President Barack Obama Humiliates Benjamin Netanyahu

[muckraker10021]

President Barack Obama got 80% of the ‘Jewish’ vote. Netanyahu called Obama’s top ‘Jewish’ advisors, Axelrod & Emanuel self-hating Jews. The top US military commander in the Middle-East Gen David Petraeus, warns the Pentagon and the White House that Israel is empowering al Qaeda, and as a result American men & women are being killed. What is the response of Netanyahu when the US ask him to curtail the building of settlements?? His response is Fuck You! What Chutzpah!

<blockquote>
....Here is how the relationship with Israel works
A) We give them Billions $$$$ per year = then we should thank them for accepting the money

B) We fight wars they instigated thru their amen corner in washington and NeoCons= we thank them for not shedding any of their money or blood

C) They deliberately attack the USS LIBERTY in 1967 killing 34 sailors= we sent them the napalm and torpedos used

As an old polish peasant proverb says “the jew screams in pain as he is slapping your face”.... </blockquote>


<hr noshade color="#0000FF" size="6"></hr>

Benjamin Netanyahu, Humiliated after <div align="right"><!-- MSTableType="layout" --><img src="http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/benjamin_netanyahu-web.jpg" align="right"></div>Barack Obama 'Dumped Him For Dinner'
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7076431.ece


March 26, 2010

by Giles Whittell, Washington, and James Hider, in Jerusalem

For a head of government to visit the White House and not pose for photographers is rare. For a key ally to be left to his own devices while the President withdraws to have dinner in private was, until this week, unheard of. Yet that is how Binyamin Netanyahu was treated by President Obama on Tuesday night, according to Israeli reports on a trip viewed in Jerusalem as a humiliation.

After failing to extract a written promise of concessions on settlements, Mr Obama walked out of his meeting with Mr Netanyahu but invited him to stay at the White House, consult with advisers and “let me know if there is anything new”, a US congressman, who spoke to the Prime Minister, said.

“It was awful,” the congressman said. One Israeli newspaper called the meeting “a hazing in stages”, poisoned by such mistrust that the Israeli delegation eventually left rather than risk being eavesdropped on a White House telephone line. Another said that the Prime Minister had received “the treatment reserved for the President of Equatorial Guinea”.

Left to talk among themselves Mr Netanyahu and his aides retreated to the Roosevelt Room. He spent a further half-hour with Mr Obama and extended his stay for a day of emergency talks to try to restart peace negotiations. However, he left last night with no official statement from either side. He returned to Israel yesterday isolated after what Israeli media have called a White House ambush for which he is largely to blame.

Sources said that Mr Netanyahu failed to impress Mr Obama with a flow chart purporting to show that he was not responsible for the timing of announcements of new settlement projects in east Jerusalem. Mr Obama was said to be livid when such an announcement derailed the visit to Israel by Joe Biden, the Vice-President, this month and his anger towards Israel does not appear to have cooled.

Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, cast doubt on minor details in Israeli accounts of the meeting but did not deny claims that it amounted to a dressing down for the Prime Minister, whose refusal to freeze settlements is seen in Washington as the main barrier to resuming peace talks.

The Likud leader has to try to square the rigorous demands of the Obama Administration with his nationalist, ultra-Orthodox coalition partners, who want him to stand up to Washington even though Israel needs US backing in confronting the threat of a nuclear Iran.

“The Prime Minister leaves America disgraced, isolated and altogether weaker than when he came,” the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz said.

In their meeting Mr Obama set out expectations that Israel was to satisfy if it wanted to end the crisis, Israeli sources said. These included an extension of the freeze on Jewish settlement growth beyond the ten-month deadline next September, an end to building projects in east Jerusalem and a withdrawal of Israeli forces to positions held before the second intifada in September 2000.

Newspaper reports recounted how Mr Netanyahu looked “excessively concerned and upset” when he pulled out a flow chart to show Mr Obama how Jerusalem planning permission worked and how he could not have known that the announcement that hundreds more homes were to be built would be made when Mr Biden arrived in Jerusalem.

Mr Obama then suggested that Mr Netanyahu and his staff stay at the White House to consider his proposals so that if he changed his mind he could inform the President right away. “I’m still around,” the daily newspaper Yediot Aharonot quoted Mr Obama as saying. “Let me know if there is anything new.”

With the atmosphere so soured by the end of the evening, the Israelis decided that they could not trust the telephone line they had been lent for their consultations. Mr Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, his Defence Minister, went to the Israeli Embassy to ensure that the Americans were not listening in.

The meeting came barely a day after Mr Obama’s health reform victory. Israel had calculated that he would be too tied up with domestic issues to focus seriously on the Middle East.


<HR NOSHADE COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE="6"></HR>

<object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,18,0" width="530" height="421" id="fullscreen"><param name="movie" value="http://www.divshare.com/flash/video2?myId=11108161-2c8&autoplay=false" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://www.divshare.com/flash/video2?myId=11108161-2c8&autoplay=false" width="530" height="421" name="fullscreen" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"></embed></object>

 

[Deuterion]

That what punk ass Netanyahu gets.

