Netanyahu Hits Back At Obama: I Know What's Best For Israel

[Purveyor]

Source: Jerusalem Post

A day after US columnist Jeffrey Goldberg quoted US President Barack Obama as saying that Israel under Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu does not know what is in its own best interest, Netanyahu visited the Gaza border Wednesday, was told that December was the quietest month in the last 12 years, and essentially replied to Obama: "Yes I do."

"I think everyone understands that only Israel's citizens will be the ones to determine who faithfully represents Israel's vital interests," Netanyahu said on a visit to an army base near Gaza in his first direct response to Obama's reported criticism. "Over the last four years we stood up against strong pressure, and I will continue to do so for Israel's security.

--CLIP
Senior Likud officials had already accused Obama on Tuesday of leaking sharp criticism Netanyahu’s leadership in order to sway voters in next Tuesday’s election.

Sources close to Netanyahu responded carefully, saying that the prime minister would continue to protect the country’s vital national security interests in the coming government that he would lead. The sources noted that Obama had said Israeli-US defense and security cooperation were at unprecedented levels, which was evident in US support for Israeli missile defense systems and diplomatic backing during Operation Pillar of Defense.

Read more: http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=299796

[Sherman A1]

1. Me too

and involves far, far less US tax dollars.

[gateley]

26. Blasphemy!

[PerceptionManagement]

70. Maybe the USA should stop giving Apartheid Israel free Money, Weapons and Intel

[Sherman A1]

75. I believe

that we are on the same page here.

[Autumn]

2. Then it's time for American politicians to quit looking out for Israel

and let them do their thing. Then our politicians can start looking out for the American people.

[Purveyor]

3. Same for the entire middle east. We are damn poor 'nation-builders' and just can't afford it! eom

[Autumn]

5. Agree totally, it's past time to build our nation

and let those countries go their way.

[1StrongBlackMan]

49. Unfortunately ...

letting Israel do its thing will likely result in a nuclear event that will affect the rest of the world.

[Ganja Ninja]

4. Great then I guess he won't be needing our help.

Good bye and good luck.

[theaocp]

6. Fuck this clown.

No more money for you, dipshit. Oh, look who wants some welfare now?

[Happyhippychick]

7. Maybe you shouldn't have shilled for Romney ya dipshit

Gobama!

[Sekhmets Daughter]

29. My thoughts exactly....

Turn about is fair play Bibi...

[geek tragedy]

8. They want our money and unqualified support, but not our opinion.

Ingrates.

[phantom power]

10. pretty good gig if you can get it, isn't it

[Jerry442]

9. Israel's rights

"I think everyone understands that only Israel's citizens will be the ones to determine who faithfully represents Israel's vital interests,"

I totally agree. And those people who try to illegitimately compromise Israel's right of self determination by giving it large sums of money should stop it, right now!

[cbrer]

11. In other words:

Write us a check and STFU

[bemildred]

12. You're a dumb ass Bibi, you couldn't even figure out who was going to win the election. nt

[Great Caesars Ghost]

13. Zionism is not he way.

But ol Bebe doesn't care.

[leftynyc]

15. This thread is fucking bonkers

What is wrong with what Bibi said? Do you really think you would say anything different about your own country? And those screaming about the money are totally ignorant of the fact that the lions share of the money is used to buy American arms so the money comes right back here. If you're going to go off and have a hissy fit, at least know what the fuck you're talking about. And I say all this as someone who detests Bibi - I hate stupidity even more.

[John2]

17. We cannot

divest ourselves of Israel's security despite what Netanyahu thinks because we helped to create Israel. They did not do it on their own after World War II. The British just passed the buck to us and Harry Truman accepted it. So whether both sides like it or not, we are married to each other. What has been done in the past cannot be reversed from the seed Harry Truman planted either because Israel is too far developed into a nuclear state. Just make the best out of it. Both sides play Politics with each other's constituents. Netanyahu does have a point as long as the Arabs don't ring in their extremists. I don't see how anyone can exist with strict Sharia Doctrine for example. The only solution is a two state solution and the moderates need to ring in their crazies on both sides. The only problem is we have our own crazies that exacerbates the situation more. Clinton and Carter was on the right path but no cigar.

