.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 |  |
|
+6Charly Shansaa Alice jam EddieCochran Biloulou 10 participants | |
| Auteur | Message |
|---|
Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 6/7/2009, 08:44 | |
| Rappel du premier message :Bonjour Biloulou  Il me semblait que cette nouvelle plairait! |
| | | |
| Auteur | Message |
|---|
Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1599 - 18/11/2009, 09:47 | |
| Pour rappel:  --- et juste pour sourire (faut bien..): Obama grovels yet again before a hereditary monarch.
Would some grown up at the State Department please let the unqualified imbecile know that excessive deference is not expected between heads of state, even by inbred aristocrats like Akihito and Abdullah, and least of all from the leader of the world's only superpower. A polite nod is quite adequate. This sort of thing sends a very strange signal. But then, he's a very strange man.
God help us when he visits China. He'll probably knock head.  |
| | | | Biloulou
 Nombre de messages : 54566
Localisation : Jardins suspendus sur la Woluwe - Belgique
Date d'inscription : 27/10/2008
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 10:01 | |
| Bonjour Sylvette !  Bon, pour le Japon ça montre le respect des coutumes et du protocole japonais et même de la simple bonne éducation de ce pays. Pour l'Émir (vaisselle) à voir le regard des autres... est-ce que votre président n'a pas laissé tomber quelque chose ?  | |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 10:15 | |
| Oui, mais lorsqu'il se rend a une visite officielle, il represente les Etats Unis, pas Barack Obama. Il pourra se plier en deux tant qu'il voudra apres 2012  (J'espere!!!) ---- Pour l'Émir (vaisselle) à voir le regard des autres... est-ce que votre président n'a pas laissé tomber quelque chose ? Oui, en particulier, l'Asiatique a gauche...  Pour moi (et je ne suis pas la seule ici), il n'y a pas de difference entre respecter les coutumes et le protocole saoudien ou japonais, en l'occurence (et ce n'est pas une insulte pour les Japonais ) |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 10:16 | |
| Pardon, Bonjour Biloulou  ! |
| | | | Biloulou
Nombre de messages : 54566
Localisation : Jardins suspendus sur la Woluwe - Belgique
Date d'inscription : 27/10/2008
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 10:32 | |
| Ah oui, évidemment, si le protocole saoudien demande à ce qu'on jete quelque chose à terre... tant que ce n'est pas sa tête... (Notons que le monsieur au premier plan et à droite du président Obama et le président Sarkozy lui-même semblent aussi chercher ce qui est tombé... au fait, tout le monde cherche. Mais quoi ? ) | |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 10:52 | |
| oui, ca rigole pas mal, Nicolas deja, au fond a droite ensuite.
Bon, je vous trouve dur avec le POTUS, c'etait sa premiere genuflexion. Il s'est debrouille deja nettement mieux devant l'empereur (la reine d'Angleterre, elle ne meritait sans doute pas...). Avec un peu d'entrainement, et entre deux excuses presentees au sujet des horreurs commises par les Etats Unis a travers l'histoire, ca va etre un veritable pro.
Eventuellement, lors d'une prochaine visite en Afrique, il devrait s'en sortir parfaitement devant Kadhafi, le Roi des Rois d'afrique (il a l'habitude qu'on se prosterne devant lui, lui aussi). |
| | | | Biloulou
Nombre de messages : 54566
Localisation : Jardins suspendus sur la Woluwe - Belgique
Date d'inscription : 27/10/2008
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 11:15 | |
| - Sylvette a écrit:
- [...] Avec un peu d'entrainement, et entre deux excuses presentees au sujet des horreurs commises par les Etats Unis a travers l'histoire, ca va etre un veritable pro.