 

[John_Gault]

Um, WOW!

SMH @ the folks in the video . . . Show us how you really feel.

Super drop btw!!

JG

 

[Costanza]

I LOVE the snub...

I'm tired of America being Debo and Israel being Screech yet Debo is Screech's bitch.

And this settlement bullshit is 100% completely wrong.

 

[The L7]

Fuck Benjamin Netenyahu.

 

[redemption]

I LOVE the snub...

I'm tired of America being Debo and Israel being Screech yet Debo is Screech's bitch.

And this settlement bullshit is 100% completely wrong.

 

[Race Harley]

That video says it all. I remember back in the mid '80's living in Crown Heights and hearing the call from Jews to move to Israel to take up resident in Palestine-occupied areas. Now to see them doing the same shit now by building residents in Palestine-occupied area is incredible. Don't they remember how shit was before 1948? This is all the U.S. fault for giving them too much rope to run with.

 

[thoughtone]

On time repost!

 

[QueEx]

<font size="4">
About the video:
</font size>

<font size="3">'Feeling the Hate' in Jerusalem. </font size>

In 2009, Max Blumenthal published a video report entitled "Feeling the Hate in Jerusalem on the Eve of Obama's Cairo Address". The video featured interviews with Jewish youth in Jerusalem in June 2009, shortly before Obama's Cairo address. The youths used expletives and racist rhetoric about Barack Obama and Arabs, which included referring to Obama as a "******" and suggesting that he is "like a terrorist". According to The Jerusalem Post, the video "garnered massive exposure and caused a firestorm in the media and the Jewish world." Haaretz described the video as "an overnight Internet sensation".

Blumenthal has stated that the video was "banned" from YouTube, Vimeo and the Huffington Post. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency quoted Blumenthal as stating, "I won’t ascribe motives to Youtube I am unable to confirm, but it is clear there is an active campaign by right-wing Jewish elements to suppress the video by filing a flood of complaints with Youtube." YouTube said that company policy forbids comment on individual videos, while asserting that its policies are applied "uniformly and not as the result of external pressure."

Blumenthal has stated that he faced death threats for his publication of the video. He identifies the radicalism of the interviewees with the "indoctrination" of Birthright Israel tours, a program in which several of the interviewees were participating. The filmmaker, a Jew himself, had participated in a Birthright tour in 2002.

<font size="4"><center>* * *</font size></center>

<font size="3">Loving Israel by hating Obama. </font size>

"I've got a home in that rock, just beyond the mountaintop ... God gave Noah the rainbow sign / No more water - but the fire next time."

- African-American spiritual​

It's become a fashion, here and abroad: Jews who are convinced that they love Israel more than the rest of us - and certainly better than the rest of us - have told anyone who will listen that one way to express love of the Jewish state is to revile Barack Obama.

This month, as the American president visited the Middle East, the fashion turned ugly. On the Sabbath, Israeli television viewers were treated to the "recorded-on-a-weekday" observations of Areleh, a resident of the West Bank settlement of Karnei Shomron, grinning as he watched the progress of a fire intentionally set on Palestinian land near Havat Gilad, an icon of the outlaw outpost movement.

Asked by Israel Channel 2 TV reporter Shai Gal how he would respond if security forces arrived to evacuate the outpost, Areleh replied: "At most, they'll demolish one measly shack, so they'll have something to show ... that kushon [a Hebrew slur equivalent to the "N" word] in the United States, in order to have an etnan [the biblical term for a fee paid to a prostitute] to give him - if you [secular] guys know what an etnan is."

And should that happen, according to Areleh, it will be followed by yet another fire - a form of preemptive revenge and the price Palestinians will be forced to pay each time Obama presses Israel to "lay a hand on any settlement of any kind, any place in Judea and Samaria."

For sheer racism and Obama-hate masquerading as love of Israel, however, nothing comes close to the filth documented in a new short film entitled "Feeling the Hate in Jerusalem on the Eve of Obama's Cairo Address." This three-minute video, by Americans Max Blumenthal, a journalist-filmmaker, and Joseph Dana, a recent immigrant to Israel, has become an overnight Internet sensation. It shows a collection of U.S. Jewish visitors to Israel, most of them college-age and plainly and proudly drunk, toasting each other in a Jerusalem bar as they vie for the twin crowns of lover of Israel and loather of Obama.

"He's a Muslim for sure, and who even knows if he was born in the United States," says one young woman, who identifies herself as a political science major. "We haven't even seen his birth certificate yet. Bullshit - he's not from the U.S. He's like a terrorist."

Another of the young American Jews calls Obama "just another n----- from the town."

Understandably, Jews abroad have voiced fears that the unapologetic racism embodied in this ostensibly ultra-Zionist criticism of Obama could spark anti-Semitic incidents, further strain black-Jewish relations and add fuel to anti-Israel fires.

The anti-Obama slurs come at a time when confusing hatred of "the other" with support for Israel is becoming increasingly trendy. From historically liberal Minnesota, Chabad Rabbi Manis Friedman contributed the following to an "Ask the Rabbis" discussion conducted by the North American Jewish magazine Moment, in which respondents were asked, "How should Jews treat their Arab neighbors?"

"I don't believe in Western morality - i.e., don't kill civilians or children, don't destroy holy sites, don't fight during holiday seasons, don't bomb cemeteries, don't shoot until they shoot first because it is immoral," Rabbi Friedman began.

"The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle)," he continued.

A storm of criticism ensued. Friedman later issued a clarification, stating that it was "obvious, I thought, that any neighbor of the Jewish people should be treated, as the Torah commands us, with respect and compassion."

Seldom has such an attitude been less obvious. We live at a time when an avowed Kahanist is a serving Knesset member, when overtly anti-Arab Knesset bills blacken Israel's name the world over, and Jewish talkbackers and bloggers think nothing of denigrating Islam and African-Americans in the name of some cockeyed personal battle against world anti-Semitism.

The haters of Obama, the haters of Arabs, and the outpost gunslingers should bear in mind what happened at the end of that Channel 2 report on the Gilad Farm activists: Not long after they started the fire on their neighbors' field, smoke and flames were licking at their own houses.

Bradley Burston is senior editor of haaretz.com.

 

[Makkonnen]

its funny watching jews collectively become nazis

 

[Sango]

its funny watching jews collectively become nazis

My exact thoughts! I'm glad Netanyahu got snubbed. I'm hoping that Israel's funding is cut drastically next.

 

[dbluesun]

crackas

 

[tdotlocs]

 

[VegasGuy]

That what punk ass Netanyahu gets.

Zackly.

-VG

 

[Upgrade Dave]

My exact thoughts! I'm glad Netanyahu got snubbed. I'm hoping that Israel's funding is cut drastically next.

I don't see that happening but the Obama Administration has sent clear signal that there will be some significant changes in US-Israeli relations.

How the Jewish bitch going to say "I know my shit" but then doesn't know who "Benjamin Yahoo" is?

Changing the world means changing everything that we've done over the last 20-30 years that hasn't worked is on the table and our relationship with Israel hasn't worked.

 

[TheDynasty]

Political theater

 

[tonybedward]

I don't see that happening but the Obama Administration has sent clear signal that there will be some significant changes in US-Israeli relations.

How the Jewish bitch going to say "I know my shit" but then doesn't know who "Benjamin Yahoo" is?

Changing the world means changing everything that we've done over the last 20-30 years that hasn't worked is on the table and our relationship with Israel hasn't worked.

Do her comments surprise you?

 

[Makkonnen]

tdotlocs - thnks for that malcolm vid - malcolm knew how to bludgeon mufuckas with the truth

 

[Costanza]

Um, WOW!

SMH @ the folks in the video . . . Show us how you really feel.

Super drop btw!!

JG

I wouldn't put too much stock in that video-- That the last kid shouts out "I wanna get some pussy!!!" tells a lot about the type of person he was interviewing. People drinking at bars showing out.

I'm not saying that Israelis love or don't despise Obama; I'm just saying I wouldn't let my views be shaped by this video.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

Do her comments surprise you?

Not really, I'm just tickled at a person that "knows her shit" that doesn't know the leader of Israel or even how to pronounce his name.

 

[jackfrost]

not an anti-semanticist hmmmm but i was wondering, after listening to Malcom
and seeing how Israel is pilfering and not caring about anybody but their own benefits and profits
Could it be possible that Hitler was dealing with the exact same mess in his period and time? Could it be possible that Hitler foresaw it right? and that we are revisiting the same problem in our century? Isnt it a deja vu?

Im not talking about the killings or holocaust but the moral of these people

btw it is just a question!!!

 

[muckraker10021]

 

[QueEx]

<font size="5">
Israeli Prime Minister to Meet With Obama</font size><font size="4">
The Two Leaders Hope to 'Reset' U.S.-Israeli
Relations in Their Meeting Tuesday</font size>


<font size="3">ABC News</font size>
by SIMON MCGREGOR-WOOD
JERUSALEM, July 6, 2010

President Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will try to "reset" U.S.-Israeli relations in their White House meeting Tuesday, repairing the damage and lifting the mood music after recent tension.

Unlike March's frosty reception in Washington, this time the Israeli prime minister gets both a press conference and a meal. In March, Netanyahu didn't even get a photo op with his closest ally, such was the U.S. anger over continued Jewish settlement building in East Jerusalem. Tuesday will see plenty of handshakes and smiles. But there are plenty of difficult issues to discuss.

Regarding the peace process, the U.S. claims George Mitchell's proximity talks have narrowed the gaps between the two sides. But that optimism is not widely shared. Certainly not by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who insists Netanyahu has been foot dragging on the core issues.

Full Article: http://abcnews.go.com/International...ads-washington-treaty-talks/story?id=11090089

 

[QueEx]

<font size="5">
Netanyahu heads to Washington
in effort to mend U.S. ties</font size><font size="4">

Prime Minister to present U.S. President with outline of new
policy ideas on the peace process, with goal of moving from
proximity talks to direct negotiations.</font size>


<font size="3">Hareetz</font size>
By Barak Ravid
July 5, 2010


Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will fly to Washington on Monday evening to meet with President Barack Obama for the fifth time since the two leaders took office.

