Sobre lo cuir. Temp 1. Cap #1: Estudios Homosexuales

Otku kuuluu että järvenpässä on uus Euroospar. - Jär. Siitä on mähtä onko kovakuria mainikin. - Miten niin mukaan? - Nau, ne on Euroospar tolaisia. - Voi että asulla huonat wizzit. - Puuken ne wizzit. Euroospar on avattu järvenpääntokman niin. Tervetuloa hollantumaan. - Faskiltiia. - Miten niin mukaan? - Miten niin mukaan? - Miten niin mukaan? - Miten niin mukaan? - Miten niin mukaan? [Muutko] - Miten niin mukaan? - Miten niin mukaan? - Miten niin mukaan? - Miten niin mukaan? se ei sulla другой genera boringi menni, allatko käci tantua voi k Lemme lervices, tuokaaeps 보는 sortir lön Markea et ruhkliv GoProiden ja se on tullut saadaan tullut, se on tullut käsivänä. Sitten se on nähden luon, että se on sitte käsivänä. Se on tullut, että se on sitte käsivänä. Se on sitte käsivänä. Lepjeektivinen on tullut hieman. Sitten on sitte käsivänä. Donald Trump, who he would have been obligated to attack this very classic rhetoric of the preventive war. He says that he will force Israel and you say that he might have been beaten. How do we understand who trained the other in this war? I don't see anything. I'm not a citizen. I've never had a phone call. But I heard the news about the war. He said that everything was remarkable. He said that we are intervened. Because from the time when Israel was decided to take the decision to intervene, the interests of the United States and the menacea were determined to intervene. The intervention was done. So he had to intervene in a preventive way. I think that he was the reason that he said that the truth is that the children are moving. And as remarkable as it is, this idea that for a long time the little brother was no longer there. You know, once again, when we were in the same alliance, there was the force that protected the people and therefore the force decided for the people. The foreign policy, Israel was among the people of Washington, practically until the failure of the Sloan agreements. Even though the foreign policy of Arab countries said that it was the time that was among the people of the same country. Today it's over. The Sloan rupture was the moment of emancipation of the small brother of the Israeli-Para-Porogan brother. It was a gigantic armoured arm, and there some of the presidents who were successful from George Dabelli-Ubouche to the current and passing by Obama and Biden, the small brother of the Israeli, was no longer there. The small brother of the Israeli, no longer there, we can maybe adapt that because very long time, the states, or very long time, the United States and Israel have been aligned with the foreign policy of Iran. It is understood in the 80s when we learn from the 85s that the United States will disarm the Iran book by the internal affairs of Israel, especially the forces of the war of Iran, that we are talking about, perhaps the rupture between Israel and the United States on this subject of the 82nd operation, the peace of the United States in the south of Lebanon and the creation of the Esbola, which is followed by Israel. Its objective is to counter-carry the political power and the military of the Esbola. And so the Iran and its sides on the political side of the Iranian regime. So you are right when I started this adventure of the failure of the Oslo agreement, it was to show that the rupture was definitive. But you are right, the Russians, the Russians of the United States, you are right, it is almost correlated to what we call the post-bipolarity, that is to say, to finally the fate of the wall. So there were 82 of course, and that is already the period where the USSR can start to be removed from international war. But indeed, we see, as we know the framework of the Cold War, that there is a diffraction of the interests between Israel and the United States, between the small brothers and the big brothers. The big satan is a little satan, by the way, by the way, the size of the 79th. And we understand that the Israeli game is the regional Germany, while the proper super-publics are not to help regional powers, because it limits you. The national power is acceptable, when it is really an affidavit. From the moment we can see a regional power to start to be autonomous. What is also true in Israel, that the Arabian Arabians say to you in American vision, and I add that with Trump, the interest of super-publics is no longer like other times, having affidavits, it is having affidavits, with which we can build a negative relationship that is profitable to you. And that is the reason why, Mr. Trump said, "Someone is the power of the power of the Caracas, or some is the power of the power of the Iran, especially when it is in the faeblie, and that I can impose it, a certain element of my will is the faeblie, which is not necessarily the intellectual of Israel. It is the reason why, in this current war, I think, we want to play the predictions, that the alignment between Guillaume and Israel and the United States is not limited or eternal. How did you explain Bertrand-Badi? You have heard of it in some of these discourses. In itself, I don't know, but Donald Trump, once again, in any case, refers to the price of the deal, to the amount of land in 1979, this American diplomat, in the amount of land in the United States, in 44 days, why come back on this episode in 2026? Is it a way to justify the war to come back to this episode of 1979? For reasons. And that you have been doing this, we have not been in evidence. Firstly, it is to show that the presence of the United States is not the Iranian people and the uncertainty of their future. It is the interest of the United States. It is a new, America First, Make America Great to Gain. It is in the logic of its grammar. And the second reason is to show that there is a content between Iran and the United States. That is, the problem of Iran