|
BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH
Envoyé par Lison2
|
NOT EVEN NIXON TRIED TO CONTROL THE MEDIA LIKE hussein ob ! 14 juin 2010, 11:54 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
Helen Thomas: Not Even Nixon Tried to Control the Media Like Obama
By Penny Starr and Fred Lucas
President Obama is introduced before taking questions during a discussion on health care,
July 1, 2009, at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale , Va. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
(CNSNews.com) - Following a testy exchange during Wednesday’s briefing with
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, veteran White House correspondent
Helen Thomas told CNSNews.com that not even Richard Nixon tried to control
the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.
“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try.
“What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” Thomas said:
“They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”
Thomas said she was especially concerned about the arrangement between the
Obama Administration and a writer from the liberal Huffington Post Web site.
The writer was invited by the White House to President Obama’s press conference
last week on the understanding that he would ask Obama a question about Iran from
among questions that had been sent to him by people in Iran.
“When you call the reporter the night before you know damn well what they are going
to ask to control you,” Thomas said.
“I’m not saying there has never been managed news before, but this is carried
to fare-thee-well--for the town halls, for the press conferences,” she said.
“It’s blatant. They don’t give a damn if you know it or not.
They ought to be hanging their heads in shame.”
During today’s briefing, Thomas interrupted a back-and-forth between Gibbs and Chip Reid,
the White House correspondent for CBS News, when Reid was questioning Gibbs about who
was going to decide what questions would be asked of President Obama in a townhall meeting
that was scheduled to take place in Annandale, Va., today.
Gibbs then had an exchange involving Reid and Thomas that went as follows:
Gibbs: “… But, again, let's--How about we do this? I promise we will interrupt the AP's tradition
of asking the first question.
I will let you [Chip Reid] ask me a question tomorrow as to whether you thought the questions at
the town hall meeting that the President conducted in Annandale—“
Chip Reid: “I'm perfectly happy to—”
Helen Thomas: “That's not his point. The point is the control--”
Reid: “Exactly.”
Thomas: “We have never had that in the White House. And we have had some, but not-- This White House.”
Gibbs: “Yes, I was going to say, I'll let you amend her question.”
Thomas: “I'm amazed. I'm amazed at you people who call for openness and transparency and—”
Gibbs: “Helen, you haven't even heard the questions.”
Reid: “It doesn't matter. It's the process.”
Thomas: “You have left open—”
Reid: “Even if there's a tough question, it's a question coming from somebody who was invited or
was screened, or the question was screened.”
Thomas: “It's shocking. It's really shocking.”
Gibbs: “Chip, let's have this discussion at the conclusion of the town hall meeting. How about that?”
Reid: “Okay.”
Gibbs: “I think—“
Thomas: “No, no, no, we're having it now--”
Gibbs: “Well, I'd be happy to have it now.”
Thomas: “It's a pattern.”
Gibbs: “Which question did you object to at the town hall meeting, Helen?”
Thomas: “It's a pattern. It isn't the question—”
Gibbs: “What's a pattern?”
Thomas: “It's a pattern of controlling the press.”
Gibbs: “How so? Is there any evidence currently going on that I'm controlling the press--poorly, I might add.”
Thomas: “Your formal engagements are pre-packaged.”
Gibbs: “How so?”
Reid: “Well, and controlling the public—”
Thomas: “How so? By calling reporters the night before to tell them they're going to be called on. That is shocking.”
Gibbs: “We had this discussion ad nauseam and—”
Thomas: “Of course you would, because you don't have any answers.”
Gibbs: “Well, because I didn't know you were going to ask a question, Helen.
Go ahead.”
Thomas: “Well, you should have.”
Reporter: Thank you for your support.
Gibbs: “That's good. Have you e-mailed your question today?”
Thomas: “I don't have to e-mail it. I can tell you right now what I want to ask.”
Gibbs: “I don't doubt that at all, Helen. I don't doubt that at all.”
Thomas, 89, has covered the White House during every presidency since John F. Kennedy’s.
By Penny Starr and Fred Lucas
President Obama is introduced before taking questions during a discussion on health care,
July 1, 2009, at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale , Va. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
(CNSNews.com) - Following a testy exchange during Wednesday’s briefing with
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, veteran White House correspondent
Helen Thomas told CNSNews.com that not even Richard Nixon tried to control
the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.
“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try.
“What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” Thomas said:
“They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”
Thomas said she was especially concerned about the arrangement between the
Obama Administration and a writer from the liberal Huffington Post Web site.
The writer was invited by the White House to President Obama’s press conference
last week on the understanding that he would ask Obama a question about Iran from
among questions that had been sent to him by people in Iran.
“When you call the reporter the night before you know damn well what they are going
to ask to control you,” Thomas said.
“I’m not saying there has never been managed news before, but this is carried
to fare-thee-well--for the town halls, for the press conferences,” she said.
“It’s blatant. They don’t give a damn if you know it or not.
They ought to be hanging their heads in shame.”
During today’s briefing, Thomas interrupted a back-and-forth between Gibbs and Chip Reid,
the White House correspondent for CBS News, when Reid was questioning Gibbs about who
was going to decide what questions would be asked of President Obama in a townhall meeting
that was scheduled to take place in Annandale, Va., today.
Gibbs then had an exchange involving Reid and Thomas that went as follows:
Gibbs: “… But, again, let's--How about we do this? I promise we will interrupt the AP's tradition
of asking the first question.
I will let you [Chip Reid] ask me a question tomorrow as to whether you thought the questions at
the town hall meeting that the President conducted in Annandale—“
Chip Reid: “I'm perfectly happy to—”
Helen Thomas: “That's not his point. The point is the control--”
Reid: “Exactly.”
Thomas: “We have never had that in the White House. And we have had some, but not-- This White House.”
Gibbs: “Yes, I was going to say, I'll let you amend her question.”
Thomas: “I'm amazed. I'm amazed at you people who call for openness and transparency and—”
Gibbs: “Helen, you haven't even heard the questions.”
Reid: “It doesn't matter. It's the process.”