][bA senior source in Jerusalem said that Netanyahu hoped the meeting would enable him to regain Obama's trustafter months of tension[/b] regarding West Bank settlement construction. [n]Netanyahu was planning to present Obama with a number of proposals for coordinating progress in the Middle East peace process, said the source.[/b]

Netanyahu and Obama have not yet managed to establish close and intimate working relations since taking leadership of their respective countries. The level of trust between the two appears very low, making it difficult to yield significant progress in the peace process.

Obama is not convinced that Netanyahu is serious in his declared intentions regarding the process, and the Israeli premier is not confident that the current American administration is committed to maintaining the same relations with Israel as those held by its predecessors.

FULL STORY: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...ashington-in-effort-to-mend-u-s-ties-1.300221

 

[Upgrade Dave]

Way to give us an update, Q.

 

[muckraker10021]

Congress to Palestinians: Drop Dead

by MJ Rosenberg | May 25, 2011 |
http://politicalcorrection.org/fpmatters/201105250007<div align="left">
<!-- MSTableType="layout" --><br>
<img src="http://i.min.us/iwHaG.png" align="left"></div>
If anyone had any doubt about whether the Palestinians would declare a state in September, they can't have them now.
On Tuesday, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu delivered a speech to Congress that essentially was a series of insults to Palestinians and every insult was met by applause and standing ovations.

In fact, Netanyahu's appearance itself was an insult.

In the entire history of the United States, only four foreign leaders have addressed joint sessions of Congress more than once.

Prime Minister Winston Churchill, America's great ally, addressed Congress three times during World War II. President Nelson Mandela was honored for destroying apartheid and freeing South Africa. Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was recognised for opening negotiations with the Palestinian people.

And now Netanyahu. For what?

In his entire term in office he has done nothing but reject every request by the United States that he take some action (like freezing settlements) to promote Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. In the history of Israel, there has been no prime minister as hardline on Palestinian rights and as indifferent to the wishes of the United States as Netanyahu.

So why was he invited to address a rare joint session?

He was invited because the new Republican leadership of the House of Representatives wanted to demonstrate, loudly and clearly, that Congress will not support President Barak Obama in the event that he tries to achieve an Israeli-Palestinian agreement.

And that is exactly what the Netanyahu appearance today did demonstrate. The prime minister unambiguously stated that he had no intention of making peace with the Palestinians.

He began by saying that, in point of fact, there is no occupation, stating, that "in Judea and Samaria [the term Israeli right-wingers use for the West Bank], Israelis are not foreign occupiers" but the native inhabitants. (He cited Abraham and Isaiah from the Bible!)

He said he might consider giving up some of that land but not an inch of Jerusalem. Additionally, he said that Israel would retain most settlements and insist on a military presence in the Jordan Valley (thereby ensuring the any State of Palestine would be locked in on both sides by Israel).

He said that Israel would never negotiate with a Palestinian government that included Hamas, whether democratically elected or not. He declared that not a single Palestinian would be allowed to return to Israel; not even a symbolic return would be acceptable to him.

There is little reason to elaborate. Netanyahu today essentially returned to the policies that Israel pursued before Yitzhak Rabin and Yasir Arafat agreed on mutual recognition and the joint pursuit of peace.

And the worst part is not the appalling things Netanyahu said, but how Congress received them. Even Netanyahu's declaration that there is no Israeli occupation was met with thunderous applause with the Democrats joining the Republicans in ecstatic support. Every Netanyahu statement, no matter how extreme, was met with cheers.

Netanyahu was also applauded wildly when he invoked Palestinian terrorism over and over again, even seeming to lump his former "partner," President Mahmoud Abbas with people who "educate their children to hate, [who] continue to name public squares after terrorists. And worst of all continue to perpetuate the fantasy that Israel will one day be flooded by the descendants of Palestinian refugees."

His bottom line, which Congress fully bought, was that all Palestinians are terrorists who haven't earned a state. And probably never will.

Congress cheered and cheered and when Netanyahu was finished, they climbed over each other to touch the hem of his garment.

It was as if Congress thought that no Palestinians or other Arabs (or Muslims) would be watching. It was as if it believes that it can shout its lungs out for Netanyahu (and thereby secure those campaign contributions from AIPAC), without any consequences to US policy and national interests in the Arab world.

But Congress is wrong. The message it sent to the Middle East today, to the whole world, in fact, was that Palestinians cannot count on the United States to ever play the role of "honest broker" between Israel and the Palestinians. Even if President Obama was inclined to, Congress would stop him. And AIPAC, using the leverage its campaign contributions gives it, would hold Obama's feet to the fire too. As far as Congress is concerned, Palestinians do not exist. They have no rights, to a state least of all.