Ah, vous voyez ? Ségolène a encore inspiré un des grands de ce monde !  | |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 11:16 | |
| C'est Marieden qui va etre contente! |
| | | | Biloulou
Nombre de messages : 54566
Localisation : Jardins suspendus sur la Woluwe - Belgique
Date d'inscription : 27/10/2008
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 11:30 | |
| Oui !!! Pour fêter ça, Marieden prendra une bonne douche avec hydro-pulsateurs et tout et tout, c'est sûr !  | |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 15:58 | |
| Le soutien fort s'etiole 26% aujourd'hui il etait de 44% en janvier dernier Date .......... Presidential Approval Index - Strongly Approve - Strongly Disapprove - Total Approve - Total Disapprove | 11/18/2009 | -14 | 26% | 40% | 47% | 52% | | 11/17/2009 | -12 | 27% | 39% | 49% | 51% | | 11/16/2009 | -10 | 28% | 38% | 50% | 49% | | 11/15/2009 | -10 | 29% | 39% | 50% | 49% | | 11/14/2009 | -9 | 29% | 38% | 50% | 49% | | 11/13/2009 | -10 | 28% | 38% | 47% | 51% | | 11/12/2009 | -9 | 29% | 38% | 47% | 52% | | 11/11/2009 | -10 | 30% | 40% | 46% | 53% | | 11/10/2009 | -10 | 30% | 40% | 48% | 52% | | 11/09/2009 | -8 | 32% | 40% | 49% | 50% |
---------- | 01/22/2009 | +30 | 44% | 14% | 64% | 29% | | 01/21/2009 | +28 | 44% | 16% | 65% | 30% |
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 16:11 | |
| 51% Oppose Decision To Try Terrorists in New York CityFifty-one percent (51%) of U.S. voters oppose the Obama administration’s decision to try the confessed chief planner of the 9/11 attacks and other suspected terrorists in a civilian court in New York City.
- Spoiler:
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 29% of voters favor the president’s decision not to try the suspects by military tribunal at the Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba where they are now imprisoned. Nineteen percent (19%) are not sure whether it was the right decision or not. Only 30% of Americans said suspected terrorists should have access to U.S. courts, while 54% favored military tribunals in July 2008, as the first such tribunal got under way at Guantanamo. Still, 58% of voters now are at least somewhat confident that New York City will be safe and secure while the trials are going on. Yet only 20% are very confident of that fact. Thirty-eight percent (38%) are not very or not at all confident that New York will be safe during this period. Most voters have consistently opposed moving any of the Guantanamo prisoners to prisons in the United States out of safety concerns. Voters continue to overwhelmingly oppose giving the terrorist suspects the same legal rights in court as U.S. citizens. Only 14% say the suspects should be given the rights of citizens, but 76% disagree. The decision to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and five other suspects in a Lower Manhattan courtroom near the site of the World Trade Center is part of the administration’s plan to shut down the Guantanamo terrorist prison camp by January. Fifty-five percent (55%) of voters oppose closing that facility, and 48% think it is unlikely it will be closed by January as President Obama has pledged. When the president announced his decision to close the Guantanamo prison camp just after taking office in January, voters were evenly divided, but public support has been trending away from closing ever since. While the president believes the prison camp established by his predecessor, George W. Bush, weakened national security, only 30% of Americans agree. Seventy-two percent (72%) of Republicans and 56% of voters not affiliated with either major political party oppose trying the terrorist detainees in a civilian court. Democrats are more closely divided, with a plurality (46%) in favor of the administration’s decision to treat the cases as criminal matters for trial in a civilian court. Sixty percent (60%) of the Political Class think the terrorists suspects should be tried in a civilian court, while the identical number (60%) of Mainstream Americans disagreeThe Political Class Index is based on three questions. Political Class voters tend to trust political leaders more than the public at large and are far less skeptical about government. Mainstream voters are skeptical of both big government and big business. Democrats and unaffiliated voters are much more confident than Republicans that New York City will be safe and secure during the trial of the suspected terrorists. Seventy-five percent (75%) of all voters say they have followed news stories about the decision to try the suspected terrorists in a civilian court at least somewhat closely. Thirty-nine percent (39%) say they have been following very closely. Only six percent (6%) are not following the news about the decision at all. Thirty-six percent (36%) of voters agree with Attorney General Eric Holder’s naming of a veteran prosecutor to probe the CIA’s handling of terrorists during the Bush administration, but 49% are opposed to such an investigation. Voter confidence in America’s conduct of the War on Terror has fallen to its lowest level since the first week of January in 2007. Largely unchanged for months is the view by 45% that America is safer today than before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Thirty-six percent (36%) disagree and say the country is not safer. Sixty percent (60%) of voters nationwide say the recent massacre at Fort Hood, Texas should be investigated by military authorities as a terrorist act rather than by civilian authorities as a criminal act. Seventy-three percent (73%) of Texas voters say Major Nadal Malik Hasan should receive the death penalty if he is convicted of the shootings at Fort Hood. Only 16% of voters nationwide say America’s relationship with the Muslim world will be better one year from now, despite the president’s outreach to the global Islamic community. That's the lowest level measured all year. Alors le Speech Cairo,Egypt et  n'auraient servi a rien?  4% d'"amelioration" depuis que Pres. Bush 43 etait a la Maison Blanche, c'est peu.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1611 - 18/11/2009, 16:22 | |
| Apres
- un refus par le POTUS de passer sur FOX News depuis janvier dernier,
- la gue-guerre menee par Anita Dunn,
- l'annonce officielle du depart de celle-ci 1 mois plutot que prevu,
une interview de Barack Obama par Bret Baier s'est tenue et passera aujourd'hui sur les airs...