Thomas: “You have left open—”
Reid: “Even if there's a tough question, it's a question coming from somebody who was invited or
was screened, or the question was screened.”
Thomas: “It's shocking. It's really shocking.”
Gibbs: “Chip, let's have this discussion at the conclusion of the town hall meeting. How about that?”
Reid: “Okay.”
Gibbs: “I think—“
Thomas: “No, no, no, we're having it now--”
Gibbs: “Well, I'd be happy to have it now.”
Thomas: “It's a pattern.”
Gibbs: “Which question did you object to at the town hall meeting, Helen?”
Thomas: “It's a pattern. It isn't the question—”
Gibbs: “What's a pattern?”
Thomas: “It's a pattern of controlling the press.”
Gibbs: “How so? Is there any evidence currently going on that I'm controlling the press--poorly, I might add.”
Thomas: “Your formal engagements are pre-packaged.”
Gibbs: “How so?”
Reid: “Well, and controlling the public—”
Thomas: “How so? By calling reporters the night before to tell them they're going to be called on. That is shocking.”
Gibbs: “We had this discussion ad nauseam and—”
Thomas: “Of course you would, because you don't have any answers.”
Gibbs: “Well, because I didn't know you were going to ask a question, Helen.
Go ahead.”
Thomas: “Well, you should have.”
Reporter: Thank you for your support.
Gibbs: “That's good. Have you e-mailed your question today?”
Thomas: “I don't have to e-mail it. I can tell you right now what I want to ask.”
Gibbs: “I don't doubt that at all, Helen. I don't doubt that at all.”
Thomas, 89, has covered the White House during every presidency since John F. Kennedy’s.
|
CONGRESSMAN ASSAULTS STUDENT ON WASINGTON SIDEWALK !!! 15 juin 2010, 06:01 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
|
Re: CONGRESSMAN ASSAULTS STUDENT ON WASINGTON SIDEWALK !!! 16 juin 2010, 00:42 |
Membre depuis : 18 ans Messages: 604 |
Oklahoma Lawmakers Seek Voter Backing to Ban Shariah From Courts
June 15, 2010
| FOXNews.com
Oklahoma lawmakers are asking voters to weigh in on a proposal that would ban local courts from considering Shariah or other international law in their rulings.
The unusual measure calling for an amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution was approved in late May by the state Senate, sending the issue to voters in the fall in the form of a ballot question.
Though the question's supporters have not pointed to any specific outbreak of Shariah, or Islamic law, being considered in the U.S. judicial system, they describe it as an encroaching threat. State Rep. Rex Duncan, author of the measure, has called the ballot question a "preemptive strike" against Shariah coming to his state.
Duncan said in a statement after the vote that he hopes other states will soon follow Oklahoma's lead.
"Judges in other states and on the federal bench have increasingly turned to citing international law in their court decisions, something I and others feel is grossly inappropriate in a sovereign state such as our own," he said.
In an interview with The Edmond Sun, Duncan said the courts' willingness in Britain to consider Shariah has become "a cancer upon the survivability of the U.K." He said the ballot question "will constitute a preemptive strike against Shariah Law coming to Oklahoma."
The amendment would require courts to adhere to the laws of the U.S. and state constitutions, as well as federal and state statutes. It would prohibit the courts from considering "the legal precepts of other nations or cultures," including Shariah.
June 15, 2010
| FOXNews.com
Oklahoma lawmakers are asking voters to weigh in on a proposal that would ban local courts from considering Shariah or other international law in their rulings.
The unusual measure calling for an amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution was approved in late May by the state Senate, sending the issue to voters in the fall in the form of a ballot question.
Though the question's supporters have not pointed to any specific outbreak of Shariah, or Islamic law, being considered in the U.S. judicial system, they describe it as an encroaching threat. State Rep. Rex Duncan, author of the measure, has called the ballot question a "preemptive strike" against Shariah coming to his state.
Duncan said in a statement after the vote that he hopes other states will soon follow Oklahoma's lead.
"Judges in other states and on the federal bench have increasingly turned to citing international law in their court decisions, something I and others feel is grossly inappropriate in a sovereign state such as our own," he said.
In an interview with The Edmond Sun, Duncan said the courts' willingness in Britain to consider Shariah has become "a cancer upon the survivability of the U.K." He said the ballot question "will constitute a preemptive strike against Shariah Law coming to Oklahoma."
The amendment would require courts to adhere to the laws of the U.S. and state constitutions, as well as federal and state statutes. It would prohibit the courts from considering "the legal precepts of other nations or cultures," including Shariah.
|
THE DANGER IS NOT hussein obama, ....BUT THOSE WHO INTRUSTED A MAN LIKE HIM WITH THE PRESIDENCY !!!! 16 juin 2010, 10:03 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
RIGHT!
Some people have the vocabulary to sum up things in a way you can understand them.
This quote came from the Czech Republic.
Someone over there has it figured out.
We have a lot of work to do.
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president.
The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America.
Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.
The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool.
It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."
Some people have the vocabulary to sum up things in a way you can understand them.
This quote came from the Czech Republic.
Someone over there has it figured out.
We have a lot of work to do.
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president.
The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America.
Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.
The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool.
It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."
|
Re: THE DANGER IS NOT hussein obama, ....BUT THOSE WHO INTRUSTED A MAN LIKE HIM WITH THE PRESIDENCY !!!! 16 juin 2010, 11:47 |
Membre depuis : 18 ans Messages: 604 |
Extrait d'un article de journal américain
..................Now the Jews have a homeland again. A place that is theirs. And that's the point. It doesn't matter how many times the United States and European powers try to rein in Israel, if it comes down to survival of its nation, its people, they will fight like no lioness has ever fought to save her cubs. They will fight with a ferocity, a determination, and a skill, that will astound us.
And many will die, mostly their attackers, I believe. If there were a macabre historical betting parlor, my money would be on the Israelis to be standing at the end. As we killed the kamikazes and the Wehrmacht soldaten of World War II, so will the Israelis kill their suicidal attackers, until there are not enough to torment them.
The irony goes unnoticed -- while we are hammering away to punish those who brought the horrors of last September here, we restrain the Israelis from the same retaliation. Not the same thing, of course -- We are We, They are They. While we mourn September 11th, we don't notice that Israel has a September 11th sometimes every day.
We may not notice, but it doesn't make any difference. And it doesn't make any difference whether you are pro-Israeli or you think Israel is the bully of the Middle East. If it comes to where a new holocaust looms -- with or without the concurrence of the United States and Europe -- Israel will lash out without pause or restraint at those who would try to annihilate their country.
The Jews will not go quietly again.
..................Now the Jews have a homeland again. A place that is theirs. And that's the point. It doesn't matter how many times the United States and European powers try to rein in Israel, if it comes down to survival of its nation, its people, they will fight like no lioness has ever fought to save her cubs. They will fight with a ferocity, a determination, and a skill, that will astound us.
And many will die, mostly their attackers, I believe. If there were a macabre historical betting parlor, my money would be on the Israelis to be standing at the end. As we killed the kamikazes and the Wehrmacht soldaten of World War II, so will the Israelis kill their suicidal attackers, until there are not enough to torment them.
The irony goes unnoticed -- while we are hammering away to punish those who brought the horrors of last September here, we restrain the Israelis from the same retaliation. Not the same thing, of course -- We are We, They are They. While we mourn September 11th, we don't notice that Israel has a September 11th sometimes every day.
We may not notice, but it doesn't make any difference. And it doesn't make any difference whether you are pro-Israeli or you think Israel is the bully of the Middle East. If it comes to where a new holocaust looms -- with or without the concurrence of the United States and Europe -- Israel will lash out without pause or restraint at those who would try to annihilate their country.
The Jews will not go quietly again.
|
NO MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO !!! 17 juin 2010, 11:45 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
|
Re: NO MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO !!! 18 juin 2010, 08:51 |
Membre depuis : 18 ans Messages: 604 |
An Honest Reporting subscriber, Stephen Franklin, complained to the BBC about its BBC2 programme "Generation Jihad" aired in February 2010. His appeal was rejected, but he complained again to the BBC Editorial Complaints Unit. Here is the reply he got from Fraser Steel, Head of Editorial Complaints:
"even in the absence of an "official" Israeli Government position on the shooting of Al-Durrah, the fact remains that many people believe that the bullets which killed him could not have come from Israeli positions. The Director of the Israeli Government Press Office believes that "there was no basis for the accusations levelled against Israel". He is quite clearly not alone in this view, as evidenced by the recent trial of Philippe Karsenty (to which your complaint refers), who had expressed the view that footage of the incident had been faked. An internet search shows a significant number of people similarly believe that the IDF could not have killed Al-Durrah (and some who believe he was not killed at all).
In the light of these points, I think that, in stating as fact that Muhammed Al-Durrah was killed by the Israeli Army, the programme went beyond what could be said with certainty. ...
I hope you will accept my apologies, on behalf of the BBC, for the breach of standards in relation to accuracy which we have identified."
"even in the absence of an "official" Israeli Government position on the shooting of Al-Durrah, the fact remains that many people believe that the bullets which killed him could not have come from Israeli positions. The Director of the Israeli Government Press Office believes that "there was no basis for the accusations levelled against Israel". He is quite clearly not alone in this view, as evidenced by the recent trial of Philippe Karsenty (to which your complaint refers), who had expressed the view that footage of the incident had been faked. An internet search shows a significant number of people similarly believe that the IDF could not have killed Al-Durrah (and some who believe he was not killed at all).
In the light of these points, I think that, in stating as fact that Muhammed Al-Durrah was killed by the Israeli Army, the programme went beyond what could be said with certainty. ...
I hope you will accept my apologies, on behalf of the BBC, for the breach of standards in relation to accuracy which we have identified."
|
THE THREE TERRORS ! 19 juin 2010, 23:26 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
|
Re: BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH 22 juin 2010, 06:54 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
Very interesting -- the University is standing by their professor and not bowing down to special interest groups!
[www.snopes.com]
Professor Wichman E-mail
Claim: A Michigan professor sent an e-mail telling Muslim students to leave the country.
Status: True.
The story begins at Michigan State University with a mechanical engineering professor named Indred Wichman.
Wichman sent an e-mail to the Muslim Student's Association.
The e-mail was in response to the students' protest of the Danish cartoons that portrayed the Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist.
The group had complained the cartoons were 'hate speech.'
============
Enter Professor Wichman.
==========================================
In his e-mail, he said the following:
===============================
Dear Muslim Association,
As a professor of Mechanical Engineering here at MSU I intend to protest your protest.
I am offended not by cartoons, but by more mundane things like beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings,
suicide murders, murders of Catholic priests (the latest in Turkey), burnings of Christian churches, the continued persecution
of Coptic Christians in Egypt, the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women
(called 'whores' in your culture), the murder of film directors in Holland, and the rioting and looting in Paris France.
This is what offends me, a soft-spoken person and academic, and many, many of my colleagues. I counsel you dissatisfied,
aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave-trading Muslims to be very aware of this as you proceed with your infantile 'protests.'
If you do not like the values of the West - see the First Amendment - you are free to leave. I hope for God's sake that most of
you choose that option.
Please return to your ancestral homelands and build them up yourselves instead of troubling Americans.
Cordially,
I. S. Wichman
Professor of Mechanical Engineering
=============================
As you can imagine,
The Muslim group at the university didn't like this too well.
They're demanding that Wichman be reprimanded, that the university impose mandatory diversity training for faculty,
And mandate a seminar on hate and discrimination for all freshmen.
Now, the local chapter of CAIR has jumped into the fray.
CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, apparently doesn't believe that the good professor
Had the right to express his opinion.
==========
For its part, the university is standing its ground in support of Professor Wichman,
Saying the e-mail was private, and they don't intend to publicly condemn his remarks.
============================================================
Send this to your friends, and ask them to do the same.
Tell them to keep passing it around until the whole country gets it.
We are in a war.
This political correctness crap is getting old and killing us.
==================
[www.snopes.com]
Professor Wichman E-mail
Claim: A Michigan professor sent an e-mail telling Muslim students to leave the country.
Status: True.
The story begins at Michigan State University with a mechanical engineering professor named Indred Wichman.
Wichman sent an e-mail to the Muslim Student's Association.
The e-mail was in response to the students' protest of the Danish cartoons that portrayed the Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist.
The group had complained the cartoons were 'hate speech.'
============
Enter Professor Wichman.
==========================================
In his e-mail, he said the following:
===============================
Dear Muslim Association,
As a professor of Mechanical Engineering here at MSU I intend to protest your protest.
I am offended not by cartoons, but by more mundane things like beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings,
suicide murders, murders of Catholic priests (the latest in Turkey), burnings of Christian churches, the continued persecution
of Coptic Christians in Egypt, the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women
(called 'whores' in your culture), the murder of film directors in Holland, and the rioting and looting in Paris France.
This is what offends me, a soft-spoken person and academic, and many, many of my colleagues. I counsel you dissatisfied,
aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave-trading Muslims to be very aware of this as you proceed with your infantile 'protests.'
If you do not like the values of the West - see the First Amendment - you are free to leave. I hope for God's sake that most of
you choose that option.
Please return to your ancestral homelands and build them up yourselves instead of troubling Americans.
Cordially,
I. S. Wichman
Professor of Mechanical Engineering
=============================
As you can imagine,
The Muslim group at the university didn't like this too well.
They're demanding that Wichman be reprimanded, that the university impose mandatory diversity training for faculty,
And mandate a seminar on hate and discrimination for all freshmen.
Now, the local chapter of CAIR has jumped into the fray.
CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, apparently doesn't believe that the good professor
Had the right to express his opinion.
==========
For its part, the university is standing its ground in support of Professor Wichman,
Saying the e-mail was private, and they don't intend to publicly condemn his remarks.
============================================================
Send this to your friends, and ask them to do the same.
Tell them to keep passing it around until the whole country gets it.
We are in a war.
This political correctness crap is getting old and killing us.
==================
|
Re: BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH 22 juin 2010, 14:03 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
Bad day for Obama.
His General has spoken what everyone else was thinking making the president look like a loser and un-American.
There's something powerful about the outspoken truth.
Even if the General get's fired, the truth of his words won't go away soon.
Then he (the president) loses his edict declaring (illegally) that drilling in the gulf must stop for 6 months.
Today, his edict is overturned by a LEGAL lawsuit brought against it by Jindall and others in the gulf.
Then the Mexican government (without legal precedence) declares it wants to sue Arizona over their new law and
the president stands with them.
YET he (the president) stands by his guns against the American people.
Is this still the USA??
Or, have we entered an alternative universe over lorded by a starry eyed, Woodstock, 60's progressive dictator from Chicago?
His General has spoken what everyone else was thinking making the president look like a loser and un-American.
There's something powerful about the outspoken truth.
Even if the General get's fired, the truth of his words won't go away soon.
Then he (the president) loses his edict declaring (illegally) that drilling in the gulf must stop for 6 months.
Today, his edict is overturned by a LEGAL lawsuit brought against it by Jindall and others in the gulf.
Then the Mexican government (without legal precedence) declares it wants to sue Arizona over their new law and
the president stands with them.
YET he (the president) stands by his guns against the American people.
Is this still the USA??
Or, have we entered an alternative universe over lorded by a starry eyed, Woodstock, 60's progressive dictator from Chicago?
|
JON VOIGT to obama: YOU ARE HARMING ISRAEL AND PROMOTING ANTI-SEMITISM! 24 juin 2010, 07:17 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
|
Re: BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH 25 juin 2010, 08:23 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
Please read and share with everyone you know!
By Lou Pritchett, Procter & Gamble
A LETTER FROM A PROCTER AND GAMBLE EXECUTIVE TO
THE PRESIDENT*
THE LAST SENTENCE IS THE MOST CHILLING
Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America 's true living legends- an
acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest
rated speakers
. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize
him as the foremost leader in change management..
Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to
be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to
Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and
Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.
AN OPEN LETTER TO
PRESIDENT OBAMA
Dear President Obama:
You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike
any of the others, you truly scare me.
You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.
You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive
Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no
visible signs of support.
You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth
growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.
You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.
You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus
don't understand it at its core.
You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.
You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned
yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to
publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail..
You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America '
crowd and deliver this message abroad.
You scare me because you want to change America to a European style
country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.
You scare me because you want to replace our health care system
with a government controlled one.
You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly
capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.
You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose
that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of
living in the world.
You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics
against certain banks and corporations.
You scare me because your own political party shrinks from
challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.
You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider
opposing points of view from intelligent people.
You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both
omnipotent and omniscient.
You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything
you do.
You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the
Limbaugh's, Hannitys, O'Reillys and Becks who offer opposing,
conservative points of view.
You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.
Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will
probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.
Lou Pritchett
*
*
This letter was sent to the NY Times but they never acknowledged it.
Big surprise.
Since it hit the internet, however, it has had over
500,000 hits. Keep it going. All that is necessary for evil to succeed
is that good men do nothing It's happening right now.*
[www.snopes.com]
By Lou Pritchett, Procter & Gamble
A LETTER FROM A PROCTER AND GAMBLE EXECUTIVE TO
THE PRESIDENT*
THE LAST SENTENCE IS THE MOST CHILLING
Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America 's true living legends- an
acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest
rated speakers
. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize
him as the foremost leader in change management..
Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to
be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to
Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and
Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.
AN OPEN LETTER TO
PRESIDENT OBAMA
Dear President Obama:
You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike
any of the others, you truly scare me.
You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.
You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive
Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no
visible signs of support.
You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth
growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.
You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.
You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus
don't understand it at its core.
You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.
You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned
yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to
publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail..
You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America '
crowd and deliver this message abroad.
You scare me because you want to change America to a European style
country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.
You scare me because you want to replace our health care system
with a government controlled one.
