BILINGUES ? POSTS IN ENGLISH

Wolf a écrit:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Des photos ... A defaut de parler anglais ...

mechancete gratuite..
voila des potes a toi qui savent l anglais.. eux..
Pièces jointes:

Merci Marylou, je crois qu'il en a prit pour son grade hahaha....
BONNE JOURNEE

Heeeeey, mais vous vous êtes déchainées pendant mon absence
Yallah ... llay sameh !!

something to think about....... these tribes should be considered, we need more people like these people.

wow !!

E

Now, with English subtitles

[www.ireport.com]

I wish you a wonderful shabbat, Lison. I don't know about you, but I just love shabbat!
Pièces jointes:

Depuis 640 AV JC.ils sont présents au Nigéria et sont environ 40000.

Quote Of The Year

"On a more serious front, I sincerely hope that when the president goes in for his annual check-up, the doctors at Bethesda will do a brain scan. Surely something must be terribly wrong with a man who seems to be far more concerned with a Jew building a house in Israel than with Muslims building a nuclear bomb in Iran."

--columnist Burt Prelutsky-

Lengthy but worth it. Joan Swirsky is an award winning author. Google her name and see for yourselves.



Joan Swirsky's analysis of Barack Obama's psychological profile is a masterpiece. You will want to pass this along to your friends, as Americans (and other "global citizens" are beginning to realize that Obama isn't what he appeared to be during a theatrically orchestrated campaign. Does inner rage - not hope - lie at the root of this man's motivations? You decide:

Obama's Revenge

Posted by: Joan Swirsky 02/15/2009

Once upon a time, a white teenager from Kansas got pregnant by her black Kenyan boyfriend, Barack Obama Sr., or was it her husband? Whatever. (I say whatever because we've never seen either marriage or divorce certificates). Some say the couple was in Kenya visiting relatives when the birth of their son, Barack Obama Jr., occurred. No matter.. (I say no matter because we've never seen an authentic birth certificate). By the time the baby was two years old his father abandoned him for his other wife and child in Kenya .

I wonder how toddler Barry felt when his father left him, and never reappeared until a single time when the boy was 10. Bewildered? Sad? Lonely? Angry? What do two-year-olds do with those feelings?

It didn't take long for Barry's mother to meet and marry an Indonesian native named Lolo Soetoro. They moved to Indonesia , where her child became Barry Soetoro, took on Indonesian citizenship, and was presumably schooled in public, Christian, and Muslim schools. (I say presumably because we've never seen those school records). But when Barry was 10 years old, his mother sent him back to the U.S. to be raised by her parents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, although she kept her baby daughter Maya Soetoro with her.

I wonder how the by-now fully-sentient young Barry felt when his mother sent him packing. Sad? Jealous of the baby who remained behind with mommy? Confused and dizzy by the disparate cultures - languages, customs, foods, sights, sounds, schooling - he had experienced? Resentful? What did Barry do with those feelings?

By the time he was 10, the boy had been abandoned three times - by his father, stepfather, and mother. And although he was raised by his white grandparents in Hawaii - where "people of color" were not his color - he found out soon enough that his mixed-race background rendered him, in effect, an outsider. Did that make him feel self-conscious, indignant, victimized? But he wasn't altogether an outsider. In Hawaii , young Barry met Frank Marshall Thomas, his first and perhaps most influential mentor. The infamous Marshall, a Communist activist (and self-confessed pedophile) taught Barry - was it Obama, Soetero, Dunham? - that white people were the devil incarnate and that blacks were the most "victimized" people on earth.

Yet the abandoned and rejected child was lucky. His white-devil grandparents gave him a comfortable life in Hawaii , and an education that apparently qualified him to attend several prestigious schools - Occidental College in CA, Columbia Univ. in NY City, and Harvard Law School in Cambridge , MA . (I say apparently qualified because we've never seen any of his college transcripts).

