Obama misrepresents his conversation with Iraqi Foreign Minister Zebari
By LisaB on June 18, 2008 at 9:50 PM in ABC News, Barack Obama, Foreign Policy, Iraq
The Obama campaign has stated Senator Obama will visit Iraq and Afghanistan sometime before August. Earlier this week, Obama had a phone conversation with Iraqi Foreign Minister Zebari. As we noted here at NQ:
Obama finished the conversation by saying he looked forward to a face to face meeting in Baghdad. Mr Zebari may have been more impressed by McCain, however, who spoke face to face with the foreign minister on Sunday.
But something interesting came up today.
During an interview with Jake Tapper, when asked about the conversation and if Mr Zebari’s had concerns about an Obama plan for withdrawal, Obama had this to say:
“No, he did not express that,” Obama said. “He did emphasize his belief that we’ve made real progress and I think was eager to see political accommodations between the factions follow up in the wake of this progress.
“I think that he expressed what President Maliki has expressed as well,” Obama continued, “which is that the Iraqis are obviously concerned about their sovereignty and are not seeking a long term occupation by the U.S. And so my sense is that we should be able to execute a withdrawal and set a timeframe - a timetable that continues to allow US forces to support Iraqi forces in going after terrorists, that continues to train the Iraqi police and military as long as we’re not training militias that are turning on each other.”
But today’s WaPo. tells a slightly different story.
Mr. Zebari, who has served as foreign minister in every Iraqi government since 2003, finds Mr. Obama’s proposal worrying. In a meeting with Post editors and reporters Tuesday, he said that after all the pain and sacrifices of the past five years, “we are just turning the corner in Iraq.”
————————–Mr. Zebari said he told Mr. Obama that “Iraq is not an island.” In other words, an American withdrawal that destabilized the country would also roil the region around it and embolden U.S. adversaries such as al-Qaeda and Iran. “We have a deadly enemy,” Mr. Zebari said. “When he sees that you commit yourself to a certain timetable, he will use this to increase pressure and attacks, to make it look as though he is forcing you out.
However, apparently Mr. Zebari chose to feel somewhat reassured by Obama’s response.
He said he was reassured by the candidate’s response, which caused him to think that Mr. Obama might not differ all that much from Mr. McCain.
So, what IS Obama’s position? He told or allowed Mr. Zebari to think the U.S. would not withdraw “precipitously” and gave Mr. Zebari the impression his position on Iraq is not dissimilar to John McCain’s. Yet here in the U.S., Obama stresses he has a verrrrry different position on Iraq and will bring the troops home sooner.
So, who got the straight talk? Mr. Obama has been touting his policy on Iraq as a marque or defining position for his candidacy. He should come clear about exactly what he is telling the Iraqi government.
That nobama flip flops faster than a frying fish!
Oh, you know we’re not going to hear anything real from Obama. He just *winks* *winks* and then chalks it up to “intense campaign rhetoric.”
Used to be campaigns were a chance to find out about someone’s position.
Not now.
And the real problem in my opinion is that if elected we won’t be able to hold the man accountable for anything just like the present witless in chief. I think it is imperative that we 1) know what our elected officials intend to accomplish before electing them and 2) vote for or against them the next time out in regards to how successful their policies were. We must be able to hold someone accountable otherwise we will continue to have government for the sake of everyone/thing except for the people.
Oh, you know we’re not going to hear anything real from Obama. He just *winks* *winks* and then chalks it up to “intense campaign rhetoric.”
Used to be campaigns were a chance to find out about someone’s position.
Not now.
I will go the safer route and vote for McCain…Every day something Obama says makes me trust him even less…My distrust is getting very strong…
Yes, he’s the flim flam flip flop man. I hear he’s got another position on NAFTA too. I think barak looks into the mirror and debates himself on his various positions on foreign affairs. Maybe that’s why he doesn’t have time to debate McCain.
A duplicitous panderer.
All things to all people–and nothing to anybody.
That’s exactly what he is, why doesn’t everyone see this about him?
Wake up obambi pod people!!
I feel like I’m in a bad version of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”.
He told the kids and the screaming liberals exactly what they wanted to hear to get Hillary out of the way. Now he exposes himself for the “say anything to get elected” panderer that we suspected he was. No platform. No values. To the highest bidder. Corruption in DC as usual only Chicago style — under the table. Hopey don’t make it changey.
Maybe his problem is that he has multiple personality disorder just like Hershel Walker.
So, what IS Obama’s position?
You fool! There’s no needle inthe haystack. Quit looking. There is no ‘there’ there.
How about doing a story about Ayham al-Samurai’s $2,300 donation to Obama’s campaign. The former Iraqi Minister of Electricity now holds an American citizenship
According to one website referenced below,
“While serving as minister of electricity, al-Samurai brokered deals with Antoin Rezko, the Syrian-American millionaire who backed Obama politically and personally.”