[leftynyc]

18. You are a welcome voice of reason

and I'm in complete agreement.

[Aerows]

20. We hand over too much in foreign aid to Israel.

They have single payer health care. We don't. When we catch up to Israel, maybe then we can do something for them. It chaps my ass that we donate billions to Israel while our own people suffer. There is no excuse for that.

Netanyahu gets himself in trouble with his intransigent position on the settlements.

[Behind the Aegis]

21. We do not "donate billions" to Israel.

Most of the loan money actually cycles right back into the US. We do donate billions to other countries, are you willing to cut them off as well?

[Aerows]

22. Yes, I am.

ALL of them. This isn't directed at Israel alone. And yes, we do donate billions to them. This isn't conjecture, it's a fact. Again, it isn't leveled at Israel alone. We spend money in foreign aid to several countries, and until we have some of the same luxuries as other members of the industrialized world, we should be spending it at home on our citizens.

[Behind the Aegis]

23. Let's see some proof of your fact.

[Aerows]

24. Took me all of one second

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/fullpage/top-10-us-foreign-aid-recipients-17534761

If this isn't adequate, I have several more links to choose from.

[Behind the Aegis]

25. Do you not know what a donation is?

That is aid. It is not a "donation" as you claimed.

[Aerows]

27. Free money is free money

No matter how you slice it.

[Behind the Aegis]

30. As I thought.

[Aerows]

31. ?

What? First you try to bait me into saying that I only want to end it for Israel like I'm some raving anti-semite, then, I point out that we hand over 3 billion a year and I say that is ludicrous because we have people suffering in our nation, and then you say "As I thought."

What do you mean by that? As you thought? Yes, as you thought, I'd like to see us spend our tax dollars here in the US first before we go finding ways to spend them in other nations.

[Behind the Aegis]

32. You have no clue as to what we are discussing.

I didn't bait you into anything, I asked you a legitimate question. You answered honestly. Second, you clearly do not understand the difference between a donation and financial aid. So let me help you: a donation is a gift, something that does not have to be returned; it can be cash or physical goods. Aid can be donations, but in the case of Israel and most of the countries from your list, it is in the form of loans or grants. Grants do not have to be "paid back" usually, but stipulations determine how the money is used; in Israel's (Egypt, and several other countries) case, those grants are used to purchase military hardware form the US. Loans have less stipulations, but are required to be repaid. Neither are donations, as you claimed.

Edit: forgot a word

[Aerows]

37. If I don't have any clue

as to what we are discussing, then neither do you. Acrobatics with semantics do not a point make, my friend, so let's not pretend this conversation is going anywhere when you utilize them. You asked for facts. I provided them. You don't like the fact that I provided them, and proceeded to go off on a semantic tangent.

You are free to make your own points, but I am not obliged to agree with them, and do not. I can't put it any plainer than that.

[Behind the Aegis]

38. You didn't provide any facts that substaniated your claim.

It isn't semantics, it is fact. We do not donate billions to Israel, as you claimed.

[Aerows]

40. I provided a link that substantiates my claim

You have not. Feel free to provide your version of events with links.

[Behind the Aegis]

41. When you learn the definitions of the words in question, I shall.

It is clear you are happy with your own definitions and not those commonly accepted.

Donation -- gift, no repayment expected (Your claim.)

Loan -- temporary help, repayment expected

Grant -- temporary help, may or may not be expected to be repaid

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/foreign_aid.html

[Aerows]

42. Now we are getting somewhere

You posted a link, I can now read it and either agree with you or refute it. That tends to work out a whole lot better than "You are wrong" "No, you are wrong." I'll read your information and come back and discuss it.

