.gif) Les Cohortes Célestes ont le devoir et le regret de vous informer que Libres Propos est entré en sommeil. Ce forum convivial et sympathique reste uniquement accessible en lecture seule. Prenez plaisir à le consulter.
Merci de votre compréhension. |
|
| | Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise |  |
|
+10Shansaa jam Ungern Laogorus EddieCochran OmbreBlanche Le chanoine quantat Zed Biloulou 14 participants | |
| Auteur | Message |
|---|
Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 8/11/2008, 13:47 | |
| Rappel du premier message :Browse Newspapers by country
http://newsdirectory.com/
Africa
Asia
Europe
North America
Canada
United States
Oceania
South America
Resources
Breaking News
Business Newspapers
College Newspapers
Media Industry Associations
Metropolitan Daily Press
Searchable Archives
Coffee Break
Television
Broadcast TV Stations
Network News
TV Networks
Additional Research
City Governments
County Governments
Travel Planner
College Locator Browse Magazines by subject
Arts and Entertainment
Automotive
Business
Computer
Culture and Society
Current Issues
Health
Home
Industry Trade Publications
Pets and Animals
Religion
Science
Sports
Travel
. . . more subjects
Magazines by Region
Africa
Asia
Europe
North America
Oceania
South America
More |
| | | |
| Auteur | Message |
|---|
Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2386 - From CBSnews.com 31/5/2010, 15:06 | |
|  From a distance they're just pictures of a flag, or an eagle, or the Liberty Bell. But look again . . . Only when you get closer do you realize that these images are actually formed by people. Here, 100 officers and 9,000 enlisted men at Parris Island formed the Marine Corps' symbol. (Photo: Hammer Gallery)----------  Unbelievably, it took 30,000 men at Camp Custer in Battle Creek, Mich., for this "human shield" photo created by photographers Arthur Mole and John Thomas in 1918. Frank Maresca, owner of New York's Ricco/Maresca Gallery, told CBS News correspondent Serena Altschul this picture holds the record for the largest number of people posing in a picture: "From the tip of the shield to the bottom of the stars you might have 2,000 people. But if you are talking about the last row of stars, you would probably have 20,000 people at least, just in the last row." That's because to maintain proper perspective, many more men had to be placed in the distance than up close. (Photo: Library of Congress)---------- Mole and Thomas lived outside Chicago, and started off shooting religious images with members of their church. Later, soldiers on military bases volunteered for the cause. Here, 25,000 officers and men at New Jersey's Fort Dix form the Liberty Bell (with crack). (Photo: Hammer Gallery)---------- Most of the people in the Mole/Thomas photos create military formations of American symbols. "Mole and Thomas were just patriotic people," Maresca said. (Photo: Hammer Gallery) |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2387 - 31/5/2010, 15:11 | |
|  Using a special camera which had huge 11- x 14-inch negatives, they took pictures perched atop custom-built towers 80 feet high. "Pretty rickety structures," Maresca called them. In this image taken at Camp Dodge in Des Moines, Ia., the huddled masses number 15,000 for Lady Liberty's flame and torch, and just 17 for the base. The camera was a quarter-mile away. (Photo: Hammer Gallery)---------- Mole and Thomas popularized this form of photography at the beginning of World War I, and the "living pictures" caught on. Between the two World Wars, other photographers — like E.O. Goldbeck — took them, too. This Goldbeck image features the Hawaiian Division - Schofield Barracks in 1926. (Photo: Hammer Gallery)---------- Uniforms of different colors were used to fashion the light or dark details, turning the soldiers into human pixels. No Photoshop! Marseca explained that for this image of President Woodrow Wilson, the white area of the president face is made up of soldiers lucky enough to be wearing their white regulation Army issue T-shirts, while those making up the hair are in their Army regulation wool — most unfortunate as it was 105 degrees at the time. (Photo: Hammer Gallery)---------- A closeup of part of this machine gun insignia image taken at Camp Hancock in Augusta, Ga. (Photo: Library of Congress)---------- It didn't take just 22,500 officers and men to create this Machine Gun Insignia. It also took 600 machine guns! (Photo: Library of Congress) |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2380 - 31/5/2010, 15:17 | |
|  Bluejackets at the U.S. Naval Training Station in Pelham Bay, New York, here form the "Living Allied Flags." (Photo: Library of Congress)---------- An eagle as formed by 12,500 officers, nurses and men at Camp Gordon in Atlanta, Ga. Mole and Thomas donated some of the proceeds from the sale of their photographs to returning servicemen, and to their church — proof that one picture can be worth at least a thousand words, particularly if it's made up of many thousands of people. "Living" Pictures (CBSnews.com) |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2389 - Netanyahu Cancels Visit as White House Regrets Loss of Life Following Israel Flotilla Conflict 31/5/2010, 17:12 | |
| Netanyahu Cancels Visit as White House Regrets Loss of Life Following Israel Flotilla ConflictPublished May 31, 2010FOXNews.com Monday: An Israeli armed naval boat sails into the port of Ashdod in the Mediterranean Sea, southern Israel. The Israeli military says more than 10 pro-Palestinian activists were killed after attacking naval commandos who were halting an aid flotilla heading toward the blockaded Gaza Strip. (AP Photo)- Spoiler:
The White House is taking a cautious approach before chastising Israel as it awaits more details on what happened in the conflict. The United Nations was preparing an emergency session that would most likely end in condemnation.
Netanyahu had been expected to arrive in Washington, D.C., Tuesday after leaving Canada, where he's been meeting with officials there.
Instead, he is headed back to Israel.
White House spokesman Bill Burton said Monday the United States "deeply regrets the loss of life and injuries sustained" in the incident.
Burton also said that administration officials are "currently working to understand the circumstances surrounding this tragedy."
Two Israeli commandos were also injured in the conflict after they were dropped by helicopter onto the decks and met by people trying to seize their guns, the Israeli Foreign Ministry said.
The United States, among others, has been trying to restart direct peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians, and the meeting between Netanyahu and President Obama was an attempt to reset talks after a disappointing visit earlier this year.
Obama also has scheduled a meeting June 9 with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
In a statement last week, the White House said that Obama and Abbas planned to discuss the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian proximity talks and ways the U.S. can work with both parties to move into direct talks.
They also will discuss U.S. efforts to support the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Israeli Foreign Minister Ehud Barak said Monday that he regrets the deaths, but the flotilla contained violent supporters of terror groups that have attacked Israel. Gaza is run by Hamas, which the U.S. State Department lists as an international sponsor of terrorism.
Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi said soldiers were forced to fire on the ship, which contained weapons. The flotilla of six ships reportedly did not heed orders by the Israeli Navy to stop its progress toward Israeli waters.
One participant in the flotilla told Haaretz that the 700 pro-Palestinian activists aboard the ships were prepared for the scenario that unfolded.
"We fully intend to go to Gaza regardless of any intimidation or threats of violence against us," Huwaida Arraf said. "They are going to have to forcefully stop us."
Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon noted that any other country would be considered in the right if it had acted in defense of its territorial integrity in the face of an armed group attempting to break the sovereign authority of a nation.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry added that Gaza is not facing a humanitarian crisis, but if activists want to deliver aid, they can deliver shipments through the Israeli port of Ashdod.
"The flotilla constitutes a politically-motivated media event, initiated by anti-Israel activists and extreme Islamic elements, under the guise of an act the organizers are attempting to depict as a humanitarian operation," the ministry said.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2390 - Never forget 31/5/2010, 17:26 | |
| Never Forget!Those beautiful flags, big and small, each signify a death in combat in service to our countryBy Sam AllisMay 31, 2010 Memorial Day is the most profound holiday of the year. July Fourth may be more significant to us as a nation, but this is the one that brings lumps to our throats. I gaze at the waves of small American flags in cemeteries, flapping in the breeze like Kansas wheat, and I am overwhelmed.- Spoiler:
The burst of flags on the Common this year to honor the 20,000 from Massachusetts who died in combat since World War I is breathtaking.
Nothing can approach the enormity of combat death. Members of the First Marine Division stranded on Guadalcanal in World War II knew many would die there. They stayed and fought and fell until help arrived. They had no choice.
Respect for the military is a sometime thing. Troops who came back from Vietnam were purportedly treated like pariahs because, by its end, most of the country didn’t support the war. (I say “purportedly’’ because, while I’m sure it happened, I know of no one who experienced such mistreatment.) Some people back home failed to recognize the distinction between war policymakers and its prosecutors.
This is not the case today. We have rallied behind our troops in harm’s way in Iraq and Afghanistan, regardless of how we feel about the wars they are fighting. Americans this time have made the distinction between policy and prosecution. There is significant opposition here to both wars, yet we see bumper stickers declaring “Support Our Troops, End the War.’’ I sure don’t remember seeing that during Vietnam.
No one curses servicemen and women when they come home now. Instead, what you hear a lot is “Thanks’’ to the people in uniforms we see on the streets or in airports. It is tough for anyone in fatigues to pay for a drink in a bar these days, for good reason.
What is behind this change? Vietnam, primarily. As movies and literature began spilling out about the soldiers who fought there, they became far more sympathetic figures, often portrayed as victims of Washington decisions. Movies like “Coming Home’’ and “Born on the Fourth of July,’’ books like “Dispatches’’ and “The Things They Carried’’ educated us to what they went through. We learned about post-traumatic stress and alcohol and drug addictions.
