I don’t know you, you don’t know me
We don’t know each other
Yet we do, somehow,
Some way, We are all connected.
We are connected to this life by many threads
Which we only notice when they are broken
Whether family, friends, work or welfare, all
Pull us apart in different dimensions in time.
You are connected to me by small pleasures
Which we only notice when we stop giving
Whether interest, intent, wish or wisdom, all
Pull us apart in different dimensions in space.
We are connected to each other for ever now
Which we only notice when we are apart again
Whether travel, trust, freedom or failure, all
Pull us apart in different dimensions in love.
Antoine Leiris wrote although the terrorists had taken ‘an exceptional life’ they would ‘not have my hatred’ Rose Troup Buchanan
Thursday 19 November 2015
Paris terror attack
Husband pays touching tribute to ‘love of his life’ in defiant message to attackers
The husband of a woman killed in the Paris attacks has written a touching message to the “love of my life” and promised to raise their 17-month-old son “happy and free ”.
Antoine Leiris, whose wife Helene Muyal-Leiris was among the 89 killed in the Bataclan concert hall attack on Friday evening, posted an emotional message on Facebook.
Mr Leiris, who first met his 35-year-old wife 12 years ago, told the attackers he would “not grant you the gift of my hatred.”
In a post – shared more than 60,000 times by Tuesday morning – Mr. Leiris said in French he would raise their son Melvil “happy and free” and that responding to “hatred with anger is falling victim to the same ignorance that has made you what you are.”
Antoine Leiris lost his wife Helene in the Bataclan theatre in Paris.
His Facebook tribute to his wife and challenge to her killers has since been shared thousands of times. Mr Leiris read out the letter to BBC News in Paris.
“IOTD” is image of the day, a concept I came up with. I teach visual meditative therapy – or in easy terms – a mini mental holiday. For some people it is very difficult for them to get their image right. I post an image a day for people to use in their mini mental vacay. Some are serious, some are silly, and some are just beautiful!”
Wrong About Iraq, Wrong About Iran
by Robert Greenwald
The framework agreement that the U.S. and its international partners reached with Iran that blocks Tehran’s pathways to building a nuclear bomb is several weeks old, yet the usual suspects have already denounced it as a “bad deal.”
Former George W. Bush administration official John Bolton called the agreement “a surrender of classic proportions,” and for Bolton, war is the only answer.
“The inconvenient truth is that only military action … can accomplish what is required,”
Bolton wrote in The New York Times last month.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu opposes it too. “I think this is a bad deal,” hesaid on Sunday, adding, “I think there is still time to reach a good deal, a better deal.”
How do we get a “better deal”? Netanyahu doesn’t have an answer.
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) also criticized the agreement on Sunday, but he went a bit further than Netanyahu. “I don’t want a war, but…,” Graham said. But what?
The South Carolina Republican said that Iran would have to completely capitulate and agree to dismantle its entire nuclear program and address other issues that weren’t part of the nuclear talks or face war.
What do Bolton, Netanyahu, Graham and a whole host of others in Washington opposing this deal have in common?
They were passionate supporters of the Iraq war and continue to hold that view today.
~~GALLERY~~
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
Here’s what Netanyahu told Congress in September 2002, five months before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq: “If you take out Saddam … I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region.”
And here’s what the Israeli Prime Minister told Congress just last month: “The agreement … would all but guarantee that Iran gets nuclear weapons.”
Graham said in 2003 that Saddam Hussein “is lying … when he says he doesn’t have weapons of mass destruction.”
And here’s Bolton in late 2002: “The Iraqi people would be unique in history if they didn’t welcome the overthrow of this dictatorial regime.”
Of course, we all know how this played out: no WMDs, tens of thousands of Americans killed or wounded, countless Iraqi civilians dead, nearly $4 trillion spent, and ISIS on a rampage throughout the Middle East.
Why should we listen to these people again?
The reality is that there is no better Iran deal, and those calling for one never offer a viable plan on how to get there. In fact, the real alternative is war, which will come at tremendous cost.
“After you’ve dropped those bombs on those hardened facilities, what happens next?” former commander of U.S. Central Command Gen. Anthony Zinni (Ret.) once wondered.
“If you follow this all the way down, eventually I’m putting boots on the ground somewhere. And like I tell my friends, if you like Iraq and Afghanistan, you’ll love Iran.”
The framework agreement the U.S. and its international partners reached with Iran that blocks Tehran’s pathways to building a nuclear bomb is barely a week old and yet the usual suspects have already denounced it as a “bad deal.”
It Is What It Is 