Il y parlera de la dette. Le president Chinois aurait-il mis les points sur le "i" et aurions nous une chance d'echapper au projet de loi sur la sante?
Updated November 18, 2009
Debt Could Fuel "Double-Dip Recession"
by FOXNews.com
In an interview with Fox News, President Obama also warns that Israel's move to build hundreds of new settlements in a Palestinian area is not helpful to ongoing peace talks, and is potentially "dangerous."
... |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1612 - 18/11/2009, 21:26 | |
| Updated November 18, 2009 Graham Accuses Holder of 'Making Bad History' With Sept. 11 Trial Decisionby FOXNews.com Attorney General Eric Holder stands by his decision to bring five terror detainees into federal court, saying he considered "every alternative" and determined that New York is the venue "most likely to obtain justice for the American people." - Spoiler:
A top Senate Republican on Wednesday accused Attorney General Eric Holder of "making bad history" in his decision to send professed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-conspirators to New York for trial in civilian court.
Speaking at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in which Holder testified, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., raised concerns that the attorney general was imperiling national security by determining that war-time combatants, potentially even Usama bin Laden, might be sent into the criminal system.
"We're making bad history here," Graham said. "The big problem I have is that you're criminalizing the war. ... I think you've made a fundamental mistake here."
Testifying for the first time on the decision, Holder delivered a point-by-point rebuttal to his critics who say he's treating the suspects with a "pre-9/11 mentality."
"I know that we are at war," Holder declared.
The attorney general said he knew his decision would be controversial and considered it a "tough call." He said the defendants could have been tried in either military or civilian court, since, "The 9/11 attacks were both an act of war and a violation of our federal criminal law."
But he stood by his call to bring the five defendants into federal court, saying he considered "every alternative" and determined that New York is the venue "most likely to obtain justice for the American people."
"We need not cower in the face of this enemy. Our institutions are strong ... and our people are ready," Holder said. Asked what might happen if the suspects are acquitted, Holder replied: "Failure is not an option. These are cases that have to be won. I don't expect that we will have a contrary result."
Holder's testimony comes after days of criticism from Republicans and Democrats who warned that New York civilian court is not the appropriate venue and could pose several problems for the prosecution.
Critics say the venue could make it difficult to use evidence obtained without a warrant, create problems over classified information and give Mohammed the platform he wants.
But Holder defended the record of the civilian courts in handling international and domestic terrorists, and said Mohammed would have no more of a platform to "spew his hateful ideology" in New York than in a military commission.
"I'm not scared of what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has to say at trial and no one else needs to be afraid either," Holder said, adding that the judge in the case will ensure "appropriate decorum."
Holder also faced tough criticism Wednesday from Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., the ranking Republican on the committee, who said the Sept. 11 trial and several other administration decisions signal a return to a "pre-9/11 mentality."
"I believe this decision is dangerous. I believe it's misguided. I believe it is unnecessary," Sessions said.
Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., defended Holder, voicing "great confidence" in the nation's top law enforcement official.
"They committed murder here in the United States and we'll seek justice here in the United States," Leahy said of the defendants.
Meanwhile, President Obama said in one of a series of TV interviews during his trip to Asia that those offended by the legal privileges given to Mohammed by virtue of getting a civilian trial rather than a military tribunal won't find it "offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him."
