Potterton Performa 28 Manual

2.0

Go ahead typical "everyone can do what they want" and other phrases manual.

The other day I was eating at a VIP's, was with a friend who a few months earlier did not see. At a time of food, he had to take a call from work, so I was only 3 or 4 minutes. I began to observe people, I always do, but eagerly gossip or anything, just to see how they act. It was then I discovered, it had before ......... was before the stupefied 2.0.

dumbed 2.0: The former refers to those individuals or @ that it has acquired in recent years an appendix in your body, usually in his right hand. This appendix usually has a Blackberry, IPhone or similar technologies. Recognize a good dumbed 2.0 because it is unable to release the electronic gadgets, even on weekends. Sometimes lower its guard, if you are eating temporarily left undisturbed on the table to cut meat, but quickly return to it. You will also notice a good dumbed 2.0 when telling something and stop or even worse, while you hear is typing so hard that think you are signing the contract of his life. The same as if you stroll through the countryside, will be more pending seeking coverage to enjoy the landscape.

Yes, readers unconsciously follow me, this is a dumbed 2.0. Which is replacing a good book on the Metro by the new mobile chat, which is unable to enjoy a good conversation without being on the inside thinking you have to write to the Facebook or answer a vital message that as long put a "cane in La Latina" or "I go to sleep, good night." (It excludes from the definition to those who use mobile phones to work, that's out of obligation)

Anyone who knows me knows I am a strong advocate of new technologies. I will not be the fool who criticize them when they live, my job is to move on FB and Twitter profiles. What I criticize is the misuse that is given. Like everything when it becomes something new and massive ends undermined by misuse. Of course everyone can use it whenever you want, anytime you want ... but when be Hyperconnected becomes a need, 24 hours, when that connectivity has been a decline in the quality of social and personal relationships when reading chat less for more, something goes wrong.

communication has become commoditized to the extent that two hours to go to the movies and do not look at Facebook or Twitter is becoming a risky business. How many 2.0 stupefied look at the phone while watching a movie? 2.0 How many idiots will interrupt a conversation or not as they should continue to update social networks?

see
Perhaps in this way because I work on it and when I leave home I will not stand the sight of the Internet, but the feeling I get is that it has created a dependency and very unhealthy to Network Social and Technologies. And when I happily with my Nokia for a lifetime without a camera or touch screen, and look at the comments of the people I'm from the era of Maricastaña. A rare 1.0 to be extinguished soon. This strangeness bring some 4 or 5 years ago is the best proof that we've gotten into a spiral "dangerous" silly and unnecessary dependency.

bad example for new generations who someone is even stopping to educate them in use.

Noma Thermostat Wiring

Germany 2011

On February 24 I made a trip with 4 friends from 2 days to the Germanic lands visiting a total of 2 cities and a village by the sea of \u200b\u200bnice.

Here is a summary of events:

A picture is worth 1000 words ..

(actually this post is more an index of what I'll write something else, when you published the story below will place the links here ...)

-Day 1: Köln: Stairs, chocolate, beer and Nazis.

-Day 2: Düsseldorf: Eurovision Taverners, ducks and expensive shops.

Play Free Pokemon Soul Silver

idiots Libya is not Iraq

These days it is producing an intense debate in the media, or even in the salons of Facebook, Twitter and other social networks. In the same is being criticized by President Rodríguez Zapatero for being a demagogue and Libya support the war when he did years ago with Iraq. The most simplistic positions say that "war is war, no matter how it is ... visions as linear can not be reached to discuss the issue with some logic. The Socialist government has acted consistently with the support of the UN resolution ... not with a couple of trigger-happy leaders.

And is that Libya is not Iraq. The only thing that unites them is that both countries had a dictator that is rampant with the approval of Western powers. Elsewhere, the situation resembles a dog like a frog, yes, these animals are both, but different.

At this point in the party, and no doubt that the Iraq war were lies, hidden agendas and unilateral decisions equally. The famous weapons of mass destruction were only a hypothesis with which to justify an attack that in no case was legitimized by the UN. The reader knows that I follow that I have an allergy to the UN for its cowardice and incompetence to make big decisions when it is required, but the rules of the game are what they are, and an attack by two countries, as were U.S. and the UK (plus the support of others such as Spain, Portugal, Denmark, Australia ...) was not authorized by the person must give his approval, the United Nations.

For months, sold the idea that Hussein could brush half the world hitting a button. With this premise was attacked, and especially without a backup plan after the victory ... so we have 9 years of bombings and civil war between Iraqi ethnic groups. Countries such as France, Germany and the entire Arab League rejected the intervention, but Bush and Blair turned a deaf ear.