[Aerows]

47. According to your linke

the aid that we send is military assistance. In deference to the fact that Israel has many of the US's interests in matters of national security in the Middle East, I can agree that you are correct in that it is more along the lines of serving our own interests by giving military assistance to Israel.

I am more than willing to admit when I am wrong, and I thank you for the information.

[Behind the Aegis]

50. You are very gracious. It is appreciated!

BTA

[Aerows]

53. It's always a good thing

when people can help each other look at situations from a different point of view. I learned something, and I appreciate it.

[awoke_in_2003]

61. "are you willing to cut them off as well?"...

I am. We need to start getting our house back in order. We cannot financially continue to keep throwing away money. Another thing we really should do is scale back our overseas bases by at least half. The American economy need some strain relief.

[cosmicone]

62. Whether the money comes back or not

Israel gets free use of top notch hardware.

Would it be any different if the Italian government gave me $1.2 million to buy a Ferrari Enzo saying "the money is coming right back and so nothing is lost?"

Wouldn't I be getting free use of a Ferrari in that example?

[leftynyc]

66. That metaphor is too ludicrous

to be able to make a fair comparison. All of our allies benefit from top notch hardware. If you don't think Israel is an ally, why don't you just say so?

[cosmicone]

68. Other allies pay for the privilege.

Saudi Arabia and Japan pay for the hardware. They are not given aid.

[leftynyc]

71. Did you pull that out of your ass?

Here are facts: Saudi Arabia got $13 billion in military aid in 2007 (yes, the same Saudi Arabia that controls the oil)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18106.htm

Japan (after bombing us at Pearl Harbor) - was rebuilt by the US and their allies and got billions after that earthquake. What did we get from either of those? Why you can't just admit you don't like US money going to specifically Israel is beyond me (not really but the way you dance around it is amusing).

[The Stranger]

89. 2007? Is that all you've got?

That number in that one year is DWARFED by what Israel collects.

You know this to be true. Please at least argue in good faith.

[leftynyc]

93. I am arguing in good faith

You put our only reliable ally in the region on the same level as those who call us the Great Satan. That would be your problem, not mine.

[The Stranger]

96. Nonsense

The career intelligence officer who helped to assess the Pollard damage has come to view Pollard as a serial spy, the Ted Bundy of the intelligence world. "Pollard gave them every message for a whole year," the officer told me recently, referring to the Israelis. "They could analyze it" -- the intelligence -- "message by message, and correlate it. They could not only piece together our sources and methods but also learn how we think, and how we approach a problem. All of a sudden, there is no mystery. These are the things we can't change. You got this, and you got us by the balls." In other words, the Rota reports, when carefully studied, gave the Israelis "a road map on how to circumvent" the various American collection methods and shield an ongoing military operation. The reports provide guidance on "how to keep us asleep, thinking all is working well," he added. "They tell the Israelis how to raid Tunisia without tipping off American intelligence in advance. That is damage that is persistent and severe."

NOT every document handed over by Pollard dealt with signals intelligence. DIAL-COINS is the acronym for the Defense Intelligence Agency's Community On-Line Intelligence System, which was one of the government's first computerized information-retrieval-network systems. The system, which was comparatively primitive in the mid-nineteen-eighties -- it used an 8088 operating chip and thermafax paper -- could not be accessed by specific issues or key words but spewed out vast amounts of networked intelligence data by time frame. Nevertheless, DIAL-COINS contained all the intelligence reports filed by Air Force, Army, Navy, and Marine attaches in Israel and elsewhere in the Middle East. One official who had been involved with it told me recently, "It was full of great stuff, particularly in HUMINT -- human intelligence. Many Americans who went to the Middle East for business or political reasons agreed, as loyal citizens, to be debriefed by American defense attaches after their visits. They were promised anonymity -- many had close friends inside Israel and the nearby Arab states who would be distressed by their collaboration -- and the reports were classified. "It's who's talking to whom," the officer said. "Like handing you the address book of the spooks for a year."

