Dhimmedia Tries - and Fails - to Keep Quiet on Sarkozy-Obama Dirty Little Secret

 

"We are hated not because we are blamed for everything, 
but we are blamed for everything because we are not loved."

- Jabotinsky, one hundred years ago.

 

ebrawer on November 8, 2011 at 3:31 AM:

“Je ne peux plus le voir, c’est un menteur”, a lancé Sarkozy.“Tu en as marre de lui, mais moi, je dois traiter avec lui tous les jours!”

My translation (better translation of the flavour factor IMHO):

Sarkozy: I can’t stand the sight of him any longer, he’s a liar” 

Obama: You’ve had it with him, but me, I have to deal with him every day!

The Guardian (UK):

The French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, described the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, as a "liar" in a private exchange with Barack Obama at last week's G20 summit in Cannes that was inadvertently broadcast to journalists.

 

"I cannot stand him. He's a liar," 

 Sarkozy told Obama.

 

The US president responded by saying:

"You're fed up with him?

I have to deal with him every day."

 

 

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton gives Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu a high five ...

 

Neither leader apparently realised that microphones that had been attached for a press conference were still switched on, allowing journalists to hear the embarrassing exchange.

The exchange was first reported on the French website Arrêt Sur Images, and was later confirmed by a Reuters reporter who also heard the remarks.

The gaffe followed a press conference after which the two presidents retired to a private room. The conversation apparently began with Obama criticising Sarkozy for not warning the US that France would vote in favour of the Palestinians' application to join Unesco, the United Nations agency for culture and education.

One French journalist told Arrêt Sur Images that the conversation was broadcast for around three minutes before officials realised the mistake. Another told the website that the reporters agreed not to publicise the remarks because of their sensitive nature.

 

But, as you can see, the news leaked out anyway. Allah Pundit:

I can buy that no one recorded it, and I can buy that some reporters would go so far into the tank that they’d sign a nondisclosure statement, but surely someone in the room would have found a scoop this juicy too irresistible and would have leaked it.

The exchange between O and Sarkozy supposedly happened on Thursday; it took four days for news to break about an explosive “hot mic” exchange between the presidents of the United States and France about the prime minister of Israel? C’mon.

Anyone know if Arret is trustworthy? And if so, I want to know which reporters were in the room and refused to report.

 

 

 

Note to Bibi, en davar. Never mind. "... for history is long, the Jewish people everlasting, and truth is sacred..."

Comments

[Mannie Sherberg]

There is, perhaps, no surer sign of the current decline of the West than the feebleness, the impotence, of its leadership. Wherever we look, in the United States or in Europe, we see pygmies masquerading as giants, puny men wearing the accouterments of power, dwarfish pretenders to rank and authority. If England had been "led" by a Sarkozy or an Obama in 1940, England would exist today only as a satrapy under the Third Reich -- and all non-Jewish Americans (the Jewish ones would all be dead) would be speaking German. We have no true leaders these days -- only imposters and fools. What this says about us -- the people who placed these imposters and fools in their positions of power -- is a tragedy for which there is no name.

[Rick Richman]

I don't think Netanyahu was lying when he said this, back in 2006: "There is time to act in a variety of ways, and all ways must be considered, and all ways that work must be employed, because we cannot let this thing happen again. Now to do this requires something that is particularly difficult. It requires what I call pre-emptive leadership. And of all the activities required in the political, economic and military fields, pre-emption is the most difficult. You can never prove to people what the situation would be if you do not move. . . . All leadership exacts a cost -- because otherwise you don’t need leaders. You just need managers . . . you just run to the head of the herd. As it charges in one direction, you just charge along with it. Today what is required is leadership, leadership to change this tide of history, leadership to confront this danger -- leadership to act. ... For us the Jewish people, too many times in our history we didn’t see danger in time, and when we did, it was too late. Well, we see it now. . . . But can the world wake up? Can we wake up the world? Can we get the United States to act on its commitment -- a commitment made by President Bush -- he said we will not let Iran arm itself with nuclear weapons? Everybody in his right mind should support that position. It should be carried out. Can we get the world to do that? A man I very much admire -- he said 'no.' This is what Winston Churchill said in the House of Commons in 1935, about this tendency of democracies to sleep, while dangers lurk and gather up: 'There is nothing new in the story. It is as old as Rome. It falls into that long, dismal category of the fruitlessness of experience and the confirmed unteachability of mankind. Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong, these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.'”