Obama quickly added that he did not mean to suggest he was prejudging the outcome of Mohammed's trial. "I'm not going to be in that courtroom," he said. "That's the job of the prosecutors, the judge and the jury."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Lors de son interview sur FOX News, le POTUS confirme que Guantanamo sera ferme l'annee prochaine mais il refuse de donner une date fixe (Cette fermeture devait etre effectuee pendant sa premiere annee au pouvoir. Il avait meme signe un acte a cet effet.....): Premiere date butoir non-respectee. Tout etait porutant si simple lorsqu'il critiquait le gouvernement Bush 43. |
| | | | EddieCochran
Admin
Nombre de messages : 12768
Age : 64
Localisation : Countat da Nissa
Date d'inscription : 03/11/2008
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 18/11/2009, 23:09 | |
| 613 - Sylvette - p. 62 Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise Mer 18 Nov 2009 à à 21:26
- Citation :
- Lors de son interview sur FOX News, le POTUS confirme que Guantanamo sera ferme l'annee prochaine mais il refuse de donner une date fixe (Cette fermeture devait etre effectuee pendant sa premiere annee au pouvoir. Il avait meme signe un acte a cet effet.....): Premiere date butoir non-respectee
Il ne faut pas être trop dur avec le président Longbow qui n'a pas encore fait flèche de tous ses abois. | |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1614 - 19/11/2009, 03:19 | |
| November 18, 2009 Graham Presses Holder On Reading Osama Bin Laden Miranda Rights VIDEO! SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: "If you're gonna prosecute anybody in civilian court, our law is clear that the moment custodial interrogation occurs, the defendant, the criminal defendant, is entitled to a lawyer and to be informed of their right to remain silent. The big problem I have is you're criminalizing the war, that if we caught bin Laden tomorrow, we have mixed theories and couldn't turn him over to the CIA, the FBI, military intelligence for an interrogation on the battlefield, because now you're saying he's subject to criminal court in the United States and you're confusing the people fighting this war."==========
AUTRE VIDEO 9/11 Victim To Holder: We Are Heartsick Of Theatrics That Will Take Place At KSM Trial Eric Holder is confronted by a woman who lost her son on Flight 93 on September 11, 2001. She says she gives great "exception" to Holder's decision to put KSM and other terrorists on trial in New York. She says it makes New York City a much more "dangerous" place. |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1615 - 19/11/2009, 03:35 | |
| November 18, 2009
Eric Holder's Grave MistakeBy Michael GersonWASHINGTON -- Eric Holder -- distinguished prosecutor, judge, foe of public corruption, basketball enthusiast, mentor to disadvantaged youth -- seemed a reassuring choice for attorney general.
When Holder affirmed during his confirmation hearing that America remains at war with terrorists, Sen. Lindsey Graham enthused, "I'm almost ready to vote for you right now."
So how did Holder become the most destructive member of Barack Obama's Cabinet?
- Spoiler:
Holder launched his tenure by showing disdain for the work of career federal prosecutors when it fit his ideological predispositions. In 2004, a task force from the Eastern District of Virginia investigated allegations of misconduct against the CIA and found insufficient evidence of criminal conduct or intent. Holder ignored the views of these respected prosecutors and appointed his own special prosecutor, appeasing a political constituency that wanted the CIA to be hounded and punished. As a result, morale at a front-line agency in the war on terror has plunged. What possible reason could a bright, ambitious intelligence professional have to pursue a career in counterterrorism when the attorney general of the United States is stubbornly intent on exposing and undermining his colleagues?
Now Holder is displaying an exaggerated respect for the work of career federal prosecutors in New York, also when it fits his ideological predispositions. He is asking them to make the case against five 9/11 conspirators, in a circus atmosphere, with an uncertain chain of evidence (gathered on a battlefield), under a cloud of torture allegations that Holder himself has encouraged.
There is one serious argument for this course: that a civilian court will provide greater legitimacy for the imposition of the death penalty than a military tribunal. But the guilt of these terrorists is not in question. And it is difficult to imagine that those repulsed or impressed by Khalid Sheik Mohammed's confessed crimes will care much about the procedures surrounding his sentencing.
In exchange for a marginal public relations advantage, America will be subjected to the airing of intelligence sources and methods, to the posturing of mass murderers fully aware of their terrorist star power, to the possibility of mistrial and procedural acquittal, and to an increased threat of revenge attacks against New York City. Holder seemed to concede this last complication by asserting that New York is "hardened" against possible terrorism. If I were a New Yorker, that would fall into the category of chilly comfort.
In the end, Holder made a decision memorable for its incoherence. He declared American military tribunals constitutional and appropriate for some terrorists -- then awarded 9/11 mastermind Mohammed a presumption of innocence and the full O.J. Simpson treatment.
In the original plan for the terrorist attacks, according to the report of the 9/11 Commission, Mohammed was supposed to be on the only hijacked plane that landed. He would kill all the males aboard, then make a dramatic speech to the world. At his trial, he will now get his wish.
Holder's choices do not reflect the normal policy shifts between administrations. It is not typical that seven former directors of the CIA have publicly denounced Holder's assault on the institution they served. It is not typical that Holder's immediate predecessor, Michael Mukasey, has called the plan for trials in Manhattan a risky "social experiment" that will raise the risk of attack "very high." Something unique and frightening is taking place: The ACLU is effectively being put in charge of the war on terror.