You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly
capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.
You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose
that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of
living in the world.
You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics
against certain banks and corporations.
You scare me because your own political party shrinks from
challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.
You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider
opposing points of view from intelligent people.
You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both
omnipotent and omniscient.
You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything
you do.
You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the
Limbaugh's, Hannitys, O'Reillys and Becks who offer opposing,
conservative points of view.
You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.
Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will
probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.
Lou Pritchett
*
*
This letter was sent to the NY Times but they never acknowledged it.
Big surprise.
Since it hit the internet, however, it has had over
500,000 hits. Keep it going. All that is necessary for evil to succeed
is that good men do nothing It's happening right now.*
[www.snopes.com]
|
Re: BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH 27 juin 2010, 04:15 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
MoveOn. 'General Betray Us'
By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
Thu, 06/24/2010 - 17:49 ET
In a classic example of liberal hypocrisy, the far-left leaning, George Soros-funded group MoveOn.org has removed its controversial "General Betray Us" ad from its website.
For those that have forgotten, shortly after General David Petraeus issued his report to Congress in September 2007 concerning the condition of the war in Iraq and the success of that March's troop surge, MoveOn placed a full-page ad in the New York Times with the headline, "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?"
This created quite a firestorm with media outlets on both sides of the aisle circling the wagons to either defend or berate both the Times and MoveOn.
Now that President Obama has appointed Petraeus to replace the outgoing Gen. Stanley McChrystal to lead the war effort in Afghanistan, the folks on the far-left that castigated Petraeus when he worked for George W. Bush have to sing a different tune.
With that in mind, the ad, which has been at MoveOn's website for years, was unceremoniously removed on Wednesday as reported by our friends at Weasel Zippers:
Story Continues Below Ad ?
It was there the last time Google cache took a screen shot of it (June 18th), so it was scrubbed sometime between then and today. If you try the link now (http://pol.moveon.org/petraeus.htm) it goes to MoveOn's default page.
I guess MoveOn couldn't possibly bash this General now that he's working for Obama.
To give readers an idea of the firestorm this created at the time, here are some NewsBusters articles published after this ad hit:
CBS and NBC Morning Shows Ignore Dem Embarrassment Over MoveOn Ad
Parroting MoveOn, Matthews Accuses Bush of 'Betrayal'
Keith Olbermann Coined General ‘Betray Us’ Not MoveOn
Senator Hatch Lashes Out at MoveOn and ‘Nutroots’
MRC's Bozell Slams NYT's MoveOn.org 'Betray Us' Ad Discount
NYT Shares Plunge While It Deeply Discounts MoveOn's Ad Space
NYT-MoveOn.org's 'Petraeus -- Betray Us' Ad Cited NYT's Own Reporting Wrongly
NYT Rejected Advocacy Ads Like MoveOn’s From Conservative Groups
How Will Media Report Senate Vote Condemning MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad?
Michael Kinsley Defends MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad
Senate Condemnation of MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad Receives Mixed Coverage
NYT's Public Editor Says Paper Made Mistake Running MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad
Russert Lets Hillary Off Hook Concerning MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad
New York Times Admits Discount Rate for Moveon.Org (Blogosphere Roundup)
NYT Confesses: Mistake to Grant MoveOn.org Deep Discount
With Petraeus now part of the Obama administration, it's going to be fascinating watching all of the media members and outlets that supported MoveOn's ad now backtrack and gush over the General they once despised.
By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
Thu, 06/24/2010 - 17:49 ET
In a classic example of liberal hypocrisy, the far-left leaning, George Soros-funded group MoveOn.org has removed its controversial "General Betray Us" ad from its website.
For those that have forgotten, shortly after General David Petraeus issued his report to Congress in September 2007 concerning the condition of the war in Iraq and the success of that March's troop surge, MoveOn placed a full-page ad in the New York Times with the headline, "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?"
This created quite a firestorm with media outlets on both sides of the aisle circling the wagons to either defend or berate both the Times and MoveOn.
Now that President Obama has appointed Petraeus to replace the outgoing Gen. Stanley McChrystal to lead the war effort in Afghanistan, the folks on the far-left that castigated Petraeus when he worked for George W. Bush have to sing a different tune.
With that in mind, the ad, which has been at MoveOn's website for years, was unceremoniously removed on Wednesday as reported by our friends at Weasel Zippers:
Story Continues Below Ad ?
It was there the last time Google cache took a screen shot of it (June 18th), so it was scrubbed sometime between then and today. If you try the link now (http://pol.moveon.org/petraeus.htm) it goes to MoveOn's default page.
I guess MoveOn couldn't possibly bash this General now that he's working for Obama.
To give readers an idea of the firestorm this created at the time, here are some NewsBusters articles published after this ad hit:
CBS and NBC Morning Shows Ignore Dem Embarrassment Over MoveOn Ad
Parroting MoveOn, Matthews Accuses Bush of 'Betrayal'
Keith Olbermann Coined General ‘Betray Us’ Not MoveOn
Senator Hatch Lashes Out at MoveOn and ‘Nutroots’
MRC's Bozell Slams NYT's MoveOn.org 'Betray Us' Ad Discount
NYT Shares Plunge While It Deeply Discounts MoveOn's Ad Space
NYT-MoveOn.org's 'Petraeus -- Betray Us' Ad Cited NYT's Own Reporting Wrongly
NYT Rejected Advocacy Ads Like MoveOn’s From Conservative Groups
How Will Media Report Senate Vote Condemning MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad?
Michael Kinsley Defends MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad
Senate Condemnation of MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad Receives Mixed Coverage
NYT's Public Editor Says Paper Made Mistake Running MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad
Russert Lets Hillary Off Hook Concerning MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad
New York Times Admits Discount Rate for Moveon.Org (Blogosphere Roundup)
NYT Confesses: Mistake to Grant MoveOn.org Deep Discount
With Petraeus now part of the Obama administration, it's going to be fascinating watching all of the media members and outlets that supported MoveOn's ad now backtrack and gush over the General they once despised.
|
Re: BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH 28 juin 2010, 04:48 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
|
Re: BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH 28 juin 2010, 06:26 |
Membre depuis : 18 ans Messages: 604 |
A touring french tourist in Tel Aviv, suddenly felt a strong urge to pee ..
