January 14, 2009

Why did America abstain on its own resolution?

I'm reading bizarre reports here that Olmert has claimed the credit for getting America to abstain on a UN Security Council resolution that America itself had drafted. I first saw the story in the Washington Post in a piece about how Israel hasn't defeated and won't defeat Hamas.
In Washington, the State Department used unusually strong language Tuesday to deny a claim by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that he personally was able to convince President Bush to order that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice abstain on the resolution, which she had negotiated.

Olmert's claim is "wholly inaccurate as to describing the situation, just 100 percent, totally, completely not true," spokesman Sean McCormack said. He said Rice had recommended that the United States abstain.

Ok, simply matter, Olmert took credit for something and the US says he's lying. The reason for this attack on Gaza is because there's an election coming and the reason there's an election coming is because Olmert is facing corruption charges so lying, that is beyond the usual call of mainstream politics and zionist politics in particular, may well be his main line of business.

But googling around names like Rice, Olmert, Bush and words like UN, resolution and so on, there are a lot of articles on this and a lot of detail, particularly in what Olmert actually claimed.

Today's Independent in the UK has a piece on it:
Israel's prime minister Ehud Olmert boasted that he in effect instructed George Bush not to vote for the UN resolution on a Gaza ceasefire, leaving Condoleezza Rice, who had, "cooked it up... pretty shamed".

In an extraordinary speech, Mr Olmert also claimed yesterday that the US President confessed to him that he did not even know the wording of last week's crucial resolution, the most important international diplomatic step at the time in an attempt to end the conflict. The US was the only Security Council member to abstain.

Mr Olmert said: "Mr Bush gave an order to the Secretary of State Rice and she did not vote in favour of it – a resolution she cooked up, phrased, organised and manoeuvred for. She was left pretty shamed and abstained on a resolution she arranged."

The Israeli Premier described how he had telephoned the White House and demanded to talk to the President after learning, with just 10 minutes to go before the vote, that Ms Rice intended to support the resolution.

"I looked for President Bush and they told me he was in Philadelphia making a speech," said Mr Olmert. "I said, 'I don't care. I have to talk to him now'. They got him off the podium, brought him to another room and I spoke to him. I told him, 'You can't vote in favour of this resolution'. He said, 'Listen, I don't know about it, I didn't see it, I'm not familiar with the phrasing'."

Mr Olmert then apparently brusquely told President Bush: "I'm familiar with it. You can't vote in favour."

A White House spokesman said: "I've seen these press reports, they are inaccurate."
But these aren't simply "press reports". They are claims made by the Prime Minister of a state that receives more aid from America than other country in the world. Let's look at the IHT. It carries all the same detail about Olmert's proud boast but it also carries a stronger denial by US officialdom:
The State Department disputed Olmert's account. "Her recommendation was to abstain; that was her recommendation all along," said an official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the delicate nature of the matter....

After the vote, Rice said the United States "fully supports" the resolution, which called for "an immediate, durable and fully respected cease-fire leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza," but opted to abstain to see the outcome of an Egyptian-French peace initiative.

Rice did not respond to Olmert's remarks, which were unusual even in the context of the secretary's occasionally bumpy relationship with the prime minister, according to the official.
Ok, he's notoriously dishonest even by politician and zionist standards but would even he have told such a whopper? and why?

The same story is now all over the net but Yahoo, even Yahoo Canada, probably gets more passing trade than most news services:
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."

"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,"
I'm not sure everyone would agree with that but who's lying here, Sean McCormack or Ehud Olmert?


Post a Comment