BARRY MORPHS INTO BARACK

After his undergraduate days at Columbia , Obama chose not to go to graduate school, but instead held various jobs in the Big Apple and then moved to Chicago to become a community organizer.. Although he had been exposed to American exceptionalism through his life in the United States and his privileged education, it is clear that his experiences in impoverished Kenya and totalitarian Indonesia, as well as his exposure to Marshall and the other radicals he had met during his years in New York - among them the unrepentant domestic terrorists William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn of Weather Underground infamy - made the deepest and most lasting impressions. Their messages of American imperialism and its white-devil culture clearly resonated in the thrice-abandoned boy. In his young-adult and adult years, free to choose his friends and pursuits, he opted exclusively for far-left socialists and Marxists, and activities aimed at relieving the suffering of people he perceived to be as victimized as apparently he felt he had been. He understood their feelings of helplessness, hopelessness, and impotent rage, as well as the pain of fatherlessness. After all, his Harvard-educated father consciously chose to leave him. And his mother gave him away. Was that depressing to Barry? Infuriating?

When given the opportunity to join one of dozens of churches in Chicago, Barry - who had morphed into Barack - opted for the Trinity United Church of Christ, which was led by the fire-breathing Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whose decades-long anti-American and anti-Semitic rants apparently resonated in Obama's rejected and abandoned heart and soul. (I say apparently resonated because in over 20 years of regular attendance, Obama said he heard nothing inflammatory or anti-American, and we've never seen the videotapes of any sermon, although each one was unfailingly recorded). "God damn America," Wright raged. "The chickens have come home to roost," he "preached" to his whooping and hollering congregation after 9/11. Obama heard nothing.

But it wasn't only Wright who Obama was attracted to in Chicago . He was also drawn to another hate-spewing radical, Rev. Louis Farrakhan, as well as to the raving Father Michael Phleger, the radical Islamist Khalid Rashidi, his friends and neighbors the Ayers, and to equally-close friends "Tony" and Rita Rezko - Tony being the notorious "fixer" and now-convicted-and-imprisoned felon for fraud, bribery, and money laundering. What did the seemingly mild-mannered Obama find so irresistible in these angry and/or crooked people and others like them? Was it the same thing that a shy man finds in his attraction to a flamboyant girlfriend - and alter-ego, a person who expresses what he really feels but is unable to give voice to? In these relationships and in community organizing - which offers inner-city mostly-black residents job training, tutoring, and methods to organize tenants'-rights groups and voter-registration drives, etc. - the twenty-something Obama apparently found his calling, and also a renewed and burning ambition.

WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE

While his community-organizing job paid a paltry $12,000 or so per year, Obama somehow managed to pay his way through one of the priciest graduate schools in the world, Harvard Law School . (I say somehow managed because we have no record of his tuition payments). Even more amazing, he became the first black president of the Harvard Law Review without ever producing a written paper - or at least a paper that the public has ever read.

There is a good deal of evidence that Obama's acceptance at Harvard Law - and his tuition - were facilitated by friends who had a vested interest in the community organizer. Among them was Percy Sutton, a former Manhattan borough president and ardent leftist, who was also Malcolm X's lawyer. In an interview last year, the octogenarian Sutton stated: "I was introduced to [Obama] by a friend. The friend's name was Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, and the introduction took place about 20 years ago." Sutton described al-Mansour as "the principle adviser to one of the world's richest men" and suggested that al-Mansour was raising money for Obama. Knowing that Sutton had friends at Harvard, al-Mansour aske d him if he would write a letter to Harvard recommending Obama, which Sutton did most agreeably. This took place about 1988 when 27-year-old Obama was applying Harvard Law.

Journalist Jack Cashill has credibly speculated that Obama's two memoirs were actually written by his pal Bill Ayers, who was and is a University of Illinois at Chicago English professor, having escaped life in prison on a technicality. Two years [after he was admitted to law school], Cashill writes, "while still a law student, Obama improbably received an advance to write a memoir that would be called `Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance,' which was published in 1995." His second memoir, published in 2006, was "The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream." (I suspect Cashill said "improbably received an advance" because, as stated earlier, Obama had not produced even one paper or distinguished himself in any way to have inspired a major publishing company to approach him).