The article goes on to quote al-Samurai in a radio Sawa interview as saying,
“the [insurgency] in Iraq is a legitimate resistance, and it is against occupation, and any resistance in the world against occupation is considered legitimate. I hope that [it] continues and avenges the Iraqi people, and I look forward to expanding its political agenda.”
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67225
http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/06/16/ayham-al-samurai-iraqi-insurgent-supporter-donated-2300-to-obama/
Except for the name calling, I encourage you to repeat this sentiment, over and over. Looking for any semblance of substance only legitimizes this farce.
Sorry to go off topic, but I just read an article titled “Don’t Expect Gore on Campaign Trail” from Politico. I am just shocked that there is STILL Clinton bashing going on. I refer to this statement regarding Gore:
“He’s going to do enormous good with the base. And to the extent people are worried about Obama’s inexperience, having Gore may help.” said Elaine Kamarck, a Harvard professor of government who served as a senior policy adviser to Gore. “Gore, unlike [Bill] Clinton, has certainly enhanced his post-administration reputation.”
Why? Why do these folks have to be so negative about the best president in the past 40 years? And does this professor of government not know of President Clinton’s foundation?
This party is doomed.
The article doesn’t add up. Gore isn’t campaigning for Obama, so how will he help? LOL*
Have they been paying attention to the money that Bill has raised for programs world wide? These people are asses.
Oh for cryin’ out loud! Alright that’s it…Who has the stomach of a concrete elephant to go over to KOS and find out what they think of this? They BLASTED…wait…they still BLAST Hillary as a warmonger, scream she voted for the war, and call her a murdering baby killer. They keep spewing that OBAMA is going to ride in on his magical, white (oops can I say white anymore?) unicorn and lift his hand to the heavens and call down rays of hopium to stop the evil slaughter of innocents. AND BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW! But all of a sudden his plan is more like McCAIN’S? Ok No Quarter, everytime a troll spouts “Obama will end the war” Bullshit. We need to link to those statements….now whose up to teaching me how to link…again.
You just go the top of the page at the end of the address, hit your left button, click on copy. Then click on paste wherever you want to insert the link.
Oh sure, you make it seem soooooooo easy. Haha.
How sad. We can trust an Iraqi Minister to tell the truth, but not the guy who wants to be president.
lol*…….I thought about that, too. We trust him more, clearly.
Do you believe the conman or the person being conned?
Sounds like Obama has alot in common with Baghdad Bob.
Now I see how easy it was for Bush to fool all of his blind followers.
We have the same type in the democratic party.
Actually, I think MANY, MANY, MANY of Bush’s blind followers are exactly the same as Obama’s blind followers. I think they have just latched onto a new messiah.
And this “is” the legitimate question:
what is Barack Obama’s take on any issue, question or policy that comes up?
He switches and wiggles and manuevers all over the place, panders to whatever group he’s speaking to, and refuses to take responsibility for his shifts in position. He’s taken out of context, his says. He’s misinterpreted or misunderstood. Or lastly, bringing up inconsistincy is a typical smear to confuse voters, a cheap political trick.
No!
The problem is Barack Obama’s. He owns it, not the voter or the audience. For a candidate who is applauded for his speaking skills, he is amazingly ambiguous, vague, all over the place. Michelle Obama? I don’t care about. This is what I care about, this is one of many reasons that this man will never get my vote.
PUMApac.org
If he gets the nomination, the Republicans won’t have to “swiftboat” Obama. He does a good job of doing it to himself.
One question, is Obama paying for these trips or are the taxpayers footing the bill for the empty suit to learn international relations, which he claims to be the strongst candidate having the most experience?
I’m sure he will want to stop over at Pakistan…I mean “Pockiston” and hang out with his buddies, maybe set a few women on fire for sport before he comes home.
a timetable that continues to allow US forces to support Iraqi forces
StrawberrybitesBarky; can you show me “linking” when you find out?
Seriously…Did BO say he was for a timetable before he was against it?
And now he is getting his NAFTA on?
.
For god’s sake, how does this information about Obama get across to the average US public when there’s no cooperation from the mainstream media? Could the “Obama/The Postmodern Coup” be … I’m beginning to think … maybe??? And try criticizing Obama on one of the sites that worship him … you won’t be posted, or you’re branded a racist.
blog.pumapac.org
Gore wants to run in 2012.
He expect Obama to lose.
You will see both Gore and Hillary organizing for a run in 2012 right after Obama is defeated in November.
What do you say that?
I would love to see Gore or HRC make a 2012 run.
But why do you think that Gore would see Obama as a loser?
Why would Gore see Obama as a loser? Because Obama is a loser.
Why can’t Clinton and Gore,run in 2008, after Obama steps down,for embarrassing the party,or admitting,he didn’t win the popular vote.lol
If Gore had wanted to run, he could have run this time. Gore is not going to run. He has a better likelihood of being the next Jenny Craig spokes person than Democratic candidate.
I found this at Wall Street Journal.
