Let's be a little circumspect here. It is quite possible that the new president was wearing new shoes when he met Netanyahu and they were pinching and making him a little less than his generally charming self.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3yMq8qodfI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.google.com%2Fnwshp%3Fhl%3Den%26tab%3Dwn%26q%3Dabbas%2520obama&feature=player_embedded

Obama is going to bring peace to the Middle East and new era of respect for Islam and Muslims.

BTW, Ive been banned at Harry's Place. So much for their moniker.....Liberty if it means anything, means the right to tell people what they dont want to hear. Its pretty clear that Leftwingers arent into liberty....so much as controlling the debate, and instituting the thought police. Oh, they are much more nuanced, moving from multi generational re-education camps, purges, and gulags....but the drive and goals are the same.

A picture is worth a thousand words.
Obama being chummy with a terrorist - get used to it because this is the future, wait until he has Ahmadinejad over to the White House for tea & Jew-bashing .......

What thousand words does this photo say?

http://zioneocon.blogspot.com/abbas%20w%20bush.jpg

or this

http://www.endtheoccupation.org/img/original/bush_abbas_olmert_annapolis.jpg

or this

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef01156f9b07cf970c-500wi

It's not a picture worth any words. Each photo could have been snapped at any time. Even if both photos were representative of the tenor of the conversations, that means little.

Obama could have been humoring Abbas or maybe he did have a better rapport with him. But that means little. We've had presidents who liked less or liked more the Israel pm in power during their administrations. But that means little. The basic orientation of US foreign policy has not changed in 40 years, and is unlikely to now.

And, frankly, Bibi is no one to like. With him in office, there will be no movement on peace, especially when it comes to the settlements.

"The Obama administration is considering reducing its support for Israel in the UN if Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu does not agree to freeze settlement construction, US officials were quoted by the New York Times as saying.

According to Monday's report, measures under consideration included refraining from the Security Council veto of United Nations resolutions that Israel opposes and making use of US President Barack Obama's "bully pulpit" to criticize the settlements.

The officials stressed, however, that setting conditions for loan guarantees to Israel was not under discussion.

"There are things that could get the attention of the Israeli public," a senior administration official said"

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1243346522032&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

#6 Joanne
However, Abbas is so lovable. With him there is so much movement on peace. Really breath taking.

Updated with Al Jazeera video.

I can't imagine FDR in similarly juxtaposed frames and postures with Churchill and Hitler. Of course, that's an unsophisticated and too simple compare and contrast. But it says something nonetheless and perhaps says more than we'd care to admit.

And Marcia, your photos mean nothing because they're standard, diplomatic, photo-op glossies, and nothing more.

The overall tone was shown and assessed in the video, not just a one time snappy here and there.

The original photos that Solomon posted are indicative of reality.

And, frankly, Bibi is no one to like. With him in office, there will be no movement on peace, especially when it comes to the settlements.

And where was the movement with Rabin - the suicide bombings started in 1994 less than year after the Oslo accord was signed?
And the movement to peace when Peres was in office; and when Olmert was in office.

I won't bother with Sharon even though he ethnically cleansed Gaza of all Jews, because well he and Bibi were from the same party.

When will people admit to the facts on the ground?

A-propo cynic's comment,

Bernard-Henri Levy:

"Ehud Olmert’a peace offer:

I met Ehud Olmert in Jerusalem. He recounts, not without amusement, the choreography of harried mediators in a rush. He related Mubarak’s double game; the international community will have to eventually force him to seal Egypt’s Gaza borders to Bedouin smugglers. This is when his tone changes. And, lowering his voice as though speaking confidentially, he tries to tell me about Abu Mazen’s last visit, just three weeks ago, where he was in this office, sitting in the very chair I was occupying.

