Mediaboss Marketing

May 9, 2013

THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 8, 2013

On behalf of the President and the people of the United States, we congratulate Prime Minister Najib on his coalitions victory in Malaysias parliamentary elections on Sunday May 5. We also congratulate the people of Malaysia, who turned out in record numbers to cast their votes, as well as the parties of the opposition coalition on their campaigns, as a vibrant opposition is a foundation of democracy.

We note concerns regarding reported irregularities in the conduct of the election, and believe it is important that Malaysian authorities address concerns that have been raised. We look forward to the outcome of their investigations. The United States looks forward to continuing its close cooperation with the government and the people of Malaysia to continue to strengthen democracy, peace, and prosperity in the region.

Mr Press Secretary The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington DC

Whos going to address the irregularities?

Watch this Youtube about what happened on May 8 at Kelana Jaya Stadium, Selangor, Malaysia. Malaysians have shown to the United States and the rest of the world that they are unhappy with the outcome of the Malaysian elections no.13. Your statement is, therefore, disappointing to say the least.Din Merican

Like Loading...

. Bookmark the

.

Follow this link:
Comment on The White House on GE-13 by C.L. Familiaris

If it were possible to tally up all the moments of my life so far, the top activities would probably be watching "Simpsons" reruns, talking to computers over the telephone, and asking fellow diners, "Are you gonna eat that?"

The activity of "swapping the places of the letter E and the letter R" wouldn't make the top three, yet it would nonetheless rank surprisingly high.

"In theatres now!"

"An exciting night of live theatre."

"The festival will take place in the city centre."

Back when a lot of my work was editing entertainment- and retail-related press releases, I spent an impressive chunk of my week moving the Rs and Es in theatre and centre. When, on occasion, I got to talk to the people behind the spelling choices, I got a glimpse into their reasoning.

Many people think theatre is the correct spelling. Others think the theatre is different from a theater. These folks will tell you that theatre refers to the art of or a venue for live stage performance, but theaters are places where movies are shown.

Still others believe that theatre and centre are simply to be rolled out any time you want to sound fancy.

These reasons fell on deaf ears. I changed the theatres to theaters and the centres to centers anyway but not because they were wrong, per se.

Both theatre and centre are standard spellings in British English. But they also appear in American dictionaries. Webster's New World College Dictionary gives theatre its own entry, where it defines it as a "variant" of theater. As for centre, Webster's notes that it's "chiefly British."

Read the rest here:
A Word, Please: Going to the theatre, or the theater?

How To Add Widgets To Your Word Press Blog
How to add widget to your word press blog http://trudygray.com/ez http://trudygraymarketing.com/ ==== PLEASE SUBSCRIBE ===== CLICK on the link below to find ...

By: Trudy Gray

Read the original:
How To Add Widgets To Your Word Press Blog - Video

WASHINGTON The FBI did not initially share with Boston police the warnings from Russias security service in 2011 about one suspect in last months marathon bombings, despite the work of four city police representatives on a federal terrorism task force, Bostons police commissioner told Congress on Thursday.

Yet Commissioner Ed Davis acknowledged that police might not have uncovered or disrupted the plot even if they had fully investigated the family of Tamerlan Tsarnaev based on those warnings. The FBI after a cursory investigation closed its assessment on Tsarnaev, who died in a police shootout after the bombings. Boston police learned about the Russian warnings only later.

Thats very hard to say. We would certainly look at the information, we would certainly talk to the individual, Davis said. From the information Ive received, the FBI did that, and they closed the case out. I cant say that I would have come to a different conclusion based upon the information that was known at that particular time.

The congressional hearing was the first in a series to review the governments initial response to the attacks, ask what information authorities received about Tsarnaev and his brother before the bombings and consider whether it was handled correctly.

READ MORE:Body of Boston Marathon bombing suspect is buried outside of city

Some lawmakers questioned whether Boston police could have more thoroughly investigated Tsarnaev after 2011, based on Russias vague warnings to the FBI and CIA or the discovery by the Homeland Security Department in 2012 that he was travelling to Russia for six months, and whether Justice Department rules intended to protect civil liberties constrained the FBIs own inquiry.

Why didnt they involve the local law enforcers who could have stayed on the case and picked up signals from some of the students who interacted with them, from the people in the mosque, asked former Sen. Joe Lieberman, who also testified. In this case, aggravatingly, you have two of our great homeland security agencies that didnt involve before the event the local and state authorities that could have helped us prevent the attack.

Davis testimony revealed a gap in information-sharing between federal and local officials. That was somewhat reminiscent of intelligence failures that preceded the 2001 terror attacks. Unlike those lapses, however, its not clear that anything would have been different, whatever co-ordination there might have been.

Led by the FBI, Joint Terrorism Task Forces operate in many cities as a way to bring federal, state and local officials together to share information. The model has existed for decades but, after Sept. 11, 2001, task forces sprouted up in cities nationwide to ensure that police were not out of the loop on investigations like the one the FBI conducted into Tsarnaev.

READ MORE:What Boston strong means to one Bostonian

See more here:
City ‘received no word’ from the FBI about warning from Russia: Boston chief

For movie details, please click here.

After collapsing in front of a battery of television screens displaying commercials, high-powered advertising agency owner Adan (Greenwood) wakes up in a hospital, communicating only through such familiar catchphrases as You deserve a break today and, in one particularly applicable to his own situation, Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you dont.

When charity worker Karen (Posey) comes across Adan, whose seminar she once attended, she takes pity on his situation and impulsively agrees to take him in for a few days. This doesnt go over well with her teenage daughter Meghan (Allie MacDonald), with whom she has a contentious relationship.

Meanwhile, the newly beatific Adan reluctantly finds himself in a battle for control of his ad agency with its ruthless president Lucas (Callum Blue), who hopes to exploit his bosss mental condition for his own advantage.

The films chief conceit is that Adans sound bites are seamlessly integrated into the dialogue in often amusing ways. Offered cereal for breakfast, he naturally asks Got milk? Confronting Meghans overly sexually aggressive boyfriend, he inquires, Have you spoken to your doctor about erectile dysfunction? And, shades of Chauncey Gardiner, his aphorisms are sometimes taken for deep wisdom, such as when a presidential candidate he meets in a restroom decides that Adans repeated utterances of Can you hear me now? would make the perfect campaign slogan.

Even more predictable are the life-changing effects that Adan has on those who come into contact with him, such as the mother and daughter who find his soothing presence spurring them towards reconciliation.

The ever-reliable Greenwood somehow manages to find the charm in his addled character, while Posey displays her trademark appeal as the beleaguered caretaker. But their strong efforts can only go so far in preventing And Now a Word from Our Sponsor from lapsing into hopeless silliness. The Hollywood Reporter

Follow this link:
Film Review: And Now a Word from Our Sponsor