Comments on: Media narrative or floating balloons?

By: Alex Bensky

Alex Bensky — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 00:15:52 +0000

So Israel will be punished for failing to go along with an American initiative. Obama wants both sides to work for peace and I’m waiting to see what punishments, or mild criticisms, he will offer of the Palis’ relentless, constant hatefest towards Israel. Will he even mention it? Any bets.

By: Pamela

Pamela — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 00:04:34 +0000

Obama’s ego needs a pride cut.

By: cliff was from montreal

cliff was from montreal — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:50:55 +0000

â€œPart of being a good friend is being honest,â€ Mr. Obama said in an interview with NPR News.
Works both ways..I hope his huge ego is ready for a slap.

By: Soccerdad

Soccerdad — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 20:14:15 +0000

Here’s a vote for “media narrative,” as co-reported by Helene Cooper:
Obama Plays Down Split Over Israeli Settlements .

In other words, “President Obama is trying to put out the fires I keep trying to start.”

By: Soccerdad

Soccerdad — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:02:16 +0000

I believe that there's an element of media inflation. (see my previous post and see Backspin) Helene Cooper is looking for anything to show - and magnify - the deep divisions between the administration and Israel. But there's also something that's being mis-represented here. The Bush administration adopted a policy, not of an unqualified automatic veto, but of an automatic veto of any resolution that was clearly biased against Israel. Amb. John Danforth articulated the Bush adminstration's view very well in October 2004. But before it was put to a vote, U.S. Ambassador John Danforth took the floor to serve clear notice that Washington considered it lopsided and unbalanced. He charged that the measure would only encourage terrorists by condemning Israel while omitting the other side of the story. "It does not mention even one of the 450 Qassam rocket attacks launched against Israel over the past two years," he said. "It does not mention two hundred rockets launched this year alone. It does not mention the two Israeli children who were outside playing last week when a rocket suddenly crashed into their young bodies." Ambassador Danforth charged that a vote in favor of the proposed resolution would have encouraged terrorists and done nothing to prevent what he called "the predictable Israeli response" "When the rest of the world gangs up on Israel with insidious silence about terrorism, it does not advance the cause of peace," he said. "It encourages both sides to dig in. It makes Israel feel isolated and backed into a corner and it discourages dialogue." Claiming that the United States automatically vetoes any resolution critical of Israel misses this important context. It fails to acknowledge that the reason for the veto is the extremely skewed nature of the resolutions brought to the floor of the UN.

By: Eric J

Eric J — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 15:42:16 +0000

If the US really has been working “to ensure that Israel is treated fairly at the United Nations,” based on the results, it may be time to say “Stop Helping!”

By: hs935684

hs935684 — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 15:15:35 +0000

I suspect that it’s a case of neither wishful thinking on the part of the liberal media, nor State telling the truth. The UN isn’t the important problem. It’s the potential failure (refusal) to provide munitions or spare parts, that has me worried..

Israel needs to find other sources, or become self-sufficient.

You’re right about most American Jewish voters, with their heads in the clouds. I have an elderly aunt who still thinks that Hussein can do no wrong. She becomes very upset whenever I tell her what I think of him. As an outsider, her attitude puzzles me. Sadly, the 1930s appear to be repeating themselves.

Henry Kissinger was right about America – being her enemy can be dangerous, but being her ally can be fatal.