgotten.
AF has long had PJ's, SAR personnel, combat controllers, forward construction engineers, air traffic elements, radar sites, and special operators working outside the wire. All were trained in those dedicated specialized venues.
Comments:
It's not just the specialized elite AFSCs that are going outside of the wire. I agree that those AFSCs should receive standardized training. Keep in mind that there are many instances of other base support career fields being pulled to augment convoys on an as needed basis and this is not necessarily a foreseeable occurrence prior to deployment.
I've been out of the loop on the actual training BAT training for a couple of years, but when the training was established at some bases (Beale for example) as almost a grassroots experiment it was required training for all hot AEF deployers and the practical experience that was gained was quite valuable from what friends have told me. Especially when you hear some of the stories of regular junior enlisted and NCOs who ended up engaging the enemy. The bottom line is that a little training spread over the course of a week is better than none at all. Especially when the instructors have a lot of flexibility in what they are teaching folks.
As a matter of practicality, if the training is at the base that the deployers are stationed out of it's a lot easier, cheaper, and more convenient to put on, and the overall quality of the training is probably not terribly diminished. Plus, you can put more people through the training.
All in all, maybe not such a bad thing to move away from standardized training. I wouldn't count this development as another nail in the coffin for the AF.
Comments:
I was sent to the Air Mobility Warfare Center at Ft. Dix New Jersey back in 2000 and went through a week of training.. followed by a "deployment" of three days to practice all we learned to defend a forward base. Convoy operations, sweep and clearing of buildings, map reading, training on a FATS simulator and then practice combat shooting afterwards wtih MILES gear etc.
When I got to a Air Combat Command unit soon afterwards.. No one cared.. they never acknowledged the training.. claimed that the ACC could not afford to send troops to a school for skills they would never use.
Comments:
Not sure a "one size fits all" training course would be much use. 90% of AF deployers will work on base in their primary AFSC and the existing 1-week course taught at base level is OK for them.
The people who are really in harm's way - Cops, for example - get specialized training like Phoenix Warrior.
CBAT sounds like it was a bit of a boondoggle, to be frank, especially since the AF hlready has a perfectly good venue and cadre at the AF Expeditionary Center (formerly known as AMWC).
Comments:
PHOENIX READINESS is what I was refering to Maguro.
When I went through it.. security forces, civil engineers, services, admin, communications, mulitmedia, chaplains, aerial port, combat controllers and we had USMC dog handler teams and Coast Guard Port Security platoon all mixed into our deployed "wing".
But apparently its up to the commands to pay for the personnel to go through the PHONIEX WARRIOR course..hence the reason not everyone gets to go to though the program
Comments:
I absolutely agree with you! Cancelling CBAT is a horrible idea. Our Airmen, who are being called on in increasing numbers to assist with combat-related duties, need the training. It's a shame that the "powers-that-be" don't understand.
Comments:
I think this is just another example of the Air Force's identity crisis. Can anyone explain what CBAT or hand-to-hand combat training or this silly ABU has to do with AIR POWER or AIR/SPACE SUPERIORITY?
We've been fed dozens of chapters from SOS, ACSC, AFFOR, AF Doctrine Documents, and AFTTP's that talk about "leveraging power of informational technologies" and advancing the "development of our core competencies..." How does convoy operations or combat firearms qualification wearing full NBC-gear contribute to the tenets of air and space power?
I'm not arguing that we do not have personnel "outside the wire" in harms way and by all means they should be given whatever training necessary to fight & survive (as we have historically done with our pilots). But that group should be the exception - not the rule. Lets be honest, the vast majority of AF personnel do not need this kind of field combat training.
We need to re-focus on the roles, missions, and functions of our service - not take on taskings for which we are so ill-suited and ill-prepared (read: in-lieu-of-Army). It may be that the land forces do not have enough manpower or that they've sacrificed too much of their support functions in favor of combat forces. But the answer IS NOT to abandon the AF distinctive capabilities to become a manpower pool for the Army.
Ecommerce Webmaster for First Page Web Solution
xiao77 发表于 2009-07-01 22:29:49
First Page Web Solution
Cebu City, Cebu
Details
COMMUNICATION4 is a UK-based company that operates several ecommerce websites. We are now recruiting for our Cebu Branch.Title : Ecommerce Webmaster
Job summary
- Full technical management of 3 ecommerce web businesses
Qualifications
- Exceptional coding experience and skills ONLY
- Reasonable layout skills
- Excellent organisational/planning skills
- Language skills inc HTML, PHP, MySQL etc (would need to rate at least 9/10 for each)
Benefits
- Standard Company benefits (including health insurance)
- Regular team outings
- Free Daily Meal
Pay
- 20k – 40k Depending on experience and skillEcommerce Webmaster for First Page Web Solution