The Briefing Room
General Category => World News => Topic started by: mystery-ak on July 29, 2014, 07:26:02 pm
-
http://jpupdates.com/2014/07/29/report-obama-was-rude-and-hostile-during-phone-call-with-netanyahu/ (http://jpupdates.com/2014/07/29/report-obama-was-rude-and-hostile-during-phone-call-with-netanyahu/)
Report: Obama Was Rude and Hostile During Phone Call With Netanyahu
Today 1:48 PM by Jacob Kornbluh
The conversation between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Barack Obama was tense and tough, according to a report on Channel 1 Tuesday evening.
Based on a transcript of the conversation, obtained by Israel’s channel 1, Obama “behaved in a rude, condescending and hostile manner,” the network’s foreign correspondent concluded.
During the 35-minute conversation on Sunday, the president reportedly demanded that Israel should immediately and unconditionally end the operation.
When Netanyahu asked what Israel would get in return for unilaterally ending the strikes, Obama replied: “I believe Hamas will stop firing rockets – quiet in return for quiet.” To which Netanyahu responded that Hamas has already violated 5 cease-fires and is committed to the destruction of Israel.
“I repeat and expect Israel to stop all of its actions against Hamas in Gaza,” Obama said. He added that despite Netanyahu’s objections the United States trusts Qatar and Turkey’s mediation. “Israel is not in a situation that it can choose its mediators,” the president told his Israeli counterpart.
Netanyahu in response: “Hamas will continue firing rockets on Israel and use their tunnels to attack our people.”
At this point, Obama interrupted the Israeli leader, stating, “the ball is in Israel’s court, and it must end all military activities.”
UPDATE 15:00: The State Department spokesperson told BBC reporter Paul Danahar that if President Obama’s conversation with Prime Minister Netanyahu was indeed leaked to Israel’s Channel 1, it would be a “severe violation of a private discussion.”
UPDATE 15:20: NSC Spokesperson Meehan says Channel 1′S report of transcript of Obama-Netanyahu conversation “don’t bear any resemblance to reality.. Shocking that someone would sink to misrepresenting private conversations between PM and POTUS in fabrications in Israeli press.” [via @ChemiShalev]
-
Or what, Barack? Stop...or what?
-
curious. where did this "transcript" come from?
-
curious. where did this "transcript" come from?
Netanyahu's staff?? Obama doesn't control both ends of that phone line and Obama/Kerry have been playing Israel and Netanyahu for idiots for far too long. This is what you have an Intelligence service for...leaking this to the Israeli press is far too easy, and they are making it clear that Obama is no friend of Israel.
I think this sounds all too much in character with Obama, and it is exactly like him to take that kind of arrogant tone with the Israeli PM. Obama thinks that all he need do is say something and the world is going to respond and make it so. He also is incredibly bull headed about demanding to see the world the way he wants it instead of how things really are.
-
Netanyahu's staff?? Obama doesn't control both ends of that phone line and Obama/Kerry have been playing Israel and Netanyahu for idiots for far too long. This is what you have an Intelligence service for...leaking this to the Israeli press is far too easy, and they are making it clear that Obama is no friend of Israel.
I think this sounds all too much in character with Obama, and it is exactly like him to take that kind of arrogant tone with the Israeli PM. Obama thinks that all he need do is say something and the world is going to respond and make it so. He also is incredibly bull headed about demanding to see the world the way he wants it instead of how things really are.
except that it appears the "transcript" may not actually be a transcript.
-
curious. where did this "transcript" come from?
Both the President's office and the PM's office have said this is a "fabrication". Never happened.
-
never happened
not the first time i have heard that.
-
US Ambassador: Tape of 'Obama-Netanyahu Conversation' Fabricated
US, Israeli PM rush to reject the authenticity of a recording claimed to be of Obama trying to force an unfavorable ceasefire on Israel.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/183496#.U9gNnVYmWao (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/183496#.U9gNnVYmWao)
-
OK. Sure. Never happened.
Honest.
:smokin:
-
Let us hear the audio. I would like to hear how good these shysters are at impersonating the president and the Israeli prime minister. I wonder if anyone will be arrested for pepetrating this fraud? /s
-
From the article:
[[ NSC Spokesperson Meehan says Channel 1′S report of transcript of Obama-Netanyahu conversation “don’t bear any resemblance to reality...]]