Government investigators discovered that one of the system's heaviest users in 1984 and 1985 was Jonathan Pollard. He had all the necessary clearances and necessary credentials to gain access to the classified Pentagon library; he also understood that librarians, even in secret libraries, are always eager to help, and in one instance he relied on the library security guards. With some chagrin, officials involved in the Pollard investigation recounted that Pollard had once collected so much data that he needed a handcart to move the papers to his car, in a nearby parking lot, and the security guards held the doors for him.

POLLARD also provided the Israelis with what is perhaps the most important day-to-day information in signals intelligence: the National SIGINT Requirements List, which is essentially a compendium of the tasks, and the priority of those tasks, given to various N.S.A. collection units around the world. Before a bombing mission, for example, a United States satellite might be redeployed, at enormous financial cost, to provide instantaneous electronic coverage of the target area. In addition, N.S.A. field stations would be ordered to begin especially intensive monitoring of various military units in the target nation. Special N.S.A. coverage would also be ordered before an American covert military unit, such as the Army's Delta Force or a Navy Seal team, was inserted into hostile territory or hostile waters. Sometimes the N.S.A.'s requests were less comprehensive: a European or Middle Eastern business suspected of selling chemical arms to a potential adversary might be placed on the N.S.A. "watch list" and its faxes, telexes, and other communications carefully monitored. The Requirements List is "like a giant to-do list," a former N.S.A. operative told me. "If a customer" -- someone in the intelligence community -- "asked for specific coverage, it would be on a list that is updated daily." That is, the target of the coverage would be known.

"If we're going to bomb Iraq, we will shift the system," a senior specialist subsequently told me. "It's a tipoff where the American emphasis is going to be." With the List, the specialist added, the Israelis "could see us move our collection systems" prior to military action, and eventually come to understand how the United States Armed Forces "change our emphasis." In other words, he added, Israel "could make our intelligence system the prime target" and hide whatever was deemed necessary. "The damage goes past Jay's arrest," the specialist said, "and could extend up to today." Israel made dramatic use of the Pollard material on October 1, 1985, seven weeks before his arrest, when its Air Force bombed the headquarters of the Palestine Liberation Organization in Tunisia, killing at least sixty-seven people. The United States, which was surprised by the operation, eventually concluded that the Israeli planners had synergistically combined the day-to-day insights of the SIGINT Requirements List with the strategic intelligence of the FOSIF reports and other data that Pollard provided to completely outwit our government's huge collection apparatus in the Middle East. Even Pollard himself, the senior official told me, "had no idea what he gave away."

http://cryptome.org/jya/traitor.htm

[cosmicone]

94. The "aid" to Saudi Arabia was actually compensation

for putting up with the refugees etc. from our Iraq war (which Israel pushed for to eliminate a bigger enemy) and our troops and aseets on their soil. It was not to purchase military hardware. Saudi Arabia can afford to purchase it.

The aid to Japan after WWII was after we nuked them and destroyed their ability to function as a nation. We were afraid that the communist Chinese will bring communism to Japan so we rebuilt it.

We have neither nuked Israel nor staged any operations from their soil. They have suffered no refugees or other expense due to our actions. Still, we supply the aid.

[The Stranger]

86. Oh come on, at least try to come within a few light years of truth.

The "loan guarantees" are forgiven, not paid back.

I mean, please.

[leftynyc]

33. Educate yourself

We don't donate money. As I pointed out before, the vast majority comes back as payment for weapons. It just goes from one American bank account to another.

[Aerows]

39. I'm not very good

with conversations that involve "my way or the highway". I was asked for facts, I provided them. It's entirely up to you how you take them. If that isn't "educating" then I don't know what your definition of "education" is. Education involves facts. If you do not like the facts I provided, you are more than welcome to provide your own.

[leftynyc]

44. I already have

You seem to think we give billions and get nothing in return but nothing could be further from the truth. The money comes right back into the bank accounts of our defense industry. Is it an ideal situation? Not even close. But it's also not a gift. Those are the facts.

[Aerows]

48. See post #47.

I clarified my position.

[cosmicone]

63. See my post #62

[azurnoir]

54. No we do not donate it 75% comes right back to American arms manufacturers

yea arms producers huh of course that doesn't indicate if the arms are actually made in the US just who the CEO's of those companies are and where the companies are licensed, and we all know just how popular arms manufacturers are these days, maybe that's where the M-16's that the Israeli's living in the West Bank are allowed to carry come from, what'd ya think?

[madrchsod]

56. the us tax payers paid more to the isreali defence budget than israeli citizens

http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2012/09/17/us-taxpayers-paid-more-to-israeli-defense-budget-than-israelis/

[leftynyc]

67. So?

We're talking about a country that is the size of NJ and is surrounded by people who want to blow it off the earth (you're not really going to make me dig out the quotes backing that up, are you? You know it's true). I'm sure the same could be said about many of our allies.

[The Stranger]

88. Oh come on, not that again.

They're one of the most powerful nuclear powers on Earth. They are backed by the only hyperpower in history. They have access to all of the technology of that same hyperpower.

No one is going to do a f___ing thing to Israel, and you know it.

[leftynyc]

91. Do you not read the news?

Or do you think rockets being launched into their country are merely fireworks? And you're right about the governments of their neighbors - none of them are that stupid. That said, I'm more worried about the lunatics that strap bombs onto their bodies (or the bodies of their children) and send them into crowds.

You may want to ruminate on the fact that perhaps nobody is going to take Israel on BECAUSE they have the nukes. Without them, they would have disappeared long ago.

[cosmicone]

95. Israel can negotiate a deal for peace

by withdrawing to the pre-1967 borders.

Israel doesn't want peace without land grab.

If Israel was serious, it would not construct settlements left and right --ALSO with American resettlement aid.

Disgusting.

[The Stranger]

97. So we can agree that no one is going to "blow (Israel) off the earth."

You admit that that was just (I suppose) hyperbole.

[Zoeisright]

99. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!

Yeah, those "rockets" sure are weapons of mass destruction. Why don't you try comparing deaths of Palestinians to deaths of Israelis in the last billion or so conflicts?

Pathetic.

[Iggo]

16. And we know what's good for us, Benny my boy.

So please proceed to fuck the hell off.

[Aerows]

19. I agree, Mr. Netanyahu

And while we are at it, let's start spending the foreign aid money at HOME, instead of in your country that you know how to run. It's way past time to stop the allowance.

[DallasNE]

28. What A Misrepresentation Of Facts

Plus, it is a takeaway by Goldberg on comments made by Obama. They are not Obama's words nor are they in relation to security in Gaza as Netanyahu would have us believe with his photo-op visit to that area.

3,000 housing units would be built in areas beyond the Green Line, and zoning and planning for thousands of other units throughout Judea and Samaria would be authorized, including in the controversial project between Jerusalem and Ma’aleh Adumim called E1.

Obama's comments were in regard to the above announcement by Israel on settlement policy going forward, and in particular the E1 project, calling this "counterproductive". Frankly, this trip by Netanyahu is political grandstanding before next weeks election - nothing more, nothing less. As such, I am not sure why DU would even post such a story let alone with such extreme bias. They need to clean up their act.

[hopemountain]

34. thank you, dallasNE

i agree. this post is irresponsible.

[leftynyc]

35. You must be new to this place

Hyperbole about Israel is an every day event.

[1StrongBlackMan]

52. LOL ...

but it is you defending the hyperbole contained in the article.

That's victim rich.

[leftynyc]

65. What hyperbole would that be?

The unsourced stuff that was presented as Pres Obama's words or the fact Bibi thinks he may know better what is best for Israel? I think you may be confused about what hyperbole is - try a dictionary.

[1StrongBlackMan]

69. I have apretty good command of the English language ...

and access to a pretty good dictionary.

I saw the title of the piece as hyperbolic ... moreso, after having read the first sentence of the OP that mis-attributed the inaccurate "quote."