Holder contends that if people will "in a neutral and detached way, look at the decision ... and try to do something rare in Washington -- leave the politics out of it and focus on what's in the best interest of this country -- I think the criticism will be relatively muted." Holder clearly views himself as Atticus Finch, dispassionately defending the rule of law against the howling mob. In fact, Holder is taking the legal path blazed by former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who defined legal objectivity as indifference to the soiled interests of his country. Holder's liberal principles have become "detached" from the real-world struggle against terrorism: Let justice be done, though the heavens, and buildings, fall.
Wartime American presidents such as Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt have understood that the Constitution is not a suicide pact. So enemy combatants consistently have been judged by a different and harsher legal standard than American citizens. Whatever his initial assurances, Holder does not believe America is at war with terrorists. Even worse, he seems determined to undermine those who do.
checkTextResizerCookie('article_body');
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1616 - 19/11/2009, 03:50 | |
| Obama’s Pacific Trip Encounters Rough Waters By HELENE COOPER and MARTIN FACKLERPublished: November 18, 2009 SEOUL, South Korea — For all of President Obama’s laying claim to the title of “America’s first Pacific president,” Asia was always going to be a tough nut for him to crack.- Spoiler:
Without the first lady at his side, he would not have the kind of round-the-clock coverage the first couple got during their inaugural tour of Europe.
Without a popular gesture like elevating the plight of the Palestinian people to equal status of the Israelis, he would not be showered with the kind of praise he got for his speech to the Muslim world in Cairo.
And without a stop in Indonesia, his boyhood home, he would not bask in the kind of adulation he received in Accra, Ghana.
Instead, with the novelty of a visit as America’s first black president having given way to the reality of having to plow through intractable issues like monetary policy (China), trade (Singapore, China, South Korea), security (Japan) and the 800-pound gorilla on the continent (China), Mr. Obama’s Asia trip has been, in many ways, a long, uphill slog.
So it is no wonder that on the last day of the toughest part of his trip — the China part — Mr. Obama took a hike: a brisk, bracing 30-minute climb up the Great Wall. Around 3:30 Wednesday afternoon, Mr. Obama’s mile-long motorcade arrived at the Badaling section of the Great Wall, which snakes over jagged, rocky mountains.
Visitors to that touristy section of the wall generally encounter a cacophonous melee of vendors, but on this day, the place was like a ghost town, courtesy of the Chinese authorities who had shut it down. (The same thing happened Tuesday when Mr. Obama sped through an empty-but-for-his-entourage Forbidden City.)
Even the two sightseeing trips did not offer a total respite, however, as they were prominent, well-publicized examples of what Mr. Obama did not do in China. He steered clear of public meetings with Chinese liberals, free press advocates and even average Chinese, with his aides citing scheduling conflicts. Mr. Obama did, though, give an interview on Wednesday morning to Southern Weekly, one of China’s most popular newspapers, sometimes known for poking the authorities by breaking news on delicate subjects.
Still, for an American president who has tried to make openness a hallmark of his public persona, it was a departure, made more stark since Chinese authorities largely hijacked Mr. Obama’s one other attempt at a give and take with Chinese students, a town hall meeting in Shanghai, by stuffing the auditorium with young Communist Party aspirants.
A week ago, when Mr. Obama kicked off his trip in Japan, things were not so grim. Tokyo welcomed him as much as a celebrity as a world leader, with cries of “Obama-san!” from the people who gathered in the rain to watch his motorcade pass. Local newspapers gushed about how he told his Japanese hosts that he wanted to eat tuna and Kobe beef. Even the ballyhoo from right-wing bloggers back at home over Mr. Obama’s deep bow to Emperor Akihito did not seem to dent Mr. Obama’s image in Japan; his aides said he was unfazed by the criticism.
But Mr. Obama quickly discovered that popularity on the Asian streets did not necessarily translate into policy successes behind closed doors in the Kantei, the Japanese White House, let alone in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing.
Political analysts in Japan gave Mr. Obama high marks for what was one of his principal goals: improving communication with Japan’s outspoken new leaders.
But the trip managed only to paper over some of the recent differences between the sides, like the contentious issue of the relocation of an unpopular Marine air base in Futenma, on the southern island of Okinawa. Mr. Obama and Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama could not solve that issue, instead merely deferring a tough decision by agreeing to form a working group to look at the relocation problem.
One former Japanese diplomat praised the president for showing patience and avoiding mishaps that would have further tarnished the relationship. The former diplomat, Kunihiko Miyake, who now teaches international affairs at Ritsumeikan University in Kyoto, said the United States and Japan still did not see eye to eye on their single biggest bilateral issue: how to make their cold-war-era alliance relevant in a region where the balance of power had been upset by China’s rise.
“The two countries are in the same bed, but dreaming different dreams,” Mr. Miyake said. “The Americans want the alliance to be stronger, but the Japanese seem to want to do less.”
Mr. Obama’s next stop was Singapore for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference, best known for its quaint custom of making all the leaders wear the same style of colorful shirt, helpfully supplied by the host country. Mr. Obama, in blue, wore a brave grin in the group photo, flanked by the red-shirted Singaporean prime minister and an identical blue-shirted Indonesian president.
This year, APEC made headlines, though not the sort Mr. Obama might have liked. With a deadline looming for a big climate change conference in Copenhagen, the leaders convened a hastily called breakfast meeting to acknowledge that they would not be able to resolve entrenched differences in time.
And then, Mr. Obama departed for China, where the authorities stage-managed and restricted access to his town hall meeting in Shanghai. He did offer a nuanced, oblique critique of China’s rigid controls and restrictions of the Internet and free speech without mentioning, let alone condemning, China’s government.
Mr. Obama and President Hu Jintao presented their two days of talks as substantive, even though they did not appear to make much progress on issues like Iran, China’s currency or human rights. Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman, took the unusual step of sending a statement to reporters — something he did not do for either stop in Japan or Singapore — saying the China trip went well.
In Seoul, where Mr. Obama ends his trip, he will have perhaps his easiest leg. South Korea is a longtime ally that has been cooperating with the United States on vital issues like North Korea and does not appear to have any big ax to grind with the United States.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1617 - 3/12/2009, 03:48 | |
| Comedy Central Scoops Network News on Climate-Gate ScandalWednesday, December 02, 2009  By Diane Macedo  YouTubeJon Stewart discusses leak of controversial emails exchanged by British climate researchers.ABC didn't cover it. CBS didn't either. And NBC apparently wouldn't go near it.- Spoiler:
The network news broadcasts have ignored a growing scandal over evidence of a potential climate cover-up — and now they've even been scooped by the fake news at Comedy Central.
"The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" produced its "reporting" on Climate-gate Tuesday night, when Stewart quipped, “Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!”
Stewart described leaked e-mails from Britain's University of East Anglia, including one referring to a researcher's "trick" to "hide the decline" in some temperature readings in recent decades.
"It's just scientist-speak for using a standard statistical technique — recalibrating data – in order to trick you," Stewart said sarcastically.
Nearly two weeks since news broke of the e-mail scandal, climate change skeptics have gloated; a leading climate scientist has resigned; at least one U.S. lawmaker has called for an investigation, and countless prominent news outlets have deemed the story worthy of major reporting.
Still, according to a report Wednesday morning by the conservative Media Research Center, "none of the broadcast network weekday morning and evening news shows addressed Climate-Gate or the incriminating Jones development. ... This marked 12 days since the information was first uncovered that they have ignored this global scandal."
The Business & Media Institute had just as much trouble finding the networks' Climate-gate coverage.
"An examination of morning and evening news programs on ABC, CBS and NBC since Nov. 20 yielded zero mentions of the scandal, even in the Nov. 25 reports about Obama going to Copenhagen to discuss the need for emissions reductions," the Institute reported Wednesday.
But during that time, the Institute says, "the networks reported on pro-golfer Tiger Woods' 'minor' car accident at least 37 times. They also found time to report on an orphaned Moose and the meal selection at the president’s State Dinner."
Media Research Center President Brent Bozell reacted to the findings saying, "To pretend this story simply doesn’t exist is damning to journalism."
That left Stewart to fill the void — with analysis of the comedic variety.
The comedian mocked the scientists for discarding the raw data used to formulate the adjusted temperature data that much of the scientific community agrees confirms global warming is occurring.
"Why would you throw out raw data from the '80s? I still have Penthouses from the '70s!" he joked.
Click here to see Stewart's Climate-gate broadcast.
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1618 - 3/12/2009, 04:00 | |
| Au sujet du 1617: c'est uniquement pour faire plaisir a Shansaa qui a dit apprecier Jon Stewart.  |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1619 - 4/12/2009, 22:01 | |
| Aie aie aie aie aie aie aie... (j'ose esperer qu'on va pouvoir dire "bye bye" au cap-and-trade (l'impot et les impositions ecolo - je me demande ou en sont les actions Gore...) U.N. to Investigate Leak of Fudged Climate Data E-MailsFriday, December 04, 2009  APFlock of geese fly past a smokestack at a Kansan coal power plant.LONDON — The United Nations will conduct its own investigation into e-mails leaked from a leading British climate science center in addition to the probe by the University of East Anglia, a senior U.N. climate official said Friday.- Spoiler:
E-mails stolen from the climate unit at the University of East Anglia appeared to show some of world's leading scientists discussing ways to shield data from public scrutiny and suppress others' work. Those who deny the influence of man-made climate change have seized on the correspondence to argue that scientists have been conspiring to hide evidence about global warming.