" I made him an offer. 94,5% of the West Bank. Another 4,5% made up from territoriy within Israel proper. A tunnel, under Palestinian control, connecting the West Bank and Gaza, making up for the remaining 1% . As for Jerusalem, a logical and simple solution: Arab quarter will go to him; Jewish quarter will go to us. The Holy Sites will be placed under a joint administration comprised of Saudi, Jordanian, Israeli, Palestinian, and American representatives. Abu Mazen asked for a map, on which I would draw out the perimeters of my proposal. I did not, because I know him, and I know how it would be: the next time we meet, the proposal I’d drawn out would be taken as a starting point for further negotiations. Well, then… the offer is there… I am waiting ". Too good to be true? Is it possible that we have managed to sidestep, so recently, another opportunity to make peace?"

http://contentious-centrist.blogspot.com/2009/02/so-close-yet-so-unachievable.html

"And Marcia, your photos mean nothing.. "

Here is something "Marcia" wrote on some message board where she is a regular poster, in connection with this subject:

"I have a fantasy that Sharon's doctors were not supportive of his work toward a two country solution and didn't keep him in the hospital where he belonged. They gave him blood thinner and let him out of the hospital. Even I know you don't give someone blood thinners after a massive stroke. I live with someone on blood thinners and they must be kept at a certain level ... not to thick not to thin or a person can have a stroke. He did and has been in a coma for 4 years. It is criminal"

Beyond bizarre and self-indulgent, this is what counts as an opinion for her and her friends. You can read this kind of lunatic stuff on MEMRI almost every day, except there it is reported as coming from Arab and Muslim media.

Marcia replied via email (I have to get the notifier to make it more clear that you have to come back here for people to see it):

"Dear Mr. B. These are all photo opt photos. Heads of state do not have serious negotiations about international affairs in front of a bunch of photographers. The fact you think that is naive, but it is kind of cute that you do. Thank you though for your response. mm"

Another:

"It is naive, but cute that you think heads of state negotiate in front of a bunch of photographers. These are photo opts. These photos are for the folks back home in Israel and we folks here. It is called PR.

mm"

A third:

"Nothing bizarre Noga about thinking that Sharon's treatment bordered on the criminal. I cannot even conceive of what his family is going through. I truly believe there would be a solution to the I/P conflict had he not been treated so carelessly. He was the head of state and should have been given the finest care the country could give. I had a lot of respect for him, because he arrived at a point that he was willing to go against his own feelings and bend in the name of peace. He was not a favorite of mine, but I was duly impression with the very controversial moves he made that surely angered many. He was forging ahead to find a peaceful solution, when his doctors failed him.

As to my fantasy, of course it was bizarre, that is the definition of a fantasy.

My photos were no different than those of Bibi and Barack. Photo opts mean nothing but just that and that was what those photos were. Since when do heads of state discuss international affairs in front of a bunch of photographers and reporters? Its risible to think that. I can even speak from experience since my father was in the business and was a White House correspondent and covered every president from Hoover to Nixon. The set up is the same. They are both placed in front of a White House fireplace and made to look like they are chatting like old friends when it is all small talk.

Bibi and Barack are probably more alike temperamentally than different. They are complex men. They are three dimensional, not like Bush who was either raging or being a silly goof."

"Nothing bizarre Noga about thinking that Sharon's treatment bordered on the criminal."

Is that what Marcia said? Or was it:

"Sharon's doctors were not supportive of his work toward a two country solution and didn't keep him in the hospital where he belonged. They gave him blood thinner and let him out of the hospital."

which means there was a conspiracy among Sharon's doctors to induce him into a coma, because they did not like his political agenda.
________________________

"I had a lot of respect for him [Sharon]," says "Marcia".

I've known "Marcia" since both she and I were regular posters on the now-defunct Charlie Rose message boards. I can distinctly remember some of her more outrageous "opinions", as, for example, when Arafat died, she declared that she hoped Sharon, too, would soon drop dead and maybe the peace process might get somewhere. I guess there was a window of opportunity between November 2004 when Arafat died and January 2006 when Sharon had his fatal stroke for her statement here to be somewhat true. But I doubt it. I do not recall her ever saying anything genuinely respectful about Sharon, (or Israel, or Jews, for that matter, unless they are Jews like Norm Finkelstein).

I guess, Solomon, you'll be receiving yet another email from this person who is respected for her wisdom and life experience at that message board where she usually posts.