So we can be on the same page ... Please explain what you have seen as hyperbolic in the OP. Thanks.

[leftynyc]

72. I find anything unsourced as hyperbolic

as anyone can say anyone said anything. My favorite is when any author decides what the person quoted REALLY meant.

[1StrongBlackMan]

73. So we agree ...

this OP is political spin?

One question though ... Why'd you write:

What is wrong with what Bibi said? Do you really think you would say anything different about your own country?

When you acknowledge that the comment was based on an unsourced comment that the author clearly re-interpreted?

Just wondering.

[leftynyc]

74. It's the President's statement

that was unsourced.

A day after US columnist Jeffrey Goldberg quoted US President Barack Obama....


The reply from Bibi is in quotes (unlike the President's "quote&quot so I assume that is legitimate.

[1StrongBlackMan]

76. What is legitimate ...

about responding to something that was not said?

What is legitimate about supporting a comment that responds to something that was not said?

[leftynyc]

77. Did Bibi know it wasn't a quote?

or did the reporter say "Pres Obama has said this......, do you care to comment". That question needs to be answered.

[1StrongBlackMan]

78. Good point!

I don't know about what Bibi knew when commenting.

Now, what about you? You have the knowledge that the comment was unsourced and re-intepreted, yet you asked:

What is wrong with what Bibi said? Do you really think you would say anything different about your own country?

[leftynyc]

79. Because as a stand alone quote -

that he knows better than the President what is good for Israel - happens to be the truth. I would say the same of anyone running for PM of Israel not matter whether they were left right or middle. Israeli's know what is best for themselves. Bibi injecting himself in the US elections pissed me off just as much.

[1StrongBlackMan]

80. Okay ...

I see your point.

but the OP was not a stand alone quote. It was preceded by the unsourced, re-interpretation of what President Obama didn't say.

I was just wondering how with that knowledge, and in that context, you would ask what is wrong with Bibi's response/comment?

[leftynyc]

81. I'm not understanding your question

Whether Bibi knew it was a quote or not isn't the point (at least not to me).

[1StrongBlackMan]

82. I'm asking about YOUR response to the thread. n/t

[leftynyc]

83. Well, I think Bibi is an asshole

who had no business getting involved in our election so he's also a hypocrite if he thinks our President should keep his opinions to himself. That said, I'm a strong supporter of Israel who/which is by no means perfect but there are no perfect countries out there. I have many friends and relatives there who just want to live their lives without having to worry about getting blown up. The election of Hamas in Gaza shook everyone up pretty bad and that the Israeli government turned hard right after that is not really a mystery (or shouldn't be).

I think this board, in general, gives a pass to Islam and the Palestinians in particular. I see Christianity bashed on a daily basis here and nonsensical comparisons to our fundamentalists and those who throw acid in the faces of girls who want an education. So it's hard to comment on just one thread here as if in a vacuum - I've been here a long time and have seen a lot. I've been called an Islamophobe for simply being disgusted at the treatment of women in many Muslim countries so that label has become totally meaningless here.

I'm not sure if that answers your question or not.

[1StrongBlackMan]

84. Thanks ...

I think this board, in general, gives a pass to Islam and the Palestinians in particular.

This may be true; but I have not seen that so much as arguing the "chicken and egg" to counter the "Israel is to be unquestioningly supported by the U.S." narrative on these boards.

I would say, as with most conflicts, there are few "angels" on either side that engage in violence ... because both will claim their acts to be "self-defense", and can "prove it" depending on where one chooses to start and stop the time-line of events.

[leftynyc]

85. Your comment about timelines

being arbitrary had me nodding along. Very true. It's been very nice chatting with you.

[1StrongBlackMan]

87. So much ...

our current positions remind me of the school yard thing, with each side justifying their conduct by say, "well ... he/she hit me first", while neglecting to mention that I spit on you, called your mother a syphed up, clappy whore and kicked your puppy, before daring you to hit me.