Between Vietnam and Iraq, the military was all but invisible to most of us. There was no major conflict to raise its profile, no cosmic specter of the draft hanging over young men’s heads. It was and is a volunteer Army. Out of sight, out of mind. But with the US invasion of Afghanistan and then Iraq, our troops moved front and center once again.
We know these men and women better than we did our troops in Vietnam. Despite heroic combat reportage by print and television there, we rarely got to know the grunts. In contrast, there have been countless American journalists embedded with units in Iraq, bent on telling human interest stories, often from a hometown angle, as well as the reporting vagaries of war.
Death in combat is timeless, which is why the American flags that blanket cemeteries today never feel old. In his masterpiece, “Let the Great World Spin,’’ author Colum McCann introduces us to a small circle of women who lost sons in Vietnam. They meet regularly to share their grief. One is a Park Avenue matron, another a woman from the worst part of the Bronx who lost all three of her sons. They share nothing in common but the holes in their hearts.
This is why Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s sketchy memory about his military service is so devastating to his integrity.
You cannot associate yourself with those who died in combat if you were not there. You just can’t. This is more than a third-rail political issue, like Social Security. It is a moral one.
There is no irony in death, nothing shiny about dying for your country.
It’s just what happens when we send our own off to war. So I’ll look at the flags on the Common today and think long and hard about those who died. Each flag that waves so prettily above the grass carries a horror story all its own.
 |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2391 - The Obama Mantra: Bill, Baby, Bill 31/5/2010, 18:03 | |
| The Obama Mantra: Bill, Baby, Bill A Commentary By Debra J. Saunders President Obama spoke in the unfinished hull of a new factory built by solar-panel manufacturer Solyndra in Fremont, Calif., Wednesday to highlight his administration's focus on creating jobs. The new facility, Obama explained to a crowd of hard hats and suits, created 3,000 temporary construction jobs and was expected to provide 1,000 production jobs. Problem: Solyndra has never turned a profit since it was founded in 2005. The company has an accumulated debt of $557 million. It paid for the new plant with a $535 million federal loan made possible by last year's $787 billion economic stimulus package. If Obama wants to make Americans feel good about the economy, couldn't he have found a business that doesn't rely on taxpayer money? Suite...  |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2392 - President Ronald Reagan's 1986 Memorial Day remarks at Arlington National Cemetery 31/5/2010, 18:59 | |
| President Ronald Reagan's 1986 Memorial Day remarks at Arlington National Cemetery:Today is the day we put aside to remember fallen heroes and to pray that no heroes will ever have to die for us again. It's a day of thanks for the valor of others, a day to remember the splendor of America and those of her children who rest in this cemetery and others. It's a day to be with the family and remember.
- Spoiler:
I was thinking this morning that across the country children and their parents will be going to the town parade and the young ones will sit on the sidewalks and wave their flags as the band goes by. Later, maybe, they'll have a cookout or a day at the beach. And that's good, because today is a day to be with the family and to remember.
Arlington, this place of so many memories, is a fitting place for some remembering. So many wonderful men and women rest here, men and women who led colorful, vivid, and passionate lives. There are the greats of the military: Bull Halsey and the Admirals Leahy, father and son; Black Jack Pershing; and the GI's general, Omar Bradley. Great men all, military men. But there are others here known for other things.
Here in Arlington rests a sharecropper's son who became a hero to a lonely people. Joe Louis came from nowhere, but he knew how to fight. And he galvanized a nation in the days after Pearl Harbor when he put on the uniform of his country and said, "I know we'll win because we're on God's side." Audie Murphy is here, Audie Murphy of the wild, wild courage. For what else would you call it when a man bounds to the top of a disabled tank, stops an enemy advance, saves lives, and rallies his men, and all of it single-handedly. When he radioed for artillery support and was asked how close the enemy was to his position, he said, "Wait a minute and I'll let you speak to them." [Laughter]
Michael Smith is here, and Dick Scobee, both of the space shuttle Challenger. Their courage wasn't wild, but thoughtful, the mature and measured courage of career professionals who took prudent risks for great reward—in their case, to advance the sum total of knowledge in the world. They're only the latest to rest here; they join other great explorers with names like Grissom and Chaffee.
Oliver Wendell Holmes is here, the great jurist and fighter for the right. A poet searching for an image of true majesty could not rest until he seized on "Holmes dissenting in a sordid age." Young Holmes served in the Civil War. He might have been thinking of the crosses and stars of Arlington when he wrote: "At the grave of a hero we end, not with sorrow at the inevitable loss, but with the contagion of his courage; and with a kind of desperate joy we go back to the fight."
All of these men were different, but they shared this in common: They loved America very much. There was nothing they wouldn't do for her. And they loved with the sureness of the young. It's hard not to think of the young in a place like this, for it's the young who do the fighting and dying when a peace fails and a war begins. Not far from here is the statue of the three servicemen—the three fighting boys of Vietnam. It, too, has majesty and more. Perhaps you've seen it—three rough boys walking together, looking ahead with a steady gaze. There's something wounded about them, a kind of resigned toughness. But there's an unexpected tenderness, too. At first you don't really notice, but then you see it. The three are touching each other, as if they're supporting each other, helping each other on.
I know that many veterans of Vietnam will gather today, some of them perhaps by the wall. And they're still helping each other on. They were quite a group, the boys of Vietnam—boys who fought a terrible and vicious war without enough support from home, boys who were dodging bullets while we debated the efficacy of the battle. It was often our poor who fought in that war; it was the unpampered boys of the working class who picked up the rifles and went on the march. They learned not to rely on us; they learned to rely on each other. And they were special in another way: They chose to be faithful. They chose to reject the fashionable skepticism of their time. They chose to believe and answer the call of duty. They had the wild, wild courage of youth. They seized certainty from the heart of an ambivalent age; they stood for something.
And we owe them something, those boys. We owe them first a promise: That just as they did not forget their missing comrades, neither, ever, will we. And there are other promises. We must always remember that peace is a fragile thing that needs constant vigilance. We owe them a promise to look at the world with a steady gaze and, perhaps, a resigned toughness, knowing that we have adversaries in the world and challenges and the only way to meet them and maintain the peace is by staying strong.
That, of course, is the lesson of this century, a lesson learned in the Sudetenland, in Poland, in Hungary, in Czechoslovakia, in Cambodia. If we really care about peace, we must stay strong. If we really care about peace, we must, through our strength, demonstrate our unwillingness to accept an ending of the peace. We must be strong enough to create peace where it does not exist and strong enough to protect it where it does. That's the lesson of this century and, I think, of this day. And that's all I wanted to say. The rest of my contribution is to leave this great place to its peace, a peace it has earned.
Thank all of you, and God bless you, and have a day full of memories.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2393 - IAEA report on Iran likely to boost West's opposition to Tehran's fuel swap offer 1/6/2010, 08:22 | |
| ... et pendant ce temps-la... IAEA report on Iran likely to boost West's opposition to Tehran's fuel swap offerPublished May 31, 2010Associated PressVIENNA (AP) — Iran has amassed more than two tons of enriched uranium, the U.N. atomic agency said Monday in a report that heightened Western concerns about the country developing the ability to produce a nuclear weapon.- Spoiler:
Two tons of uranium would be enough for two nuclear warheads, although Iran says it does not want weapons and is only pursuing civilian nuclear energy.
The U.S. and the four other permanent U.N. Security Council members — Russia, China, Britain and France — have tentatively backed a draft fourth set of U.N. sanctions against Iran over its refusal to stop enriching uranium.
Separately, the International Atomic Energy Agency — the U.N. nuclear watchdog — said Syria continues to stonewall agency reports to follow up on U.S. assertions that a facility destroyed three years ago by Israeli warplanes was a secretly built reactor meant to produce plutonium.
"Syria has not cooperated with the agency since June 2008" on most aspects of its investigation, according to the IAEA's Syria report. But it noted that Syria has admitted to small-scale nuclear experiments that it had previously not owned up to.
Syria denies allegations it was being helped by Iran and North Korea in developing a covert program.
But diplomats familiar with the Syria probe told The Associated Press of a visit to Syria in January by a high-ranking Iranian nuclear delegation led by Mahdi Kaniki, a deputy to Ali Akhbar Salehi, an Iranian deputy president and head of his country's nuclear program. The two diplomats asked for anonymity because their information was confidential.
For seven months, Iran refused to accept a deal brokered by the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency that foresaw Iran exporting 2,640 pounds (1,200 kilograms) of low-enriched uranium to Russia and France to be turned into fuel for Tehran's research reactor.
The West backed that offer because it would have committed Iran to exporting most of the enriched uranium it had produced and left it with less than the 2,200 pounds (1,000 kilograms) of material needed to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a bomb.
Iran rejected the offer then but now says it is ready to ship out the same amount of material and has enlisted the backing of Turkey and Brazil in trying to reach a compromise and derail the new sanctions push.
Iran insists it has no interest in nuclear weapons. But its refusal to stop enrichment — which can create both nuclear fuel and warhead material — and its stonewalling of IAEA efforts to investigate suspicions it is interested in developing such arms have increased international worry.
The restricted International Atomic Energy Agency report said that the IAEA "remains concerned about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed nuclear related activities, involving military related organizations, including activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile."
On enrichment, the report made available to the AP shortly after release to the U.N. Security Council and the IAEA's 35-nation board said Iran had now enriched 2,427 kilograms to just over three percent level.
That means shipping out 2,640 pounds (1,200 kilograms) now would still leave Iran with more than enough material to make a nuclear weapon. That makes the deal unattractive to the U.S and its allies
The report confirmed that Iran continues a separate program of small-scale enrichment of uranium, using 3.5 percent feedstock and enriching to near 20 percent — another hurdle for the West. Iran could produce weapons grade uranium much more quickly from the 20 percent level, making the separate program another hurdle to any fuel swap deal.
The U.S. and its allies view Tehran's insistence on continuing higher enrichment even as it offers to accept the swap deal with suspicion since it originally said it had to enrich to 20 percent as the first step in making fuel for the Tehran research reactor.
The IAEA also said that equipment had been removed from a laboratory it was investigating, confirming a report last week to the AP from diplomats familiar with the issue.
At issue is pyroprocessing, a procedure that can be used to purify uranium metal used in nuclear warheads.
In January, Iran told the agency that it had carried out pyroprocessing experiments, prompting a request from the nuclear agency for more information — but then backtracked in March and denied conducting such activities.
IAEA experts last month revisited the site — the Jabr Ibn Jayan Multipurpose Research Laboratory in Tehran — only to establish "that the electrochemical cell had been removed" from the unit used in the experiments, said the report.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2394 - U.N. Condemns Israeli Raid, Calls for Probe 1/6/2010, 10:05 | |
| U.N. Condemns Israeli Raid, Calls for ProbePublished June 01, 2010NewsCoreThe U.N. Security Council called Tuesday for an impartial investigation into the Israeli attack against a flotilla carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza, and the immediate release of all civilians.- Spoiler:
The statement by the council president condemned "those acts which resulted in the loss of at least 10 civilians and many wounded" and requested the immediate release of all ships and civilians held by Israel.
APMay 31: An Israeli armed naval boat sails into the port of Ashdod in the Mediterranean Sea, southern Israel.
"The Security Council took note of the statement of the U.N. Secretary General on the need to have a full investigation into the matter and it calls for a prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation conforming to international standards," the statement said.
The news came as an Israeli defense official said it would continue to prevent aid ships from reaching Gaza, despite the bloody end to a dawn raid Monday that saw at least nine people killed.
"We will not let any ships reach Gaza and supply what has become a terrorist base threatening the heart of Israel," deputy defense minister Matan Vilnai told public radio.
Vilnai's remarks were made as organizers of the so-called Freedom Flotilla said they were preparing to send two more aid boats to Gaza.
Greta Berlin of the Free Gaza Movement told AFP the next attempt to run the blockade would not take place for several days.
"The Rachel Corrie (cargo ship) is currently located off the coast of Italy and the other boat is still being repaired," she said.
The first six ships that left Cyprus on Sunday -- carrying more than 700 passengers -- were on a mission to deliver about 11,000 tons (10,000 tonnes) of supplies to Gaza, which has been under a crippling Israeli blockade since 2007.
CNN has reported one American was injured and up to nine U.S. citizens were also thought to have been on the flotilla. A Briton and an Australian man were also among those wounded during the raid, AFP reported.
Israel detained 480 pro-Palestinian activists captured during the commando raid and will expel 48 others, according to a public radio report cited by AFP.
Those detained were being held at the southern Israeli prison of Ashdod, while the other 48 were being taken to Ben Gurion international airport to be sent back to their home countries, said the report.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2395 - North Korea Circumventing Sanctions? 1/6/2010, 10:17 | |
| Quelle surprise!!
North Korea Circumventing Sanctions?
U.N. experts report rogue nation is using intermediaries to export nuclear and ballistic technology |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2396 - GOP sees a way to revive old debate 1/6/2010, 11:49 | |
| S'agit-il bien du meme systeme, si formidable et extraodinaire que les Britanniques sont obliges de venir se faire soigner en France? GOP sees a way to revive old debateBy CARRIE BUDOFF BROWN | 6/1/10 4:35 AM EDT  Donald Berwick's self-professed 'love' of Britain's health care system could spell trouble. John Shinkle
- Spoiler:
But Obama’s pick to run Medicaid and Medicare — Donald Berwick — is a pediatrician and Harvard University professor with a self-professed “love” of the British system.
Berwick has called Britain’s National Health Service “one of the greatest health care institutions in human history” and “a global treasure.” He once said it sets an “example” for the United States to follow. And his decadelong efforts to improve the NHS were so well-regarded that Queen Elizabeth granted him an honorary knighthood in 2005.
Now Senate Republicans are vowing to press their case against Obama’s sweeping new health care law bychallenging Berwick’s nomination — just in time to resurrect the brutal yearlong health reform battle ahead of the midterm elections.
And given Berwick’s long career and extensive writings, Republicans say they have a lot to work with.
“He is, as far as I am concerned, bad news,” said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “If he wants to turn America into the National Health Service in England — he thinks that is the model — he is going to find a lot of pushback.”
The Republican campaign has grown so alarming to Democratic senators and health care activists that the White House is facing fresh demands to launch a more vigorous defense of Berwick, who is considered an American pioneer in helping doctors and hospitals provide improved care at a lower cost.
At a private meeting last month between the Senate Democratic Caucus and presidential advisers Anita Dunn and Stephanie Cutter, Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse put the White House on notice.
“I have warned them specifically to be prepared,” he said. “It looks like the Republicans are gunning for this guy, and I hope you have yourself prepared to defend him. He has a wonderful story to tell that Americans would be very proud of if they knew it.”
Reid Cherlin, a White House spokesman, said Republicans are using the nomination as an “excuse to re-fight health care.”
The reform law pushes a “middle of the road” strategy that fixes what is broken in the market-based system but doesn’t turn America into Britain, administration officials said.
“We’re prepared for that. We’ve got our eyes open,” Cherlin said of the GOP campaign. “We’re cleareyed about the fact that there are certain folks who don’t seem too interested in having an honest dialogue.” 
Obama tapped Berwick to serve as administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services — a post second only to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in terms of influence within the department over implementing the massive new health care law. CMS is tasked with expanding Medicaid to an additional 16 million people, writing regulations to implement the law and establishing dozens of pilot projects that are central to realizing long-term deficit savings.
The most recent CMS administrator departed in 2006, leaving the agency without a permanent chief for the past four years, a leadership void that health care advocates call unacceptably long even without the post’s vast new responsibilities.
The political stakes of a prolonged confirmation battle are high.
Polls show voters are still deeply skeptical about the new health care changes, and any GOP lines of attack over “socialized medicine” and rationing could renew some of the public’s worst fears about Obama’s changes.
In addition, an extended delay in confirming Berwick could hamper efforts to meet countless implementation deadlines in the new law.
Berwick, a physician with three Harvard degrees, founded the nonprofit Institute for Healthcare Improvement in 1991. In this capacity, Berwick has traveled the country and the world, pressing his theory that doctors and hospitals can boost care and reduce medical errors while saving money. Admirers — a group that includes a few Republicans who headed CMS — have described his work as “revolutionary.”
“He is basically the inventor and lead proponent of the theory that quality improvement in our health care system can save not only lives but an enormous amount of money,” Whitehouse said. “He is perfectly positioned to drive the savings we need in our health care system in ways that don’t take benefits away from people but actually improve their quality of care.”
But Berwick also has an index of speeches, interviews and articles that suggest he never planned to undergo the scrutiny of a Senate confirmation hearing. He is a blunt speaker who acknowledges that his ideas can cut against the grain.
His comments on Britain’s NHS are drawing the most scrutiny. Berwick calls the system “far” from perfect, but he also describes it in glowing terms, citing elements that the American system lacks: universal coverage, “centralized stewardship” and guaranteed care regardless of income.
“I fell in love with the NHS,” Berwick said in a 2008 speech of the system that he worked on since the 1990s. “To an American observer, the NHS is such a seductress. ... Like any lover, it took me a while to see the blemishes of my beloved, though I soon had help from people quite willing to point out the warts.” 
At his institute’s annual conference in 2005, Berwick described the emotional news that he would be certified as Honorary Knight Commander of the British Empire, an honor bestowed to Americans such as Steven Spielberg, Alan Greenspan and Rudy Giuliani.
“The NHS is one of the great human health care endeavors on Earth,” Berwick said in the speech on file with the Senate Finance Committee and circulated by Republicans. “It can be an example for the whole world — an example, I must say, that the United States needs now more than most other countries do.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the consumer health group Families USA, said Berwick would not serve as chief spokesman for the new health care law.
“Don is not a traditional politician,” said Pollack, who supports Berwick.
“Don will provide substantive insights. But if you are looking for someone who knows how to spin language for a purely political process, that is not Don’s experience. Don is in the nature of the scientist who looks at data and draws conclusions from that.”
The Senate confirmed the past two administrators, under former President George W. Bush, by voice votes, but at this point, Berwick appears unlikely to receive the same treatment.
A meeting last week between Berwick and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell failed to allay any of the Kentucky Republican’s concerns, said a Republican Senate aide briefed on the meeting. The aide said Berwick didn’t appear to feel compelled to dispel the issues surrounding his nomination.
Democrats are turning to Berwick’s supporters across the country to lobby senators. Berwick’s institute started the 100,000 Lives Campaign in 2004, which drew commitments from more than 3,100 hospitals to reduce by 100,000 the number of deaths from medical errors by June 2006.
This network of hospitals could be pivotal to his Senate confirmation battle. Administration officials who shepherded nominees in the past have turned to doctors and hospital executives in a wavering senator’s home state to vouch for their candidate. In Berwick’s case, he is known by or has worked with health care providers in all 50 states. A letter from South Carolina hospital administrators is already in the works.
“In the current environment, with the health care bill in an election year where it is a big issue, it is pretty clear Republicans are going to pick on anybody,” said Thomas Scully a Republican who headed the agency from 2001 to 2003. “I told Don, ‘Don’t take it personally.’
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2397 - Flotillas and the Wars of Public Opinion 1/6/2010, 14:02 | |
| Flotillas and the Wars of Public Opinion
By George FriedmanOn Sunday, Israeli naval forces intercepted the ships of a Turkish nongovernmental organization (NGO) delivering humanitarian supplies to Gaza. Israel had demanded that the vessels not go directly to Gaza but instead dock in Israeli ports, where the supplies would be offloaded and delivered to Gaza. The Turkish NGO refused, insisting on going directly to Gaza. Gunfire ensued when Israeli naval personnel boarded one of the vessels, and a significant number of the passengers and crew on the ship were killed or wounded.- Spoiler:
Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon charged that the mission was simply an attempt to provoke the Israelis. That was certainly the case. The mission was designed to demonstrate that the Israelis were unreasonable and brutal. The hope was that Israel would be provoked to extreme action, further alienating Israel from the global community and possibly driving a wedge between Israel and the United States. The operation's planners also hoped this would trigger a political crisis in Israel.
A logical Israeli response would have been avoiding falling into the provocation trap and suffering the political repercussions the Turkish NGO was trying to trigger. Instead, the Israelis decided to make a show of force. The Israelis appear to have reasoned that backing down would demonstrate weakness and encourage further flotillas to Gaza, unraveling the Israeli position vis-à-vis Hamas. In this thinking, a violent interception was a superior strategy to accommodation regardless of political consequences. Thus, the Israelis accepted the bait and were provoked.
The ‘Exodus' Scenario
In the 1950s, an author named Leon Uris published a book called "Exodus." Later made into a major motion picture, Exodus told the story of a Zionist provocation against the British. In the wake of World War II, the British - who controlled Palestine, as it was then known - maintained limits on Jewish immigration there. Would-be immigrants captured trying to run the blockade were detained in camps in Cyprus. In the book and movie, Zionists planned a propaganda exercise involving a breakout of Jews - mostly children - from the camp, who would then board a ship renamed the Exodus. When the Royal Navy intercepted the ship, the passengers would mount a hunger strike. The goal was to portray the British as brutes finishing the work of the Nazis. The image of children potentially dying of hunger would force the British to permit the ship to go to Palestine, to reconsider British policy on immigration, and ultimately to decide to abandon Palestine and turn the matter over to the United Nations.
There was in fact a ship called Exodus, but the affair did not play out precisely as portrayed by Uris, who used an amalgam of incidents to display the propaganda war waged by the Jews. Those carrying out this war had two goals. The first was to create sympathy in Britain and throughout the world for Jews who, just a couple of years after German concentration camps, were now being held in British camps. Second, they sought to portray their struggle as being against the British. The British were portrayed as continuing Nazi policies toward the Jews in order to maintain their empire. The Jews were portrayed as anti-imperialists, fighting the British much as the Americans had.
It was a brilliant strategy. By focusing on Jewish victimhood and on the British, the Zionists defined the battle as being against the British, with the Arabs playing the role of people trying to create the second phase of the Holocaust. The British were portrayed as pro-Arab for economic and imperial reasons, indifferent at best to the survivors of the Holocaust. Rather than restraining the Arabs, the British were arming them. The goal was not to vilify the Arabs but the British, and to position the Jews with other nationalist groups whether in India or Egypt rising against the British.
The precise truth or falsehood of this portrayal didn't particularly matter. For most of the world, the Palestine issue was poorly understood and not a matter of immediate concern. The Zionists intended to shape the perceptions of a global public with limited interest in or understanding of the issues, filling in the blanks with their own narrative. And they succeeded.
The success was rooted in a political reality. Where knowledge is limited, and the desire to learn the complex reality doesn't exist, public opinion can be shaped by whoever generates the most powerful symbols. And on a matter of only tangential interest, governments tend to follow their publics' wishes, however they originate. There is little to be gained for governments in resisting public opinion and much to be gained by giving in. By shaping the battlefield of public perception, it is thus possible to get governments to change positions.
In this way, the Zionists' ability to shape global public perceptions of what was happening in Palestine - to demonize the British and turn the question of Palestine into a Jewish-British issue - shaped the political decisions of a range of governments. It was not the truth or falsehood of the narrative that mattered. What mattered was the ability to identify the victim and victimizer such that global opinion caused both London and governments not directly involved in the issue to adopt political stances advantageous to the Zionists. It is in this context that we need to view the Turkish flotilla.
The Turkish Flotilla to Gaza
The Palestinians have long argued that they are the victims of Israel, an invention of British and American imperialism. Since 1967, they have focused not so much on the existence of the state of Israel (at least in messages geared toward the West) as on the oppression of Palestinians in the occupied territories. Since the split between Hamas and Fatah and the Gaza War, the focus has been on the plight of the citizens of Gaza, who have been portrayed as the dispossessed victims of Israeli violence.
The bid to shape global perceptions by portraying the Palestinians as victims of Israel was the first prong of a longtime two-part campaign. The second part of this campaign involved armed resistance against the Israelis. The way this resistance was carried out, from airplane hijackings to stone-throwing children to suicide bombers, interfered with the first part of the campaign, however. The Israelis could point to suicide bombings or the use of children against soldiers as symbols of Palestinian inhumanity. This in turn was used to justify conditions in Gaza. While the Palestinians had made significant inroads in placing Israel on the defensive in global public opinion, they thus consistently gave the Israelis the opportunity to turn the tables. And this is where the flotilla comes in.
The Turkish flotilla aimed to replicate the Exodus story or, more precisely, to define the global image of Israel in the same way the Zionists defined the image that they wanted to project. As with the Zionist portrayal of the situation in 1947, the Gaza situation is far more complicated than as portrayed by the Palestinians. The moral question is also far more ambiguous. But as in 1947, when the Zionist portrayal was not intended to be a scholarly analysis of the situation but a political weapon designed to define perceptions, the Turkish flotilla was not designed to carry out a moral inquest.
Instead, the flotilla was designed to achieve two ends. The first is to divide Israel and Western governments by shifting public opinion against Israel. The second is to create a political crisis inside Israel between those who feel that Israel's increasing isolation over the Gaza issue is dangerous versus those who think any weakening of resolve is dangerous.
The Geopolitical Fallout for Israel
It is vital that the Israelis succeed in portraying the flotilla as an extremist plot. Whether extremist or not, the plot has generated an image of Israel quite damaging to Israeli political interests. Israel is increasingly isolated internationally, with heavy pressure on its relationship with Europe and the United States.
In all of these countries, politicians are extremely sensitive to public opinion. It is difficult to imagine circumstances under which public opinion will see Israel as the victim. The general response in the Western public is likely to be that the Israelis probably should have allowed the ships to go to Gaza and offload rather than to precipitate bloodshed. Israel's enemies will fan these flames by arguing that the Israelis prefer bloodshed to reasonable accommodation. And as Western public opinion shifts against Israel, Western political leaders will track with this shift.
The incident also wrecks Israeli relations with Turkey, historically an Israeli ally in the Muslim world with longstanding military cooperation with Israel. The Turkish government undoubtedly has wanted to move away from this relationship, but it faced resistance within the Turkish military and among secularists. The new Israeli action makes a break with Israel easy, and indeed almost necessary for Ankara.
With roughly the population of Houston, Texas, Israel is just not large enough to withstand extended isolation, meaning this event has profound geopolitical implications.
Public opinion matters where issues are not of fundamental interest to a nation. Israel is not a fundamental interest to other nations. The ability to generate public antipathy to Israel can therefore reshape Israeli relations with countries critical to Israel. For example, a redefinition of U.S.-Israeli relations will have much less effect on the United States than on Israel. The Obama administration, already irritated by the Israelis, might now see a shift in U.S. public opinion that will open the way to a new U.S.-Israeli relationship disadvantageous to Israel.
The Israelis will argue that this is all unfair, as they were provoked. Like the British, they seem to think that the issue is whose logic is correct. But the issue actually is, whose logic will be heard? As with a tank battle or an airstrike, this sort of warfare has nothing to do with fairness. It has to do with controlling public perception and using that public perception to shape foreign policy around the world. In this case, the issue will be whether the deaths were necessary. The Israeli argument of provocation will have limited traction.
Internationally, there is little doubt that the incident will generate a firestorm. Certainly, Turkey will break cooperation with Israel. Opinion in Europe will likely harden. And public opinion in the United States - by far the most important in the equation - might shift to a "plague-on-both-your-houses" position.
While the international reaction is predictable, the interesting question is whether this evolution will cause a political crisis in Israel. Those in Israel who feel that international isolation is preferable to accommodation with the Palestinians are in control now. Many in the opposition see Israel's isolation as a strategic threat. Economically and militarily, they argue, Israel cannot survive in isolation. The current regime will respond that there will be no isolation. The flotilla aimed to generate what the government has said would not happen.
The tougher Israel is, the more the flotilla's narrative takes hold. As the Zionists knew in 1947 and the Palestinians are learning, controlling public opinion requires subtlety, a selective narrative and cynicism. As they also knew, losing the battle can be catastrophic. It cost Britain the Mandate and allowed Israel to survive. Israel's enemies are now turning the tables. This maneuver was far more effective than suicide bombings or the Intifada in challenging Israel's public perception and therefore its geopolitical position (though if the Palestinians return to some of their more distasteful tactics like suicide bombing, the Turkish strategy of portraying Israel as the instigator of violence will be undermined).
Israel is now in uncharted waters. It does not know how to respond. It is not clear that the Palestinians know how to take full advantage of the situation, either. But even so, this places the battle on a new field, far more fluid and uncontrollable than what went before. The next steps will involve calls for sanctions against Israel. The Israeli threats against Iran will be seen in a different context, and Israeli portrayal of Iran will hold less sway over the world.
And this will cause a political crisis in Israel. If this government survives, then Israel is locked into a course that gives it freedom of action but international isolation. If the government falls, then Israel enters a period of domestic uncertainty. In either case, the flotilla achieved its strategic mission. It got Israel to take violent action against it. In doing so, Israel ran into its own fist.
A Stratfor Intelligence Report.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2398 - Ankara ambushes Israel at sea 1/6/2010, 15:10 | |
| Ankara ambushes Israel at seaLast Updated: 8:55 AM, June 1, 2010 Posted: 12:21 AM, June 1, 2010  Ralph PetersYesterday's "aid convoy" incident off the coast of Gaza wasn't about bringing humanitarian supplies to the terrorist-ruled territory. It wasn't even about Israel. - Spoiler:
It was about Turkey's determination to position itself as the leading Muslim state in the Middle East. Three ships of that six-ship pro-terror convoy flew Turkish flags and were crowded with Turkish citizens. The Ankara government -- led by Islamists these days -- sponsored the "aid" operation in a move to position itself as the new champion of the Palestinians. And Turkish decision-makers knew Israel would have to react -- and were waiting to exploit the inevitable clash. The provocation was as cynical as it was carefully orchestrated. The lead vessel, the Mavi Marmara, just happened to have an al-Jazeera TV crew on board to film Israel's response. Ironically, the early videos would've been counterproductive, had world leaders and journalists not been programmed to blame everything on Israel. Those videos showed Israeli commandos rappelling onto the ship with both hands on the rope (making it rather hard to use a weapon), yet activists claimed the Israelis opened fire as they descended. Purely by coincidence, dozens of "peace activists" waited with sharpened iron bars, clubs, slingshots -- and rifles. Of course, the nine dead in the melee were all Israel's victims. The first wave of Israeli commandos reportedly were armed only with paintball rounds for crowd control. Inspect those videos of maddened peaceniks assaulting the soldiers as they landed on deck. You don't see any Israelis pointing rifles -- they're fending off blows. But the claims of pro-terrorist "peace advocates" are given instant credence. The US government's initial response was restrained, but Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu understandably canceled his meeting with President Obama, scheduled for today. Bibi's got an emergency on his hands back home, as well-organized protests sweep the Middle East. Meanwhile, the Europeans and UN bonzes rage at Israel with unseemly relish, but ignore the luxury lifestyles of Gaza's insider elite and the fact that no Palestinian's going hungry. The Israelis had even offered to transfer the aid aboard those ships to the Palestinians -- as long as they could inspect it. But neither the activists nor the Turkish government wanted a negotiated outcome. This was a stunt from the start. Now, as we wait to see if Hamas and Hezbollah up the ante, the world ignores Turkey's decisive role in this fiasco. The US and the European Union cling to the fiction that Turkey's a "westernized Muslim democracy." But Turkey's moving to the east as fast as the Islamist leaders of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) can drag it there. Turkish leaders visit the West and sing, "Democracy, democracy, democracy!" We coo and clap. Then they go east and cry, "Islam, Islam, Islam!" And we insist they don't mean it. Then there's Turkey's unfortunate NATO membership. Since the rise of its Islamists, Turkey has been a Trojan horse, not an ally. What happens now if Ankara provokes a military confrontation? How would we respond, given NATO's mutual-defense agreements? The madcap agenda of Turkey's current rulers is to create a 21st-century version of the Ottoman Empire. Turks even mutter about the caliphate -- headed for centuries by the Turkish sultan. This is explosive stuff. And the Turks are playing with matches. But we've obstinately ignored every warning sign. First, our "ally" stabbed us in the back on the eve of Operation Iraqi Freedom, denying our troops their planned routes into Iraq. Then the Turkish media intensified its anti-American fantasies. Headscarves became de rigeur for the wives of top officials in Ankara as the Turks made mischief in Iraq. Emulating the history-obliterating Saudis, the Turks began work on the vast Ilisu Dam -- which will permanently submerge pre-Islamic and Kurdish archaeological sites of incalculable value. (The Bamiyan Buddhas destroyed by the Taliban were of comparatively minor interest to researchers.) Then, just last month, the Turks moved to provide the Iranian regime with cover for its nuclear program. And we still didn't get it. The most dramatic transformation in the Middle East since the fall of the shah is playing out before us. And we can't see behind the mask of the "plight of the Palestinians" (a key Obama administration concern).In yesterday's confrontation, Israel behaved clumsily. The peace activists behaved savagely. The Turks behaved cynically. The world reacted predictably. And Washington scratched its head. Ralph Peters' latest book is "Endless War." VIDEOS
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2399 - Flotillas and Falsehoods 1/6/2010, 15:54 | |
| Flotillas and Falsehoods Don’t members of the press ever resent being so used?Mona Charen  The effort to destroy the Jewish state has many fronts. One front is in Iran, where the maniacal regime that has repeatedly promised to “wipe Israel off the map” marches inexorably toward a nuclear bomb. Another is in Gaza, from which Hamas has lobbed 10,000 missiles into Israeli cities. Yet another front, the most insidious, is comprised of the propaganda arm of the Palestinian movement. And this front thrives for only one reason — the complicity of the world press and the so-called “international community.”
- Spoiler:
It was the propaganda arm that staged the “Freedom Flotilla.” But there have been many previous productions: The propaganda arm was responsible for the photo-shopped images of damage to Lebanon during the 2006 war, the staged “death” of twelve-year-old Muhammad al-Durrah, the “massacre” at Jenin, and the “war crimes” in Gaza.
In each and every case, the “news” of Israeli atrocities was broadcast far and wide by organizations such as Reuters, AP, CNN, and AFP. The United Nations has offered its imprimatur to every libel. The truth seemed always to have a case of laryngitis.
Today, in the wake of the confrontation between Israeli soldiers and the provocateurs aboard the Gaza flotilla, the remarkably incurious world press is providing exactly the sort of headlines on which the organizers knew they could count. “Flotilla Attack Is Israel’s Kent State” screamed the Huffington Post. Agence France Presse carried a banner quoting the Turkish foreign minister to the effect that “Israel has lost all legitimacy.” Every news outlet I checked docilely described the flotilla as “humanitarian.”
Don’t members of the press ever resent being so used?
Suite..
|
| | | | Biloulou
 Nombre de messages : 54566
Localisation : Jardins suspendus sur la Woluwe - Belgique
Date d'inscription : 27/10/2008
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 1/6/2010, 18:13 | |
| - Citation :
- And this front thrives for only one reason — the complicity of the world press and the so-called “international community.”
Noooonnnn.... qui l'eut cru !  | |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2401 - PRUDEN: A shocking story of Israeli survival 1/6/2010, 22:06 | |
| PRUDEN: A shocking story of Israeli survival
By Wesley Pruden
When the going gets tough, the not-so-tough call in the cliches. The world's "leaders" are shocked! — shocked! — when Israel defends itself. Actually, they're "shocked" just like Claude Rains, the police inspector in "Casablanca," was shocked to learn that gambling was going on in the casino at Rick's Cafe.
Ban Ki-moon, the secretary-general of the United Nations who rarely sees Third World evil, shocking or otherwise, says he was "shocked" by the Israeli navy's stopping a convoy that was attempting to break through the blockade of Islamist terrorists in Gaza. The governments of Sweden, Greece and Jordan were so "shocked" that they recalled their ambassadors to Israel to get the inside dope to further fuel their "shock." Tony Blair, who is some sort of "peacemaker"-at-large in the Middle East, was "shocked," too. If he is, it's only because he hasn't been in the Middle East long enough to unpack his Gladstone. France was not just a little bit "shocked," but "profoundly shocked." There was so much "shock" in the air that the manufactured mourning became electric.