All this begs the question: Who writes two memoirs about himself before the age of 45? My own speculation is that it could be no one but a narcissist. As most people know in this age of pop psychology, the psychiatric disorder of narcissism derives from the Greek myth in which Narcissus, a handsome young man, became obsessed with himself and fell in love with his own image as he gazed into a pool of water. A lot of people have some degree of narcissism, which is characterized by grandiosity, an unquenchable need for admiration, unhealthy self-absorption, dependence on the affirmation of others, and also a lack of empathy, which is hidden by both personal charm and the kind of earnest language that pretends to "feel your pain." Or he could20be a malignant narcissist., which psychiatrist Dr. Otto Kernberg, a legendary leader in thought disorders, compares to anarcissist on steroids. This variety involves paranoid traits (think of Obama's thin-skinned, quasi-hysterical reactions to Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin), and ego-syntonic aggression, which means the person is perfectly in-sync with people who have the courage he lacks to lash out. But consider the source! Obama's father was a self-aggrandizing narcissist who thought nothing of throwing his son away to fulfill his own ambitions and his mother also threw him away for the same reason. Talk about DNA, which Obama perfectly exhibited when, during his campaign, he unflinchingly dispensed with both his white grandmother and his black "mentor" Rev. Wright for his personal ambition.

GROOMING THE PERFECT MARXIST CANDIDATE

This leads me to only one conclusion, which I wrote about in a former article: "Obama: The Trojan Horse." My theory is that President Obama's narcissistic charm, even temperament, ski ll with words (teleprompter included), hunger to please, radical agenda, and subterranean rage at the "unfair" American system have been brilliantly exploited by powerful leftist radicals and Marxists in the United States, who for decades have plotted America's path to socialism. He is their pawn, totally dispensable but handy while the "aura" lasts. These "handlers" saw in Obama the ideal blank slate on which to actualize their agenda, and they made sure the slate remained blank by concealing (or destroying) any evidence of his past, including his birth certificate, Selective Service record, visa(s), school transcripts, and other vital documents. All of which is costing his moneyed backers - including America-loathing billionaire George Soros - multimillions in lawyers' fees to fight the proliferating lawsuits that seek the truth about this stealth president. In fact, former ambassador Alan Keyes, one of the many plaintiffs seeking proof of Obama's American citizenship, has reported that Obama's lawyers have now filed a motion "to quash our effort to obtain the relevant documents...[which] confirms Obama's ruthless determination to destroy anyone wh o continues to seek the information the Constitution requires. Obama thus signal s his intent to bring financial ruin on those who won't accept his cover-up of the circumstances of his birth is a tactical escalation. It confirms the common sense suspicion that he won't act forthrightly in this matter because he has something to hide."

It is clear that Obama and his fellow radicals are restive. In the less-than four weeks of his presidency, the new president has taken volumes from the Marxian handbook, which dictates that the stupid masses be blitzed with an overload of information, hollow press conferences, appointments, dismantling of formerly effective national-security programs, et al., in order to set the stage for a massive,Soviet-style takeover of our government, including a civilian national security force that Obama has said should be "just as powerful, strong and well-funded as the U.S. military." Echoes of Nazi Germany in 1938, anyone? According to writer Kyle-Anne Shrive, in Obama's ascendance: "We have yet to see a more perfect collision of Murphy's Law with the Peter Principle. In only three weeks' time, [he] hassignaled to every terrorist on the planet that we are a sorry, groveling, ashamed nation ready to come to t he diplomati c confessional. He is closing Gitmo within one year, has suspended trials there, and dismissed the charges agains t the U.S.S. Cole plotter. [He] has just put our money where his mouth is and is using $20.3 million to bring in Palestinian refugees from Gaza...[he] had the gall to pronounce the so-called economic stimulus bill absolutely free of `earmarks' and `make-do work'...but according to the Congressional Budget Office [this bill] will do worse to our overall economy than no government action whatsoever." And Obama has done all this with the predictable double-speak that characterizes malevolent intention, i.e., touting transparency while concealing everything, speaking of integrity while appointing crooks and incompetents riddled with conflicts-of-interest, supporting energy independence while killing off-shore and domestic oil-drilling and nuclear power, and feigning optimism while he speaks of impending "catastrophe" in order to push through a pork-laden, trillion-dollar-plus Stimulus plan that rewards the corrupt voter-fraud organization Acorn with billions and unions with discriminatory union-only labor agreements, paves the way for socialized medicine, and threatens to take away the most cherished rights of We The People.

As blogger Eric Gurr has said: "We still talk about the health care crisis, the environmental crisis, the oil crisis, the banking crisis. Let me tell you my friends you are about to learn the meaning of the only crisis that matters, the survival crisis.."

You can be sure that the sad-lonely-angry two-year-old, the jealous-confused-resentful 10-year-old, the self-conscious- cheated-victimized adolescent, and the man who found solace in and identified with his hate-America mentors is now determined to redeem all of his demons. Unfortunately, he is acting out his rage on free-market capitalism, a free press, property and gun rights, a limited constitutional government, protection of the unborn, and everything else that is good and great about our country.

This is Obama's revenge!

Unfortunately, the tone of the article makes it difficult to concentrate on the information. While the author makes some valid points, the whole thing is a little bit over the top IMO.

surfeuse, you are right, I posted it, not because I approuve, but to give one more opinion, I am somewhat confused about the man, he is learning on the job..... maybe something good, other than please the europeans will come out of his presidency.

the western world and the USA is waiting.....i remain doubtful.

I have my doubts too, Lison. I have found nothing to redeem the man so far. Of course, I keep hoping something good will still happen. Also, the president doesn't influence my life directly the way my governor does. We're lucky to have a good governor. I hope we'll elect better representatives, though.

A glimmer of hope?

[www.washingtonpost.com]

Hi
might I suggest you to read also other tabloids in order to balance between both side views,
no one has actually a grasp on this probable strike;
all Medias set sight on it; and anything might just cause their tongues to wag
But finally, were that to happen, nothing.
Because Israel has a lot at stake
bye !

What a wonder !! enjoy

--gotta see (and hear) to believe

[www.trumpetherald.com]

je regrette infiniment que l'article suivant ne soit pas traduit en Français . Avis aux internautes. Je recherche de mon côté.
Lison

European countries funding Israeli leftists alleging IDF war crimes in Gaza
HRW head concedes soliciting Saudi funds by touting anti-Israel report

The leftist Israeli group “Breaking the Silence,” which recently released purported testimony from anonymous IDF soldiers who claimed they were ordered to commit war crimes in the Gaza fighting in January, has revealed a list of its donors which includes several European governments.

According to a list the group showed to The Jerusalem Post, the British Embassy in Tel Aviv gave BTS a donation of NIS 226,589 (approximately $50,000), the Dutch Embassy €19,999, and the European Union €43,514.

The report was released shortly after reports by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, both of which were highly critical of the IDF, making the timing of the BTS report suspicious. "It appears to us that the organization's real motive was to slander the IDF," on IDF officer said.

Breaking the Silence is registered under a status that does not require it to file public reports on its donors, other critics noted. "From our work, going through the files of dozens of Israeli non-profits, we feel that groups like this that are not listed [as an amutah – a non-profit association] raises a lot of red flags," said Prof. Gerald Steinberg, the head of NGO Monitor.

The report is also under assault from a group of Israeli reservists who served in Gaza, who have prepared signed, on-camera testimonies about Palestinian terrorists' use of Gazans as human shields to counter the anonymous accusations of alleged human rights abuses by Israeli soldiers in Gaza.

"We came upon an ambulance from a local children's hospital. It was suspicious because there was a very old lady in the ambulance of a children's hospital. Inside we found three RPG rocket launchers," recounted IDF soldier Pinchas Sanderson, according to Ha'aretz.

