Posted on 10/25/2009 4:31:37 PM PDT by Tigen
Israel says PM did not consult Obama ahead of trip because meeting on peace process unnecessary.
WASHINGTON – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's intention to visit Washington for the annual UJC General Assembly has surprised many on Capitol Hill and was apparently not coordinated with the Obama administration.
An American source told Ynet Sunday that news of the visit had been received with reserved astonishment.
The Obama administration has not yet responded to questions of whether a meeting with Netanyahu was forthcoming due to their surprise over the unscheduled visit. On the other hand, failure to invite Netanyahu to the White House may be perceived as a diplomatic crisis.
Sources in Jerusalem say Netanyahu did indeed decide to attend the GA without first consulting President Barack Obama, but that since the latter would also be present at the event the two may meet in any case.
The sources say a summit between the two leaders would be superfluous at this point in the peace process, and for this reason an official meeting has not been scheduled.
An official statement regarding Netanyahu's visit is scheduled to be published soon in the US, and an unofficial oral announcement has already been given by the Jewish Federations' leaders. The prime minister's visit is scheduled to take place on November 8-10.
(Excerpt) Read more at ynetnews.com ...
go bibi! he’s visiting America.. not that empty suit commie.
Yup now the spoiled brat in the WH is all weeweed up. snicker
The lesson Zero should get is that Netanyahu is not on this planet to do the bidding of Zero.
Netanyahu will do whatever it takes to protect his country .. which is far more than our current president is willing to do.
I'd pay GOOD MONEY to see Obama's (and his kapos - ROFL) face when he heard of such a meeting as having taken place.
But moose is perfectly kosher! [OK, I guess not shot moose, but still...]
Maybe Bibi could send a note of apology for not letting him know he was arriving and enclose a little gift...how about the speech he gave at the UN!
Post of the day winner. :D
I would bet if 0bama speaks first and sullys rsquo;a America again, Bibi will get up and fillet him again and this time with a make no mistake about it, until now our nations were close allies...and the sentiment of the American people is with Israel despite this temporary resident in the WH or words to that effect.
Obama was probably told Bibi was coming to the U.S. amd wouldn’t agree to meet with him, so Bibi is coming anyway.
...and he’s taking off the glasses! Watch out when that happens! LOL!
...and I hope Rush Limbaugh interviews him on air! Or Glenn Beck, I’m not picky!
Heads WILL explode ALL over the left, and I ain’t cleaning it up, LOL.
I figure UJC invited them both and Bibi waited until obama said yes, was scheduled, announced, and could not cancel without extreme embarrassment. He cannot NOW say that there is a scheduling conflict. If he backs out now, it sends a HUGE message to Jews all over the world who seem to not get that bam is Israel’s worst nightmare.
The UJC has been trying to schedule Netanyahu for quite awhile. It seems as if this is a bit of a coup for them.
I wonder who is speaking first. Would bam dare speak and allow Netanyahu to follow like the UN speech?
Or will Bibi speak first and challenge bam so that bam’s canned speech sounds irrelevant?
This is definitely a hit on bam. He has no input or any white tent coordination with Netanyahu on anything. bam can’t say, “Hey, Bibi, don’t trip me up, Bro.”
Netanyahu plays chess very, very well. He has one-upped bam at virtually every single turn.
E V E R Y- S I N G L E- T U R N.
MAZELTOV, BIBI!!!
I KNEW YOU COULD!
Perhaps he could be. Apparently that whole natural-born citizen thing isn’t enforced anymore.
Pat McManus is my absolute favorite author bar none.
This act of Bibi’s is brilliant!!! Godspeed to him!
IIRC, Knesset members must renounce all foreign citizenships.
Bro you and yer inner circle of kapos just got PWN3D
Netanyahu Today: First Hell Freezes, Then The Settlements
By M.J. Rosenberg - October 24, 2009, 11:38AM
In an interview in Sunday's Washington Post, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu may go further than any of his predecessors in rejecting a settlement freeze -- this after President Obama went further than any of his predecessors in demanding one.
In the fifteen years since Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO leader, Yasir Arafat signed the Oslo agreement, Israel has never, in principle, ruled out a settlement freeze. On occasion, it has, in fact, implemented a freeze while on several others, Israeli prime ministers said "yes" but with conditions.
There has been one constant. Israeli prime ministers tended to go along with the US and Palestinian view that freezing settlements was not a final status issue (i.e, one that would only be resolved in the context of comprehensive negotiations) but a precondition for negotiations like the PLO's cessation of violence, which has been in effect for years.
Israeli prime ministers understood that Palestinians viewed the expansion of settlements as something unacceptable during negotiations. As one Palestinian put it, "you can't discuss how you will divide the pizza while one guy is gobbling it up."
This all changed today with an interview in Sunday's Washington Post.
WP: What do you think should happen with the Palestinians? Netanyahu: We just wasted six months because of the Palestinian effort to place preconditions on the negotiations -- preconditions that weren't there for the last 16 years.
WP: Is that freezing the settlements?
Netanyahu: It's freezing the settlements, it's committing in advance to the negotiations.
WP: It's commiting to the outcome basically?
Netanyahu: Yes, it's the old technique. Let's agree what the results of the negotiations will be before the negotiations begin.
And then Netanyahu flatout misrepresents the Obama administration's position by saying it agrees with him.
Netanyahu: I think the Palestinians have to recognize that Washington says there should be no negotiations without preconditions.
Of course, President Obama said the opposite and so did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (In Clinton's words, President Obama wants to see a stop to settlements -- not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions.") They have both demanded a settlement freeze as a means of getting negotiations started i.e. as a precondition.
And as far as pretending that a settlement freeze is a "final status" issue and always was, Netanyahu is rejectiong the positions of every one of his predecessors since 1993. They all accepted the idea that a freeze was a preliminary step. Bibi has broken new ground (maybe to build a settlement on it).
To put it bluntly, President Obama is being royally dissed.
But all is not lost. The President should say: "Okay, Bibi, we agree. A settlement freeze is a final status issue. I want you and Abbas to come to Camp David now to begin and finish negotiations on the final status of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. We will, as you prefer, discuss the settlement freeze in the context of setting final borders for Israel and the Palestinian state."
I dare him.
One thing is certain. The President cannot accept this type of rebuff lying down. Congressman Joe Wilson only yelled out "liar." Netanyahu's response to Obama is worse. It reminds me of that old New York Daily News headline after President Ford rejected an aid package for a brankrupt New York City, "Ford to City: Drop Dead."
The president cannot accept? Bwahhhahhhhahhahah> (And what the hell is brankrupt?)
This is not how an ally -- especially one who receives more aid, by far, than any other country in the world -- should be permitted to address an American President.
I am LOVING this.....
Crossposted MEDIA MATTERS ACTION NETWORK
***************************************
You just KNOW these trogs are going spastic at this latest news.
Hope they burst a whole lot of blood vessels over this one.
“And then Netanyahu flatout misrepresents the Obama administration’s position by saying it agrees with him.”
How so according to THEIR version?
“Netanyahu: I think the Palestinians have to recognize that *Washington says there should be no negotiations without preconditions.”
No negotiations without preconditions...
I might be wrong, but isn’t this saying that Washington insists on PREconditions? A freudian typo by the letist contagion?
I HATE the left. Do they think people can’t read? or is it that THEY can’t?
Here is the quote from the original interview.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/23/AR2009102303591_4.html?sid=ST2009102303598
“I think the Palestinians have to recognize [that] *Washington says there should be negotiations without preconditions. That’s what they mean. And that’s certainly what we mean. We’re prepared to begin yesterday. Why waste more time?”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.