In an interview with BBC radio, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, said the issue raised by the e-mails was serious and said "we will look into it in detail,"
"We will certainly go into the whole lot and then we will take a position on it," he said. "We certainly don't want to brush anything under the carpet."
The University of East Anglia has defended the integrity of the science published by the climate unit and its researchers, but on Thursday said it would investigate whether some of the data had been fudged. Phil Jones, the director of the unit, stepped down earlier in the week pending the result of the investigation.
East Anglia said its review will examine the e-mails and other information "to determine whether there is any evidence of the manipulation or suppression of data which is at odds with acceptable scientific practice."
The theft of the e-mails and their publication online — only weeks before the U.N. summit on global warming — has been politically explosive, even if researchers say their content has no bearing on the principles of climate change itself.
Britain's Ed Miliband, the climate change secretary, acknowledged the revelations may have an impact on the Copenhagen talks on a new global emissions reduction pact, but dismissed as "flat Earth-ers" critics who claim the e-mails are proof the case for man-made climate change is exaggerated.
"We need maximum transparency including about all the data but it's also very, very important to say one chain of e-mails, potentially misrepresented, does not undo the global science," Miliband said Friday. "I think we want to send a very clear message to people about that."
"There will be people that want to use this to try and undermine the science and we're not going to let them," he said.
Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives have grilled government scientists on the leaked e-mails in a hearing Wednesday in Washington, but the scientists countered that the e-mails don't change the fact that the earth is warming.
"The e-mails do nothing to undermine the very strong scientific consensus ... that tells us the earth is warming, that warming is largely a result of human activity," said Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
She said the e-mails don't address data from her agency or the U.S. space agency NASA, which both keep independent climate records that show dramatic global warming.
DE QUO-A? Qu'entends-je? Gore annulerait Copenhagen et "on" demanderait le rappel de son prix Nobel????  Il va devoir rendre ses sous aussi??? Il va encore nous faire une depression nerveuse, le povre. |
| | | | EddieCochran
Admin
Nombre de messages : 12768
Age : 64
Localisation : Countat da Nissa
Date d'inscription : 03/11/2008
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 5/12/2009, 01:05 | |
| - Citation :
- LONDON — The United Nations will conduct its own investigation into e-mails leaked from a leading British climate science center in addition to the probe by the University of East Anglia, a senior U.N. climate official said Friday.
J'ai brièvement visité le très intéressant site de l'Université East Anglia. On y parle du piratage des données de la section climatologie, affaire que des gausseurs ridiculisent sous l'appellation de Climate-Gate. Laissons aux vrais scientifiques régler le froid qui s'abat sur leur communauté. Une éminente personnalité, Sir Muir Russell, a été chargée de présider une commission d'enquête indépendante chargée de faire la lumière sur le piratage de 3000 documents informlatiques et de 1000 courriels - une broutille de 200 Mo -. http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/dec/homepagenews/CRUreview Le nom de ce personnage est suivi des lettres KCB FRSE. Ce sont des distinctions toutes britanniques qui échappent à l'entendement des grenouilles républicaines en mal d'identité que nous sommes en France. Pour étoffer ma culture gé en vue d'un éventuel quizz géant à 250K€ j'ai cherché à déchiffrer ces deux sigles énigmatiques : Le premier KCB correspond à un ordre de Chevalerie traduisible à la volée en Chevalier Commandeur (ou Dame Commandeur) Grand Croix du Très Honorable Ordre du Bain - Citation :
- KCB = Knight Commander (or Dame Commander) Grand Cross of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath, 1725. Order of Chivalry. Remodelled 1815, and enlarged many times since. The Order is divided into civil and military divisions. Women became eligible for the Order from 1 January 1971. The Most Honourable Order of the Bath is the third-highest order of chivalry in the British honours system. It is primarily awarded to serving member of the armed forces, and to some civilian servants. While the term "Knight of the Bath" goes back into medieval times, referring to a ritual of washing followed by a night of prayer, the order was formally established by King George I on 18 May 1725. Originally, the Order included the Sovereign, the Great Master and 36 Knights Companions. The Order is presently limited to 120 Knights and Dames Grand Commanders, 355 Knights and Dames Commanders, and 1,925 Companions. The limit does not include foreign honorary members and Royal Knights.