Suite... |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2402 - Gergen: Mr. President, take command 1/6/2010, 22:52 | |
| Gergen: Mr. President, take commandBy David Gergen, CNN Senior Political Analyst Editor's Note: David Gergen is a senior political analyst for CNN and has served as an adviser to four U.S. presidents. He is a professor of public service and the director of the Center for Public Leadership at the Harvard Kennedy School. (CNN) -- Enough is enough! After the latest failure by BP to plug the gaping hole, it is time for President Obama to take full command of this growing national catastrophe. Immediately!- Spoiler:
President Obama visits the Gulf Coast to assess the damage up close.The president in his press conference this past Thursday assured the nation that he and his administration were already in charge and he has manfully taken personal responsibility -- "the buck stops here," he said, echoing Harry Truman. Well, it may be true that BP has been acting all along under the oversight of the federal government, but that supervision has been loose and ineffective.To the world, it has been apparent that the government has been riding shotgun and BP has been at the wheel. It's time for the White House to get in the driver's seat and get us to safety -- fast.First off, who can now trust BP to do the job right? From the beginning, it has appeared to be more interested in shoring up its stock price than in playing straight and solving the problem. It took reckless short cuts in opening up the rig, had no serious plan in place for a disaster, low-balled early estimates of the spill, has high-balled its chances of stopping the leak and has kept both the government and the public too much in the dark. And its efforts on shore are increasingly pathetic -- can it really have failed to protect the safety of beach workers and have stage managed the clean-up when Obama was there, as reported? It was a mistake to leave our fate in the hands of this company as long as we have.Second, even if BP were reliable, the problem has clearly become too big for it to handle, as Colin Powell is now arguing on television. We have been told for days that the top kill procedure was BP's best hope for stopping the leak and if that failed, we would likely have to wait until BP drilled new wells which might be as late as August. We can't wait that long. BP is especially not up to the task of protecting our precious shorelines and cleaning up the beaches. For that, we need the organizational strength of the U.S. military.Third, this catastrophe is increasingly threatening the nation's welfare. With a potentially dangerous storm season just around the corner, a continuing gush of oil will not only pose huge, long-term damage to the Gulf region but could easily wash the oil around the tip of Florida and up the East Coast. The loss to livelihoods, the economy and to ways of life would be immeasurable. It would be worse than Katrina and Exxon Valdez put together. Unless we solve this soon, this spill could do to off-shore drilling what Three Mile Island did to nuclear power -- darn near kill it. Obama is right that it is a wake-up call to end our addiction to oil, but we need some forms of off-shore oil as a bridge to that future.Finally, Obama's leadership is increasingly at stake in this emergency. I thought Peggy Noonan was premature in arguing in the Wall Street Journal this weekend that the spill has already broken his presidency, but her column certainly gave pause. The cameras down at the bottom of the sea give us vivid reminders that this oil is spewing forth day after day after day -- almost like the daily television reminders we had of how long our hostages were held in Teheran while Jimmy Carter sat helplessly in the White House, the authority leaking out of his presidency.What can the White House do? For starters: -- Set up a daily command center in Washington where a presidentially appointed leader runs the show, calls the shots, coordinates the overall effort, briefs the president and briefs the country-- Have two deputies, one to direct the leak-stoppage and the other to direct the clean-up. Ex-CEOs and generals would be excellent candidates-- Summon all the major oil and drilling companies to the White House for emergency efforts to get the hole plugged-- Get BP out of the picture for clean-up; just send it the bill. If it is still needed for hole-plugging, okay, but ensure that it answers every day to directions from the government. If BP needs new internal leadership, figure out how to get that done-- Employ the U.S. military for organizational coordination and where needed, for anything else such as clean-up-- Make more aggressive efforts to tap the best minds in the world for help-- Provide the country with the kind of daily briefings that the military has mastered for wartime -- bring in people who are smart, straight and tough -- Ensure that economic assistance is provided to families, small businesses and communities that need it with dispatch and generosity-- Call off the finger pointing until we get out of this mess-- And finally, very importantly, exercise the powers of leadership every day from the Oval OfficeThe whole country now has a keen interest in the White House now taking full command. Mr. President, it's your move. The nation cannot afford to wait that long -- the government needs to summon all the big oil and drilling companies to the White House on an emergency basis and seek faster answers.The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David Gergen.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2403 - U.S. opens criminal probe of oil spill 1/6/2010, 23:31 | |
| Comme le POTUS ne sait que faire mais qu'il souhaite donner l'impression de faire quelque chose... U.S. opens criminal probe of oil spillBy JOSH GERSTEIN | 6/1/10 1:50 PM EDT Updated: 6/1/10 4:51 PM EDTThe Justice Department has opened civil and criminal investigations into the events that led to the continuing BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday
- Spoiler:
The first and foremost goal of the entire government is stopping the leak, containing and cleaning up the oil, and helping the people in this region get back on their feet and return to their normal lives,” Holder told a news conference in New Orleans, according to a text of his prepared remarks. “But as we have said all along, we must also ensure that anyone found responsible for this spill is held accountable. That means enforcing the appropriate civil – and if warranted, criminal – authorities to the full extent of the law.”
Holder also suggested that a serious federal investigation was merited into the deaths of workers aboard the Deepwater Horizon rig when an explosion apparently fed by the blowout took place on April 22.
“There is one thing I will not let be forgotten in this incident: In addition to the extensive costs being borne by our environment and by communities along the Gulf Coast, the initial explosion and fire also took the lives of 11 rig workers. Eleven innocent lives lost,” Holder said. “We will prosecute to the full extent any violations of the law.”
Earlier Tuesday, President Barack Obama warned that the federal government would prosecute anyone found to have violated the law in connection with the spill.
“If our laws were broken, leading to this death and destruction, my solemn pledge is that we will bring those responsible to justice on behalf of the victims of this catastrophe and the people of the Gulf region,” Obama said in the Rose Garden after a meeting with the co-chairmen of a commission he named to look into the spill and the future of drilling off U.S. coasts.
The talk of legal action from Obama and Holder came as the White House launched a new offensive Tuesday aimed at convincing Americans that the federal government is responding aggressively to the continuing oil spill in the Gulf.
In his appearance earlier Tuesday, Obama pledged that the blue-ribbon commission, to be headed by former Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and former Environmental Protection Agency chief William Reilly, would get to the bottom of what caused the blowout.
“In doing this work, they have my full support to follow the facts wherever they may lead, without fear or favor. And I am directing them to report back in six months with options for how we can prevent and mitigate the impact of any future spills that result from offshore drilling,” the president said.
The effort to quickly find out what happened and the effort to prosecute any crimes that were committed could be at odds. At least one BP official, rig manager Robert Kaluza, took the Fifth Amendment last week to avoid testifying at a government hearing into the disaster.
It’s possible that more rumblings about potential criminal prosecutions could prompt more of those involved to invoke their right to remain silent.
In addition, the commission Obama named lacks subpoena power, though it may be able to get information subpoenaed by other government agencies
Suite...
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2404 - 'The Euro Zone Has Failed' 1/6/2010, 23:46 | |
| 'The Euro Zone Has Failed' By VáCLAV KLAUS  AFP/Getty Images Czech Republic President Václav Klaus- Spoiler:
As a long-standing critic of the idea of a European single currency, I have not rejoiced at the current problems in the euro zone because their consequences could be serious for all of us in Europe—for members and non-members of the euro zone, for its supporters and opponents. Even the enthusiastic propagandists of the euro suddenly speak about the potential collapse of the whole project now, and it is us critics who say we have to look at it in a more structured way.
The term "collapse" has at least two meanings. The first is that the euro-zone project has not succeeded in delivering the positive effects that had been rightly or wrongly expected from it. It was mistakenly and irresponsibly presented as an indisputable economic benefit to all the countries willing to give up their own long-treasured currencies. Extensive studies published prior to the launch of the European single currency promised that the euro would help to accelerate economic growth and reduce inflation and stressed, in particular, that the member states of the euro zone would be protected against all kinds of external economic disruptions (the so-called exogenous shocks).
This has not happened. After the establishment of the euro zone, the economic growth of its member states has slowed down compared to previous decades, increasing the gap between the rate of growth in the euro-zone countries and that in other major economies—such as the United States and China, smaller economies in Southeast Asia and other parts of the developing world, as well as Central and Eastern European countries that are not members of the euro zone.
Economic growth in Europe has been slowing down since the 1960s, thanks to the increasingly damaging economic and social system which started dominating Europe at that time. The European "soziale Marktwirtschaft" is an unproductive variant of a welfare state, of state paternalism, of "leisure" society, of high taxes and low motivation to work. The existence of the euro has not reversed that trend. According to the European Central Bank, the average annual rate of growth in the euro-zone countries was 3.4% in the 1970s, 2.4% in the 1980s, 2.2% in the 1990s and only 1.1% from 2001 to 2009 (the decade of the euro). A similar slowdown has not occurred anywhere else in the world (speaking about "normal" countries, e.g. countries without wars or revolutions).
Not even the expected convergence of inflation rates has taken place. Two distinct groups have formed within the euro zone—one (including most of the countries of western and northern Europe) with a low inflation rate and one (including Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland) with a higher inflation rate. We have also seen an increase in long-term trade imbalances. There are countries where exports exceed imports and countries that lastingly import more than they export. It is no coincidence that the latter countries also have higher inflation. It has no connection with the world-wide crisis. This crisis "only" escalated and exposed longtime hidden economic problems; it did not cause them.
During its first 10 years, the euro zone has not led to any measurable homogenization of its member states' economies. The euro zone, which comprises 16 European countries, is not an "optimum currency area" as defined by the economic theory. Even Otmar Issing, the former member of the Executive Board and chief economist of the European Central Bank, has repeatedly pointed out (most recently in a speech in Prague in December 2009) that the establishment of the euro zone was primarily a political, not an economic, decision. In such a situation, it is inevitable that the costs of establishing and maintaining it exceed its benefits.