He kept looking for a public toilet but to his chagrin, there just wasn't any.
Having no choice, the U.S. tourist entered an alley, stood in a corner hidden by a high wall
and began to unzip.
Before starting to urinate, he felt a slight tap on his shoulder.
He turned to see an Israeli police officer standing at his side.
"Excuse me, sir" - says the cop - "you are not allowed to urinate in public".
The tourist apologizes, says he has no choice and cannot help it, cannot find services.
"I'll help you" - said the policeman - "Follow me".
He leads the way to a small gate in a wall, and
shows him the way inside.
The tourist enters, his eyes bulging.
It is an absolutely beautiful and well maintained garden,
filled with lawns, flowers, shrubs and trees.
Here and there are statues and ornamental ponds, deep in the garden is a magnificent building.
The policeman points to a tree and tells tourist: "No problem, you can pee here" ..
The tourist urinates, and relieved asks the policeman:
"Say, is this what you call Israeli hospitality"?
"No" - the policeman answers - "we call it the Turkish embassy" ....
=
He kept looking for a public toilet but to his chagrin, there just wasn't any.
Having no choice, the U.S. tourist entered an alley, stood in a corner hidden by a high wall
and began to unzip.
Before starting to urinate, he felt a slight tap on his shoulder.
He turned to see an Israeli police officer standing at his side.
"Excuse me, sir" - says the cop - "you are not allowed to urinate in public".
The tourist apologizes, says he has no choice and cannot help it, cannot find services.
"I'll help you" - said the policeman - "Follow me".
He leads the way to a small gate in a wall, and
shows him the way inside.
The tourist enters, his eyes bulging.
It is an absolutely beautiful and well maintained garden,
filled with lawns, flowers, shrubs and trees.
Here and there are statues and ornamental ponds, deep in the garden is a magnificent building.
The policeman points to a tree and tells tourist: "No problem, you can pee here" ..
The tourist urinates, and relieved asks the policeman:
"Say, is this what you call Israeli hospitality"?
"No" - the policeman answers - "we call it the Turkish embassy" ....
=
|
HOLOCAUST : 29 juin 2010, 14:47 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
Rabbi Hier's Op/Ed in LA Times:
Holocaust: A Huge Word Made Small
The Holocaust was a horrific atrocity and watershed event in human history.
The meaning of the word is being distorted and demeaned in political rhetoric and casual comparisons.
Marvin Hier
June 29, 2010
Over the last few years, U.S. political discourse has been saturated with opponents accusing each other of Nazi-like policies or behavior.
Most recently, it was California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown who likened the attack ads of Meg Whitman, his Republican opponent in the race for
governor, to the tactics employed by Nazi propaganda chief Josef Goebbels.
Brown later called me to say he regretted citing Goebbels. But most of the comparisons are made without apology.
Last week, Sarah Palin criticized President Obama's handling of the BP crisis in a tweet to followers recommending they read an
article by Thomas Sowell that compared Adolph Hitler's use of a financial crisis to give himself dictatorial powers to Obama's role in
creating the BP escrow fund.
A few months ago, speaking about the controversial Arizona immigration bill (a bill that the Wiesenthal Center criticized),
Lillian Rodriguez Lopez of the Hispanic Federation reportedly compared the measure to tactics used by the Nazis in Germany.
The Holocaust was a watershed event in the history of mankind, in which
6 million Jews — one-third of the world's Jewish population — were exterminated.
But today the word is used in ways that cheapen it.
Last fall, Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida spoke on the House floor about the need for universal healthcare,
saying Americans die every year because they lack insurance. "I apologize to the dead and their families," he said,
"that we haven't voted sooner to end this holocaust in America."
In 2007, former Arkansas governor and Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee used the word in speaking out against abortion.
"For the last 35 years we have aborted more than 1 million people who would have otherwise been in our workforce," he said,
"had we not had the holocaust of liberalized abortions under a flawed Supreme Court ruling in 1973."
And syndicated columnist David Sirota recently applied the term to the BP gulf oil disaster, saying, "Every American who
uses oil — which is to say, every American — is incriminated in this ecological holocaust."
The continued misuse and trivialization of the word prompted Elie Wiesel, Nobel laureate and chronicler of the Holocaust, to
discontinue using it.
"Whatever mishap occurs now, they call it 'holocaust,'" Wiesel said. "I have seen it myself in television in the country in which I live.
A commentator describing the defeat of a sports team, somewhere, called it a 'holocaust.'"
Wiesel is right.
There are many injustices and manifestations of evil in our world, even in our own country, the greatest of democracies.
Standing up to them is not only our right but our obligation. But that obligation does not include distorting and demeaning the word that
has come to stand for the great evil that was the Holocaust.
The Holocaust was a total eclipse of humanity
. It was not about going to the back of the line or eating in a different part of the restaurant or being escorted to the border
without recourse.
The Holocaust had one purpose: the total annihilation and extinction of a race.
The Holocaust was the story of ordinary Germans:`
students, doctors, men and women of culture, who were not demented, who listened to Bach and Beethoven, who loved their families,
who were not diagnosed as psychopaths, but who, nonetheless for six years, rounded up men, women and children and escorted
them to the gas chambers.
As the commandant of Auschwitz, Rudolf Höss, wrote in his confession before he was tried and executed in Poland:
"Up to this point, it was not clear to me, nor to Eichmann, how the killing of the expected masses was to be done — perhaps by gas,
but how and what kind of gas.
I was always horrified of death by firing squads, especially when I thought of the large numbers of women and children who would have
to be killed.
Now I was at ease, we were all saved from these blood baths and the victims would be spared until the last moment...
. I also watched how some women, who suspected or knew what was happening, even with the fear of death all over their faces,
still managed enough strength to play with their children and talk to them lovingly.
