State Department: Olmert Didn't Change Condi's Mind

According to Haaretz report "U.S.: Olmert never asked us to abstain from UN vote on Gaza truce ": The State Department denied that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was influenced by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to abstain from voting from a UN resolution passed last week calling for an immediate cease fire in Israel's war on Gaza (a concentration camp like area in which live the decendents of Muslims that Jewish Settlers pushed or frightened out of their homes in the 40s and beyond live mostly without proper food and medicine or a funtioning economy thanks to the Israeli blockade of the enclave).

Earlier Olmert told a story of demanding to speak to US President George W. Bush to make sure that the US did not vote for the cease fire while speaking in Ashkelon.  (Hey, dude.  You're not running for re-election this time.) His assertions were repeated in the IHT and NY Times "Olmert says he made Rice change vote ".

"I said, 'Get me President Bush on the phone,' " Olmert said in a speech in the southern Israeli city of Ashkelon, according to The Associated Press. "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,' " Olmert continued. "He got off the podium and spoke to me."

McCormick went on to maintain that:

"are wholly inaccurate as to describing the situation, just 100-percent, totally, completely not true" 

Now lets play journalist.  (Channeling the need ot make an analysis.....Ommmmm.....)

Mr. McCormick because he said "wholly inaccurate means Olmert was indeed lying. 

or

because he didn't specifically talk about the situation in which Bush might have rushed away from a speech to take a call from his old buddy Ehud, means it did happen, but that supposedly Condoleezza was planning to abstain anyway. 

So now you have to decide what is the truth; balancing which analysis will advance your career in mainstream news.

Or try the blogger approach. 

Ehud's a politician.  And he was in one of the towns that this horrid war is being fought for.  Though the PM can't run again, and is in fact leaving in disgrace, he couldn't resist building up his image in this place where people are terribly grateful for what he's done and therefore are little likely to question his assertions no matter how suspiciously over the top.

And, I'm afraid, though this isn't as much fun to blog about, I think Olmert was lying and he can't jerk Bush around like a little puppet.  I guess for the IHT- NY Times crew, that was a story that was just to good to check out.

I'd say that there might be a possibility that the McCormick statement is a lie he knows will be backed up by Olmert, but there should have been people at Bush's speech that would have seen him leave in the middle.  

In DC you only have to admit to embarassing things if they can be independently proven, but there would have been ample evidence of Shorty trotting off to talk to Ehud.

It made a good story though.

tags: ehud olmert  bush  condoleezza rice  israel  uinited states  state department  

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit