Al-Jazeerah: Cross-Cultural Understanding

Opinion Editorials, January 2009


Al-Jazeerah History


Mission & Name  

Conflict Terminology  


Gaza Holocaust  

Gulf War  




News Photos  

Opinion Editorials

US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)




Olmert Reminds the World, "We, the Jewish People, Control America"

By Mark Glenn, January 25, 2009


Amidst all the bombs raining down upon the civilian population of the world’s largest outdoor concentration camp known as Gaza, another bomb–1000 times as devastating as those detonated over Japan in 1945–was dropped on the American people but which did not make much discussion in the mainstream news, despite the shock waves it caused in political circles worldwide.

At the height of Israel’s bombing campaign against the Palestinian civilians of Gaza that (as of this moment) has resulted in almost 1,500 deaths of mostly women and children, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert convened a press conference in the southern Israeli town of Ashkelon to “explain” things to the world. The subject matter was the most recent vote taking place in the United Nations on Security Council Resolution 1860 mandating an immediate cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hamas, the brainchild of US Sec. Of State Condoleeza Rice who drafted it after close consultation with other Arab diplomats from the region. Due to the heavy civilian deaths being suffered by the Palestinians, again, over 1,000, compared to little over a dozen suffered by the Jewish state, such a resolution was for all intents and purposes the most humane, moral and fair thing to do that in effect called upon Israel to stop hacking innocent civilians to pieces.

Israel for her part would have nothing of it. Drunk on the bloodshed and suffering she was causing to innocent civilians, she was not going to step away from the buffet table until she had reached her limit. A mere moments before the vote was to take place, the US Sec. of State received a call from her boss, George W Bush and was told to ditch the deal and abstain from voting on the very resolution she herself had penned.

As outrageous as this was, amidst all the human suffering taking place as Israel and her “most moral army in the world” rained down outlawed phosphorous bombs on innocent civilians, schools, mosques, churches and food stores, what was to follow was even worse. Prime Minister Olmert, in behavior similar to that of some wise guy/mob boss who has just beat the rap as a result of yanking the chain of some judge or prosecutor on his payroll, stated in plain language at the convened press conference in Ashkelon that it was he, acting on behalf of Israel, who “made the call” to Bush and brought about the US abstention of vote at the UN. In his own words, upon learning of the “unacceptable” language contained in the resolution, (no doubt obtained by spies working within the State Dept who got their grubby little hands on a pilfered copy) he dropped a dime and put in a call to Bush only to learn that the President was busy giving a speech. Olmert‘s response–in demeanor all-too-typical for Zionists, was “I don’t care; I have to talk to him.” According to Olmert, Bush was called off the podium, given the phone and told in no uncertain language that “the US cannot possibly vote in favor of this resolution”. Olmert than stated with barely-concealed glee that 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, and abstained on a resolution she arranged…”

And the rest “is history,” as the old saying goes.

For its part, when asked about the exchange and subsequent abstention on the vote, the US denied Olmert’s claims. The US State Department characterized Olmert’s version of the events as “inaccurate, totally and completely untrue” while Rice herself called it “Fiction”. When asked to comment on the US’s response, Olmert’s version remain unchanged, in effect– “That’s my story and I’m sticking to it”.

Reaction on the part of organized Jewish groups to the story was mixed. The ADL, adjunct to Israel’s spy agency Mossad, rather than denying the obvious–that this recent event is a reaffirmation of what others have maintained for some time concerning Israel’s ability to yank the foreign policy apparatus of the United States around like a poodle on a leash (something which the ADL loudly denies as it did over the release of Walt and Mearsheimer’s book “The Israel Lobby” with dramatic wailing and gnashing of teeth) shrugged it off. Notorious windbag Abe Foxman, head of the ADL was quoted saying “I have no problem with what Olmert did, but I think the mistake was to talk about it in public” adding “This is what friendships are about. He was not interfering in political issues. You have a relationship, and if you don’t like what is being done, then you go to the boss and tell him.”

Douglas Bloomfield, a former chief lobbyist for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee all but gloated over the effect such a story would have in demonstrating to the world raw Jewish power over the United States saying “This reinforces the perception that the Israeli prime minister and Israeli leaders have easy access to the leaders of the U.S.. It is a fact that the Israeli prime minister can get the president on the phone. Not every prime minister in the world can do that. It is no secret that Israel tried to influence the U.S. regarding U.N. votes. It reinforces what the rivals of Israel say about the enormous clout Israel has in Washington, and I see nothing wrong with that.”

While Foxman and Bloomfield differ on some of the finer points of this event, where they agree however is that, like all criminal organizations who cannot exist in the light of day, “It is a mistake to talk about it.”

Some might make the claim that Israel decided to capitalize on the event by embellishing a few of the details in her favor. Such speculation is neither out of the question nor out of place, given Israel’s well-established history of lying to fit with her agenda, including but not limited to “Holocaustianity” and its seemingly never-ending expansion of the envelope to include grander and grander details of distinctly “Jewish” suffering.

Whether events actually took place in exactly the manner as Olmert described however is irrelevant at this point. The “facts on the ground” are that the US DID abstain from the vote at a time when worldwide outrage over Israel’s deliberate targeting of civilians in Gaza was boiling over and when the US had absolutely NOTHING to gain diplomatically by supporting the carnage. At a time when America is isolated, despised and alone as a result of its “special relationship” with the Jewish state, remaining silent as women and children are hacked to pieces of flesh and bone by Israel certainly does not make things better.

Those hoping in the “change” promised by the new president while on the campaign trail should think twice before investing themselves in such business. Remember the words of Barack Hussein Obama to AIPAC in June 2008 when he had the following to say–

“Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who threaten Israel threaten us. And I will bring to the White House an unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security. That starts with ensuring Israel’s qualitative military advantage. I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat — from Gaza to Tehran. As president, I will implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade — investments to Israel’s security that will not be tied to any other nation. We must approve the foreign aid request for 2009. We should export military equipment to our ally Israel under the same guidelines as NATO. And I will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself in the United Nations and around the world.”

In other words, the only difference between former president George W. Bush and the current president Barack Hussein Obama with regards to American foreign policy in the Middle East is that one is named George W. Bush and the other is named Barack Hussein Obama.

It is a law in organized crime circles that “silence is golden” if the syndicate is to survive. When once speaking about AIPAC and the power of organized Jewry in affecting US policy in the Middle East, Steve Rosen (former AIPAC caporegime currently under indictment for espionage against the United States) said Israel and her machinations are like a “night flower” that “thrives in the dark and withers in the light of day”.

What is more important though, and the more telling of it all is the contempt which the Jewish state holds for America as demonstrated by her willingness to gloat over sticking a knife in the back of her “friend”. Although lost on Americans who stay glued to their tv sets keeping up on the latest earth-shaking events on American Idol or Desperate Housewives, what this latest event shows is that in the world of organized crime there is no such thing as loyalty. It is a dog-eat-dog world, and Israel’s recent actions have demonstrated that truly she is not “man’s best friend” but rather, as former Defense Minster Moshe Dayan said “A mad dog, too dangerous to bother”.

Mark Glenn

Correspondent, American Free Press Newspaper

Fair Use Notice

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.





Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent