Israeli Ambassador: "That particular clip is taken out of context"

[witness23]

It is rather sad when you have the Prime Minister of Israel on your show and he has to point out that the clip you have just shown him, "was taken out of context". Huh? Fox?.....take something out of context, use questionable editing, tell half-truths? How embarassing.

The Ambassador's comments are made at the 2:20 mark in the video.

Link: Israeli Response to Apparent U.S. Policy Shift - Fox News Video - FoxNews.com

 

[dieseldiva]

It is rather sad when you have the Prime Minister of Israel on your show and he has to point out that the clip you have just shown him, "was taken out of context". Huh? Fox?.....take something out of context, use questionable editing, tell half-truths? How embarassing.

The Ambassador's comments are made at the 2:20 mark in the video.

Link: Israeli Response to Apparent U.S. Policy Shift - Fox News Video - FoxNews.com

Maybe you should watch it again. Bret Baier said the Washington Post called it a "lecture". Bret personally called it tense.

 

[witness23]

Maybe you should watch it again. Bret Baier said the Washington Post called it a "lecture". Bret personally called it tense.

I think you are missing the point. You are correct, the Washington Post called it a "lecture" and Bret Baier called it "tense" but the Israeli Ambassador says, "No, I don't think so at all and that paricular clip is taken out of context". So you are basically saying we should believe Mr. Baiers assesment of the situation over the Ambassador's? Who do you think would know if the relationship between the U.S. and Israel are "tense", the Washington Post and Brett Baier or the Ambassador of Israel to the United States? I'll take the guy that is personally involved in the talks.

Bottom line, this is being politicized by the right. We have our own problems here, we don't need the press chasing after stories that aren't there just to make the President look bad.

The President gave his support to Israel in his State Department speech over and over and reiterated it in his speech with AIPAC.

This is a complicated situation, and opinions are all over the place on this issue and I for one hesitate to take the opinions or the reporting of the Washington Post , Brett Baier or the cable news stations as a whole.

Let me ask you this, do you have a problem with what the President has stated in the last few days? If so, precisley, what are they?

 

[xiggi]

You well know every news network does the same thing. Fox certainly is not alone in creative editing or half truths.

 

[dieseldiva]

Do you think if relations were strained that the Ambassador would say that??

If I do take the word of any news organization over the Ambassador's, so what?? It wouldn't be the first time that someone "personally involved" attempted to take control of the situation....."damage control".

Maybe I'll take what I heard and saw with my own eyes and ears as truth and in this case, I'll agree with the Washington Post and Bret Baier.

You can blame the press for "chasing after stories to make the president look bad" all you want but you cannot change the fact that once again, he didn't think about the consequences, intended OR unintended, of his words. Words have meaning, remember? No one has to try to make him look bad, he does that all on his own every time he opens his mouth and the truth of what he is comes tumbling out.

 

[layoutshooter]

Yeah, Fox did that, so do all the rest, all the time. There are no good, unbiased news outlets in this country. All the others are just shills for Obama. They did not vet him at all during the last election and will not this one coming up. Fox will just be Fox, inaccurate at best.

It does little good to rag on one outlet and none of the others. We should demand more from both our new outlets and our government.

Pravda would be proud.

 

[greg334]

I can't see relations being strained but rather Israel is on the defensive with this administration and especially with this congress.

IF anyone is to consider that Obama's comments are the end of Israel as it has been mentioned over and over again, then they need to get a grip on life and hide somewhere because Obama can't change 60 years of national policy nor can he force or even in the case of many issue influence the an outcome with Israel. BUT more importantly the US won't cause them to go away.

On the subject of Fox, they need better news programming directors because I watched their 6am show and it took a long time to get to the Joplin disaster, instead they were talking about entertainment crap and Herman Cain.

 

[layoutshooter]

I can't see relations being strained but rather Israel is on the defensive with this administration and especially with this congress.

IF anyone is to consider that Obama's comments are the end of Israel as it has been mentioned over and over again, then they need to get a grip on life and hide somewhere because Obama can't change 60 years of national policy nor can he force or even in the case of many issue influence the an outcome with Israel. BUT more importantly the US won't cause them to go away.

On the subject of Fox, they need better news programming directors because I watched their 6am show and it took a long time to get to the Joplin disaster, instead they were talking about entertainment crap and Herman Cain.

