Olmert says Rice embarrassed over UN vote; U.S. denies the claim

[Cowlesy]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090112/world/israel_us_rice_1


"I said: 'Get me President Bush on the phone,"' Olmert said Monday in a speech in the southern Israeli city of Ashkelon. "They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn't care: 'I need to talk to him now.' He got off the podium and spoke to me."

Olmert said he told Bush that the United States should not vote in favour, and the U.S. president then called Rice and told her not to do so.

A senior U.S. official disputed the account.

"The government of Israel does not make policy for the United States," the official said on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the diplomacy.


Wtf? Olmert can just call up President Bush and tell him how Rice votes?

How arrogant of Olmert to say this.

[Falseflagop]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/12/AR2009011202469.html


imho this story says it all. Who is the puppet and who is the puppetier?


Kudos to Jon Stewart ! Bashing Israel with his comedy. Yeah and he is jewish I believe. Zionism is the evil folks.

[maqsur]

I am impressed with Jon Stewart (and have been for some time). Back during the primaries, the Daily Show had a nice scathing report on how the candidates were shoving each other out of the way to lick AIPAC ass.

I saw his 1st show back this month, and he called the media out on their I-Robot like devotion to Israel (you know, where all the robots act/talk in unison). He also asked one of his guests why is it that we don't hear any word criticising Israel (that it's like the 3rd rail of politics).

Too bad we can only get real journalism from a 'fake' news show on a comedy channel (at least here in the United States).

[heavenlyboy34]

I am impressed with Jon Stewart (and have been for some time). Back during the primaries, the Daily Show had a nice scathing report on how the candidates were shoving each other out of the way to lick AIPAC ass.

I saw his 1st show back this month, and he called the media out on their I-Robot like devotion to Israel (you know, where all the robots act/talk in unison). He also asked one of his guests why is it that we don't hear any word criticising Israel (that it's like the 3rd rail of politics).

Too bad we can only get real journalism from a 'fake' news show on a comedy channel (at least here in the United States).

OMG, you're so right! "Journalism" is a joke in this country. Lewis Black is more honest than the talking heads! :eek:

[lucius]

Download/read this book, "The Controversy of Zion:" http://www.controversyofzion.info/Controversybook/reeedcontrov.pdf

It documents this involvement quite clearly during the 20th century, especially the zionists' influence, during the Wilson administration with a whole chapter devoted to 'Colonel' Edward Mandell House.

[fj45lvr]

a bit older is "they Dare to speak out" (illustrates what happens when you touch the "third rail"!!!)

political death sentence.

[DeadheadForPaul]

From the Jerusalem Post

link: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231760642497&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The Security Council resolution passed on Friday calling for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza was a source of embarrassment for US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who helped prepare it but ultimately was ordered to back down from voting for it and abstain, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Monday.


Rice did not end up voting for Resolution 1860, thanks to a phone conversation Olmert held with US President George Bush shortly before the vote, the prime minister told a meeting of local authority heads in Ashkelon as part of a visit to the South.

Upon receiving word that the US was planning to vote in favor of the resolution - viewed by Israel as impractical and failing to address its security concerns - Olmert demanded to get Bush on the phone, and refused to back down after being told that the president was delivering a lecture in Philadelphia. Bush interrupted his lecture to answer Olmert's call, the premier said.

America could not vote in favor of such a resolution, Olmert told Bush. Soon afterwards, Rice abstained when votes were counted at the UN.

[Cowlesy]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090112/world/israel_us_rice_1


"I said: 'Get me President Bush on the phone,"' Olmert said Monday in a speech in the southern Israeli city of Ashkelon. "They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn't care: 'I need to talk to him now.' He got off the podium and spoke to me."

Olmert said he told Bush that the United States should not vote in favour, and the U.S. president then called Rice and told her not to do so.

A senior U.S. official disputed the account.

"The government of Israel does not make policy for the United States," the official said on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the diplomacy.

[devil21]

That's a pretty damning article. Bush stops in the middle of a speech just to bow down to Olmert's "request"? Sounds like Bush knows who runs the show...and it aint Bush.

[Lord Xar]

Of course they determine policy. Why else do we have men in VERY HIGH places in our government who also hole dual citizenship with Israel -- perhaps even the some of the crafters of the bailouts have dual citizenship. Curious where all of that 2trillion went? Oh that is right, we can't know.

hmmm.

Bush is/was a lapdog. Obama will be too.