Libya is different. The popular revolts have degenerated into a civil war. Should be cautious about labeling of "good and bad" so lightly, because the Libyan rebels probably also have to cut your fabric. But the imbalance with which Gadhafi has tried to stop the riots invites immediate action (which is late) by NATO. Gaddafi himself has been on many times has he warned that "crush" anyone who is or has been said against him (including Ministers of Government). Here there is no doubt, for weeks has been attacked with live ammunition to civilians, hiring hundreds of mercenaries coming from Africa ... and will continue if not for the feet.

The "peace at any cost" move very well in the field to complain and do not provide a solution. They complain about the war but do not say how to prevent ordinary citizens die by the firing of those who receive money from the Libyan government for it. When the conflict ends should be self-critical, and correct the mistakes that lead to the Rulers to laugh thank tiparracos as Gadhafi, who for years has traveled with impunity by Europe and America with their Tents, their virgin girls and their stupid extravagance.

The Socialist Government this time has fallen short, providing resources to the UN, and participating to the extent its capacities permit it. There is a final decision, no real reason to enter Libya. And this does not alter its stance against Iraq. Therefore, today, will support the English Parliament, with votes as diverse (and dispersed) and the PP, ICV, ERC and the PNV.

(Another topic to be treated differently why the UN would forget countries like Costa d'Ivoire, Congo, Kenya, Somalia ... which are not respecting the basic rights of the people)

Male Stripper Free Vids

Hitler and the current policy

Whenever a country wins a war against another is exploited so inexhaustible. Past wars bear population in short periods of time. Americans do not know a war on home soil. Their wars are always thousands of miles. Terrorism has barely been felt in the soil. The collapse of the Twin Towers is an exception. The average American citizen thinks, of course, that their struggle is just. Allied soldiers as they conquered ground in Europe in 1944 and 1945 were more and more confident of their just cause. An example is in the words of a British soldier in 1945 when he intervened in the liberation of a concentration camp: "That's why we've been fighting." According to the author Norman Davies is convinced the soldier who fought for a just cause. If the American citizen soldier and doubted his struggle, eventually convinced. Continuing with the analysis of Davies' when they realized the extraordinary inhumanity of the enemy and in Nuremberg know the details, they forgot their objections, the evil was defeated. "Well," had triumphed. Freedom, justice and democracy had prevailed. "

"When a politician fears the rise of rivals like Colonel Nasser or Saddam Hussein, soon called a" new Hitler "or to equate it with" fascist ". If has, or its allies have, to cope with an attack, large or small missiles, compared with the V1 and V2 of the Nazis and justify a disproportionate reprisals referring to the Strategic Bombing Offensive. In fact your country has nuclear weapons sees no threat, but denounces the threat that others have "illegal weapons." Because he has convinced him, that belongs to the alleged international community is as united nations of the past and fight for good with a pure heart, a just cause and a big stick. "

Whenever I see

international politics today, remember these words of Norman Davies. Today we have another war, this time in Libya. In recent weeks the comparisons between Hitler and Colonel Gaddafi are abundant. It is common to hear "Gaddafi end up like Hitler." The comparison is not free: Hitler is an example of evil and that evil always challenge the well the message is to be completed as Hitler and his Third Reich. Hence the term Hitler always in the minds of Western citizens. But comparisons are a scam, neither Saddam Hussein or Bin Laden or Colonel Gaddafi has nothing to do with Hitler. Even the political situations are the same. Hitler died with virtually no internal opposition. Gaddafi is a country in civil war something that never happened in Germany. Moreover, both allied and Gaddafi use at will the comparisons with Hitler. The colonel just said that the allies "end up like Hitler and Mussolini." As we see, Hitler is still a comparison of free will.

Following the axis of evil, I would like to discuss an interview that the journalist Ana Pastor made this week by Iranian President Ahmadinejad. You can see it here. The journalist has been heralded as a hero for having confronted the president. But I find a botched interview. The journalist has done an interview "Politically correct" and full of demagoguery. I have spent some embarrassment at the sight. Ana Pastor shows little respect, interrupts constantly, and miss the unique opportunity to get information. In my view, the interview is a waste of time since the president took no virtually any operator who does not know. For me it is an example of how not to do journalism. But the champions of political correctness and the journalist have risen to the level of heroin and good reporter. Moreover, the daring journalist shows signs of ignoring the situation in his country when he says that his country no one is imprisoned for publishing books. I immediately came to mind the status of Pedro Varela, who was imprisoned for publishing books. Pedro Varela's incarceration seems to me a very serious incident which is also virtually silenced by the media.