And that is why Palestinians have no choice but to unilaterally declare a state in the fall. They cannot count on America. As David Ben Gurion understood when he went to the General Assembly to achieve recognition of Israel, a small, powerless people must take its destiny into its own hands.

The good news is that, although Congress is in Netanyahu's pocket, the Obama administration isn't. Netanyahu insulted the President at the White House last Thursday and then again in the halls of Congress by eliciting support for policies Obama rejects. And the administration is furious.

That means that although Palestinians can and should ignore Congress, the White House and State Department are still in play. Yes, they will both go along with Netanyahu, but, probably, without much enthusiasm.

And they can send a signal to our allies that although the United States cannot openly oppose Bibi's policies because of Congress - and AIPAC's control of it - the allies can. The Palestinians should not give up on Obama or on Secretary of State Clinton either who cannot abide Netanyahu and made sure she was out of the country to escape being present for his speech.

And so we can look forward to a unilateral declaration of statehood in September. The Israelis who refuse to negotiate with stateless Palestinians will have no choice but to negotiate with the state whose land it is occupying. And those negotiations, state to state, may produce peace and the "two states for two peoples" that most Palestinians and Israelis aspire to. In any case, it's the only hope.

Palestinians should thank Prime Minister Netanyahu and, even more, the United states Congress for making their choice so much easier. Together they helped create the Palestinian state today. And that is a very good thing.

As for Americans, we should be deeply ashamed of our Congress. It has been sold to the highest bidder.



<hr noshade color="#333333" size="6"></hr>

Walt: ‘Every burst of congressional applause for Netanyahu was another
nail in coffin of Zionist dream’


by Philip Weiss

May 27, 2011

http://mondoweiss.net/2011/05/walt-...-another-nail-in-coffin-of-zionist-dream.html

Amazing that Jimmy Carter was tarred and feathered for writing Palestine: Peace not Apartheid, but any intelligent person agrees. Stephen Walt at Foreign Policy says Congress chose apartheid the other day:
<blockquote>
All one can say about the vast majority of our courageous elected officials is that they aren't genuine friends of Israel, because every burst of applause was another nail in the coffin of the Zionist dream. Why? Because Netanyahu's central message yesterday was an emphatic rejection of a genuine two-state solution...

Some people still believe that settlement building was just a wacky project undertaken and backed primarily by religious extremists and by rightwing parties like Likud. In fact, colonization of the West Bank began under the Labor-led governments in the 1960s and 1970s, and governments of all stripes have backed it without exception.

Read Gershom Gorenberg's http://www.amazon.com/dp/080507564X/?tag=vp314-20http://www.amazon.com/dp/080507564X/?tag=vp314-20 , and you will learn that settlement building was a deliberate policy designed to "create facts," so that future prime ministers like Netanyahu could claim it was simply impossible for Israel to withdraw. And the location of key settlement blocs like Ariel and Ma'ale Adumim were chosen to secure Israeli control over key aquifers and make it difficult-to-impossible to create a viable Palestinian state.
As I said in my previous post, Israel faces a choice-- a two-state solution or apartheid -- and it is now crystal-clear which one Netanyahu has chosen. I see this situation as genuinely tragic, as he is condemning several more generations to live in bitter conflict and putting his own country's future at risk. That's his privilege, I suppose, but America's blind support for this foolish policy is also a serious threat to U.S. national security. So if your Congressman or Senator was clapping loudly yesterday, you might drop him or her a note and ask why they care more about subsidizing an illegal and unjust occupation than they do about America's long-term welfare and well-being.</blockquote>
[/color]

 

[QueEx]

In fact, Netanyahu's appearance itself was an insult.

. . .​

He was invited because the new Republican leadership of the House of Representatives wanted to demonstrate, loudly and clearly, that Congress will not support President Barak Obama in the event that he tries to achieve an Israeli-Palestinian agreement.

And that is exactly what the Netanyahu appearance today did demonstrate. The prime minister unambiguously stated that he had no intention of making peace with the Palestinians.

I watched a vid posted by T.O., in the The GOP's New Wild Card: Herman Cain thread where Herman Cain expressed those sentiments precisely in an interview with Fox News' Chris Wallace at the 9:00 minute mark in the vid:

Chris Wallace:

Lets turn to foreign policy: You say that President Obama threw Israel under the bus, your words, with his plan this week, as a base line, for Israel to return to the 1967 borders, you say the Cain Doctrine, the Cain Doctrine, is don’t mess with Israel, you mess with Israel you’re messin with the U.S.