Meantime, Human Rights Watch continues to face criticism over its efforts to raise funds from Arab donors by touting its anti-Israel reporting record as a selling point. On Thursday, Atlantic Monthly reporter Jeffrey Goldberg posted to his on-line blog an email exchange he had with the executive director of HRW Ken Roth in which he directly asked Roth: "Did your staff person attempt to raise funds in Saudi Arabia by advertising your organization's opposition to the pro-Israel lobby?"

"That's certainly part of the story," Roth conceded. "We report on Israel, its supporters fight back with lies and deception.”

"Surely this fundamentally undermines the objectivity and the credibility that all too many in the past have attached to their reports," said Mark Regev, spokesman for the Netanyahu government, which has vowed to start scrapping away at the “halo effect” enjoyed by many human rights organizations that are biased against Israel

Why Won’t Obama Talk to Israel?



TEL AVIV
By ALUF BENN
Published: July 27, 2009

Aluf Benn is the editor at large of the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

IN his global tours and TV appearances, President Obama has spoken to Arabs, Muslims, Iranians, Western Europeans, Eastern Europeans, Russians and Africans. His words have stirred emotions and been well received everywhere.

But he hasn’t bothered to speak directly to Israelis.

And the effect? Six months into his presidency, Israelis find themselves increasingly suspicious of Mr. Obama. All they see is American pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to freeze settlements, a request that’s been interpreted here as political arm-twisting meant to please the Arab street at Israel’s expense — or simply to express the president’s dislike for Mr. Netanyahu.

This would seem counterproductive, given the importance the president has placed on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If Israel is part of the problem, it’s also part of the solution. Yet so far, neither the president nor any senior administration official has given a speech or an interview aimed at an Israeli audience, beyond brief statements made at diplomatic photo ops.

The Arabs got the Cairo speech; we got silence.

This policy of ignoring Israel carries a price. Though Mr. Obama has succeeded in prodding Mr. Netanyahu to accept the idea of a Palestinian state alongside Israel, he has failed to induce Israel to impose a freeze on settlements. In fact, he has failed even to stir debate about the merits of one: no Israeli political figure has stood up to Mr. Netanyahu and begged him to support Mr. Obama; not even the Israeli left, desperate for a new agenda, has adopted Mr. Obama as its icon.

As a result, Mr. Netanyahu enjoys a virtual domestic consensus over his rejection of the settlement freeze. Moreover, he has succeeded in portraying Mr. Obama as a shaky ally. In Mr. Netanyahu’s narrative, the president has fallen under the influence of top aides — in this case Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod — whom the prime minister has called “self-hating Jews.” Meanwhile, Mr. Netanyahu is the defender of national glory in face of unfair pressure, someone who sticks to the first commandment of Israeli culture: thou shalt never be the freier (that is, the dupe).

So far, Israelis have embraced Mr. Netanyahu’s message. A Jerusalem Post poll of Israeli Jews last month indicated that only 6 percent of those surveyed considered the Obama administration to be pro-Israel, while 50 percent said that its policies are more pro-Palestinian than pro-Israeli. Less scientifically: Israeli rightists have — in columns, articles and public statements — taken to calling the president by his middle name, Hussein, as proof of his pro-Arab tendencies.

What went wrong? Several explanations come to mind.

First, in the 16 rosy years of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, Israelis became spoiled by unfettered presidential attention. Memories of State Department “Arabists” leading American policy in the Middle East were erased. The White House coordinated its policy with Jerusalem, and stayed out of the way when Israel embarked on controversial military offensives in Lebanon and Gaza. This approach infuriated America’s Arab and European allies, which blamed Washington for one-sidedness — something they were willing to forgive of Bill Clinton but not of George W. Bush.

Mr. Obama came to office determined to repair America’s broken alliances in Europe and the Middle East. One way to do this — to prove that he was the opposite of his predecessor — was to place some distance between Israel and himself.

