I recall a prior comment from Uncle $cam suggesting that Israel was in a position to blackmail Bush and co over 9/11. With Obama keeping most of slick Willies hangers on some of them are likely also in a similar, uncomfortable position. I think Olmert is just reminding them of his power.

Posted by: Fred | Jan 14 2009 11:25 utc | 3

I mean it’s ( and was) obvious to everyone what power Israel has on USA but my question is why? And why Olmert feels free to fuck up like this USA reputation as super power?
All tho a lot more was clear to me after I saw that list of companies to boycott…

Posted by: vbo | Jan 14 2009 12:55 utc | 5

Who knows?
Maybe the Israeli message to Rice as to what her status really is, i.e. House Negro?
Racist sods sometimes cannot resist the urges.
And I cannot fully understand this “chosen people” thingy.
Let me see, for a few thousand years, a 10,000 here, a 100,000 there and finally a grand industrial scale action of millions of people/humans specifically because of their ethnicity or as they say in India, caste get their tickets punched, they still believe they’re the chosen ones?
Whatever kool aid they’re drinking, I hope no one drinks it.

Posted by: shanks | Jan 14 2009 13:28 utc | 7

Again, as with the parable of the cave, we are reduced to seeing mere reflections and trying to deduce reality. Or, as I said yesterday, how is our own government not more opaque in its processes than the Soviet Union ever was?
I tend to agree with #3 & 4.
I really am not sure how this crisis will shake out, but I am increasingly sure that Israel’s public display of brutality and hubris to the world cannot help it in the long run. The mask is off, and the likelihood of Achmedinajad’s accurately translated prediction becomes more possible every day.
I am also sure that Brand Obama was installed to restore America’s “exceptional” image to the world: A kinder, gentler form of Imperialism ala Clinton, when few even noticed the US killing almost 1M Iraqis. Unless this is part of some amazingly scripted drama, whereby Obama steps up to the plate and publicly chastizes Israel in an attempt to resusitate its image also, with its new government (highly unlikely) — then I am increasingly sure that Israeli intransigence must be raising the concerns of US planners, such as Bzezinski. That is to say, whatever is really happening, we have a real conflict here playing out on the public stage. Most unusual.
Also operative, is the magician’s ruse. When one thing catches your attention, maybe the real action is happening beyond our current scope of vision.
Totally aside from politics, I do know as an animal trainer, that when the dog and the dog handler have a tussle, the end result is that the dog trainer gets peed and shit upon.

Posted by: Malooga | Jan 14 2009 14:04 utc | 9

Unless a nation wants its citizens to conduct hate crimes against its religious minorities, no nation on Earth wants the majority of its citizens to be religious extremists filled with nothing but hate! Here’s a piece from Frontline about several gangs of Jewish extremists in Israel who are hellbent on removing all Palestinians from Israel and its occupied territories. I don’t know about anyone else here, but these folks scare the bejesus out of me…:~(
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/israel/view/

Posted by: Cynthia | Jan 14 2009 14:13 utc | 11

Another thing that scares the bejesus out of me is that back in 2006 30% of Israelis favored pardoning Yigal Amir for assassinating Yitzhak Rabin. And now that right-wing candidates, who favor war over peace as a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, are leading in the polls, it’s very likely that an even greater percentage of Israelis today want to see this cold-blooded killer set free!
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3320266,00.html

Posted by: Cynthia | Jan 14 2009 14:22 utc | 13

officials have said that Israel achieved several days ago all that it possibly could in Gaza.
Or as Rumsfeld once put it, there are no targets left there.
Perhaps they are running out of ammunition, and we have the Greeks to thank.
“325 standard 20-foot containers of what is listed as “ammunition” … 3,000-odd tons of ammunition in one go is a lot,” one broker said, on condition of anonymity.” Reuters
Yep, a lot of lead.
They will never let us know if this is the real reason because then people might think that they have the power to stop war, which they do.
Let me repeat for emphasis: They will never let us know if this is the real reason because then people might think that they have the power to stop war, which they do.
Three cheers for Greece!
They understand that power comes when you are ready and committed enough to lay down your bodies and sieze it.
Where would those weapons be by now if they had decided to form a committee to draft a petition to circulate to their friends to bring to the politicians to negotiate over endlessly………Where would that lead be? In the bodies of Palestinan children right now, embedded in fragments of bones and blood.
Three cheers for our Greek comrades! That’s what I have to say today.

Posted by: Malooga | Jan 14 2009 15:36 utc | 15

Remember, Olmert’s focused on the Israeli elections. I suspect his message is entirely internal: “Kadima get’s shit done in Washington, and gets it done fast.” The further subtext is “do you think that kook Netanyahu is going to be able to yank Obama’s chain like this? Vote Kadima or lose all your influence.”
Israeli politicians are willing to kill by the thousands to win elections. You seriously think they wouldn’t sacrifice Rice’s ego (and possibly Israel’s position in Washington)?

Posted by: Bill | Jan 14 2009 15:53 utc | 17

Yeah, the US is helping Israel blow up other things as well. Like their economy. From Bloomberg:

Israel is the latest country to suffer from the collapse of the U.S. subprime mortgage market, which led to an economic crisis in Iceland, currency devaluations in Russia and street protests in Greece and Kuwait. There may be more fallout as the economies of the U.S., Japan and the countries of the European Union contract in 2009.

Posted by: DharmaBum | Jan 14 2009 16:55 utc | 19

From Malooga@9–Totally aside from politics, I do know as an animal trainer, that when the dog and the dog handler have a tussle, the end result is that the dog trainer gets peed and shit upon.
Malooga as a former dog musher, I think that maybe your excrement problem is that you’re scaring the dog. I know that the only times I got into tussles with dogs I got bit. But only because I was breaking up two dogs fighting. None of which has much to do with this thread…
Or maybe it does because it appears, publicly at least, that Miss Condi was bit while trying to break-up the dogfight.
From Cluelessjoe@4
Even if it were true, as a Jew, and particularly as the most important Israeli figure at this time, you just don’t go to the media and claim the USA, the biggest military of the world, takes your marching orders from you.
I mean, the usually antisemitic claims of Jews controlling the world for their own nefarious purposes was already bad enough, but with that kind of stupid claim, you’re just hanging yourself.
CJ, maybe Olmert is turning up the heat on jews in america (and the rest of the world) to make them “pick a side” and he’s just trying to tip the scales in his favor.
The Gaza conflict works for him in several ways. First; it sends a message to the world how deep into depravity israel is willing to sink to achieve its goals with no shame, no remorse.
Second; it creates a huge conflict amongst jews who have cultural ties to their history, but who certainly don’t support the heinous and numerous crimes committed by israel. But this situation is what will force these moderates though a sifter to separate which side of the jewish state they support. And once someone has turned their back on peace because they buy into the whole sad farce, they will support it with the same mindlessness of the naked emperor feeling cool in his lightweight new threads.
Third; any opposition that rears its head immediately can then be identified and a strategy developed to counter it. And Olmert knows that with every swastika painted on a temple, every poorly worded criticism that is published, it helps his cause and doesn’t hurt it. Do you think a statement like his would have been published if it wasn’t part of israel’s plan.
Gaza is about choosing sides. From the way the mainstream media paints it you’re either with israel’s peaceful bombing and killing or you support those horrible terrorist woman and children who are starving themselves and getting killed only to make jews look bad. Bad women and children.

Posted by: David | Jan 14 2009 17:23 utc | 21

@ vbo #5 – Where is the list for boycott?
I’ve been looking and can’t find it here. Thanks.

Posted by: beq | Jan 14 2009 18:18 utc | 23

Israel is a ‘blood a soil’ fanatic state with nuclear weapons, but hey, there always is another holocaust movie, another phony hate crime, another politician to finance/blackmail or manipulate. It never ends.

Posted by: anon | Jan 14 2009 18:20 utc | 25

“What do I miss?”
This is diplomatic oneupmanship. Israel probably believed that Rice or the Foggy Bottom leaked the story about WH denying the Israel request about Iran. Olmert took that as a snub, so Olmert puts her down.
The Iran story probably had a negative effect in Israel and Olmert tried to restore the position by showing his influence over the US President. Which is never in doubt but a public display just reaffirms Israel’s preeminent position in the US foreign and domestic politics.
Rice in the larger scheme of things is just nobody!

Posted by: Hoss | Jan 14 2009 19:20 utc | 27

it is all so bizarre, the prime minister of a dinky little country with undefined borders brags about calling the president of the most powerful nation on earth out of a meeting to give him instructions on how to vote on a non binding resolution in the UN…..and no one is even upset about it.
the president of the US has two shoes thrown at him and the reaction is a grin and a knowing nod from the west and outright jubilation everywhere else.
I remember when people were happy to meet “americans” and I have had many very pleasant encounters around the world over the last 35 years or so, still do but it is different. Now it is much better not to call attention to the fact you are a US citizen. (there is nothing I can do to hide the fact, I speak Italian fluently and German well enough to get basic needs but even though I dress in european styles and visit places frequented by europeans only I get spotted right away. don’t know if it is the walk or the talk or just the lack of sophistication but I never fool anyone.) What I notice now is a polite response and reserved discussion, before it seemed that people really were thrilled to meet an actual american and wanted to know all about where I was from and stuff like that. no more.
perhaps it sounds as if I am nostalgic for the empire of old. maybe so, it was much more pleasant and made doubly so because I harbored no guilt, no shame for having destroyed civilizations and cultures which came later when I started thinking about what we had done in Vietnam.
why are these two announcements concerning Israel, the first being the US calling off a strike on Iran from Israel and the second with Olmert telling bush to vote no on the resolution and Rice merely abstaining so incredibly weird. Is it really two guys arguing about who has the bigger dick? Does Olmert need to prove to his people that he is relevant and does bush need to let everyone know that he still calls the shots. are we to start a new field of study similar to kremlinology where we can analyze these press releases? I read many suggestions in this thread and others but none have yet jumped out at me. Maybe we will find out later, when more information is leaked for the elites.

Posted by: dan of steele | Jan 14 2009 20:10 utc | 29

Thanks rudolph!

Posted by: beq | Jan 14 2009 23:04 utc | 31

bragging… pride… arrogance. Rice is disposable trash to Olmert. As will be say, Hagee and his christian zionists, when the time is right, for a cleansing. Pawns are used and then knocked out of the game. This is what you are seeing. IS RA EL is saying very clearly, we are in charge. The US just moved weapon stockpiles to IS RA EL on 12/10/08. They are willing and compliant and we do not rule in our own best interest, but in the best interest of that little criminal country, known as IS RA EL.

Posted by: concerned | Jan 15 2009 3:15 utc | 33

My reading is that the NYT piece and this pieces of deliberate staged animosity are one at the same thing: An attempt to put distance between Bush and Israel in advance of something that Israel is about to do…. an attempt that is pure kabuki theatre, since they both are in agreement that this next step is in order….
Such a public braggadocio about manipulating the leader of the free world is probably unprecedented — it cannot be happenstance and it must have a hidden purpose.
That’s my .02. Reading also that Olmert is gung ho to continue the war, I take away that Olmert is in on the conspiracy to the next phase whereas perhaps the other Israeli military who are pushing to end Gaza are not? Or have I been hanging around Uncle $cam too much? LOL. I feel that a much broader war is planned and in the offing. I just read a report that Israeli troops are massing along the South Lebanese border now and Hebullah are on red alert. I dearly hope it is all wrong. But how convenient it would be for ISrael, to unleash a massive chaos, then open the long-shut gates of GazaHell and engineer a massive total exodus… every Zionist’s wet dream.

Posted by: bea | Jan 15 2009 4:31 utc | 35

@Cynthia:
Corporations aren’t doing anything.
It is up to us, as consumers, the one power we are freely given, to boycott those corporations.

Posted by: Malooga | Jan 15 2009 15:11 utc | 37

Malooga,
Boycotting corporations is a useless act of guilt suasion.
Dismantling the corporations, that’s the way it should go. Not boycotting them. As we have just seen, a “failing” (due to boycotts or anything else) corporation will just get an infusion of money from the US Treasury.
I just don’t see how boycotts actually work. Sure, they serve to get people mobilized behind something, but it seems to me more a charade than an act of purpose and long-term utility.

Posted by: micah pyre | Jan 15 2009 16:04 utc | 39

@micah pyre:
Certainly I believe that corporations MUST be dismantled, or the entire Earth will eventually be destroyed. It is impossible to watch the movie “The Corporation” and not come away with that conclusion.
But that does not prevent us from pursuing multiple goals, using multiple tactics, simultaneously.
Corporation’s most valuable possesion is their brand image; they absolutely do not want to see it sullied. César Chávez theorized that a drop of 15% in sales is enough to render the average corporation unprofitable. Of course, future profits are dependent upon image too.
(Unfortunately, these days we see government has fashioned a response: Just GIVE corporations money — but INSIST that they lower workers’ wages and benefits. This is the deliberate imposition of neo-liberal shock therapy, as done in the Soviet Union, upon the US working class.)
In many ways, I am initially inclined to agree that boycotting corporations is a minor tactic. But history shows us that it is a very effective first step.
Here are the reasons:
1) In a world with an overwhelming amount of injustice, it gives people one single focus.
2) It gives people who feel helpless a concrete step to take.
3) It empowers people to take larger steps.
4) It generates its own publicity, both in the media and around the watercooler.
5) By taking a first step, it generates momentum for future steps.
6) Having taken a first step, people look for more steps. Broad-based education is the natural next step, thereby rapidly expanding the movement.
7) Money does make the world go ’round. Small boycotts lead to larger steps, like major institutional divestments.
8) There is a proven track record for this. South Africa, of course, is the obvious comparison. But before that, there was César Chávez and the UFW strikes. More recently, along the same lines is the successful action taken by the Immokalee Farm Workers.
People are controlled by their rulers in many ways. In so-called “democratic” societies, emotional states like alienation, powerlessness, ignorance, and fear are intentionally fostered to control people. Organized state power — violence — is secondary, and only used when the state feels particularly threatened.
It is easy to see how boycotts address these disabling emotional states on may levels, thereby confronting authority more directly than one might initially suspect.
So, of course, boycotts are not a magic bullet. The target is always moving. Govermental power is always learning how to respond, and activists must keep learning, too. It is a game of strategy — in real life — and so, infinitely more meaningful and gratifying than the board games we spend so much of our life on.
Anyway, to my mind, this is how boycotts work. I hope this was helpful.

Posted by: Malooga | Jan 15 2009 16:59 utc | 41

Micah@42-We are in a stage where supply precedes demand, and creates demand. How does a boycott affect that? How can a boycott trump the highly manipulative and subtle psychological warfare of modern advertisement?
We are no longer in place where supply precedes demand. The economy is screwed, and there are warehoused full of products without buyers. This is the perfect time for an economic boycott.
The very act of participating in a boycott is one of standing-up to the madmen of marketing and manipulation who are trying to force your capitulation. Don’t buy, and like a drunk that doesn’t take that first sip, you suddenly you realize you have the power. And during an economic downturn it is certainly easier to convince people they don’t need to buy stuff.
Imagine if the majority of americans decided not to pay taxes. This, opposed to voting, would bring about change and quick. The power structure can’t “massage” dollars out of thin air the way they seem to do with votes.
This would be a boycott and not useless at all.

Posted by: David | Jan 15 2009 18:01 utc | 43

Perhaps the reason that Olmert would boast so brazenly about embarrasing condi is intended to create outrage in some, within the new administration, and thus encourage the ‘weak supporters of Israel’ to show themselves. The AIPAC machine would then identify them, and politically dismember them limb by limb, so that they are reduced to the compliant slaves APAIC desires.

Posted by: juno junoveldt | Jan 15 2009 21:34 utc | 45