Here is a link to that message board. Marcia goes under a different moniker there but is easily identifiable:

http://forums.delphiforums.com/CRII/messages/?msg=2770.1

Mr. B.? I like the "Mr." part. But, Marcia, am not naive as you're imagining, I'm urbane, worldly wise and sophisticated. For example, I'm presently sitting at my desk, fiddling with the keys to my Aston Martin and cleaning my .32 Walther PPK.

And yes, I'm aware they are all photo-ops, more or less, but the two in question provide, chronologically and in terms of setting, subject matter to be discussed, and in relation to the current POTUS, B. Hussein O., whose recent policy statements are similarly suggestive, a certain, juxtaposed quality that is not definitive, but is nonetheless suggestive. Though given your own level of sophistication, Marcia, it behooves me to be explicit: I'm jesting and am being ironic in using the "B. Hussein O." denotation. (Though am completely serious and unironic concerning the Aston Martin and the .32 Walther PPK.)

We all can differ on the body language of a single shot, but I still don't place any international significance to it.

I see Obama making his own tracks that are quite distinguishable from all previous presidents. He was accused of being cool to the English P.M, and appeared to be unusually chummy with the Queen, which I thought a delight to see. I have some differences of opinion with things he has said and done, as perhaps you all have, but they are based on decisions not on a split second expression on his face for which none of us has a clue what was said.

This is a time in a president's term when there really is no retrospect yet. I'm giving him some more time before I will feel disappointed or delighted.

(I'm an '84 Volvo type, and I leave the keys in the car)

Oh, bother. No one is placing any great "international significance" in the photos per se. It's being noted as an aside, worthy of a remark or two, an aside that is somewhat amusing and perhaps indicative of a certain sentiment, within a broader context of policy indicators, some known, some about to be made known, in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. And there's always the outside chance BHO actually is playing such images and impressions in general as but a pawn's ruse within a larger and more strategic and more deftly handled gambit. I doubt it, given the broader context alluded to, but there's always that outside chance.

Besides, if Abbas and Obama were to act like two school boys conspiratorially in league with one another, making faces at Bibi behind his back, shooting spitballs at him, placing thumbtacks on his chair (pointy end up), mooning him from the White House lawn, etc. - you still wouldn't place any "international significance" in it, perhaps adding that Obama is simply his own man, making his own tracks, distinguishing himself from all the presidents, kings, emperors, pharaohs and potentates in general who preceeded him. Blah, Obama, blah, Obama, blah, blah ... the greatest thing since Britney Spears' latest release, blah ...

"The United States are " one of the largest Muslim countries of the planet", underscored US president, Barack Obama on Tuesday June 2 on Canal+, as he is set to make on Thursday an important reconciliation speech towards the Muslim world from Cairo, (see interview of Barack Obama on Canal+ here). "The United States and the western world must learn to know Islam better. If we count the number of American Muslims, we can see that the United States is one of the largest Muslim countries of the planet" he says. " Whatever their confession, it is those that build and not those that destroy who leave behind them an enduring legacy,” he continues. " I think there is currently a genuine conflict between those who believe that Islam is irreconcilable with modern life and those who think quite the contrary, that Islam has always evolved, keeping pace with progress”, he added."

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2009/06/02/tnr-slideshow-middle-eastern-visits.aspx#comments

"What dismays me most about Barack Obama's Middle East initiative is that the only country in the area he seems to be pressing is Israel. He is not pressing Egypt and perhaps that's because there is nothing that Cairo can give., Maybe I'll be surprised by the presidential visit to Riyadh but he is, thus far, also not pressing Saudi Arabia and its king to whom he offered at the G-20 meeting rather curious and extravagant homage. If you read A Safe Haven by Allis and Ronald Radosh (reviewed by me in the Wall Street Journal) you'll see how King Ibn Saud was flattered by F.D.R. and took that flattery as an index of his actual power. Roosevelt reinforced the illusion."

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_spine/archive/2009/06/02/an-inconvenient-truth.aspx

Wow, Sol, you seem to have touched a nerve!