Well, Fox sucks, just as the rest do.

I wonder, do you think that Obama would aid Israel if they were attacked? I am not so sure that he would. I wonder the same about Taiwan. I don't trust Obama. I think that he believes that he is an extension of the UN. It would not surprise me one bit. I believe that he is more interested in putting UN policy in place, both here and abroad, than US policy.

 

[witness23]

If I do take the word of any news organization over the Ambassador's, so what??"

Okay, good, at least we are on the same page about what my post was about.

It wouldn't be the first time that someone "personally involved" attempted to take control of the situation....."damage control"..

Damage control for whom? You do realize this man is the Israeli ambassador to the U.S., not the other way around. He was appointed as the ambassador of Israel to the United States by Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu.

Maybe I'll take what I heard and saw with my own eyes and ears as truth and in this case, I'll agree with the Washington Post and Bret Baier

Okay....fine. Believe them over the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S.

You can blame the press for "chasing after stories to make the president look bad" all you want but you cannot change the fact that once again, he didn't think about the consequences, intended OR unintended, of his words.

Report the facts, enough with the tabloid jounalism. What consequences? This has been the starting point of discussions in past administrations, now all of the sudden its a problem? Oh gee, I wonder why?

Words have meaning, remember?

Absolutely words have meaning, but not when they are taken out of context, then the meaning has changed, as the Ambassador plainly pointed out to the host.

No one has to try to make him look bad, he does that all on his own every time he opens his mouth and the truth of what he is comes tumbling out.

And what truth would that be?

FoxNews evidentally feels the need to make the President look bad by cherry picking and editing his words to manufacture controversy.

Look, their is plenty of policies to go after with this President, this isn't one of them.

 

[greg334]

I wonder, do you think that Obama would aid Israel if they were attacked? I am not so sure that he would.

Yes I think he would because even if the rhetoric has been slanted towards the Arab cause, the fact remains that many in the American Jewish communities support democrats and Israel at the same time. It is their money that he has to use to get reelected.

I wonder the same about Taiwan.

I believe Bush said he would not come to the aid of Taiwan in the past and Obama may also continue this policy.

I don't trust Obama. I think that he believes that he is an extension of the UN. It would not surprise me one bit. I believe that he is more interested in putting UN policy in place, both here and abroad, than US policy.

Well EVERY PRESIDENT since Truman believes he is an extension of the UN, no exceptions. It hasn't gotten worst but what has is the idea that the UN and other organizations can actually dictate to us and other countries what we can and can't do at the same time we are doing their bidding on the world stage.

 

[witness23]

Yeah, Fox did that, so do all the rest, all the time.

Point them out then.

It does little good to rag on one outlet and none of the others. We should demand more from both our new outlets and our government.

For most in the Soapbox, Fox and its pundits are their trusted news station, that is an undeniable fact. If I were to post something that was reported by, what you would call the evil "lamestream media", I would fully hope that it would be questioned and I would have to back it up with fact.

If you think all of them do it, then point out those that are considered to be somewhat legitimate news outlets (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN) that are doing these stories so that we can discuss them.

 

[witness23]

I wonder, do you think that Obama would aid Israel if they were attacked?

I guess that would really depend on the circumstances now wouldn't it.

I think that he believes that he is an extension of the UN. It would not surprise me one bit. I believe that he is more interested in putting UN policy in place, both here and abroad, than US policy.

Then why would the President come out and emphatically say he is against the U.N. recognizing the Palestinian's statehood in which they will be seeking in September?

 

[layoutshooter]

Point them out then.



For most in the Soapbox, Fox and its pundits are their trusted news station, that is an undeniable fact. If I were to post something that was reported by, what you would call the evil "lamestream media", I would fully hope that it would be questioned and I would have to back it up with fact.

If you think all of them do it, then point out those that are considered to be somewhat legitimate news outlets (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN) that are doing these stories so that we can discuss them.

When did I call them the "lamestream media"?

I am consistent on this subject. I trust none of the US news outlets. When I was in government service I used to work on a "mission" that would make the news from time to time. When I got home and watched the news and the reporting made it same as if there were two different things going on at the same time.