I will accept the Israeli reporting's view of "reality" over that of Obama's "spokesperson".
Hands down.
No contest.
Forgeddaboutit...
-
Obama “behaved in a rude, condescending and hostile manner,” the network’s foreign correspondent concluded.
Not for nothing, but if the correspondent's conclusion is correct, so what? Has Netanyahu such delicate sensitivities that he cannot bear to hear something he doesn't like?
This was a private conversation, not public. It was exactly where such disagreements should be aired. And it's not the only time Netanyahu has had a "hostile" conversation with a Western leader. I can't help but wonder what the foreign correspondent would conclude of the conversation between Merkel and Netanyahu about continued settlement building during the "peace negotiations" that ended in a screaming match and hang-up.
The stark, cold reality is: when Israel accepts the level and type of financial and military support given from the US for 67 years, like it or not, they have provided a seat for the US at the decision-making table. As the recipient of such generosity and support, the onus is on Israel to respect that relationship even when they do not receive a rubber stamp of approval. Back rooms were built for such disagreements, not the press and television cameras--where Israel's representatives have been ridiculing and fighting with the US for over a year.
I understand the overwhelming support for Israel's efforts in this "action" and the deep dislike of Obama. I also understand the deep, mutual distain between the two men on that phone call. But why do we support one expectation when the United States speaks to or of Israel/Netanyahu but none at all the other way around?
-
Not for nothing, but if the correspondent's conclusion is correct, so what? Has Netanyahu such delicate sensitivities that he cannot bear to hear something he doesn't like?
This was a private conversation, not public. It was exactly where such disagreements should be aired. And it's not the only time Netanyahu has had a "hostile" conversation with a Western leader. I can't help but wonder what the foreign correspondent would conclude of the conversation between Merkel and Netanyahu about continued settlement building during the "peace negotiations" that ended in a screaming match and hang-up.
The stark, cold reality is: when Israel accepts the level and type of financial and military support given from the US for 67 years, like it or not, they have provided a seat for the US at the decision-making table. As the recipient of such generosity and support, the onus is on Israel to respect that relationship even when they do not receive a rubber stamp of approval. Back rooms were built for such disagreements, not the press and television cameras--where Israel's representatives have been ridiculing and fighting with the US for over a year.
I understand the overwhelming support for Israel's efforts in this "action" and the deep dislike of Obama. I also understand the deep, mutual distain between the two men on that phone call. But why do we support one expectation when the United States speaks to or of Israel/Netanyahu but none at all the other way around?
The salient point here is not the hostility, necessarily, but the administration's PR surrounding it. Is the "most transparent in history" administration lying about the tape? If so, did some impersonators actually make such a tape and then a senior administration official handed it to the press? And why isn't there any follow-up? By anyone? Either in the FBI or the MSM?
-
The salient point here is not the hostility, necessarily, but the administration's PR surrounding it. Is the "most transparent in history" administration lying about the tape? If so, did some impersonators actually make such a tape and then a senior administration official handed it to the press? And why isn't there any follow-up? By anyone? Either in the FBI or the MSM?
Let's go with your "salient" point (although I do not agree with it). What of Israel's "transparency"? Are they lying about the tape? After all, they too denied it. And forget the FBI, where the heck is Mossad?!
No, my friend, this is not about the Obama administration's transparency. This story damages Obama. Do you really think a senior Obama administration would set this up? Seriously.
-
Let's go with your "salient" point (although I do not agree with it). What of Israel's "transparency"? Are they lying about the tape? After all, they too denied it. And forget the FBI, where the heck is Mossad?!
No, my friend, this is not about the Obama administration's transparency. This story damages Obama. Do you really think a senior Obama administration would set this up? Seriously.
I think they thought it would help improve OPapaDoc's indecisive, dithering image and that is why they released it. Also, they want to send the message to the Sunni world that OPapaDoc is really on their side. So, yes, it was intentional. And then denying it was also intentional, so that they could limit the damage with Israel-supporting Americans.
I also think that Kerry's "open mic" thing on Fox was staged and intentional.
