'America is a thing you can move very easily': Netanyahu

[EmilyKent]

Netanyahu: 'America is a thing you can move very easily'

The United States and Israel have made a huge effort this month to patch up the sometimes difficult relationship between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. But a newly released video of Netanyahu, speaking in an unvarnished manner in 2001 about relations with the United States and the peace process, may cause some heartburn at the White House.

"I know what America is," Netanyahu told a group of terror victims, apparently not knowing his words were being recorded. "America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won't get in their way."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/checkpoint-washington/2010/07/netanyahu_america_is_a_thing_y.html

[Enrique]

1. oh boy

:popcorn:

[Enrique]

2. is this what they mean by "tail wagging the dog?"

how much do we give to Israel every year? $1 billion?

[EmilyKent]

3. More from Tablet which also has the video.

'A newly revealed tape of Netanyahu in 2001, being interviewed while he thinks the cameras are off, shows him in a radically different light. In it, Netanyahu dismisses American foreign policy as easy to maneuver, boasts of having derailed the Oslo accords with political trickery, and suggests that the only way to deal with the Palestinians is to “beat them up, not once but repeatedly, beat them up so it hurts so badly, until it’s unbearable” (all translations are mine).'

http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/39692/fibi-netanyahu

[msongs]

4. without Hamas Netanyahu has no reason to exist - Israel makes Hamas possible nt

[Ken Burch]

6. There has to be some kind of back channel connection between those two groups

Everything each group does always works to the political benefit of the other.

[peacetalksforall]

5. So loathsome. So creepy. So diabolical.

[oberliner]

7. "They won't get in their way" ??

What is that supposed to mean?

Who won't get in whose way?

[EmilyKent]

8. They won't get in 'the' way.

Simple typo. The media does this a lot anymore, I've noticed, having fired all the proof readers.

[oberliner]

10. It's written elsewhere as "They won't get in our way"

Still not sure what it means. Get in the way of what?

In any case, this video is 10 years old so it doesn't really seem relevant.

[EmilyKent]

12. I'm sure you know what it means.

And yes, it's relevant.

[oberliner]

16. I'm actually not entirely sure what the context is

And no, it's no relevant. It's typical Netanyahu.

[shaayecanaan]

13. Why would it not be relevant?

Is he a changed man from when he uttered these remarks 10 years ago? Did he find Jesus or something?

When the tapes turned up of Billy Graham saying to Richard Nixon "The Jews have too much power" do you think it would have been acceptable for Graham to say:-

"I made that statement 30 years ago. I don't think its really relevant."

[oberliner]

15. How is it relevant?

He is an arrogant SOB - it doesn't take a ten year old video to know that.

[Chulanowa]

19. If he were only an arrogant SOB, that'd be one thing

But he's an arrogant SOB who gets our money, is currently leader of one of our primary allies, and who has the lives of millions of people - his own and those of the Palestinians - in his hands at the moment.

Unless you're going to argue that he underwent some sort of conversion in the past decade, and is no longer a militant fuckhead, this remains relevant. Saying otherwise is like saying Bush's tenure as governor of Texas was irrelevant to anything ten years later. Still an asshole; just with more power.

[Violet_Crumble]

36. Gosh, maybe because him and many Americans claim he's truly interested in peace and honest?

I'm a bit uncertain as to why you've exerted so much energy in this thread trying to make out there's nothing relevent to anything in the video...

[oberliner]

39. Why Binyamin Netanyahu tape is no real shocker

A recently released tape revealing Binyamin Netanyahu's contempt for both the Palestinian and US administrations has caused far less of a diplomatic storm than his opponents hoped it might. For all that Netanyahu's innate arrogance and self-aggrandisement was laid bare by the contents of the nine-year-old recording, the collective shrugging of shoulders implies that few expected anything else from a man who has been boasting of his own political prowess throughout his tumultuous career.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/26/binyamin-netanyahu-tape-israeli-palestinian-politics

This Seth Freedman article presents the gist of my point pretty well.

[Violet_Crumble]

46. I'm still at a complete loss as to why yr investing so much energy and time...

It's almost like you don't want people to talk about the embarressment that video would cause to Nutty and his govt...

[oberliner]

49. Doesn't take much time and energy

Just made a few posts and read a few articles.

I spent a lot more time and energy trying to find that Egyptian article whose authenticity was being disputed in another thread.

Lord knows why I invested so much energy and time into that.

Guess I have a bit too much time on my hands right now.

[Violet_Crumble]

53. Yr sure posting away a lot about it

It's a shame you can't devote that spare time on yr hands into something that's constructive...

[oberliner]

55. Agreed

Would that I didn't spend as much time on DU as I did.

Something about it that keeps drawing me back in!

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[oberliner]

9. This is from ten years ago

This is a recording from 2001 that has just been made public now. At least that is my understanding from this article.

Not exactly news.

[EmilyKent]

11. Yes, it clearly says that.

Do you think he's changed?

Have recent events led you to believe he's changed?

[whosinpower]

18. He hasn't changed but

George W. Bush is not in the White House anymore.

Barak Obama may not be quite so easy to move....there are certain Israeli groups that will leap to the Cairo Address and claim Obama does not love Israel quite as wholeheartedly as Bush did....and this causes them concern.

[shaayecanaan]

14. Get over yourself

Its just as relevant as Mahmoud Abbas' holocaust denial thirty years ago (which is brought up repeatedly, including when he met with American Jewish leaders a month ago).

[oberliner]

17. I don't understand what you mean

There is nothing surprising about these ten year old remarks.

His actions since he has become PM of Israel are a lot more egregious and insulting to the US than anything he said on this video.

To say nothing of the way he treated former President Clinton.

[enola fay]

20. Here is a link to the video with English subtitles:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6KLFrye9Xk

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PDJane]

22. Doesn't surprise me.

Makes me absolutely ill, leaves me frustrated and angry and hurting...but doesn't surprise me.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jester Messiah]

24. Really...

Interesting. Very interesting.

[oberliner]

25. Have you looked closely at the website you are linking to?

Headings include:

Call for investigation of Israeli influence in UK government
#
Campaigners fight power of Israel lobby in UK
#
Israel’s agents of influence in Britain
#
Who's who of Israel's agents of influence in Britain
#
Name and shame British “Friends of Israel”
#
Zionists at the heart of the British government

Welcome to Zionized Britain

[azurnoir]

26. Is the video fake? or is this just an attempt at distraction n/t

[whosinpower]

27. Huffington Post covered the same story

As did Washington Post.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/checkpoint-washington/2010/07/netanyahu_america_is_a_thing_y.html

The tape is on Youtube.

If it is fake - by all means, show us how.

[oberliner]

28. I was trying to explain why the last post may have been deleted

Could have been the source rather than content.

[whosinpower]

29. Oh, I understand

The content in the tape is pretty controversial and potentially damaging. It would be just too juicy for some websites - such as the one you are questioning the validity....

However.....the content speaks for itself. If it is a fake....then there is a very good actor out there posing and sounding like Netanyahu. I have not heard any claims of debunking....only utter silence. I've searched to find claims of debunking the tape, but have found nothing.

Usually - when something like this drops in, there is a plethora of defense....

If you want to see how viral the story is, just google Netanyahu - I know America. Allot of anti-Israel to be sure....but the phenomenon is growing.

[oberliner]

31. I certainly don't think it's fake

I also don't think it is controversial or damaging.

Netanyahu says crap like that all the time. These remarks are from ten years ago - he has said (and done) a lot worse since then.

[Violet_Crumble]

34. Well, anyone who believes Nutty doesn't lie about wanting peace is a complete moron....

The thing is there's a lot of them in America who behave as though the sun shines out of Nutty's backside, and that he's honest and genuinelly interested in peace. I'd be interested in knowing whether you believe such a video is embarressing to Nutty, seeing as how some in the current US govt have tried to portray his govt as one that's searching for peace?

[whosinpower]

38. Really?

See, we are led to believe that the Oslo Accords failed because of Arafat's intransigence. We are led to believe that the palistinians have always been the traitor to peace.

The United States invested allot of time and effort into the accord. That the US "greatest ally" in the middle east would sabotage its efforts in such a manner...well if I was an American, I would certainly be questioning why we sent billions of dollars to Israel, To Egypt so it helps Israel, to the UN so it helps the refugees displaced by Israel.

Perhaps that does not seem controversial or damaging to you. I am not so sure. Israel really needs better leadership.

[oberliner]

41. Israel really needs better leadership.

Could not agree more. The sad thing is that Netanyahu's party lost the last election, yet here we are.

[LeftishBrit]

44. Yes.

The extremes of a complete lack of proportional representation (as in the UK) and its excess (as in Israel) can be remarkably similar in their capacity to produce very unrepresentative governments.

Netanyahu and his even more RW coalition partners are walking disasters.

[shira]

42. Netanyahu had nothing to do with Arafat rejecting Barak/Clinton in 2000-01

Neither did Netanyahu have anything to do with Abbas rejecting Olmert's offer in 2008.

[whosinpower]

51. Just can't do it can you...

Can't accept that when there is proof that Israel, via Netanyahu did not act in good faith in regards to a PEACE settlement, and a TWO STATE SOLUTION.....you just have to throw out there something negative about the palistinians.