Question, what would President Cain offer the Palestinians to make peace.​

Herman Cain:

Nothing. Because I’m not convinced that the Palestinians are really interested in peace. If the Palestinians come to the table with Israel with a genuine offer that the two of them can sit down and negitate, the United States would in fact try to facilitate that discussion. But if we look at history, it has been clear that the Palestinians have always wanted to push the Israelis and push israel formore and more and more. And I respect president Benjamin Netanyahu for taking and stand and saying they cannot give that up. Secondly, its Israel’s decision, not President Obamas’ decision, as to where those borders ought to be.​

 

[muckraker10021]

Feeling the Ignorance at AIPAC 2011




May 24 2011

by Max Blumenthal

On May 22, thousands of supporters of America’s most powerful pro-Israel lobbying group, the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, converged on Washington for the group’s annual conference. For two days they watched Democratic and Republican congressional leaders pledge their undivided loyalty to the state of Israel, and by extension, to AIPAC’s legislative agenda. Speeches by President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu highlighted the conference, with Obama attempting to clarify his statement demanding that 1967 borders be the “starting point” for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

I interviewed several AIPAC delegates in the streets outside the conference. While few, if any, of them were able to demonstrate the slightest degree of sophistication in their understanding of the Israel-Palestine crisis, they had been briefed inside on how to respond to critics. No one I spoke to would concede that Israel occupied any part of Palestinian territory; none would concede that Israel had committed acts of indiscriminate violence or that it had transferred Palestinians by force; one interviewee could not distinguish Palestine from Pakistan. With considerable wealth and negligible knowledge — few had spent much time inside Israel — the delegates were easily melded by the cadre of neoconservative and Israeli “experts” appearing in AIPAC’s briefing sessions.

As the day wore on, many delegates waded into confrontations with members of Code Pink and Palestine solidarity demonstrators who had set up a protest camp across the street. With conflict intensifying on the sidewalk, Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin invited AIPAC delegates to express themselves from the protest stage. There, their most visceral feelings and deeply held views about Israel-Palestine crisis were revealed. See it for yourself.

http://maxblumenthal.com/2011/05/feeling-the-ignorance-at-aipac-2011/

 

[QueEx]

The Sarkozy-Obama exchange reflects the
world's growing frustration with Netanyahu​

​

French President Sarkozy overheard telling President Obama
that Prime Minister Netanyahu 'a liar' when microphone
accidentally left on after G20 summit press conference. ​

Sarkozy and Obama at last week’s G20 meeting
in Cannes.

By Barak Ravid
November 9, 2011


a remark by French President Nicolas Sarkozy publicized Tuesday is any indication, not much is left of what was once a strong friendship between himself and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, dating back to when both men were finance ministers.

The French president, unaware last Thursday that a mic in the meeting room at the G20 summit at Cannes was on, was heard calling Netanyahu "a liar" in what he thought was a private exchange with U.S. President Barack Obama. "I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar," Sarkozy told Obama, who was also unaware that the mike had been turned on and was being monitored by reporters via the headsets used for simultaneous translations.

Obama didn't exactly defend Netanyahu, either.

"You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you," Obama replied, according to wire service reports.

Obama also complained to Sarkozy about France's vote in favor of Palestinian membership in UNESCO, and asked him to tell the Palestinians to stop their unilateral moves at the United Nations.

"We'll have to impose economic sanctions on the Palestinians," Obama said.

Several journalists, including a few from large media organizations, heard the exchange but did not initially report it, agreeing among themselves that to do so would be a violation of journalistic ethics. The remarks appeared Tuesday on a relatively obscure French website that deals with media criticism.

A Reuters reporter, however, confirmed that he had heard the exchange, and neither the White House nor Elysee Palace issued any denials.

It is not the only time recently that Sarkozy has expressed his frustration with Netanyahu.

During a French cabinet meeting a few weeks ago, he told his ministers, "Abu Mazen [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas] is a statesman, but Netanyahu never misses an opportunity to disappoint us," according to a report in Le Canard Enchaine. "Just now he approved the construction of 1,100 apartments in the Arab section of Jerusalem."



And while Obama has been restraining himself so as not to alienate voters before the 2012 presidential election, his disdain for Netanyahu is well-known.

Former U.S. defense secretary Robert Gates reportedly called Netanyahu "ungrateful" in a meeting with Obama before the former left his post this summer, adding that the prime minister was "endangering his country by refusing to grapple with Israel's growing isolation."

The Prime Minister's Office refused to comment on Tuesday. At the Foreign Ministry, whose head, Avigdor Lieberman, has gotten his own share of insults from Sarkozy, there were some amused responses.

"It's a good thing the microphones didn't catch what Merkel told Obama about Sarkozy," said one senior official, who refused to be named.

Vice Premier Silvan Shalom played down the episode: "Everyone talks about everyone. Sometimes even good friends say things about each other, certainly in such competitive professions," Shalom told Army Radio. "So you have to consider the main things. Is Obama a friend of Israel's? Is Sarkozy a friend of Israel's? Is their policy a consistent policy of support for Israel? The answer to all of these questions is affirmative and, as far as I'm concerned, that is what's important."

The exchange between Sarkozy and Obama is not exceptional; it represents the increasing contempt and frustration many world leaders feel for Netanyahu and the wavering position of the Israeli government in the international arena. Though Netanyahu promised nearly three years ago that he would deliver "surprises" with regard to the peace process and implement historic measures, many world leaders have stopped believing him.

"I don't believe a word he says," German Chancellor Angela Merkel reportedly said recently, in a closed conversation.

Earlier this year, Merkel confronted Netanyahu directly, saying, "You've disappointed us. You haven't taken a single step to advance peace."

