PM, Abbott to attend Bali bombings service - Sydney Morning Herald [getdailynow.blogspot.com]
Is It A Good Idea To Microwave A Thermometer?Experiment #232: Thermometer No, we're not stupid enough to nuke a Mercury thermometer, but are definitely interested to see what happens if you light up an alcohol based one... So, you're probably wondering, Is It A Good Idea To Microwave This? Tune in to find out. Twice a week, microwave specialist Jory Caron microwaves different objects... so you don't have to! The "Jory Caron Microwave Laboratory 2.8" is a state-of-the-art facility equipped with tinfoil shielding, a ventilation system, emergency surge protectors, safety masks, and many sexy microwaves. Related Videos: Microwave: Match - www.youtube.com Microwave: Newton's Cradle - www.youtube.com Jon's World: Katy Perry Topless? - www.youtube.com +++++++++++++++++++++++ ~~ Links ~~ FAQ Video --------- bit.ly Merchandise ------- bit.ly Flagged Videos --- bit.ly ~~ Connect With Us ~~ ::: Jonathan Paula ::: YouTube ---- bit.ly Facebook --- bit.ly Twitter ------- bit.ly ::: Jory Caron ::: YouTube ---- bit.ly Facebook --- bit.ly Twitter ------- bit.ly ::: Riley McIlwain ::: YouTube ---- bit.ly Twitter ------- bit.ly Facebook --- bit.ly ::: Jogwheel Productions ::: Facebook --- bit.ly Twitter ------- bit.ly ~~ Technical ~~ Created by ----- Jonathan Paula & Jory Caron Starring --------- Jory Caron, Jonathan Paula, & Riley McIlwain Camera --------- Panasonic HMC-150, Panasonic Lumix-GH1, & Canon SX20 Software -------- Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 Computer ------ bit.ly • Jogwheel Productions © 2010 • ~
AAP
Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Opposition Leader Tony Abbott will set aside their political differences as they stand side by side in Bali to commemorate those killed in the 2002 bombings.
After a bruising week in parliament, they will attend a memorial ceremony in Kuta where two bomb blasts killed 202 people including 88 Australians 10 years ago on Friday.
With Ms Gillard and Mr Abbott will be former prime minister John Howard, Indonesian dignitaries, survivors and families of those killed.
Before she left Australia on Thursday, Ms Gillard told parliament that images of those killed and injured were likely to be etched in the minds of Australians forever.
"We will honour those who were lost, embrace those who survived, and comfort those who grieve," Ms Gillard said.
She called on all Australians to find the time to reflect on the bombings, either at a public gathering, or alone on Friday.
"We would give everything to erase the events of that night, from the page of history," she said.
"But we cannot.
"We will carry the images of Bali on October 12, 2002, for the rest of our days."
Mr Abbott said he looked forward to standing alongside Ms Gillard in Bali on Friday "to say to our country's enemies you can hurt us but you can't break us".
The bombings were an attack on Australia because the targets 10 years ago were places frequented by Australians.
"But it was more than that - it was an attack on civilisation."
He said that it was to Australia's credit it didn't lash out in fury at another country or religion.
Instead authorities worked with Indonesia to bring the perpetrators to justice, Mr Abbott said.
"We will always be grateful to Indonesia and its people for doing so.
"Our country was at its best in the aftermath of Bali."
Foreign Minister Bob Carr told the Senate the spirit of the Australian response in the "terrible hours and days after the bombing" should be honoured.
Senator Carr said many doctors and nurses who happened to be in Bali on holidays rushed to help the victims.
"It's that spirit, the refusal to be cowed by evil extremists and our sense of common humanity that we pay tribute to tomorrow," he said.
Senator Carr recalled his dealings with a Maroubra family who lost their 17-year-old son on his first holiday overseas.
He said when his suitcase was returned it contained presents the teen had bought his parents.
Memorial services will be held around Australia including in Canberra; Coogee, in Sydney; on the Gold Coast; in Melbourne; Adelaide and in Perth.
Related PM, Abbott to attend Bali bombings service - Sydney Morning Herald Topics Question by Jules Winnfield Utopian Socialist: Should we amend the Ist Amendment and add the word "separation of church and state" so Republicans can? understand what it means? Apparently they have an issue with the wording. They are defending O'Donnell on the grounds that the 1st Amendment does not say "separation". What part of "make no law respecting an establishment of religion" can't they figure out? Best answer for Should we amend the Ist Amendment and add the word "separation of church and state" so Republicans can?:
Answer by kathleen O
They need a redneck to english dictionary To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut. Gentlemen The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing. Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem. (signed) Thomas Jefferson Jan.1.1802. BTW....author of said Constitution
Answer by The Viper
The 1st amendment only prevents the government from establishing a state run religion, so there for the sepration of church and state is not in their FAIL
Answer by ArizonaRejects0bamaCare
It does not say separation child. Try to amend it see how far you get.
Answer by hiztreebuff
I'd be willing to go as far as France and write into our Constitution that we are a secular state.
Answer by Yep
The clause was put in to protect the Church from the State, genius, i.e., no State sponsored religion. It's guaranteeing freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion, genius.
Answer by robzuc97
Some interprete that part to mean "no establishment of a STATE religion" aka the Church of England to force it's citizens to worship at the church of it's choice, not that the government should completely disregard religion entirely! If "separation" were desireable, why is "God" so prominent in our government buildings, documents, and even our money? The Founders would have left out the part about "our Creator", would they not? But then you also left out the most impor tant part and thepart which the left seems to always want to ignore: the "impeding the free exercise of religion"! This does not say we shall not pray before the "big game" or in class as a free expression of our faiths...
Answer by tribeca_belle
Conservatives apparently want to interpret the Constitution, particularly the First Amendment, solely according to their liking on any given day. They act as if they never heard of the Supreme Court, except as convenient. The Supreme Court has been interpreting the Constitution for over 200 years. This country has a well-established body of constitutional law. If they want to reinterpret everything differently then they have a Herculean task ahead of them. Either they're ignorant or they're pretending to be ignorant. Either way it is disgraceful.
Answer by Sam
Yes we should or the nutters will do their best to make us like Iran.
0 comments:
Post a Comment