Netanyahu had ALLOT to do with Abbas rejecting Olmert's offer. And you know it. Just who was undermining Olmert in the first place? Who publically CAMPAIGNED on rejecting ANY offer that Olmert made to Abbas and anything Abbas agreed upon? "If they sign a deal - I WILL NOT HONOUR it."
In the games of politics - Abbas gave Netanyahu an out, so as to negotiate with him....because Netanyahu would of torn up the paper Olmert wrote up anyways.

[shira]

69. Just saw this for the 1st time....

Netanyahu couldn't have done a damned thing had Arafat or Abbas accepted peace in 2000 and 2008. The pressure on Israel internationally to stick with a deal they initiated and the Palestinians accepted would have been enormous. In fact, in 2000 Israel's cabinet accepted the Clinton Initatives. All Arafat had to do was agree and there would have been a deal, Nutty or no Nutty.

Actually, Arafat did accept but it was too late...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/jun/22/israel

[whosinpower]

71. And yet it is he who is boasting

That he stopped Oslo. Those are HIS words Shira.....even if you still cling to the idea that Arafat and Abbas are to blame.

snip - Netanyahu: How can you tell. How can you tell? But then the question came up of just who would define what Defined Military Sites were. I received a letter – to my and to Arafat, at the same time – which said that Israel, and only Israel, would be the one to define what those are, the location of those military sites and their size. Now, they did not want to give me that letter, so I did not give the Hebron Agreement. I stopped the government meeting, I said: “I’m not signing.” Only when the letter came, in the course of the meeting, to my and to Arafat, only then did I sign the Hebron Agreement. Or rather, ratify it, it had already been signed. Why does this matter? Because at that moment I actually stopped the Oslo Accord.

[shira]

72. Clinton and Barak didn't believe Oslo ended when they were at Camp David / Taba

Apparently, neither did Arafat, or later, Abbas.

It appears Nutty was full of shit with his boasting. Nothing new there.

[Jefferson23]

30. Thanks for posting the WP link. n/t

[LeftishBrit]

33. Thanks for link.

Some of us were just objecting to the hate-site; not saying that the video was faked.

It's been pretty clear all along that Netanyahu is trying to sabotage the peace process, so this isn't actually surprising to me; but interesting that like many other politicians he's been caught in the 'I-thought-the-mike-was-off' syndrome.

A disastrous leader, anyway.

[LeftishBrit]

32. Could you please not link to that site? The info is available on respectable ones.

As I said some months ago:

'Two of the main writers seem to be Gilad Atzmon and Paul Balles. Atzmon a Brit of Israeli origin,, though a gifted musician, is a virulent antisemite (he's of course ethnically Jewish, but is to Jews what Nonie Darwish and Wafa Sultan are to Muslims). He has another article on this site saying 'Welcome to Zionized Britain'! Balles, an American writer, has written vile articles elsewhere, accusing Israel of involvement in 9-11, and of controlling America like a puppet-master, and saying that the Department of Defence is full of 'dual loyalists' (McCarthy, anyone?)'

I am not saying that the video is faked, or that Nutty is anything other than a nasty piece of work; but I still don't appreciate links to hate-sites.

[Lithos]

35. +1

Well said...

L-

[Violet_Crumble]

37. +1, but I'll add that I think it applies to ALL hate sites...

And that includes anti-Muslim/Arab hate sites like Arutz Sheva...

[oberliner]

40. You yourself have posted articles from the site you are calling an Arab hate site

I understand not why.

[Violet_Crumble]

45. Do you consider it a hate site?

And I'm not sure why yr pretending not to know why I posted ops from arutz Sheva when I'd told you why. Is it bad memory on yr part ?

[ConsAreLiars]

47. The list of OK/NotOK sites is a strange one.

Out of curiosity I posted a news article to see if anything notable had changed. Got disappeared.

[oberliner]

48. It is a far-right website that represents the RW perspective of the settler movement

As to whether or not I consider it a hate site, I guess that depends on what the definition of hate site is.

Tell me what the criteria are for determining whether or not a site is a hate site and I'll tell you if I think the site qualifies.

Is Fox News a hate site? What about Newsmax?

[Violet_Crumble]

52. You didn't seem to have the same difficulty identifying anti-Jewish hate sites

Why would you use a different criteria when it comes to identifying sites that promote hatred against Arabs and Muslims? Most people I know, including myself, use the same standards.

So let's try this again. Using the same standards you use to identify anti-Jewish hate sites, do you consider sites like Arutz Sheva to be an anti-Arab/Muslim hate site? And if not, which sites, if any, would you identify as being hate sites? Also, why would you ask someone else to define the criteria when it comes to *you* being asked if something's a hate site when you've NEVER once had in problems in self-definting it when it comes to anti-Jewish hate sites?

[oberliner]

54. What have I identified as an anti-Jewish hate site?

I don't recall making such an identification.