There are two realities here. They want the American public to believe one reality, and they want the Arab world to believe another reality. So they give both worlds a version of the "truth" and both can believe the version that corresponds with their bias while no one checks into what actually happened.
It is the American people who are being lied to, because in all likelihood the tape is genuine.
-
I think they thought it would help improve OPapaDoc's indecisive, dithering image and that is why they released it. Also, they want to send the message to the Sunni world that OPapaDoc is really on their side. So, yes, it was intentional. And then denying it was also intentional, so that they could limit the damage with Israel-supporting Americans. . . ./
It is the American people who are being lied to, because in all likelihood the tape is genuine.
Are you calling for an investigation of the tape? If so, would it not turn attention away from the actual war and further chip away at America's voice in the peace process? Who benefits from this?
-
Are you calling for an investigation of the tape? If so, would it not turn attention away from the actual war and further chip away at America's voice in the peace process? Who benefits from this?
Just asking, RIV...
Why do you seem to be an Obama apologist here, giving them any benefit of a doubt? Where does the anti-Israel sentiment come from?
-
Let's go with your "salient" point (although I do not agree with it). What of Israel's "transparency"? Are they lying about the tape? After all, they too denied it. And forget the FBI, where the heck is Mossad?!
No, my friend, this is not about the Obama administration's transparency. This story damages Obama. Do you really think a senior Obama administration would set this up? Seriously.
There is nothing, repeat, nothing that the Obama administration wouldn't do, including setting up this tape.
The possibility that it might be damaging to Bambi just points out how arrogant and ignorant they are.
-
Not for nothing, but if the correspondent's conclusion is correct, so what? Has Netanyahu such delicate sensitivities that he cannot bear to hear something he doesn't like?
This was a private conversation, not public. It was exactly where such disagreements should be aired. And it's not the only time Netanyahu has had a "hostile" conversation with a Western leader. I can't help but wonder what the foreign correspondent would conclude of the conversation between Merkel and Netanyahu about continued settlement building during the "peace negotiations" that ended in a screaming match and hang-up.
The stark, cold reality is: when Israel accepts the level and type of financial and military support given from the US for 67 years, like it or not, they have provided a seat for the US at the decision-making table. As the recipient of such generosity and support, the onus is on Israel to respect that relationship even when they do not receive a rubber stamp of approval. Back rooms were built for such disagreements, not the press and television cameras--where Israel's representatives have been ridiculing and fighting with the US for over a year.
I understand the overwhelming support for Israel's efforts in this "action" and the deep dislike of Obama. I also understand the deep, mutual distain between the two men on that phone call. But why do we support one expectation when the United States speaks to or of Israel/Netanyahu but none at all the other way around?
/snicker
Sorry, but that's about the only response you really deserve. I wasn't aware that Israel was back in bondage to latter-day Egyptians resident in the White House, and I wasn't aware that "aid" to Israel wasn't really aid but rather the price of purchasing that bondage.
But then I suppose liberals really are into plantations and slaves; after all, witness how effectively they've kept blacks downtrodden and compliant on the mental plantation they've constructed - and to add insult to injury, they've constructed that plantation at taxpayers' expense.
-
Just asking, RIV...
Why do you seem to be an Obama apologist here, giving them any benefit of a doubt? Where does the anti-Israel sentiment come from?
I'm not an Obama apologist. But I've never understood why we support one expectation when the United States speaks to or of Israel/Netanyahu but none at all the other way around?
And my question does not apply to the Obama administration (especially) but to every administration I can remember in my lifetime.
I do not have an anti-Israel sentiment. I view Israel as a nation state with the same rights as any other nation state. I passionately defend them when I think their political decisions are in the best interests of Israel and the global community in which they live. However, I (less passionately, to be sure) will question and/or disagree with Israel's direction if I don't see the long-term success or if I don't quite believe what they're telling me.
I cringe at the "anti-Israel" question--although you did ask it very gently (thanks for that). But I truly have never understood the "Israel can do no wrong" and "Israel first, USA second" responses. And I've heard them throughout my life.
Why is the State of Israel and her leaders ALWAYS above reproach?
-
I'm not an Obama apologist. But I've never understood why we support one expectation when the United States speaks to or of Israel/Netanyahu but none at all the other way around?
And my question does not apply to the Obama administration (especially) but to every administration I can remember in my lifetime.