My choice of the words "establishing" and "maintaining" is not accidental. Most economic commentators were satisfied by the ease and apparent inexpensiveness of the first step (the establishment of the common monetary area). This helped to form the impression that everything was fine with this project.
The exchange rates of the countries joining the euro zone probably more or less reflected the economic reality at the time when the euro was born. However, over the last decade, the economic performance of euro-zone countries diverged and the negative effects of the "straight-jacket" of a single currency have become more and more visible. When "good weather" (in the economic sense of the word) prevailed, no visible problems arose. Once the crisis (or "bad weather") arrived, the lack of homogeneity manifested itself very clearly. In that sense, I dare say that—as a project that promised to be of considerable economic benefit to its members—the euro zone has failed.
The second meaning of the term collapse is the possible collapse of the euro zone as an institution, the demise of the euro. To that question, my answer is no, it will not collapse. So much political capital had been invested in its existence and in its role as a "cement" that binds the EU on its way to supra-nationality that in the foreseeable future the euro will surely not be abandoned.
It will continue, but at a very high price—low economic growth. It will bring economic losses even to non-members of the euro zone, like the Czech Republic.
The huge amount of money that Greece will receive can be divided by the number of the euro-zone inhabitants, and each person can calculate his or her own "contribution." However, the "opportunity" costs arising from the loss of a potentially higher growth rate, which is much more difficult for a non-economist to imagine, will be far more painful. I do not doubt that for political reasons this price will be paid and that the euro-zone inhabitants will never find out just how much the euro truly cost them.
The mechanism that will save the European monetary union is the increasing volume of financial transfers that will have to be sent to euro-zone countries suffering from the biggest economic and financial problems. Yet everyone knows that sending massive financial transfers is possible only in a state, and the EU, or the euro zone, is not a state. Only in a state there is a sufficient feeling of solidarity among its citizens. Only in a state—and unified Germany in the 1990s is an excellent example—can massive financial transfers be justified and made politically viable. (By the way, the inter-German financial transfers in that era annually equaled the whole sum potentially needed for Greece to survive). Twenty years ago, I happened to be the minister of finance in a dissolving political—and monetary—union called Czechoslovakia. I have to confess that the country broke up because of the lack of mutual solidarity.
That is why Europe will have to decide whether to centralize itself politically as well. Europeans don't want that because they know (or at least feel) that it would be to the detriment of liberty and prosperity. There is, however, a real danger that the politicians will do it anyway—behind the backs of those who elected them. And this is what bothers me most. The recent dealings in EU headquarters in Brussels—literally behind closed doors—about the aid package for Greece demonstrated that there is no democracy there. The German-French tandem made the decision on behalf of the rest of the euro-zone countries, and I am afraid this will continue.
It is evident that the euro—the European single currency—and the currently proposed measures to save the euro do not represent any "salvation" for the European economy. In the long run, it can be saved only by a radical restructuring of the European economic and social system. My country had a velvet revolution and made a radical transformation of its political, economic and social structures. Fifteen years ago, I sometimes joked that after entering the EU we should start a velvet revolution there as well. Unfortunately, this ceases to be a joke now.
The Czech Republic has not made a mistake by avoiding the membership in the euro zone. I am glad we are not the only country taking that view. In April, the Financial Times published an article by the late governor of the Polish central bank, Slawomir Skrzypek. He wrote it shortly before his tragic death in an airplane crash near Smolensk, Russia. In that article, Mr. Skrzypek wrote, "As a non-member of the euro, Poland has been able to profit from flexibility of the zloty exchange rate in a way that has helped growth and lowered the current account deficit without importing inflation." He added that "the decade-long story of peripheral euro members drastically losing competitiveness has been a salutary lesson." There is no need to add anything to that.
Václav Klaus has served as president of the Czech Republic since 2003.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2405 - Rice Facing Criticism for U.N. Job Performance, Low Profile on Key Issues 2/6/2010, 00:19 | |
| Rice Facing Criticism for U.N. Job Performance, Low Profile on Key IssuesPublished June 01, 2010| FOXNews.com U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice speaks to reporters after a meeting on Iran May 18 at United Nations headquarters. (AP Photo) The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations is facing revived criticism of her job performance after she chose to stay in Washington during Monday's emergency meeting over the Israeli raid on an aid flotilla bound for the Gaza Strip. - Spoiler:
Susan Rice, who lives in the nation's capital and works most days in New York City, where the U.N. is headquartered, was with her family on Memorial Day when the news broke that the clash between Israeli forces and pro-Palestinian activists had left at least nine dead and dozens more wounded. In her place, Deputy U.S. Representative Alejandro Wolff successfully pressed the U.N. Security Council to tone down its rebuke of Israel. A U.N. official said Rice was fully engaged the entire time, "managing the situation and in constant communication." The official said Wolff attended the marathon 12-hour meeting because he was already in New York, and that Rice was the one giving the orders from Washington. She has since traveled to New York. But one of Rice's foremost critics slammed the U.S. ambassador, calling her absence part of a pattern of passivity. Richard Grenell, who served as U.S. spokesman at the United Nations under four different ambassadors during George W. Bush's administration, called it "troublesome" that Rice would remain in Washington while the crisis was unfolding. "It's just unbelievable that Susan Rice didn't go out there," Grenell said. "She had plenty of time to get to New York." Grenell previously has accused Rice of not spending enough time in New York and not pressing U.S. interests at the United Nations forcefully enough. "She clearly wants to be the popular ambassador and has demonstrated that she's unwilling to take on the controversial issues," he said. Rice has tackled some hot-button, top-shelf controversies at the United Nations, working with other influential members to pass sanctions against North Korea last year and to draft a new round of sanctions against Iran this year. The U.N. official described Rice as the leader of those talks, "literally at the table with her counterparts going line through line." While Rice rarely grants extensive interviews with the media, the official dismissed the notion that her low profile in public spoke to anything about her profile at the United Nations. "Look at the results rather than the number of television appearances," the official said. But at the same time, the U.S. delegation has been relatively silent on U.N. developments that would normally entail a certain outrage factor for the United States. The United States just endorsed a U.N. resolution on nuclear non-proliferation that singled out Israel's nuclear program but not Iran's. That came after Libya, a country with ties to terror groups, won a seat last month on the U.N. Human Rights Council. Rice at the time criticized the council -- which the Obama administration has joined -- as "flawed," but she would not specifically address Libya's election. The U.S. was successful in lobbying against Iran's bid for a seat on the same council, but in late April the Islamic Republic won election to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women. The U.S. delegation did not issue any objection during the acclamation vote. While an official with the U.S. Mission to the U.N. said at the time that there was "no opportunity" to object to the women's council vote and that the U.S. was powerless to stop Iran because it faced no competition for the seat, Grenell said the U.S. delegation could have drummed up a competitor. Claudia Rosett, a journalist in residence with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the U.S. delegation is sending the message that "America doesn't mind." "I think they believe that they can horse-trade their way at the United Nations to a more peaceful world, and they're wrong," Rosett said. She said she doesn't question whether Rice "puts in the hours" at her job, but said she should have been in New York on Monday. She suggested that the elevation of Rice's job to a Cabinet-level position has put a strain on her time -- essentially requiring her to be both in Washington and New York City for different aspects of the job. Still, she said, Wolff provided the "voice of reason" at the emergency meeting Monday and that the U.S. delegation was more effective than usual. U.N. Security Council notes from that meeting show that Wolff was just about the only member not expressing "shock" at Israel's actions. He balanced calls for an investigation with an acknowledgement that Hamas' "interference" in the Gaza Strip has "complicated humanitarian efforts." Rice, who served as an assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration, is one of several top-ranking Obama administration members who have put a premium on restoring ties with the international community, and the United Nations as a whole, in the wake of what they say was a hostile approach from the Bush administration. Rice said last year that "patient diplomacy" would mark U.S. leadership abroad. She appeared from the start to take a warmer approach to her post -- Rice told Vogue in an interview last June that she might have met all 192 permanent representatives in the period of a month.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2406 - McGinniss: Palin using 'Nazi' tactics 2/6/2010, 09:30 | |
| On imagine l'impartialite dont ce livre va etre impregne! McGinniss: Palin using 'Nazi' tacticsBy ANDY BARR | 6/1/10 1:13 PM EDT Author Joe McGinniss accused former Alaska GOP Gov. Sarah Palin on Tuesday of using “Nazi” tactics in unleashing the “hounds of hell” upon him in protest of his moving next door.  Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has suggested McGinniss could see into the window of her teenage daughter's bedroom. AP - Spoiler:
Since then, McGinniss has been a target of conservative scorn online and has even received death threats for moving next door to Palin, a reaction for which the author blames Palin.
“Sarah hysterically puts up this Facebook page with all sorts of ugly innuendo,” McGinniss said Tuesday during an interview on NBC’s “Today" show.
McGinniss said the reaction to his moving next door to the former governor has demonstrated “the power Palin has to incite hatred and her willingness and readiness to do it.”
“She has pushed a button and unleashed the hounds of hell, and now they're out there slavering and barking and growling,” McGinniss said.
“I'm not calling her a Nazi,” he added, “but that's the same kind of tactic that the Nazi troopers used in Germany in the '30s. And I don't think there is any place for it in America.”