[leftynyc]

90. Now just imagine

when you have hundreds of years of history to fight about!!! The most maddening thing is that the vast majority of people on both sides just want to live their lives in peace. But, as always, the loudest and most extreme elements get all the attention and everyone has to suffer along.

[1StrongBlackMan]

92. True that ...

When I was much younger, one of my friends ... a missionary doing refuge work in Thailand during the Vietnam war, reflected that the vast majority of people he encountered couldn't have cared less about the ruling regime, the face of the currency or the form of government they lived under ... they just wanted to feed their families and raise their children.

[John2]

36. I believe you

are right. President Obama has a tough job, dealing with all extremes misrepresenting the facts. Everybody in Israel is not far right either. I wouldn't put all Israelis in the same camp just as well as the Palestinians.

[Politicalboi]

43. As Benny said

He knows what's good for Israel. 9/11 was good for Israel too. I don't like Nutnyahoo.

[leftynyc]

45. Who is Benny?

And what does 9/11 have to do with Israel?

[1StrongBlackMan]

46. I only got through the first sentence of the article ...

Source: Jerusalem Post

A day after US columnist Jeffrey Goldberg quoted US President Barack Obama as saying that Israel under Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu does not know what is in its own best interest, ...

When I had to doubt the veracity of whatever else followed.

First, Goldberg did not quote President Obama, but rather an administration spokesperson. Secondly, the quote from the story was:

“We believe these actions are counterproductive and make it harder to resume direct negotiations or achieve a two-state solution,”

Which doesn't speak to what is in one's best interests; rather, it speaks to one's actions that are intended to further one's interests. One can know it is in one's best interest to be seen as honest and truthful; but when someone points out instances where you are dishonest and/or untruthful, that person isn't questioning your knowledge, but rather your actions.

[appacom]

58. Thanks for clarifying

[Luschnig]

51. Who cares what's good for Israe?

What matters is what's good for America. And for sure it is not good for America to get involved with a bunch of squabbling Middle Easterners.

[madrchsod]

55. the middle east is not our main focus anymore

south east asia will be our focus this century.

[LoisB]

57. Then he needs to stay out of our business right after he returns the billions we have sent to Israel

since he took office.

[Ash_F]

59. Bad headline...bad quote...bad thread

Mainstream Journalism 2013

[Purveyor]

60. Lodge your complaint with the Jerusalem Post then, other than that...I found this thread

'delightful', indeed.

BTW...Here is the NYTimes version:

Netanyahu Issues Veiled Barb in Response to Reported Criticism From Obama

JERUSALEM — Days before an Israeli election that he is expected to win, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday directed a veiled barb at President Obama, who was quoted this week as denouncing Mr. Netanyahu’s policies.

Relations between the two leaders have long been marked by tension that has erupted on occasion into open hostility, particularly over the handling of the Iranian nuclear issue and Israeli settlement plans. Israeli commentators said the latest exchange of messages seemed to suggest that future relations between Mr. Obama and Mr. Netanyahu could be equally fraught.

In a column published by Bloomberg View on Monday, Jeffrey Goldberg, an American journalist who is well acquainted with Israel, wrote that in the weeks after the United Nations General Assembly voted to upgrade the status of Palestine to nonmember observer state, “Obama said privately and repeatedly, ‘Israel doesn’t know what its own best interests are.’ With each new settlement announcement, in Obama’s view, Netanyahu is moving his country down a path toward near-total isolation.”

Responding to a journalist’s question about the comments and the timing during a televised visit to a military base on Wednesday, Mr. Netanyahu said, “I think everyone understands that only Israeli citizens will be the ones who determine who faithfully represents the vital interests of Israel.”

MORE...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/world/middleeast/netanyahu-issues-veiled-response-to-criticism-from-obama.html?_r=0

[Ash_F]

64. I was mainly talking about Jeffrey Goldberg

It wasn't directed at you.

[kelliekat44]

98. Yeah, because that thiinking has worked so well in the past. nt