[Sandra]

Something tells me CNN will actually latch on to this one. They've been vicious this week.

[Sandra]

Is there any account in Philly about this interuption?

[Josh_LA]

Nope

Not until our President is a dual citizen and moves our capital to Israel will I believe it ;)

[Sandra]

Now Washington's calling Olmert a liar:


http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231866576464&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[devil21]

Im finding plenty of reports of the speech and his visit to Philly but none mention any interruption. But that's not "newsworthy" to the average American so it wouldn't be included in the write-up anyway.

ETA: Is it sad that I believe Olmert more than the Bush administration?

[Imperial]

Sorry, this is a lie. While Israel has influence, that doesn't equal control.

Iran is the best point. It was recently (AND FINALLY) validated in the New York Times that the rumors of Bush veto'ing Olmert the lame-duck bombing of Iran and stopping the sale of bunker-busters to Israel(which it was finally admitted were for the purpose of bombing Iran's nuclear facilities, something denied for the past year as well).

I think that the far more accurate way of thinking about this is that they feed off of each other. Both Bush and Olmert must appear firm to others, and so they push their mutual parasitism on each other. Thus, Bush starts a covert program against Iran after he rejects Israel. Israel serves as an autonomous extension of neo-conservatism and gives intelligence in the region.

[Sandra]

Bush is calling Olmert a liar:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231866576464&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[Kotin]

Bush is calling Olmert a liar:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231866576464&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

lol some neo-con drama..

[Sandra]

Break out the popcorn and beer.


Olmert's comment, said in an off-the-cuff manner and not read from a text, is widely believed to reflect the degree of Israeli disappointment at Rice's handling of the Security Council resolution.

Middle East expert Steven Spiegel described the episode as "the worst faux pas by an Israeli prime minister in history."

"You really do wonder what the prime minister was thinking - if it's true, you'd really want to keep it as quiet as possible, and if it's not true, why would you want to make up a story that would embarrass both the Bush administration and the Israeli government and draw criticism from those who are antagonistic to Israel?" asked Spiegel, director of the Center for Middle East Development at UCLA.

"No matter how you play it, exaggeration, falsehood, whole truth, the whole thing makes them all look bad," Spiegel told The Jerusalem Post.

[Cowlesy]

oops...this didn't merge how I wanted it to merge the 3 threads on the same topic

sorry

[Sandra]

I picked the one with the most posts.

[HOLLYWOOD]

They don't give a shyt... Israel is guaranteed a minimum of $3 BILLION a year for the next DECADE!

None of the Cowards in Washington DC would dare file legislation/bill to remove the $30 BILLION.

And... Olmert knows it... he has wealth and control in all the right places... he can say anything he wants, the taxpayer's money is gone.

On the vote:


The resolution, passed Jan. 8 in a 14-0 vote, "calls for an immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire, leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza."

no one is reporting the first UN vote, when the UN Security Council to an immediate Israeli cease fire... which the US was the ONLY vote to BLOCK the measure.

[Cowlesy]

It sounds like Olmert was grandstanding for his local constituents, trying to sound all big and bad that he has the U.S. by the cajones. Imperial is right that we did neg him on fly-over rights for Iraq, and his desire to bomb Iran, so it'd be wrong to say Olmert has a pile of blank checks from Bush.

I'm tired of this Wag The Dog BS.

[Sandra]

I think he's trying to get back at the White House for outing the "Israel asking to bomb Iran" story.

[paulitics]

I said it before and I'll say it again. Israel looks bad in this conflict. There has been a slight but noticeable shift in the media's coverage of Israel. Why now? Neocons have lost their control...for now, and Brezinski is at the helm?

[nbruno322]

I think the Zionist distinction needs to be emphasized. Not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews (see John Haggee's Christian Zionist movement). Also, there are numerous Jewish personalities in the media who give a more balanced view on the Middle East, and are certainly not Zionists:

-Aaron Russo (RIP)
-John Stewart
-Eric Margolis (The Real News~Look this guy up! He has some great stuff)
-Seymour Hersh
-William Kristol ~ Just Kidding

[Zippyjuan]

Yep- US follows all the orders from Isreal. Not! http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3653927,00.html

[devil21]

The more I think about this, the more it irks me. On one hand, if Bush is lying and this really did happen, then it's proof positive that Israel does indeed pull the strings of our foreign policy at the very highest levels. If Olmert is making it up then it shows that the Israelis do not respect the US or appreciate all the "support" we give them. Either way its terrible and a tribute to what this country has become. Our enemies hate us and our allies don't respect us.