Once, a woman with four children, all holding each other by the hand to help the smallest ones, passed by me.
She stepped very close to me and whispered, pointing to her four children,
'How can you murder these beautiful, darling children? Don't you have any heart?'"
That was the Holocaust.
It is not the BP oil disaster,
it is not healthcare,
it is not Arizona law,
it is not the attack ads of Meg Whitman,
it is not abortion,
and it is not even horrific violations of civil rights.
The enormity of the crimes of the Holocaust was such that if you were to try to call out 2,000 of the names every day of the 6 million
who perished, it would take more than eight years to complete the task.
That's what a holocaust is.
Rabbi Marvin Hier is the Founder and Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
Click here to read this on latimes.com.
Holocaust: A Huge Word Made Small
The Holocaust was a horrific atrocity and watershed event in human history.
The meaning of the word is being distorted and demeaned in political rhetoric and casual comparisons.
Marvin Hier
June 29, 2010
Over the last few years, U.S. political discourse has been saturated with opponents accusing each other of Nazi-like policies or behavior.
Most recently, it was California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown who likened the attack ads of Meg Whitman, his Republican opponent in the race for
governor, to the tactics employed by Nazi propaganda chief Josef Goebbels.
Brown later called me to say he regretted citing Goebbels. But most of the comparisons are made without apology.
Last week, Sarah Palin criticized President Obama's handling of the BP crisis in a tweet to followers recommending they read an
article by Thomas Sowell that compared Adolph Hitler's use of a financial crisis to give himself dictatorial powers to Obama's role in
creating the BP escrow fund.
A few months ago, speaking about the controversial Arizona immigration bill (a bill that the Wiesenthal Center criticized),
Lillian Rodriguez Lopez of the Hispanic Federation reportedly compared the measure to tactics used by the Nazis in Germany.
The Holocaust was a watershed event in the history of mankind, in which
6 million Jews — one-third of the world's Jewish population — were exterminated.
But today the word is used in ways that cheapen it.
Last fall, Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida spoke on the House floor about the need for universal healthcare,
saying Americans die every year because they lack insurance. "I apologize to the dead and their families," he said,
"that we haven't voted sooner to end this holocaust in America."
In 2007, former Arkansas governor and Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee used the word in speaking out against abortion.
"For the last 35 years we have aborted more than 1 million people who would have otherwise been in our workforce," he said,
"had we not had the holocaust of liberalized abortions under a flawed Supreme Court ruling in 1973."
And syndicated columnist David Sirota recently applied the term to the BP gulf oil disaster, saying, "Every American who
uses oil — which is to say, every American — is incriminated in this ecological holocaust."
The continued misuse and trivialization of the word prompted Elie Wiesel, Nobel laureate and chronicler of the Holocaust, to
discontinue using it.
"Whatever mishap occurs now, they call it 'holocaust,'" Wiesel said. "I have seen it myself in television in the country in which I live.
A commentator describing the defeat of a sports team, somewhere, called it a 'holocaust.'"
Wiesel is right.
There are many injustices and manifestations of evil in our world, even in our own country, the greatest of democracies.
Standing up to them is not only our right but our obligation. But that obligation does not include distorting and demeaning the word that
has come to stand for the great evil that was the Holocaust.
The Holocaust was a total eclipse of humanity
. It was not about going to the back of the line or eating in a different part of the restaurant or being escorted to the border
without recourse.
The Holocaust had one purpose: the total annihilation and extinction of a race.
The Holocaust was the story of ordinary Germans:`
students, doctors, men and women of culture, who were not demented, who listened to Bach and Beethoven, who loved their families,
who were not diagnosed as psychopaths, but who, nonetheless for six years, rounded up men, women and children and escorted
them to the gas chambers.
As the commandant of Auschwitz, Rudolf Höss, wrote in his confession before he was tried and executed in Poland:
"Up to this point, it was not clear to me, nor to Eichmann, how the killing of the expected masses was to be done — perhaps by gas,
but how and what kind of gas.
I was always horrified of death by firing squads, especially when I thought of the large numbers of women and children who would have
to be killed.
Now I was at ease, we were all saved from these blood baths and the victims would be spared until the last moment...
. I also watched how some women, who suspected or knew what was happening, even with the fear of death all over their faces,
still managed enough strength to play with their children and talk to them lovingly.
Once, a woman with four children, all holding each other by the hand to help the smallest ones, passed by me.
She stepped very close to me and whispered, pointing to her four children,
'How can you murder these beautiful, darling children? Don't you have any heart?'"
That was the Holocaust.
It is not the BP oil disaster,
it is not healthcare,
it is not Arizona law,
it is not the attack ads of Meg Whitman,
it is not abortion,
and it is not even horrific violations of civil rights.
The enormity of the crimes of the Holocaust was such that if you were to try to call out 2,000 of the names every day of the 6 million
who perished, it would take more than eight years to complete the task.
That's what a holocaust is.
Rabbi Marvin Hier is the Founder and Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
Click here to read this on latimes.com.
|
Re: BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH 29 juin 2010, 15:58 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 1 757 |
Israel FM says no chance of Palestinian state by 2012
[www.google.com]
JERUSALEM — Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman told his Russian counterpart on Tuesday that he saw no chance of meeting international aspirations for Palestinian statehood within 18 months.
Meanwhile, the Palestinian president said he had made proposals regarding final borders and security arrangements and received no Israeli response, adding that he was committed to reaching a peace deal "as soon as possible."
Speaking ahead of a July 6 meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama, Lieberman told reporters he did "not see any chance of a Palestinian state arising by 2012."
"The reality is that we are still far from reaching understandings and agreements on the founding of an independent Palestinian state," he said at a press conference with visiting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
The Middle East Quartet (Russia, the United States, the United Nations and the European Union) called during a March meeting in Moscow for a peace agreement within 24 months, leading to a two-state solution
Lavrov later insisted the Quartet still had that timetable in mind, speaking after talks with Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas in the occupied West Bank.
"In Moscow the Quartet affirmed that it would exert every effort to resolve the Palestinian issue within two years, and we still hold that position," he said.