Other world leaders, such as British Prime Minister David Cameron, have simply taken to avoiding Netanyahu.

Meanwhile, two of Netanyahu's only friends of late, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou have both vowed to resign in the face of their respective countries' economic collapse. Next week Netanyahu will be visiting the Hague, one of the few major cities in which the Israeli prime minister is still received cordially.

Reuters contributed to this report.





http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...s-growing-frustration-with-netanyahu-1.394448

 

[QueEx]

The Jewish "Anti-Defamation League ("ADL"):

". . . "deeply disappointed" by the private exchange between French President Nicholas Sarkozy and U.S. President Barack Obama in which the two leaders were overheard making critical remarks Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

"We are deeply disappointed and saddened by this decidedly un-Presidential exchange between Presidents Sarkozy and Obama," Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, said in a statement. "President Obama’s response to Mr. Sarkozy implies that he agrees with the French leader.

"In light of the revelations here, we hope that the Obama Administration will do everything it can to reassure Israel that the relationship remains on a sure footing and to reinvigorate the trust between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu, which clearly is not what it should be," Foxman continued.

"What is sad is that we now have to worry to what extent these private views inform foreign policy decisions of the U.S. and France - two singularly important players in the peace process."
​

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...-sarkozy-obama-exchange-on-netanyahu-1.394569

 

[muckraker10021]

Israeli Opposition Leader:
Netanyahu trying to overthrow Obama:

<img src="http://previous.presstv.ir/photo/20120912/myriam20120912142007760.jpg" width="600">
Israeli opposition leader, Shaul Mofaz

<img src="http://previous.presstv.ir/photo/20120913/mbadakhsh20120913071217633.jpg" width="600">


September 12, 2012

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/09/12/261200/netanyahu-trying-to-overthrow-obama/

Israeli opposition leader Shaul Mofaz has accused the regime’s premier of trying to overthrow the government of US President Barack Obama because of a dispute over Iran's nuclear energy program.

"Please explain to us: who is Israel's greatest enemy -- the US or Iran? Who do you fear more -- (Iran’s President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad or Obama? Which regime is more important to overthrow -- the one in Washington, or in Tehran?" Mofaz said at the Israeli parliament, Knesset, The Jerusalem Post reported on Wednesday.

"Israeli meddling in internal US affairs and turning the US administration from an ally to 'an enemy' has caused us severe damage," he added.


Mofaz also accused Benjamin Netanyahu of “seeding fear and panic” among Israeli people over Iran's issue, saying that, “Wars should only be waged when there is no choice,” he said. “We know how they will start, but [we do] not [know] how they will end. Where is your judgment? You are scaring the public.”

Relations between Israel and the US have deteriorated over the past few weeks after Netanyahu publicly criticized Obama’s policies about Iran's nuclear energy issue.

On September 2, Netanyahu called on the international community to set a "clear red line" for Iran over its nuclear energy program.

The US snubbed the call. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Monday that Washington is “not setting deadlines” for a diplomatic resolution of the Western dispute over Iran’s nuclear energy program.

Enraged by Washington’s refusal, Netanyahu said on September 12 that the United States has no “moral right” to stop Israel from launching a military strike against Iran.

Meanwhile, Israeli daily Ha’aretz reported that Netanyahu had made a request to meet Obama during his upcoming visit to New York to attend the UN General Assembly, but the White House snubbed the Israeli premier’s request by saying, "The [US] president's schedule will not permit that."

 

[muckraker10021]

Betting On The Wrong Horse:
The Night Benjamin Netanyahu Will Not Soon Forget

Listening to the mistaken advice from his political whiz Arthur Finkelstein, the re-election of Barack Obama –seized Netanyahu and his advisers with an astonishment that was absolute and authentic.

<img src="http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Campaign-2012-Obama-Netanyahu-20120302.jpg" width="600">

by Yossi Verter | Nov.09, 2012

http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week...tanyahu-will-not-soon-forget.premium-1.476406

The astonishment that seized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his advisers on Wednesday morning, as President Barack Obama crossed the threshold of 270 electoral votes needed to return him to the White House, was as absolute as it was authentic. Netanyahu was utterly convinced that the presidency was in the pocket of the candidate of his choice, his old buddy Mitt Romney. In private conversations, he ridiculed anyone who advised him not to rule out a scenario in which the other candidate was the winner.

What made Netanyahu and his political adviser, the American-born Ron Dermer, ignore the various polling analyses - such as Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight blog for The New York Times - that were published every day in the American media, and that almost universally predicted an Obama victory?

That question has a two-word answer: Arthur Finkelstein. Until the end, the legendary strategic adviser and polling expert - who is working with Netanyahu and his running mate in the upcoming election in January, Yisrael Beiteinu's Avigdor Lieberman - hammered it into their heads that Mitt Romney would be the next president of the United States. Finkelstein predicted a 4 percent win for Romney in the popular vote (he lost by approximately 2 percent) and victories in all the swing states (Romney lost all but one).