for Trump is not the pain of a oppressed people or a people on which we have taken when it is manifested, or a people who is strangled, it is not forgotten, it is not more about sanctions. The Iranian problem is a people who have defied the United States. And so, it is a whole other language than the regime change. There are also many questions about the United States perhaps many asked to give Trump an intervening, even though those who already wanted to convince Barack Obama to come to the armed confrontation. So, he had nothing to do with it. He had even concluded that the nuclear war was taking place in Sanroa. We also heard a lot about Bertrand Badi. And it was also the time of the attack of Venezuela. He would say to put in his regime that we found parades to counter the dollar. He said, "We have to dollarize their exchanges. They will send their petro, the Chinese, Yuan, and then to Rupi Island." This hypothesis, because it circulates a lot. As if it was a fundamental element of these interventions. And is it possible to have a starting point to answer this? It doesn't matter. Yes. So, I think there are two things that we have to see behind this posture. The first thing is that the United States are able to redefine a minimum Germany. That is to say that the old Germanic conception that was ceded by the Pag of the 15th, between the Arabis and the United States, the 14th February 1945, the day of the 19th of 1935, all these military alliances, call the Sainteau, which was the military alliance that united the United States and the Great Britain in favourable countries, in the Middle East, all of this was finished. It is, indeed, and, above all, essential to convening an international order that preserves the essential, the sovereignty of the dollar, the pre-dominance of the dollar, but also the fact that the United States would not be humiliated as long as it was at the top of the total price. That is a very, very important element. The second element, you have to be aware of all the worst that we live in, and, indeed, the situation with the high-end, in the most expensive and uncertainties, comes from this day of 2018, where Mr Trump had to decrypt the agreement of the 14th of July 2015 on the nuclear war. Why? Because we have seen that the signature of this agreement was to open the republic that is now in the world. To do it again, in the world of aviation. What is the most expensive of the Iranian society that is very world-ized, is to see very Westernized. Because we have seen at this point the economy is reconstructed. And we have seen, at this point, under the presidency of the Iranian people, we have seen this very public Islamic to enter the world, it is forgotten. And the day where this agreement was described by the President of the United States, I imagine the mass of tapas and pistach and caviar that had a huge voice of terror, coming from the most conservative who found its living cage. That is, we will be able to refer the Islamic Republic to the Western Union. We will be able to reprendre the repression in the deaths of political behavior. We will be able to impose a vision at the same time predatory of the Iranian economy. They won. That is, this alliance is very strong. Among the ultra-conservators and the Trumpism is the origin of the catastrophe that we live in. The President Trump has all the latitude in the world. We can't take all the latitude to revoke time, to reprendre or not. 4 weeks, 2 weeks, 6 weeks. It could be reduced. It is not a war. I was there for both. Is there any American soldiers on the Iranian territory? No, we are not going to throw ourselves in the conditions we will do. I think it is a mistake to believe that the President or the President will do the same. We will go there for a long time. We will go there until we are ready to do and not to do. It is stupidity. The President Trump is sure that our enemies understand that we will go as far as necessary to defend the American interests. We are not stupid. He is not necessary to send 200,000 soldiers to the war and stay for 20 years. The Defense Minister of Speed is trying to counter this. He is not stupid. It is the most important today. Bertrand Badi doesn't know what is the longest of the United States and Israel. In the air, in addition to the truth, that we know it. When Mike Johnson, President of the President of the United States, does not have a war. He does not have the intention to let the operation on Iran and the limited operation. It reminds us of a certain special operation in Ukraine. We don't know what are the objectives. We must distinguish between the United States and Israel. I think that we don't know what the plan of the United States is, but I think that the United States doesn't know what the plan is. This is the big problem. The story is to show that the consequences of a certain situation are more murderous. And the most prone to the Movera reflex. That is to say, we have decided, we have chosen. On the other hand, I think that the things are much clearer and much more accurate. It has been 30 years that Mr Netanyahu, the high attribute of the United Nations and of many other places, you explain that tomorrow morning, Iran is going to have the armatomic and after tomorrow, Israel will be able to manage the map and we will not intervene. Well, all the specialists and experts tell us that it was a lie, to escape the plans of intervention. I think that exists. For the United States, an intervention on the ground would be a catastrophe. First, because the story is shown that there is no turning back. And secondly, because you have to be obliged that the electoral pact is very good, it was "Make America Great Again", it is shown to the musk. What I would call the "political and diplomatic conflict" or "military conflict". But there is another piece, which is "No Buts and the Ground", that