. Le second sigle, FRSE pour Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, parle de lui-même. Pour visiter la Société royale d'Edimbourg voici le lien : http://www.rse.org.uk/ Cette institution est fortement impliquée dans la recherche scientifique sur l'évolution du climat. Tous les jours on peut apprendre des trucs intéressants sur la vaste Toile mondiale si l'on regarde au-delà des apparences. J'espère que cette digression vous a réchauffé le cœur. | |
| | | | Biloulou
Nombre de messages : 54566
Localisation : Jardins suspendus sur la Woluwe - Belgique
Date d'inscription : 27/10/2008
| | Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise 5/12/2009, 12:36 | |
| Ah ! C'est vrai que le Net regorge de curiosités qui sont autant de sources de savoir, bien qu'elles soient souvent cachées par des khôneries incommensurables, éhontées et d'une gigantesque mauvaise foi. C'est un cadeau que vous nous faites là, ces curiosités dénichées et qui sont autant de petits délices intellectuels. Merci Eddie ! | |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1622 - 11/12/2009, 10:41 | |
| Rasmussen (et meme gallup est d'accord maintenant..) Date .......... Presidential Approval Index - Strongly Approve - Strongly Disapprove - Total Approve Total Disapprove | 12/10/2009 | -12 | 28% | 40% | 46% | 53% | | 12/09/2009 | -10 | 29% | 39% | 48% | 52% | | 12/08/2009 | -11 | 27% | 38% | 47% | 52% | | 12/07/2009 | -11 | 27% | 38% | 49% | 50% | | 12/06/2009 | -14 | 25% | 39% | 47% | 52% | | 12/05/2009 | -14 | 26% | 40% | 47% | 52% | | 12/04/2009 | -12 | 28% | 40% | 46% | 54% | | 12/03/2009 | -11 | 29% | 40% | 46% | 54% | | 12/02/2009 | -12 | 27% | 39% | 47% | 52% | | 12/01/2009 | -13 | 27% | 40% | 47% | 52% | | 11/30/2009 | -14 | 26% | 40% | 47% | 52% | | 11/29/2009 | No polling | | 11/28/2009 | No polling | | 11/27/2009 | No polling | | 11/26/2009 | No polling |
|
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 623 - 11/12/2009, 14:55 | |
| Tiens!! elle non plus n'a pas du comprendre le speech comme le reporter du nouvelobs l'a analyse! Palin Likes Obama's Nobel SpeechSarah Palin and President Obama don't agree on much, but last year's Republican vice presidential nominee just gave the president's defense of "just wars" a thumbs up in an interview with USA TODAY. In fact, she said that the president's address in Oslo, where he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize today, reminded her of what she wrote on the same subject in her hugely successful memoir, Going Rogue.
"I liked what he said," Palin told us in a phone interview. "I talked too in my book about the fallen nature of man and why war is necessary at times." For Palin, that view strikes close to home: Her eldest son, 20-year-old Track, is an Army infantry member who recently returned from a tour of duty in Iraq. |
| | | | Invité
Invité
| | Sujet: 1624 - 13/12/2009, 17:00 | |
| ... et pourtant il(s) continuent son(leur) CHANGEment(chambardement).  Date ........... Presidential Approval Index - Strongly Approve - Strongly Disapprove - Total Approve - Total Disapprove | 12/13/2009 | -19 | 23% | 42% | 46% | 53% | | 12/12/2009 | -16 | 25% | 41% | 46% | 53% | | 12/11/2009 | -12 | 27% | 39% | 47% | 51% | | 12/10/2009 | -12 | 28% | 40% | 46% | 53% | | 12/09/2009 | -10 | 29% | 39% | 48% | 52% | | 12/08/2009 | -11 | 27% | 38% | 47% | 52% | | 12/07/2009 | -11 | 27% | 38% | 49% | 50% | | 12/06/2009 | -14 | 25% | 39% | 47% | 52% | | 12/05/2009 | -14 | 26% | 40% | 47% | 52% | | 12/04/2009 | -12 | 28% | 40% | 46% | 54% | | 12/03/2009 | -11 | 29% | 40% | 46% | 54% | | 12/02/2009 | -12 | 27% | 39% | 47% | 52% | | 12/01/2009 | -13 | 27% | 40% | 47% | 52% | | 11/30/2009 | -14 | 26% | 40% | 47% | 52% |
---------- | 01/21/2009 | +28 | 44% | 16% | 65% | 30% |
|
| | | | 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
| |
| |
| |
|
