Rachel Ray's "terrorist" chic

Is America's Martha Stewartesque cooking icon Rachel Ray a terrorist sympathizer?

If you poke around the conservative blogosphere, you might get that impression.

Ray became a target of some prominent right-wing bloggers after she was featured in a new on-line ad for Dunkin' Donuts wearing a checkered scarf that looks something like the Middle Eastern kaffieyh.

The ad sparked an irrational frenzy among bloggers who suggested that the ad was something akin to endorsing terrorism.

Michelle Malkin derided it as "clueless jihadi chic" and "hate couture."

In a post titled "Mainstreaming Terrorism to Sell Donuts," Little Green Footballs decried Dunkin' Donuts for being the latest company "to casually promote the symbol of Palestinian terrorism."

Never mind that the kaffiyeh is worn by millions of men in the Middle East who are not terrorists, or that the kaffiyeh is worn by Bush administration allies like Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, Malkin et al went off on a crusade that quickly forced Dunkin' Donuts to pull the ad.

"Absolutely no symbolism was intended," the company said in a statement on the blogosphere-generated controversy. "However, given the possibility of misperception, we are no longer using the commercial."

Looks like we can all sleep a little more soundly tonight...

The Day After for Olmert

As expected, American businessman Morris Talansky's emotional testimony on Tuesday created political shrapnel that is cutting across Israeli politics.

Israeli commentators skewered Olmert, who has tried to remain above the fray.

(One suspects that it is no small coincidence that, in the weeks since the corruption probe has become public, Olmert and his team have announced significant breakthroughs on talks with Syria and the Palestinians, news that seems designed in-part to indicate that getting rid of him prematurely would be a blow for peace and stability...)

"In a word: Disgusting," wrote Yedioth Ahronoth's Sima Kadmon. "In two words: Very disgusting."

"If Talansky is a liar, then Olmert comes out looking bad," wrote veteran commentator Nahum Barnea, who sat in the courtroom and wrote one of the more entertaining pieces on the day's drama. "And if he is telling the truth, Olmert comes out looking even worse."

After digesting the news, Labor Party leader Ehud Barak pulled a full Tzipi Livni by calling on Olmert to resign, but not doing anything to make it happen.

Barak warned that he would bring down Olmert's coalition government if he does not step aside, but didn't set a deadline for doing so.

That allows Olmert to keep holding on. At least for now.

While Olmert's hold on power is growing increasingly precarious, he is still able to stay in office because no one has yet been able to figure out how to position themselves as the heir-apparent.

Barak knows that he and his party are polling very poorly with Israelis and would likely not emerge in the next elections with enough seats to form a new government.

There is still no consensus within Olmert's Kadima party over who should take over if-and-when Olmert steps down.

And the opposition Likud party, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, is simply waiting for the dust to settle because the polls suggest they are in the best position at this point to lead the next government.

For the moment, Olmert is dying a political death by a thousand cuts. Barak failed to deliver the fatal cut today, and so Olmert lives to fight another day.

(AP photo of Barak/Tara Todras-Whitehill)

Olmert "the mooch"

Who’s The Real Schnorrer?

Yedioth Ahronoth (p. 1)

by Nahum Barnea

He leaned with both elbows on the narrow wooden stand of courtroom number 3 in the Jerusalem District Court, his hands intertwined, his head covered with white hair, his face agonized. An uncle from America. A Diaspora Jew. Even his English is Jewish, accented, tinged with Yiddish. Even the jokes. Even the gray business suit, which had seen better days, and the white shirt, which was big on him.

Were a film to be made about him, Walter Matthau might have been asked to play him. Or George Burns. Or Shmuel Rodensky. All three, incidentally, are no longer with us. He might be imagined taking the stage as Tevye the milkman in a production of “Fiddler on the Roof” at an old age home in Great Neck, Long Island. “If I were a rich man,” he would sing, and all the girls in the home would shed a tear.