McGinniss plans to stay in the house through the summer as he completes his research on the former governor.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2407 - 2/6/2010, 09:42 | |
| Parfaitement d'accord avec Rep. Michele Bachman. J'avais d'ailleurs deja exprime ce point de vue, hier. Bachmann: 'Signals of weakness'By ANDY BARR | 6/1/10 5:15 PM EDT Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said Tuesday that President Barack Obama has encouraged Israel’s enemies by sending “signals of weakness” in the U.S. commitment to its ally. “We have to ask if the Obama administration remains committed to the state of Israel and the right of Israel to exist and defend herself,” Bachmann told POLITICO. “The Obama administration, through its word and its actions, has been sending the world mixed signals at best.” - Spoiler:
 Michele Bachmann insists that the commandos who dropped onto the ship from helicopters were attacked by the activists. AP
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2408 - Israel; “global jihad linked to flotilla” 2/6/2010, 10:43 | |
| Israel; “global jihad linked to flotilla”June 2, 2010 - 3:35 AM | by: Dana Lewis Israeli defense officials now say dozens of passengers who were aboard the Turkish ship the Marmara, the scene of a bloody show down with Israeli Navy Seals Monday, are suspected of having connections to terrorist organizations. - Spoiler:
The Isreali Army says it's identified 50 passengers on the ship with terrorist links.
It's known the flotilla of 6 ships was in part organized by the IHH group in Turkey, which has links to Al Qaeda. And three members of Yemen's Parliament, from the Islah Party, were also among the more than 600 activists detained by Israel after ships refused to stop for Israeli patrol boats and were boarded by Israeli Navy Seals who eventually opened fire killing 9 people. The Islah party is also said to have shadowy links to Al Qaeda. Both groups certainly support the Hamas organization in Gaza.
Israel believes the larger danger is that Turkey, a NATO ally, is becoming a foe to the U.S. and Israel. Israeli's Mossad Chief, Meri Dagan told top Government Ministers here that Turkish President Erdogan has "a dream of returning Turkey's dominance through going down the Islamic hall". He sites Turkeys warmer relations with the Palestinians and Hamas, and improving relations with Syria, Iran and others. Dagan described a new anti-Israel coalition. Turkey facilitated the flotilla and the Marmara is Turkish flagged. *1
Why did Israel then send it's Naval Commando's down ropes from helicopters, to the deck below mainly armed with paint ball guns into what was clearly much more than a mission of crowd control, but a violent mob armed with bats and steel bars and knives and eventually guns taken from the soldiers who were beaten to the point they feared for their lives? In fact 4 of the Israeli's were set upon and stabbed and shot and are still in the hospital. The answer is Israeli Commanders now admit it was a case of "bad equipment, bad tactics, and bad intelligence".
Had the Seal team boarding the ship not been lowered one by one, to be quickly overwhelmed by violent activists, had they been trained in crowd control, the outcome may have been much different without the bloody ending which now has the International community in an uproar and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wobbling between supporting Israel's right to defend it's borders and not allow Hamas in the Gaza strip to smuggle weapons by sea, and the need to show sympathy for 1.4 million Palestinian's under a three year blockade struggling to get everything from medical supplies to food. Clinton won't condemn the blockade, even though increasingly Israel itself is questioning keeping it in place considering that Hamas manages to smuggle arms from under ground tunnels in Egypt regardless.
The fact a portion of the activists aboard the 6 ships had such serious links to extremist groups, raises more questions about who ultimately approved this bungled plan to board the ships? Prime Minister Netanyahu's inner cabinet is said to be fuming about not being consulted on the actual details of the raid and are demanding answers now. Israeli's Political leaders and top Generals are trying to avoid taking responsibility for the 'fiasco at sea' as one newspaper headline screamed here this week.
A top General, told Israel's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee this week that Israeli's commando's also used some "gray" tactics at sea on the other 5 ships, an indication they may have somehow disabled engines on the ships.
But they decided not to do the same to the large Turkish Cruise ship the Maramara, where most of the activists were, fearing they would create another kind of humanitarian problem by stranding hundred of activists at sea without food and water and creating a different kind of World spectacle.
There are now two more ships on course to attempt to run the Israeli blockade on Gaza, arriving sometime later this week. This is a war for World opinion and Israel knows it. But an army source told me "we will also do everything necessary to stop these ships too". Israel still believes the blockade is necessary at any cost. But the price Israel is paying is still being tallied Internationally in terms of weakened support in Europe and even in America.
*1 L'Europe n'en a pas voulu en son sein? Elle y aura droit quand meme d'une facon ou d'une autre. (d'ou l'insistance de Bush 43 a l'epoque pour que la candidature de la Turquie soit acceptee)
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 2409 - Gaza Clash: Turkish Charity’s Terror Links 2/6/2010, 10:50 | |
| Gaza Clash: Turkish Charity’s Terror LinksJune 1, 2010 - 10:11 AM | by: Ben Evansky The United Nations Security Council can’t decide how to sanction Iran or punish North Korea over killing 46 South Korean Sailors in last month’s unprovoked attack on one of its submarines. But on Monday, the UN called an emergency session to take Israel to task over the boarding of a Turkish registered boat on its way to deliver aid to Gaza which led to at least nine deaths following violent altercations between Israeli forces and a significant number of armed protestors.- Spoiler:
Yet the Turkish group that funded and ran the boat the Mavi Marmara, where the confrontation occurred is documented as having ties to terrorists, was named in federal court papers as playing a role in the failed millennium bomb plot and is named in a C.I.A. report in 1996 as having links to terrorist groups. The Foundation for Human Rights and Humanitarian Relief (IHH) is a Muslim charity and non-government organization (NGO) that was formed in 1992 with the goal of assisting Muslims in Bosnia. Since then it has branched out to many places including Lebanon, Pakistan, Sudan, Somalia and the Palestinian territories.
According to a report by the Israeli based Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, IHH is a “radical Islamic Organization with an anti-Western orientation.” Written by Jonathan Fighel, the report says “besides its legitimate philanthropic activities, it supports radical Islamic networks, including Hamas, and that at least in the past, even global jihad networks.”
Fighel’s report also notes that the C.I.A. report that was declassified in 2001 and titled “International Islamic NGOs and Links to Terrorism” states that the IHH had links with extremist groups in Iran and Algeria and was either active or facilitating activities of terrorist groups operating in Bosnia.
IHH's Oguzan Ulas, told Fox News from its headquarters in Istanbul, Turkey that his organization has “no relation to radical Islamic groups,” and that it was “a rubbish accusation.” Ulas blamed this on a smear campaign by the Israelis against his group. As to his organization’s support of Hamas he said that it disagrees with the U.S. government’s designation of Hamas as a terrorist group and that IHH “openly accepts Hamas.”
Steve Emerson, a leading terrorism expert, tells Fox News that IHH was banned by Israel in 2008 for its affiliation with Hamas and the so-called “Union of Good.” The Union of Good is a coalition of Islamic groups led by Muslim Brotherhood leader Yousef Al Qaradawi who has issued Fatwas calling for the killing of Americans and Jews.
Emerson who heads the Investigative Project on Terrorism points to U.S. Court documents which reveal IHH played “an important role” in the Millennium bomb plot. The Millennium bomb plot was foiled following the arrest of Ahmed Ressam who had planned to bomb the Los Angeles International Airport.
During Ressam’s trial, federal prosecutors called Jean Louis Brugiere, a French counter-terrorism expert and Magistrate, to testify. As part of his testimony he told the court that “The IHH is an NGO (non-governmental organization), but it was kind of a type of cover-up in order to obtain forged documents and also to obtain different forms of infiltration for Mujahideen in combat. And also to go and gather these Mujahideens. And finally, one of the last responsibilities that they had was also to be implicated or involved in weapons trafficking.”
According to court documents, he went on to say when talking about the cell involved in the Millennium plot that the apartment they used was “a conspiratorial flat.” All this was based on phone calls placed from that apartment “particularly to Turkey and Istanbul and I am talking about the IHH.”
IHH has offices in Gaza and the West Bank and according to reports in Israel has transferred money to Hamas in support of its goals. IHH leadership has also met with Hamas Chairman Khaled Mashal and other top Hamas leaders. Hamas is on the U.S. State Department list of designated terrorist organizations.
Emerson says IHH’s financial and political support for Hamas is “very troubling” and told Fox News that “it’s surprising that IHH has not been designated (as a terrorist group) by the U.S. government.”
Late last night the U.N. Security Council issued a Presidential Statement which condemned yesterday's action and called for an investigation into yesterday's events.
Dernière édition par Sylvette le 2/6/2010, 11:04, édité 1 fois |
| | | | Biloulou
Nombre de messages : 54566
Localisation : Jardins suspendus sur la Woluwe - Belgique
Date d'inscription : 27/10/2008
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 2/6/2010, 11:01 | |
| NON ! Comme quoi il n'y a pas de petites coïncidences !  Voyons comment la presse francophone va réagir ?  | |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 2/6/2010, 11:04 | |
| De facon tres silencieuse a n'en pas douter, Biloulou.
(On comprend pourquoi tant haissent FOXNews) |
| | | | Contenu sponsorisé
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise | |
| |
| | | | | | Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise | |
|
Sujets similaires | |
|
| | Permission de ce forum: | Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
| |
| |
| |
|