I don't really have any idea what the specific parameters are for defining something as a hate site, but I would think that Franklin's Hate Directory which is listed in the DU guidelines for this forum would be a good guide.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x21970
(The relevant reference is under the Civility heading)

Obviously I would assume whatever the criteria are would be the same with respect to any group, be they Jews, Muslims, Arabs, etc.

[Violet_Crumble]

56. You've pointed out many anti Jewish sites in the past

The site the video on is anti Jewish wouldn't you agree?
I'm going to make this very clear and if you ignore it you've told me all I need to know. I don't want other peoples opinions. I want YOUR opinion on whether you think arutz Sheva is an anti Arab/anti Muslim site.

[oberliner]

57. Well obviously it is an anti-Arab/anti-Muslim site

Have you seen some of the articles on there?

[Violet_Crumble]

58. Yet it's allowed to be used as a source in this forum, despite its bigotry...

I can't think of a single anti-Jewish source that the mods allow to be used in this forum, can you?

*btw, I noticed that the term 'hate-site' caused some confusion. I only used it because LB used it to refer to whatever source was used in the OP...

[Violet_Crumble]

60. Kick for Oberliner. Can you think of any anti-semitic sources allowed in this forum?

I've been here more than a few years and can't think of a single one that's allowed, though there are Islamophobic and anti-Arab sources that are allowed to be posted.

[LeftishBrit]

61. It wasn't the OP; someone linked to redress.cc, and I do think that's a hate-site

I think that linking to dodgy Middle Eastern sites - whether Arutz Sheva, presstv, or a Hamas leaders's speech - can sometimes be justified in illustrating the opinions of some people in the region. There is a point in knowing what RW settlers are thinking, even if I hope that no one on DU shares their views!

I see no need for linking to bigoted American or Europaean sites, whether redress.cc, Frontpage.mag, IfAmericansKnew, or Dan Pipes' site.

[Douglas Carpenter]

62. if someone is only demonstrating some else's point of view, fine

but most of the time when someone on this forum links to extremist sites like CAMERA or hate-sites like Arutz Sheva they are not simply pointing out someone else's point of view - they are supporting their point of view with hate sites or at least extremist sites that they obviously think are totally legitimate sites. I think it is quite obvious that there are a number of posters on this forum who share the perspective of the right-wing settler movement.

Extremist sites like CAMERA and even hate sites like Arutz Sheva are by and large allowed on this forum. While highly partisan sites that are obviously not hate sites of a pro-Palestinian nature like Electronic Intifada - the premier site in the English language of the pro-Palestinian movement - are not allowed.

[LeftishBrit]

63. I don't think there are many people who share 'RightWingSettlersNews' perspective...

though perhaps some who don't know quite what sort of source it is.

I think it is regrettable that EI is not permitted - speaking as one who does not share its one-state view; but nevertheless it is an important source of Palestinian and pro-Palestinian perspectives. But of course I don't set the rules.

As a Brit, I wish everyone on DU was aware of how RW and unreliable much of our press is; there are fairly frequent references (mostly not on I/P) to such sources as the 'Daily Mail', which, though an official newspaper, is pretty close to being a hate-site and is sometimes known as 'Daily Hate'.

[Violet_Crumble]

65. I'm pretty sure there's a small number who do knowing full well what the source is...

I think it is regrettable that EI is not permitted - speaking as one who does not share its one-state view; but nevertheless it is an important source of Palestinian and pro-Palestinian perspectives.

I think it's regrettable and a sad sign of how this forum has sunk since I first joined it. I know both Scurrilous and PM left the I/P forum in protest over the way EI was singled out, and I for one think that's a great loss to the forum. Anyway, that incident and the excuse that was given to PM for it being banned was the final straw that sent me doing some soul-searching and got me realising that it's now at the point where I do support one binational and democratic state with equal rights and protections for all citizens rather than continuing to pretend that two viable and independent states will ever emerge...

[eyl]

66. Scurrilous and PM left?

I have been away a long time, it seems...

[Violet_Crumble]

68. Yeah, Scurrilous still posts elsewhere at DU...

..but not in this forum. I did the same, but found that many threads I posted in were moved down here anyway...

[Donald Ian Rankin]

50. Destruct testing, I think... N.T.

[azurnoir]

43. It has come to the point where I am starting to find this amusing

the desperation to limit the sources of, and cover up, and rationalize the truth points to a side that knows it is losing ground

[Violet_Crumble]

59. I don't mind the limiting of sources that are bigoted..

..if it was applied consistantly, which it's not at all. I have major issues with sources that aren't bigoted but merely partisan being banned, especially when as always in this forum, it's done in a manner that's completely one-sided...

[shira]

70. EI isn't only partisan, it's a hate site.

Allow EI, then allow all hate sites.

Ban EI, ban all hate sites.

[Violet_Crumble]

64. Kick n/t