For Netanyahu, Arthur's word is sacred. He just has to hope that Finkelstein's forecast for the Likud-Yisrael Beiteinu ticket - 45 seats - will be more accurate. Likud's Knesset contenders, especially the MKs and newcomers who are huddled on the fringes of the list, have to pray that the meta-pollster isn't making another meta-mistake.

The day after the election, Netanyahu went into battle mode. Cabinet ministers were instructed not to talk about Obama. Members of the prime minister's close circle mobilized to rebuff allegations that their boss had intervened in the American elections. "What, we intervened? No way," the confidants shot back angrily. "Show us one specific place of intervention. It's an allegation people are concocting to hurt the prime minister. Both candidates used the prime minister in their election campaign. Both candidates debated which of them has closer ties to Israel and with the prime minister."

Asked about the extraordinarily warm welcome candidate Romney got when he visited Israel last summer, a member of Netanyahu's staff said, "Not true. We checked it out and found that Obama, as a presidential candidate in July 2008 [when Ehud Olmert was prime minister], got the same degree of warmth, including a meal in the Prime Minister's Residence, just like Romney.

By the way, Obama was also given a helicopter tour of Israel, which Romney did not get. So where does the story of crude intervention come from? From the [link to] Sheldon Adelson. He is a friend of Netanyahu's and a major donor to Romney. That's true. But it doesn't make Netanyahu someone who worked for Romney in the campaign. "

The astonishment that seized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his advisers on Wednesday morning, as President Barack Obama crossed the threshold of 270 electoral votes needed to return him to the White House, was as absolute as it was authentic. Netanyahu was utterly convinced that the presidency was in the pocket of the candidate of his choice, his old buddy Mitt Romney. In private conversations, he ridiculed anyone who advised him not to rule out a scenario in which the other candidate was the winner.

What made Netanyahu and his political adviser, the American-born Ron Dermer, ignore the various polling analyses - such as Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight blog for The New York Times - that were published every day in the American media, and that almost universally predicted an Obama victory?

That question has a two-word answer: Arthur Finkelstein. Until the end, the legendary strategic adviser and polling expert - who is working with Netanyahu and his running mate in the upcoming election in January, Yisrael Beiteinu's Avigdor Lieberman - hammered it into their heads that Mitt Romney would be the next president of the United States. Finkelstein predicted a 4 percent win for Romney in the popular vote (he lost by approximately 2 percent) and victories in all the swing states (Romney lost all but one).

For Netanyahu, Arthur's word is sacred. He just has to hope that Finkelstein's forecast for the Likud-Yisrael Beiteinu ticket - 45 seats - will be more accurate. Likud's Knesset contenders, especially the MKs and newcomers who are huddled on the fringes of the list, have to pray that the meta-pollster isn't making another meta-mistake.

The day after the election, Netanyahu went into battle mode. Cabinet ministers were instructed not to talk about Obama. Members of the prime minister's close circle mobilized to rebuff allegations that their boss had intervened in the American elections. "What, we intervened? No way," the confidants shot back angrily. "Show us one specific place of intervention. It's an allegation people are concocting to hurt the prime minister. Both candidates used the prime minister in their election campaign. Both candidates debated which of them has closer ties to Israel and with the prime minister."

Asked about the extraordinarily warm welcome candidate Romney got when he visited Israel last summer, a member of Netanyahu's staff said, "Not true. We checked it out and found that Obama, as a presidential candidate in July 2008 [when Ehud Olmert was prime minister], got the same degree of warmth, including a meal in the Prime Minister's Residence, just like Romney. By the way, Obama was also given a helicopter tour of Israel, which Romney did not get. So where does the story of crude intervention come from? From the [link to] Sheldon Adelson. He is a friend of Netanyahu's and a major donor to Romney. That's true. But it doesn't make Netanyahu someone who worked for Romney in the campaign. "


Generally speaking, all the above is correct. If there was any taking of sides - and there was - it was manifested more in nuance. Netanyahu's key mistake with regard to Obama in recent months, a hypersensitive period, was to sharpen the critical message about him in connection with Iran and to draw the "red lines." In the case of Iran, Netanyahu went out of his way to send a message to American Jewry that a second term for Obama would be bad news for Israel. For that he will have to pay a price - at a rate, time and place to be chosen by the president.

"The best is yet to come," Obama promised U.S. citizens in his victory speech. What do the next four years hold out for Obama-Netanyahu relations, on the assumption that Netanyahu, too, will be re-elected in January? Good they won't be. The only question is how bad they will be.............



<hr noshade color="#ff0000" size="6"></hr>

 

[code_pirahna]

And people say that young folks aren t racist......

please....

 

[nyyyyce]

i am going to enjoy seeing him contort and gag on the outright disrespect and venom he directed at Obama the past year. payback b*tches. but on the real, Obama does not even retaliate overtly, if at all, so its a wash.

 

[HeathCliff]

i am going to enjoy seeing him contort and gag on the outright disrespect and venom he directed at Obama the past year. payback b*tches. but on the real, Obama does not even retaliate overtly, if at all, so its a wash.

Netanyahu may not get reelected in January,