I do not have an anti-Israel sentiment. I view Israel as a nation state with the same rights as any other nation state. I passionately defend them when I think their political decisions are in the best interests of Israel and the global community in which they live. However, I (less passionately, to be sure) will question and/or disagree with Israel's direction if I don't see the long-term success or if I don't quite believe what they're telling me.
I cringe at the "anti-Israel" question--although you did ask it very gently (thanks for that). But I truly have never understood the "Israel can do no wrong" and "Israel first, USA second" responses. And I've heard them throughout my life.
Why is the State of Israel and her leaders ALWAYS above reproach?
As to the moral ground, right now Israel occupies higher ground than the US at this point, not the least because the US is effectively siding with those who occupy the moral gutters. Israel is not above reproach, but its failings pale into insignificance compared to those of Hamas/the Palestinians, and one normally gives a little more leeway to a people who are fighting to stop unprovoked attacks on their own civilians by terrorists, terrorists who, along with a broad swath of the world's populace, wish to see Israel - and all Jews - wiped off the face of the Earth. Witness the joint protests by pro-palestinians and neo-nazi groups in Europe.
-
Why is the State of Israel and her leaders ALWAYS above reproach?
That would be a good topic for discussion...
-
/snicker
Sorry, but that's about the only response you really deserve.
No it's not. In the world of grownups this is where discussion would begin. Your veiled and not-so-veiled insults and ridicule would often cause me to ask if your knee hurts when it jerks like that. But, gratefully, I've outgrown that. ^-^
-
That would be a good topic for discussion...
Agree.
-
No it's not. In the world of grownups this is where discussion would begin. Your veiled and not-so-veiled insults and ridicule would often cause me to ask if your knee hurts when it jerks like that. But, gratefully, I've outgrown that. ^-^
As you wish.
-
Are you calling for an investigation of the tape? If so, would it not turn attention away from the actual war and further chip away at America's voice in the peace process? Who benefits from this?
No. I am not necessarily calling for an investigation. I don't have that kind of power anyways. I'm just another Internet nitwit full of idle speculation.
The administration accuses the press of printing false information and no one in the press seems the least bit interested. According to the administration, someone impersonated the POTUS and the PM in a deliberate attempt to instigate mischief, but no one seems at all interested in challenging the veracity of that claim, or in finding the culprits. Having grown up at a time when the press used to be interested in getting at the truth, I find that curious and disheartening.
-
I cringe at the "anti-Israel" question--although you did ask it very gently (thanks for that). But I truly have never understood the "Israel can do no wrong" and "Israel first, USA second" responses. And I've heard them throughout my life.
Why is the State of Israel and her leaders ALWAYS above reproach?
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”
― Voltaire
-
I'm just another Internet nitwit full of idle speculation. Me too.
The administration accuses the press of printing false information and no one in the press seems the least bit interested. According to the administration, someone impersonated the POTUS and the PM in a deliberate attempt to instigate mischief
That's the thing. What does this accomplish? And for whom? It is no secret to anybody, or at least it shouldn't be, how Obama feels about America, Israel, and Britain, along with his admiration of all things Muslim and Islamic. He's been very open and clear about it.
I don't see anything in this that I would not expect to happen. I just don't see the value added of this whole thing.
-
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”
― Voltaire
Oh no. Not another "Jews run the world" conspiracy.
If you look around, Israel is having coals heaped on her head at a rate unseen in my lifetime. Accused of targeting children, women, of genocide--Israel is a dog in the Muslim world and the EU. About the only place they're supported is in the US.
Above reproach? No. Israel is not above reproach. But Israel is our strategic ally in the Middle East, a country bordered on two sides by terrorist groups committed to her destruction. What alternative do we have but to back Israel, to support Netanyahu and others who are committed to living in peace but MUST respond when attacked?
Only fools give any ground on anything but condemnation of Hamas and its actions. Hamas, who uses children as pawns, who parade dead children in front of cameras then race to post them on youtube. Hamas, who uses strategic materials provided to it to build tunnels so that Israelis can be kidnapped and used as pawns.
Criticize Israel all you want. But if Israel is driven out, anyone who doesn't think these bastards will turn their attention on us is delusional.