is to say, not too sure. And indeed, we see that the "sondage", the "sondage" is clearly a majority of the American of the "sondage" of the United States. That's our invention. So I think that the United States is a strategy of aromas. That is to say, we have to do something that we will perhaps be object to. And the game of Israel is quite clear. It is to push the United States to do what they want to do, because once they start to do it, they will have to remain the same. In 2010, when Donald Trump had announced the "American" troops after the "Turk" in Syria, he had said intervening in the Middle East was the worst decision of the history of the United States. And the forced to constate Bertrand-Badi that he did not take the blame to the United States, not to reveal the nationalism or patriotism as we have not constated after some war, launched by his predecessors. Yes, because when he was a war, even when he was hostile to the idea of this war, what we call the reflex of the "reports" is not agreeable, but we still support it. The last "sondage" was made a week after the start of the intervention that the "reports" did not play. And that he is in a very risky strategy. Stay with us, Bertrand-Badi. You are the first guest of our series about the mechanics of the war that the United States would be the main counter-liorant and its allies. I think you are not the "alliance" but proxies, it is not very satisfying as a word. So, we seem to be the same for the European allies, the European allies, the European allies, the more complicated it is in the Union. We must remember that the Spanish and one of the rare states is found openly opposed to this war. The French culture, the world culture, I agree. We must act with coherence and defend the same values when we speak of Ukraine, Gaza, Venezuela, or Greenland. The question is not to know if we are in the allies. Obviously, we are in the same country. And not the people, or the Spanish government. The question is to know if we are on the right side of the international law. And so, on the right. The head of the Spanish Prime Minister, who is one of the rare states in Europe with the island of Ireland and also the north-east of the Norwegian, to be raised as the international citizen in Iran, as well as the international law, but also as well as the success of the previous interventions and understand how the Spanish people were. As in the year 2003, José María Aznar, who are the political and historical racines of the Spanish people, is Maria Elisa Alonzo. Thank you very much for being with us. You are the head of the conference of the island of the Orain, the central centre of research and documentation on the Americans. First, what is this two strategic basis where we have felt that the United States is in Spain and in which Madrid refuses to use in this moment, in which context, it was a dream, I don't know if we have to say, to delegate the press, to the press, to give the Spanish dictator a sign in 1953. So, it was the Madrid pact, where Madrid gave its two bases to the island, and it changed from a sort of legitimacy of the regime of the dictator and also a change of economic z. So, it was a little bit in the Spanish imagination, as a negative point of view, knowing that all the Spanish republics were enduring the dictatorship, and even the citizens who fought against the dictatorship and they felt that they were in the same way as the United States. In which occasion, the United States used its military bases in the south of Spain. In fact, every time they use these bases with the agreement of the government, the sovereignty of the territory belongs to the Spanish government and not the United States. Sometimes, it is for a question of defense, or of legitimate sages. Not really like in this case, with an intervention like Mr. Badi, actually, when there is an intervention and that does not respect the international law and the advice of the United Nations. Besides, it is a bit the relationship of 17th century. In 1989, the Gulf War and the Gulf War have been put on this base but, more recently, Pedro Sanchez has entered the United Nations to lead weapons of the fuel and fuel of the material in the Israeli army in the framework of the Gaza War. Before Washington and Israel were not able to attack on Iran and a week ago, Pedro Sanchez had already been sermone, and several reprisings for Donald Trump to have been brought to the military to the asylum-based alliance that he regularly posited Pedro Sanchez today to say, "We can't do this." In fact, he has put a little talk about the government that does not allow it to be said. The speech that he has in the back of the Spanish is that the other presidents do not allow it to be said that they cannot be able to to think about 5% of their country. And, in fact, he will not lie. And, as the priority on the state of the United Nations, if he goes to the State of the United Nations, it will be determined by the financing of the health and education. That is what the speech is actually. We could only realize these efforts by increasing the impacts of each worker of almost 3,000 euros per year, by supporting the social restrictions in the matter of the shortage, of malady and maternity, this level of money will be incompatible and not only on the site of the president of the Spanish but also on the budget. The level of military money has been brought to 2,1% of the GDP. This is a high historically high-speed which, in the meantime, is said to agree to increase the expenses. But, until 2025, in the meantime, we let it go. When the Spanish is entered in the year 1982, Maria Elisa Alonzo, the Spanish government was socialist at the time. It is therefore not a socialist tradition that Pedro Sánchez perpetuated in the war or in the increase of military expenses. Is Spain already remunerable more seriously, its belonging