[nbruno322]

Is Ehud's Poodle Acting Up?


January 17, 2009

by Patrick J. Buchanan

As Israel entered the third week of its Gaza blitz, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert regaled a crowd in Ashkelon with an astonishing tale.

He had, said Olmert, whistled up George Bush, interrupted him in the middle of a speech and told him to instruct Condi Rice not to vote for a U.N. resolution Condi herself had written. Bush did as told, said Olmert.

The crowd loved it. Here is the background.

After intense negotiations with Britain and France, Secretary of State Rice had persuaded the Security Council to agree on a resolution calling for a cease-fire. But Olmert wanted more time to kill Hamas.

So, here, in Olmert's words, is what happened next.

"In the night between Thursday and Friday, when the secretary of state wanted to lead the vote on a cease-fire at the Security Council, we did not want her to vote in favor.

"I said, 'Get me President Bush on the phone.' They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn't care. 'I need to talk to him now.' He got off the podium and spoke to me."

According to Olmert, Bush was clueless.

"He said: 'Listen. I don't know about it. I didn't see it. I'm not familiar with the phrasing.'

"I told him the United States could not vote in favor. It cannot vote in favor of such a resolution. He immediately called the secretary of state and told her not to vote in favor."

The UN diplomatic corps was astonished when the United States abstained on the 14-0 resolution Rice had crafted and claimed her country supported. Arab diplomats say Rice promised them she would vote for it.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, with Rice at the United Nations during the debate on the resolution, said Olmert's remarks were "just 100 percent, totally, completely untrue."

But the White House cut Rice off at the knees, saying only that there were "inaccuracies" in the Olmert story. The video does not show Bush interrupting his speech to take any call.

Yet, the substance rings true and is widely believed, and Olmert is happily describing the egg on Rice's face:

"He [Bush] gave an order to the secretary of state, and she did not vote in favor of it – a resolution she cooked up, phrased, organized and maneuvered for. She was left pretty shamed. ..."

With Bush and Rice leaving office in hours, and Olmert in weeks, the story may seem to lack significance.

Yet, public gloating by an Israeli prime minister that he can order a U.S. president off a podium and instruct him to reverse and humiliate his secretary of state may cause even Ehud's poodle to rise up on its hind legs one day and bite its master.

Taking such liberties with a superpower that, for Israel's benefit, has shoveled out $150 billion and subordinated its own interests in the Arab and Islamic world would seem a hubristic and stupid thing to do.

And there are straws in the wind that, despite congressional resolutions giving full-throated approval to all that Israel is doing in Gaza, this is becoming a troubled relationship.

Two weeks ago, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, in opposing any truce, assured the world there "is no humanitarian crisis in the (Gaza) Strip," and the humanitarian situation there "is completely as it should be."

Not so to Hillary Clinton. In her confirmation hearings, the secretary of state-designate, reports the New York Times, "struck a sharper tone toward Israel on violence in the Middle East."

Clinton "seemed to part from the tone set by the Bush administration in calling attention to what she described as the 'tragic humanitarian costs' borne by Palestinians, as well as Israelis."

More dramatic was a weekend report by the Times' David Sanger that the White House had rebuffed Olmert's request for new U.S. bunker-buster bombs and denied Israel permission to overfly Iraq in any strike on Iran's nuclear enrichment plant at Natanz.

Sanger described these U.S.-Israeli talks as "tense."

Repeatedly, Israel has warned that Iran is close to a bomb and threatened to attack unilaterally. Indeed, Israel simulated such an attack in an air exercise of 100 planes that went as far as Greece.

Bush both blocked and vetoed that attack, says Sanger. But he did assure Olmert that America is engaged in the sabotage of Iran's nuclear program by helping provide Tehran with defective parts.

This would seem a stunning breach of security secrets, but no outrage has been heard from the White House, nor has any charge come that the Times compromised national security.

With Olmert, Rice and Bush departing, and Obama and Hillary taking charge committed to talking to Iran, can the old intimacy survive the new friction and colliding agendas?

http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=14091

[angelatc]

All I know is that it is very strange for Rice to have drafted the same resolution she then declined to vote on.

Olmert may have assumed that Bush left to take his call, but it could be that the speech was actually ending anyway.

She missed a chance for a bigger book deal - she could have voted for this if she believed in it and then written a book about the saga. What was he going to do - fire her? She's on the way out anyway.