-
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”
― Voltaire
By that logic, we are currently being 'ruled' by Muslims, homosexuals, and Black people. Three groups you absolutely are not allowed to criticize under any circumstances whatsoever.
The Left has no problem at all criticizing Jews and Christians. Go to any college campus if you want to witness the full brunt of what I am saying here.
-
I'm just another Internet nitwit full of idle speculation.
Thanks for the smile. (BTW, I don't agree with THIS salient point either :laugh: )
-
By that logic, we are currently being 'ruled' by Muslims, homosexuals, and Black people. Three groups you absolutely are not allowed to criticize under any circumstances whatsoever.
I agree... so what's your point? :shrug:
-
As to the moral ground, right now Israel occupies higher ground than the US at this point, not the least because the US is effectively siding with those who occupy the moral gutters. Israel is not above reproach, but its failings pale into insignificance compared to those of Hamas/the Palestinians, and one normally gives a little more leeway to a people who are fighting to stop unprovoked attacks on their own civilians by terrorists, terrorists who, along with a broad swath of the world's populace, wish to see Israel - and all Jews - wiped off the face of the Earth. Witness the joint protests by pro-palestinians and neo-nazi groups in Europe.
goopo
-
Thanks for the smile. (BTW, I don't agree with THIS salient point either :laugh: )
I'm going to chime in here in semi-ignorance, and bring up an opinion I've heard (not one I espouse), and I'd appreciate any commentary/response from anyone on any side.
This is their position:
When the UN gave Israel the land it now occupies, the innocent Palestinians living there (many Christians) were abused by the Israeli army (of which Netanyahu was a part). Because they were aggrieved, the PLO developed and the retribution of groups like Hamas was only because of Israel's aggression and killing of innocents. And it is because of that that the Palestinians are in the right by waging war against Israel, whose army continues to kill innocents, and has been since the late 1940's.
I repeat: this is NOT my position, but I'd like suggestions as to how to accurately respond to it.
-
I agree... so what's your point? :shrug:
Obama, is the point.
-
I'm going to chime in here in semi-ignorance, and bring up an opinion I've heard (not one I espouse), and I'd appreciate any commentary/response from anyone on any side.
This is their position:
When the UN gave Israel the land it now occupies, the innocent Palestinians living there (many Christians) were abused by the Israeli army (of which Netanyahu was a part). Because they were aggrieved, the PLO developed and the retribution of groups like Hamas was only because of Israel's aggression and killing of innocents. And it is because of that that the Palestinians are in the right by waging war against Israel, whose army continues to kill innocents, and has been since the late 1940's.
I repeat: this is NOT my position, but I'd like suggestions as to how to accurately respond to it.
Even though the affected Muslims were at first re-located out of their then homes and property, it would be natural for Israel to experience stiff resistance from said people.
If, due to politics or a natural disaster, the same behavior would be manifested right here in present-day America. IOW, Eminent Domain, my arse.
The reason the European Jew was given a sliver of desert for a Homeland was because of Hitler's treatment of them before and during the Second World War.
Fact is that there are over a hundred thousand Arab Muslims residing inside Israel today and they live in peace.
Any armed conflict Israel instituted was from a purely defensive position.
Israel has clearly shown what can be achieved when they are threatened..They don't start it, but sure as hell, they finish it.
Look at the Israeli standard of living compared to their surrounding neighbors? Look at their technology advances.
Maybe it's because it's in my blood to cheer for an underdog since boyhood. I don't know.
The Jews are God's Chosen People for a reason. Who am I to question it? LOL!
-
Just making sure that everybody here knows that report was a hoax. :chairbang:
-
Even though the affected Muslims were at first re-located out of their then homes and property, it would be natural for Israel to experience stiff resistance from said people.
If, due to politics or a natural disaster, the same behavior would be manifested right here in present-day America. IOW, Eminent Domain, my arse.
The reason the European Jew was given a sliver of desert for a Homeland was because of Hitler's treatment of them before and during the Second World War.
Fact is that there are over a hundred thousand Arab Muslims residing inside Israel today and they live in peace.
Any armed conflict Israel instituted was from a purely defensive position.
Israel has clearly shown what can be achieved when they are threatened..They don't start it, but sure as hell, they finish it.
Look at the Israeli standard of living compared to their surrounding neighbors? Look at their technology advances.