to the neutrality of the Northern Atlantic? In fact, 1982 was a socialist government. It was a conservative government, but then he made the Gonzales, which was socialist, which won the elections in his program "The name of the time". But still, he changed his opinion and in 1986, if the convo that he referred to a man was not a citizen, he brought him to justice of 50%. Maybe the Spanish society is a society that does not like conflicts and does not like interventions by values, by principles. So, all intervention is very, very question about the power of the 50 years. It was the time that many people were aware when Maria Aznar, head of the governor of the Spanish government in 2003 and the intervention was held in Iraq, it was supported by the protest of immense demonstrations in all the Spain but also a disapprovision of the left Spanish or political class in all its spectrum. Of the left and the right. We had never experienced a Spanish movement, so strong to counter-intervention. So more than 80% of the population was protested. And it was understood, because the same time was held in the name of the war, in this moment it is always a solution to that. Because, as we know, in the last week, there was a sound that was made by the country. The most important thing is that the Spanish people were three or four and the Spanish people were against this intervention. So, it means that it is similar to the right. So, it was re-evaluated in 2003 and MENTON, it was re-evaluated from a completely different society. The society was very strong. Where the idea of some people was also understood in these days by the Spanish tradition that Pedro Sanchez would take these positions especially for political and internal issues because he knows that his public opinion is most important in any case, his discourse is even without a fair and very net. Against the interventionism of the United States, Spain does not put anti-militarism because it sent a shipper for a mission of protection after the island was established by the Iranian drones. Perhaps, for the conclusion, Maria Liza Lanzo the diaspora Venezuelan or Cuban did not convince the successive governments of this joint of the United States in their will to destroy the regimes in recent years, Cuba is in a form of hope today, that is, of the diaspora of these two countries today in Spain and of the village where they try to break down on Pedro Sanchez. In fact, there are not many influences. There is no problem. The government is a socialist and it is not about its selector and if there is no Cuban diaspora and Venezuelan who is more conservative and especially the Spanish society has criticized a lot of the intervention of Donald Trump or Venezuelan for the attitude of Cuba but also the question of the Russia is really a non-conflict that is coming from the diaspora and a lot of influence at the moment on the purposes of Sanchez. Thank you Maria Liza Lanzo and the rest of the conference is the "Lorraine" you are also living in the center of research and documentation on the Americans and it is true that Bertrand Badi has listened to you with a lot of attention maybe a little bit. We can react to a lot of things but Pedro Sanchez is a international right until we can impose this limit to Donald Trump because there is a word that is appearing in the United States in public and is making a "say no-o-ching" to say that we try to make Donald Trump and his discourse and his acts in a cat in a trap that respects international right but we can do that until now. Yes, I think what we have to notice is that the "Polite and Transgender" of Pedro Sanchez does not limit to this Christian right on Gaza, he has had extreme and also has been in the right to the right to the right to the right to the right and that is how it is constituted in Europe, a "team-it coalition" where the Dutch people will find and also the Slovak and also the Belgian who make different decisions and also the Slovak and also the Slovak and also the Slovak and also the Belgian who make different decisions and they call it that that is the chance of the "Syhovi" of Europe if Europe does not make it the "definite" of the "uniting" of the international right is disappeared this "unity" of the "political and transverse" that is being published considerably. So, it needs a "trade union" and this "trade union" is the right to the international right. International, thank you very much Bertrand Badi for coming to our first guest in our series of "Culture World" on the mechanics of the war your last book in Paris in Jean-Vierciodil Jacob by the way, the powerful "Cella Gears" the mysterious "social energy" thank you very much for coming to our series of "Culture World" and this is the "Rovite Press International" French culture international four-in-a-tune The war in the Middle East will be seen at the "Los Lors de l'O" the "Bareine" will be read by the "Lus de l'O" of the "Désal Mendo" which will be transformed in "O de mer" in "O potable" in "O do" in "O do" will be used for irrigation because if the oil has enriched the global water the water will be used for irrigation and the new "Guy" of "Supreme Ira Nien" Mochetabara Menei, our "Bloomberg" and "Ran International" will be used for irrigation and the water will be used for irrigation and the water will be used for irrigation 10 pros seeminglylösiä olkaa enchytit commands delicenhan. P pantamassa onuesten cast hear pasain kysy必 Old (ad collision) Hämmösi llähkämmalta ihmemy ennen Allegon. extinguiin yle του poämhviä tarvitse vuosisiin sari damn nove어�aisen bi hippinen, Uberiertelee perinessi epoxy onalyksien pahdansan ja Palestiniana. ientä ja colegСyö WE. Laządina #Seiseksi 11. Seuraavuttaa näyttääoden kanssa määrä fik Battery admirai on eri. Kärry expects Concept Edge Oli onko katsominen, että onko katsominen, että onko katsominen, että onko katsominen,