Second, Mr. Obama’s quest for diplomacy has appeared to Israelis as dangerous American naïveté. The president offered a hand to the Iranians, and got nothing, merely giving them more time to advance their nuclear program. In Israeli eyes, he was humiliated by North Korea’s nuclear and missile tests. And he failed to move Arab governments to take steps to normalize relations with Israel. Conclusion: Mr. Obama is a softie, eager to please his listeners and avoid confrontation with anyone who is not Mr. Netanyahu.

Third, Mr. Obama seems to have confused American Jews with Israelis. We are close emotionally and politically, but we are different. We speak Hebrew and not English, we live in the Middle East and have separate historical narratives. Mr. Obama’s stop at Buchenwald and his strong rejection of Holocaust denial, immediately after his Cairo speech, appealed to American Jews but fell flat in Israel. Here we are taught that Zionist determination and struggle — not guilt over the Holocaust — brought Jews a homeland. Mr. Obama’s speech, which linked Israel’s existence to the Jewish tragedy, infuriated many Israelis who sensed its closeness to the narrative of enemies like Mahmoud Ahmedinejad.

Fourth, as far as most Israelis are concerned, Mr. Obama has made a mistake in focusing on a settlement freeze. For starters, mainstream Israelis rarely have anything to do with the settlements; many have no idea where they are, even when they’re a half-hour’s drive from Tel Aviv.

More important: in the past decade, repeated peace negotiations and diplomatic statements have indicated that larger, closer-to-home settlements (the “settlement blocs”) will remain in Israeli hands under any two-state solution. Why, then, insist on a total freeze everywhere? And why deny with such force — as the administration did — the existence of previous understandings between the United States and Israel over limited settlement construction? There is simply too much evidence proving that such an understanding existed. To Israelis, the claim undermined Mr. Obama’s credibility — and strengthened Mr. Netanyahu’s position.

Perhaps there are good reasons behind Mr. Obama’s Middle East policy. Perhaps the settlement freeze is in Israel’s best interest. Perhaps the president is truly committed to Israel’s long-term security and well-being. Perhaps his popularity in the Arab street is the missing ingredient of peacemaking.

But until the president talks to us, we won’t know. Next time you’re in the neighborhood, Mr. President, speak to us directly. We will surely listen.

Notre islamiste persévère inlassablement dans sa volonté de reproduire les élucubrations des plus virulents partisans de la capitulation d'Israel et de sa dilution programmée dans une entité à majorité islamique.

Tout le monde a lu depuis des lustres les éditoriaux et les commentaires de ce névrosé d'Aluf BENN,Le chargé de la propagande anti-sioniste vient le rappeler à notre bon souvenir.

La reproduction de ces mêmes articles par des stipendiés de Shalom Ahchav
sur les sites les plus anti-juifs du Web prouve leur action coordonnée mais stérile,elle ne convainc que les convaincus de la victoire espérée de l'Islamisme rétrograde.

Chassés par la porte ,ils reviennent par les égouts.

A le lire, je m'en doute un peu de la réponse mais : A-t-il seulement lu l'article, l'atrophié du bulbe ?

La nouvelle marotte des super gauchistes israeliens,est de vouloir qu'Obama
s'adresse directement au peuple en court-circuitant son gouvernement élu et légitime,seul qualifié pour mener la politique qu'il a approuvée en lui donnant une majorité de votes.
C'est leur conception de la démocratie,celle du satlinisme pur et dur.La parole au peuple,s'il soutient les tyrans,le goulag s'il se révolte.
Et l'Islamiste au service de Shalom Ahshav se délecte en les lisant,réjoui de constater qu'il y a des Juifs capables de s'auto-détruire,ses congénères étant incapables de le faire.

Une seule phrase résume le mépris de ce pseudo journaliste,envers son premier ministre:
"But until the president TALKS TO US, we won’t know. Next time you’re in the neighborhood, Mr. President, SPEAK TO US DIRECTLY. We will surely listen."

Ouf, il faut la pousser à lire ...