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB121366622024479591.html?mod=Election2008_Opinion
The National Review did an analysis of this.
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDBjNTdhMzcyY2VhOTViZjc0ZmYxMzI0ZDc0OGRlZGE=
My fear of Obama is that he speaks out of both sides of his mouth and how do we know what is true, and how can we risk being wrong?
He lies so much. Today he did a 180 in NAFTA, and now he is trying to do a 180 on Iraq. How do we know what he will do once he becomes president? He has lied and flip-flopped so much, He has a flimsy voting record to help us figure him out, and most of that is full of “present” votes. There are too many bodies under his bus. There are too many radicals who have mentored him who were not the people he thought they were. I cannot trust this person. I cannot risk this country’s future and my family’s future to this man.
McCain/Clinton 08
There’s you a unity ticket.
In 2004 BO said his position wasn’t much different than Dubya’s at that point. Other than his idiot followers, who’s surprised that now BO’s position isn’t that different than McCain’s? This guy’s the human equivalent of jello, he has no policy or position that you can ever pin down.
lol, uppity woman…*pockistan* LMAO!!!
Obama has shown that he takes responsibility for nothing. He allows volunteers to move women in head scarves from near the stage…can’t have any of those type of pictures now…who got the blame the volunteers. Look at Obama impugning Hillary and Bill time and time again….was it his fault never….so we will never be able to gold this man accountable for anything because he isn’t resonsible for anything that anyone who advises him does….what a disaster…we can’t let him have the White House! What a fraud!
“Those were not the campaign volunteers I knew”
And speaking of fraud, the Obama campaign just formally announced that Obama will go back on his promise and will refuse public financing.
http://WWW.OBAMA-WIRE.COM
Can you see the change? Not from our perspective. You can’t get away with preaching change and then play the same old political game. If you didnt know already Obama just backed out of public financing (another flip flop).
“In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election. My proposal followed announcements by some presidential candidates that they would forgo public financing so they could raise unlimited funds in the general election. The Federal Election Commission ruled the proposal legal, and Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has already pledged to accept this fundraising pledge. If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”
http://www.obama-wire.com
On Morning Joe, Scarborough confronted AxelROVE about Mr. Zebari’s comment that MCain and Obama were virtaully the same on a “no timetable” approach to Iraq.
AxelROVE simply said Mr. Zebari got it wrong.
That’s right — Mr. Zebari apprently didn’t hear what he heard from Obama.
And then AxelRove babbled on about “conditions on the ground” and “stability” and a whole bunch of other lingo which essentially means:
We’re for a timetable until we’re against a timetable.
To those voters who bought into Obama’s 16-month withdrawal lie …
You’ve been BAMBOOZLED by Obama. You’ve been HOODWINKED by the king of doubletalk.
Muahahahahaa! Told ya so!
Yes….Mr. Disingenuous…that’s the Obama we know!! Just like the Fortune Magazine interview:
FLIP FLOP!!!! Obama LIES. Yes LIES. And he is totally unashamed of doing it. He will tell you he does in so many words…..
Like in the latest Fortune Magazine article where he explains what he really thinks about NAFTA.
Totally contradicts what he told the voter’s of WI, OH, PA etc. And completely mirrors verbatim the accusations the Canadians told MSM his aides said about his remarks on NAFTA back in the spring of this year: (below described by John Nichols of The Nation http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/330911#comments)
“Obama’s interview with Fortune magazine — headlined “Obama: NAFTA Not So Bad After All” — is the best news the McCain camp has received since Mike Huckabee folded his run for the Republican nomination.
If Obama takes the economic issue that white working-class voters best understand off the table, he creates a huge opening for McCain in states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.
And that is precisely what the Democrat cynically dismisses his appropriately anti-NAFTA rhetoric during the primary season as “overheated and amplified.”
In her interview with the candidate, Fortune’s Nina Easton reminded Obama that earlier this year he had called NAFTA “devastating” and “a big mistake” and suggested that he would use an opt-out clause in the trade agreement between the US, Canada and Mexico to demand changes that would be more favorable to workers and farmers in all three countries.
Obama replied that, “Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified” — which would have been enough of an indication that he was backing off the stance that contributed significantly to his success in the February 19 Wisconsin primary that proved to be a critical turning point for his campaign.
But the presumptive Democratic nominee for president dug the hole deeper.
“Politicians are always guilty of that, and I don’t exempt myself,” he continued, suggesting that those who doubted his sincerity when he denounced NAFTA in a speech to Janesville, Wisconsin, autoworkers might have been right. ”
So yes…Obama Lies….he knows what he’s saying is NOT where he stands, but he’s saying it anyway….that’s a LIE….and he is NOT ASHAMED OF DOING IT.
That IS “Audacious”!!!
WAKE UP People! How do you know what he’s telling you he’s for and going to do is IN FACT what he will be for or what he will do in office???
VOTE AT YOUR OWN RISK FOR OBAMA!