I don't like the kind of reporting that goes on today. Like pointing out a weakness on our HUMVEES that lead our enemies to change how they used their IED's. The incident that led to my nephew getting his bronze star was made far worse by the use of that information. That change in tactics, based on US news reports, contributed to the deaths of two US troops and the severe wounding of another.

Every time I talk with vet from Afghanistan or Iraq I here the exact same story. They are wonder who's side our press is on. Not one I have spoken with, wounded or otherwise, has said different.

They see the same bias I say when I was in. I believe them.

Also since you don't even know very many people from the soapbox I find it strange that you would know much about what they really think. Rather persumptous don't you think?

 

[witness23]

I am consistent on this subject. I trust none of the US news outlets.

I know, I know you don't trust anyone. I consider that a cop out, sorry. Do you think the clip was taken out of context? That is what the post is about.

Also since you don't even know very many people from the soapbox I find it strange that you would know much about what they really think. Rather persumptous don't you think?

uhhh.....not really When you have members referring, linking, repeating and defending what they heard from right leaning websites, blogs, commentaries, news channels, blogs, etc, etc, it doesn't take much investigative work to know where they are coming from.

 

[layoutshooter]

I know, I know you don't trust anyone. I consider that a cop out, sorry. Do you think the clip was taken out of context? That is what the post is about.



uhhh.....not really When you have members referring, linking, repeating and defending what they heard from right leaning websites, blogs, commentaries, news channels, blogs, etc, etc, it doesn't take much investigative work to know where they are coming from.

Sorry, clips seldom work on this computer. This one no exception.

No, not a cop out. I really do not trust any US news outlet. I base that mistrust on my life experience. That is, after all, what matters.

Yes, you have some members posting as you say. They post what they believe as do you. I cannot say that I know exactly how you feel on every subject and you have even surprised me once or twice. Also, keep this in mind, not everyone posts just their feelings, many post things to throw others off, or, to plays devils advocate. Some even, from time to time, even post things that are opposite of what they believe.

 

[witness23]

Sorry, clips seldom work on this computer. This one no exception.

No, not a cop out. I really do not trust any US news outlet. I base that mistrust on my life experience. That is, after all, what matters.

Yes, you have some members posting as you say. They post what they believe as do you. I cannot say that I know exactly how you feel on every subject and you have even surprised me once or twice. Also, keep this in mind, not everyone posts just their feelings, many post things to throw others off, or, to plays devils advocate. Some even, from time to time, even post things that are opposite of what they believe.

Then in my opinion, those that use those tactics have no integrity. Say what you mean, mean what you say. If you can't do that, then why even comment? Another cop out in my opinion.

 

[witness23]

Sorry, clips seldom work on this computer. This one no exception.

If you haven't watched the clip, then how on Earth can you have an opinion? Are you serious? Quit wasting everyone's time.

 

[layoutshooter]

Then in my opinion, those that use those tactics have no integrity. Say what you mean, mean what you say. If you can't do that, then why even comment? Another cop out in my opinion.

Because it is fun? Those tactics are used in learning debate all the time. I used them in debate to my advantage many times. What is not a cop out?

 

[dieseldiva]

It is rather sad when you have the Prime Minister of Israel on your show and he has to point out that the clip you have just shown him, "was taken out of context". Huh? Fox?.....take something out of context, use questionable editing, tell half-truths? How embarassing.

The Ambassador's comments are made at the 2:20 mark in the video.

Link: Israeli Response to Apparent U.S. Policy Shift - Fox News Video - FoxNews.com

You've already been shown that Fox didn't take anything out of context with this report yet you're going on and on and even telling another member to "quit wasting everyone's time" when you're the one that keeps prodding and asking questions. Your point has been made and proven wrong in this particular case, maybe you should consider giving it up......

 

[xiggi]

I know, I know you don't trust anyone. I consider that a cop out, sorry. Do you think the clip was taken out of context? That is what the post is about.

IMHO the post was about trying to make fox and the conservative media look bad. That is what you do.

uhhh.....not really When you have members referring, linking, repeating and defending what they heard from right leaning websites, blogs, commentaries, news channels, blogs, etc, etc, it doesn't take much investigative work to know where they are coming from.

Kind of like the liberal left leaning blogs and web sites you get much of the info you post here? Not a problem with doing that you just need to be honest about it.