Israel and the Palestinians entered into indirect US-mediated talks in May after Washington struggled for months to relaunch the peace process, which was suspended during the devastating 2008-2009 Gaza war.
Abbas said he had passed on Palestinian demands regarding borders and security to Israel through US Middle East envoy George Mitchell, who has been engaged in months of shuttle diplomacy and returned to the region on Tuesday.
"The Palestinian side is ready to go into direct negotiations as soon as there is any progress on the issues of security and borders," Abbas said.
"We have given our ideas and opinions regarding both questions to the American side," he said, adding that Israel had yet to respond.
"We believe in the peace process and in the necessity of achieving peace as soon as possible ... We will exert every effort to arrive at this solution, because time is not on anyone's side."
At both press conferences Lavrov said he hoped the indirect talks would soon be ungraded to direct negotiations and called on Israel to completely lift its four-year blockade on the Hamas-run Gaza Strip.
Alone among the Quartet members, Russia openly holds political contacts with the Islamist Hamas, which is blacklisted as a terrorist group by Israel, the United States and the European Union.
[www.google.com]
JERUSALEM — Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman told his Russian counterpart on Tuesday that he saw no chance of meeting international aspirations for Palestinian statehood within 18 months.
Meanwhile, the Palestinian president said he had made proposals regarding final borders and security arrangements and received no Israeli response, adding that he was committed to reaching a peace deal "as soon as possible."
Speaking ahead of a July 6 meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama, Lieberman told reporters he did "not see any chance of a Palestinian state arising by 2012."
"The reality is that we are still far from reaching understandings and agreements on the founding of an independent Palestinian state," he said at a press conference with visiting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
The Middle East Quartet (Russia, the United States, the United Nations and the European Union) called during a March meeting in Moscow for a peace agreement within 24 months, leading to a two-state solution
Lavrov later insisted the Quartet still had that timetable in mind, speaking after talks with Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas in the occupied West Bank.
"In Moscow the Quartet affirmed that it would exert every effort to resolve the Palestinian issue within two years, and we still hold that position," he said.
Israel and the Palestinians entered into indirect US-mediated talks in May after Washington struggled for months to relaunch the peace process, which was suspended during the devastating 2008-2009 Gaza war.
Abbas said he had passed on Palestinian demands regarding borders and security to Israel through US Middle East envoy George Mitchell, who has been engaged in months of shuttle diplomacy and returned to the region on Tuesday.
"The Palestinian side is ready to go into direct negotiations as soon as there is any progress on the issues of security and borders," Abbas said.
"We have given our ideas and opinions regarding both questions to the American side," he said, adding that Israel had yet to respond.
"We believe in the peace process and in the necessity of achieving peace as soon as possible ... We will exert every effort to arrive at this solution, because time is not on anyone's side."
At both press conferences Lavrov said he hoped the indirect talks would soon be ungraded to direct negotiations and called on Israel to completely lift its four-year blockade on the Hamas-run Gaza Strip.
Alone among the Quartet members, Russia openly holds political contacts with the Islamist Hamas, which is blacklisted as a terrorist group by Israel, the United States and the European Union.
|
Re: BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH 29 juin 2010, 23:56 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
|
MR PRESIDENT, WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON !!!!! 30 juin 2010, 07:26 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
|
DO YOU SPEAK HEBREW ?? 04 juillet 2010, 00:14 |
Membre depuis : 15 ans Messages: 852 |
STUPID CREW !
EXCELLENT !
A little jewish humor
-----
A Syrian Air Force transport flying over the
Mediterranean sends out a MAYDAY message:
"This is Syrian Air Force #174 announcing we have lost one
engine and want to land at any airport in the Middle East,
OTHER than Israel !"
No answer
A while later he announces, "This is Syrian Air Force #174 again.
We have now lost two engines and need to land at any airportMiddle East
, OTHER than Israel !"
Silence !
A short while later the captain announces,
"This is Syrian Air Force #174. We are desperate. We have now lost THREE engine's and urgently
ask permission to land at any airport in the Middle East,
OTHER than Israel!"
Still no answer !
Finally the captain calls out, "Help! This is Syrian Air Force #174.
We have only one engine left and it is rapidly failing.
Unless we can land we are going to crash. We need permission to land
at ANY airport in the Middle East,
INCLUDING Israel !"
Shortly thereafter, a voice is heard in the Syrian cockpit:
"Shalom Syrian Air Force # 174.
This is Tel Aviv approach control. We would like to help."
"Allah be praised," says the Syrian pilot.
"Please give me instructions."
"Do you speak Hebrew?"
"No."
"OK, then please repeat after me:
Yis-ga-dal V-yis-ka-dash Sh-mai Rab-bo......
EXCELLENT !
A little jewish humor
-----
A Syrian Air Force transport flying over the
Mediterranean sends out a MAYDAY message:
"This is Syrian Air Force #174 announcing we have lost one
engine and want to land at any airport in the Middle East,
OTHER than Israel !"
No answer
A while later he announces, "This is Syrian Air Force #174 again.
We have now lost two engines and need to land at any airportMiddle East
, OTHER than Israel !"
Silence !
A short while later the captain announces,
"This is Syrian Air Force #174. We are desperate. We have now lost THREE engine's and urgently
ask permission to land at any airport in the Middle East,
OTHER than Israel!"
Still no answer !
Finally the captain calls out, "Help! This is Syrian Air Force #174.
We have only one engine left and it is rapidly failing.
Unless we can land we are going to crash. We need permission to land
at ANY airport in the Middle East,
INCLUDING Israel !"
Shortly thereafter, a voice is heard in the Syrian cockpit:
"Shalom Syrian Air Force # 174.
This is Tel Aviv approach control. We would like to help."
"Allah be praised," says the Syrian pilot.
"Please give me instructions."
"Do you speak Hebrew?"
"No."
"OK, then please repeat after me:
Yis-ga-dal V-yis-ka-dash Sh-mai Rab-bo......
Seuls les utilisateurs enregistrés peuvent poster des messages dans ce forum.