Maybe it's because it's in my blood to cheer for an underdog since boyhood. I don't know.
The Jews are God's Chosen People for a reason. Who am I to question it? LOL!
Good answer! :beer:
-
I'm going to chime in here in semi-ignorance, and bring up an opinion I've heard (not one I espouse), and I'd appreciate any commentary/response from anyone on any side.
This is their position:
When the UN gave Israel the land it now occupies, the innocent Palestinians living there (many Christians) were abused by the Israeli army (of which Netanyahu was a part). Because they were aggrieved, the PLO developed and the retribution of groups like Hamas was only because of Israel's aggression and killing of innocents. And it is because of that that the Palestinians are in the right by waging war against Israel, whose army continues to kill innocents, and has been since the late 1940's.
There is no one quick or simple answer to this. But may I suggest two areas for Google research that would provide some background on events that have not, historically, been widely discussed in the West.
"Al-Nakba" or "Catastrophe". This dates back to the 1947 Israeli War of Independence and its affect on the indigenous people living in Palestine. It is written that at least 750,000 Palestinian men, women and children were expelled from their homes by Israeli forces. Additional claims state that these 750,000 were the lucky ones--because they lived.
Zionism: To better appreciate the founding of Israel in 1947, it is necessary to have an understanding of both the pros and cons of the Zionist movement. Not just after WWII but from it's beginnings in the 1890's.
It's a little like a homework assignment--but it's well worth the effort. The more we understand the "how" this developed, the better equipped we are to diffuse the rage and hope for peace.
-
There is no one quick or simple answer to this. But may I suggest two areas for Google research that would provide some background on events that have not, historically, been widely discussed in the West.
"Al-Nakba" or "Catastrophe". This dates back to the 1947 Israeli War of Independence and its affect on the indigenous people living in Palestine. It is written that at least 750,000 Palestinian men, women and children were expelled from their homes by Israeli forces. Additional claims state that these 750,000 were the lucky ones--because they lived.
Zionism: To better appreciate the founding of Israel in 1947, it is necessary to have an understanding of both the pros and cons of the Zionist movement. Not just after WWII but from it's beginnings in the 1890's.
It's a little like a homework assignment--but it's well worth the effort. The more we understand the "how" this developed, the better equipped we are to diffuse the rage and hope for peace.
Thanks for the info, Right. I have read Blood Brothers by Elias Chacour, as I have tried to understand the situation (he is a Christian Palestinian working for peace).
I agree that the why and how historical background is important in understanding what's going on. Obviously, nothing will change in terms of understanding that Hamas is a hard core terrorist organization that kills people, bombs incessantly, and uses women and children as human shields (including photographing them, and even moving their corpses around to get more sympathy), but it's clear that the situation with the Palestinian people is more complex than a simple Israel-always-right-Palestinian-people-always-wrong perspective will allow.
I do NOT disagree with Israel's need to defend itself, nor do I disagree with the position that Israel is our close ally and needs to be supported, but I feel like the more information I have on the history, the better I am to make good decisions about how that support fleshes itself out.
-
If you don't mind factually based fiction - try Michener's "The Source." It's not 100% accurate - but it gives you a good feel for the region.
-
Thanks for the info, Right. I have read Blood Brothers by Elias Chacour, as I have tried to understand the situation (he is a Christian Palestinian working for peace).
Thanks for this lead. I read the summary on Amazon .... it looks very interesting. I think I'll go back and order it. ^-^
-
If you don't mind factually based fiction - try Michener's "The Source." It's not 100% accurate - but it gives you a good feel for the region.
Wow! I hope there's enough Summer left to get through this one. :laugh:
Thanks.
-
Wow! I hope there's enough Summer left to get through this one. :laugh:
Thanks.
:beer:
It is a fair old doorstop of a book. Worth it though. Equal parts inventive and factual.
-
Thanks for this lead. I read the summary on Amazon .... it looks very interesting. I think I'll go back and order it. ^-^
I highly recommend it!
-
If you don't mind factually based fiction - try Michener's "The Source." It's not 100% accurate - but it gives you a good feel for the region.
I haven't read a lot of Michener, but I've liked what I've read (Centennial, Poland, etc.).
I'll give it a look. Thanks!