But yesterday he was here, in Jerusalem, in the district court, giving the testimony of his life. The sense, at least mine, was growing embarrassment, shame, even anger. Not at Talansky—at Olmert. If Talansky’s testimony were true, if what he described was the ladder by which Ehud Olmert climbed to the post of prime minister, perhaps there is no choice but to search for a ladder to bring him down.

I am talking about the public aspect, not the criminal one, and on the assumption, not the certainty, that his description is rooted in reality, and not a complete hallucination or malicious fabrication.

Talansky described yesterday a senior politician, the mayor of a large city and then the deputy prime minister, who turns an American Jew into his ATM.

Talansky will pay: He will pay the difference between business class and first class on the plane. He will pay the difference between the luxurious room in the fancy hotel and a suite. He will pay the campaign expenses and the debts left behind by the elections. He will even pay for the in-house movie at the hotel.

Talansky calls himself a “schnorrer,” (a mooch) but if his descriptions are correct, the real schnorrer is the prime minister of Israel.

Let’s assume that his descriptions are false. Then too, the question should be asked who are the people who have brought Ehud Olmert this far: One a lying go-between, one an attorney whose integrity was called into question yesterday, and one woman who is maintaining the right to silence. If Talansky is a liar, then Olmert comes out looking bad, and if he is telling the truth, Olmert comes out looking even worse.

This says something not only about Olmert, but also about other figures who aspire to the throne of prime minister and about the political culture than has taken root here. A band of Israeli politicians, hedonists and power hungry, sell their birthright (by extension, the birthright given to them by the people of Israel) for a mess of pottage.

It is not only the system, which compels candidates for a political position to spend a fortune in order to be elected, but makes it difficult for them to raise money legally, which is to blame here. What is to blame is the ease with which public figures live beyond their means, the intolerable ease of the sponging, the parasitism, the illusion of “I have it coming to me.”

Not surprisingly, Talansky believes that money exempts from questioning. That’s how it is in the shtetl. He said: What is being done now (the investigations), will harm us in the long term. There was an article in the paper by a person who wrote: Get rid of all the Talanskys. Three pages before that, there was a report on the conference made by President Shimon Peres. Do you know who funded it? Sheldon Adelson. USD 3.5 million he paid. If you get rid of me, you also get rid of Adelson. Adelson was very angry at being questioned. You can get me out of bed at six in the morning. I’m a nobody. But to question Adelson, who gives USD 200 million to Jewish institutions?

In the criminal realm, as opposed to the public realm, everything is still open. Not only because Olmert is presumed innocent, but mainly because Talansky’s testimony did not prove anything: It was nothing more than a primary questioning, without cross-examination, without factual corroboration.

The State Attorney’s Office prepared the witness for testimony well. They also helped him put together a coherent version, unlike what arose from his questioning by the police, and also succeeded in creating an impression in the public that this was an eccentric, and that the expectations from his testimony were low. This way, they achieved an impressive win, and proved that the representatives of the state also know how to engage in manipulation.

Unfortunately, in this investigation, public legitimacy was given to a disgraceful concept: The investigators, so said sponsored headlines, were “briefing” the witness. And I thought that in a state of law, the witness is supposed to brief the investigators, not the other way around.

Talansky’s version, in brief, tells a love story: I loved Ehud Olmert and he loved me. I loved him for his opinions, and I loved him for his status and talent. I admired him. I worked for him for free. Like any true lover, I had to pay for love. If need be, in cash. Although I knew it was wrong. If need be, to the point of putting a lien on my property. He emphasizes: And I am no millionaire or billionaire, I’m no Rockefeller. Elsewhere, he says: I don’t live in the Regency, the St. Regis, the Ritz Carlton (hotels where Olmert stayed).

Even when Olmert offended him, for example, when he told him that he was going to visit the US for the circumcision of his son but did not bother to invite him, Talansky continued to love. I thought, he said in his testimony yesterday, that there would be a lot of important people. Honestly, I resented this. I resented it a lot.

Nonetheless, he continued to serve. To treat Olmert, according to his description, as Friday treated Robinson Crusoe, like the golem treated the Rabbi of Prague. The story he told yesterday had not been shared with anyone. He opened his mouth only when the police investigators pulled him out of bed and drove him for questioning to the National Fraud Squad headquarters in Bat Yam.

This is not the only reason that I find it difficult to treat Talansky as a hero. He spoke in his testimony about all kinds of sums, some coming from him, some from others. The total is confusing. It would be best to say, therefore, that he says that he transferred to Olmert, as donations and as a loan that was not returned, hundreds of thousands of dollars. It is difficult to believe that a shrewd person like Talansky, no matter how enamored, would transfer such large amounts from one hand to another without keeping any record. If he did this, he knew that he was an accomplice to an offense.

I was an idiot, he says today. When we are talking about such a seasoned businessman, so experienced, idiotism is no defense. I didn’t expect anything in return, he repeats, and strengthens his version by the following proof: Had he wanted favors from Olmert, he would have done business in Israel. The fact that he refrained from investments in Israel attests to his innocence.

It would have been easier to believe him had he said that his standing in the community was upgraded thanks to his ties with Olmert. Had he said that he had expectations. But Talansky was careful: Throughout his testimony he refrained from providing any cause for accusing him of bribery. Olmert’s attorneys treated him yesterday with extreme courtesy.

Their concern for his state of health, his thirst, his physical needs, was touching. First of all, they sought to disprove the allegation that Talansky was threatened. Secondly, they need him for the cross-examination. And they prefer that he come to the cross-examination in good spirits. Both in the case of Talansky and in the case of Olmert’s attorney Uri Messer, they will argue, I imagine, that the police investigators are to blame for everything: They took two weak people, broke them down and dictated a version to them.

I don’t know what Messer’s situation is. Everything that has been happening around him since the start of his questioning is odd, lacking in transparency and crying out for an explanation. But Talansky did not look broken at all. Just exhausted.

At the end of a questioning session of seven hours, he continued to be the friendly, clever old man, who chooses to pose as a dimwit. Despite all the shticks, he projected sincerity. Even his tendency to clowning, which worried the State Attorney’s Office so much, was dished out in moderation, without being tedious. Twice he cried: He cried for his sick wife, and his trampled dignity, and the stress caused to him by the investigation, and his grandchildren who began—due to the conduct of the police investigators—to doubt him, their dear grandfather, their zeyde. In the situation he has gotten into, self-pity is not uncalled for.

At the end of the testimony, in response to a question by Eli Zohar, Olmert’s attorney, he released an ethical statement. Eli Zohar wanted to get a moral writ of exemption from him. “These people,” asked the attorney, “who did not receive a salary for their expenses, don’t they deserve, at the very least, to cover their expenses?” These are charity organizations, replied Talansky, charity organizations have a responsibility towards the donors.

The Israeli government, which sends representatives (to speak in its name), it has a responsibility to remain within a framework of expenses, and not to receive a free, unbridled expense account. He said this, and left. It is interesting to consider what he will say when he returns here, if he should return.

T-Day for Ehud Olmert

Today was T-Day for Ehud Olmert.

After weeks of speculation, leaks and rumors, the man at the heart of the unfolding political corruption probe of the Israeli PM appeared at a special court deposition where he railed against the Israeli justice system, wept in frustration and lectured the judges on American justice.

Over the course of six hours of testimony, Morris Talansky painted Ehud Olmert as a once-promising politician who had lost his way.

Talansky's appearance offered the first, best chance to assess the case Israeli prosecutors are trying to build against Olmert.

Since Olmert's attorney's won't cross-examine Talansky until July, the hearing offered only part of the story.

But it is now possible to sketch out what prosecutors have, what they are looking at, and what they are trying to find.

Over the last 15 years, Talansky estimated that he had given Olmert $150,000 in cash, checks and loans. Most of the time, Talansky said, Olmert asked for the money in cash.

Though Talansky said he was "very, very uneasy" about Olmert's cash requests, he kept on giving him the money in envelopes because of his deep respect for the Israeli leader.

Olmert told him cash was better than checks, but Talansky couldn't really explain why. He mentioned something about party bureaucracy.

In what appeared to be an attempt to establish a quid-pro-quo, investigators asked Talansky about a particular timeline in 2005.

In October, 2005, Talansky said Olmert aide Shula Zaken called to say that the Israeli leader's credit card was maxed out and asked if he could cover his hotel bill at the Ritz-Carlton in Washington DC.

Talansky obliged and paid the $4,717.49 Olmert racked up during his stay and then had his mini-bar company reimburse him for the payment.

Why Olmert was in DC at the time is unclear. Talansky said he had been told that Olmert was there for an art exhibition by his wife, Aliza.

Soon after Talansky paid the bill, prosecutors say, Olmert wrote a letter to the defense minister of Chile on behalf of a satellite company in which Talansky was an investor.

Talansky said he knew nothing about the November 1st letter and had never asked Olmert to help drum up business, even though some of his associates suggested that he do just that.

On November 17th, prosecutors say, Olmert wrote a letter to American billionaire casino owner Sheldon Adelson and asked him to speak to Talansky about his struggling mini-bar business.

Talansky said Olmert put him in touch with Adelson and two other American businessmen, but that none of the contacts panned out.

Eight days later, Talansky said he met Olmert in a New York hotel room where Olmert asked for a $15,000 loan.

Talansky reluctantly obliged and offered to write a check, but said Olmert told him he needed cash, so he walked down the street to his bank and took out $15,000 that has never been repaid.

Prosecutors also pursued another curious line of questioning that appeared to rattle Talansky. But it was impossible to figure out what they were getting it.

Prosecutors presented Talansky with records showing that one of his companies had transferred $100,000 to Olmert attorney Uri Messer in 1999. Talansky expressed shock and surprise and said he had nothing to do with the transfer.

Messer served as the attorney for Talansky when he bought a Jerusalem apartment, and the transfer seemed to have some connection, but it was unclear exactly what it was.

At one point, Talansky said Messer asked him to help pay some debts for a non-profit called Jerusalem United, but he refused.

"I'm not Moshe Rockefeller," Talansky said he told Messer. "You are like a sieve. It never ends."

Talansky was also asked about a letter that he signed to Olmert that was apparently written by Messer.

In the letter, Talansky apparently asks Olmert to pay him back for a large overdraft relating to a non-profit called Jerusalem United.

In his testimony, Talansky certainly painted Olmert as a manipulative politician. And the testimony is likely to further damage Olmert's image in the Israeli public, especially since his attorneys won't respond until they cross-examine Talansky in July.

But it is still unclear what crimes, if any, Olmert may have committed and if he will eventually be indicted.

Amy Winehouse Israeli rehab? No, no, no...

Many a wayward soul from around the world finds their way to Israel for any number of reasons, so it was no surprise to read that "troubled" UK singer Amy Winehouse was planning to come to Israel for an intense and invasive drug rehab program.

"Whether it's Amy Winehouse or anyone else, it is a privilege to be able to treat anyone who is opiate-dependent, and allow them to live a normal life," Andre Waismann, the Israeli doctor who was said to be preparing for his celebrity guest, was quoted as stating.

Waismann is the pioneer of a drug treatment regimen known as ANR - Accelerated Neuro-Regulation - which entails putting the patient under anesthesia for many hours while the doctor cleans and blocks "optiod receptors."

Israel loves a celebrity rehab saga as much as the next nation, so the reports were greeted by the local paparazzi with the expected glee.

Except that Winehouse is denying the Israeli rehab talk.

And now Waismann has issued a statement rejecting the stories and apparently denying the quotes about Winehouse.

"I have never spoken to her, she has never contact(ed) my clinic," Waismann said in a statement. "All those reports are detrimental to my name because I do treat patients that are well known and they deserve privacy when it comes to issues related their health. I would never discus any information about patients who approach the clinic."

Turkey trumps US in diplomacy

I'd like to say that it was impeccable instinct and incisive reporting that led me to Ankara last week when Israel and Syria confirmed that they are taking part in informal talks brokered by Turkey, but it wasn't. (Though, that's what I'm telling my editors, so keep this between us...)

It was simple luck that put me in Turkey when the two warring nations went public with their diplomatic dance.

(Diplomats from Israel and Syria aren't yet sitting in the same room; they are taking part in so-called proximity talks, a kind of shuttle diplomacy that the Israelis apparently once dubbed "bellhop diplomacy.")

There are plenty of reasons to expect that negotiations in which the two sides aren't even talking directly to each other yet won't lead to any great breakthroughs.

But the announcement has already propelled Turkey back into the center of regional diplomacy.

As McClatchy's Warren P. Strobel and Hannah Allam wrote this weekend, Middle East diplomacy is now moving forward as the US increasingly sits on the sidelines.

In the case of Israel and Syria, Turkey is now playing the role of "honest broker" once held by the US.

Turkey has managed to gain the trust of Syrian and Israeli diplomats. Turkey is seen as a fair mediator by both sides.

Paul Salem, the head of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Middle East Center in Beirut, said Turkey is filling the political vacuum created by the US diplomatic absence.

It's worth noting that it wasn't so long ago that Turkey was threatening to go war with Syria for allowing Kurdish rebels to run their operations out of Damascus. In the wake of such threats, Syria expelled PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan in 1998, a step that helped pave the way for the current diplomatic track.

"The fact is, ten years ago, no one would have asked Turkey to mediate, so there is a sea change," said Suat Kiniklioglu, a Turkish lawmaker with the country's ruling Justice and Development Party, AKA the AK Party.

Turkey's ability to continue to fill this role could be jeopardized by the unfolding court case that could shutter the AK Party and ban the nation's charismatic PM from politics.

(There seems to be a growing sense in Turkey that the AK Party and PM will be banned, but that the members will establish a new party and reinstall Erdogan as PM... but that's another story.)

If it is successful in the Syria-Israel diplomatic push, Turkey could emerge as a more central political player in the Middle East.

Israeli film evokes massacre

Of the many grim events that have come to define the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, 1982 massacres at Sabra and Shatila have a special resonance for both sides.

For many Palestinians, the brutal siege of the two Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon has become a battle cry and a symbol of Israeli callousness.

For some Israelis, Sabra and Shatlia are an unpleasant reminder of an event most would like to see as an anomaly in their nation's history.

Now, one Israeli who was part of those events is giving the world a thought-provoking new look at Sabra and Shatila that is capturing a lot of attention at the Cannes Film Festival.

Israeli director Ari Folman has produced "Waltz with Bashir," an animated documentary that follows his own attempts to recover repressed memories of his time as an Israeli soldier in Lebanon.

The film had its debut last week at Cannes and it is generating a lot of Hollywood "buzz."

The Guardian calls it "remarkable."

Screen Daily says it will "leave its mark forever on the ethics of war films."

The film has already generated a sales frenzy and won't even debut in Israel until next month.

Any movie about such a politically-charged event is likely to be flawed, and Folman readily concedes that the film is not the whole story.

But it appears to be a provocative attempt to tackle an important event at a time when the Middle East could use more thought-provoking attempts to re-examine the history of brutality in an attempt to learn from the past.

Israeli schmaltz for Bush

Some things have to be seen to be believed.

As mentioned in a previous post, Israeli President Shimon Peres seems to have a taste for, um, unique entertainment.

When President Bush came here in January on his first visit as 43, Peres enlisted a group of young girls to serenade the leader of the free world with a schmaltzy version of "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" that was appropriately lampooned by Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show."

This time around, the entertainment provided by Peres for the US president included a schmaltzy interpretive dance to James Taylor's "You've Got A Friend."

I was planning to post the video here, but I am in Turkey at the moment where access to YouTube is currently blocked.

(Turkish courts have banned access to YouTube several times in the past year because users have posted videos insulting Turkey's founding president, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, a crime here in Turkey... But that's another story.)

You can watch this video of the performance to get a flavor. I will keep searching for the full video from the official feed so viewers can fully appreciate the show...

A Box of Fear, Hamas, Obama and more

If your Sunday is quiet, here's some interesting reading from recent days that is worth checking out:

As the 60th anniversary celebrations continue, Daniel Levy writes that "Israel has locked itself into a box of fear."

Over at The Atlantic before Bush spoke to the Knesset, Jeffrey Goldberg had an extended interview with US Sen. Barack Obama about his thoughts on Israel, the endorsement the Democratic presidential candidate got from Hamas leader Ahmed Yousef and more.

In London, The Guardian had a story about a newly-released letter from Albert Einstein in which the Jewish genius describes religious beliefs as "childish superstitions" and disparages the Jewish claim to be "the chosen people."

Gershom Gorenberg writes about attempts by the pro-Israeli group CAMERA to secretly co-opt Wikipedia entries on Israel.

Matt Beyon Rees, a long time reporter here who now writes a series of successful mystery novels featuring an amateur Palestinian detective, had a piece in The Telegraph of London titled "How I Found Peace in Gaza."

"Blood and Sand," is a piece by David Remnick at The New Yorker that takes a look at Israeli historian Benny Morris and his new book, "1948."

Then you can read "From Dove to Hawk," a piece by Morris on how his views of the conflict have changed over the years.

What Bush didn't say

It didn't take long for President Bush's first, and likely only, speech to the Israeli Knesset to create political shock waves in the US.

In the advent of what The Onion last year dubbed the 24-second news cycle, Bush's speech very quickly became a political story about his not-so-veiled swipe at US Sen. Barack Obama, former President Carter and other political opponents who have suggested that the US should sometimes use diplomacy instead of military force around the world.

The Bush-Obama flap has been covered extensively.

But what has been overlooked is what Bush didn't say.

Bush didn't use his historic address to the Knesset to talk about what is supposed to be a top priority for him in his final year: The peace process he officially launched last November in Annapolis.

He didn't use the address to speak directly to the skeptical lawmakers who will be asked to support any peace deal with the Palestinians.

He didn't use the address to speak directly to the Israeli public and urge them to support a peace deal with the Palestinians.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino was asked after the speech about the omission and here's what she said:

"First of all, this is the celebration of Israel's founding. That is the purpose of the event today -- it's not meant to be a 'kitchen sink' speech. In every interview and every opportunity the President has talked about the specifics of the policy. You know what that is. And nothing has changed in the last 36 hours."

If it was meant to be merely a celebration of Israel's founding, Bush probably would not have spoken about the threats from Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas. Nor would he have laid out his Utopian vision of the Middle East in 2068.

"Where people say that the president of the United States, this President has been the greatest friend Israel has ever had, he's also the first President who has ever articulated what a state could be for the Palestinians," Perino said, "and then given them the tools to achieve that peace with the Israelis in a way that doesn't impose the peace on them, but encourages them to establish it on their own."

Bush will meet with PA President Mahmoud Abbas and PA PM Salam Fayyad this weekend at the World Economic Forum in Egypt, and Perino indicated that Bush would use his address there to talk more about the Palestinians.

Still, in many ways, Bush's decision to completely avoid talking about the peace process was seen by some as a squandered opportunity.

(AP photo)

Bush in Israel: Unplugged

Olmert to Bush aide: "Holding on..."

President Bush had barely gotten off Air Force One in Israel when the political corruption investigation shadowing the visit came into play.

As Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert greeted Bush aides, he was asked by National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley how he was doing.

"Holding on, holding on," Olmert told Hadley as his comment was picked up by an open mic. "Don't worry."

***

Too close for comfort?

Police have been aggressively pursuing the investigation of Olmert and have used Israel's gala celebrations to their benefit.

Earlier in the week, police reportedly questioned Sheldon Adelson, the Las Vegas casino owner who was part of Bush's honorary delegation to Israel.

Adelson also served as honorary chair of Israeli President Shimon Peres's "Facing Tomorrow" conference that has drawn a large cross-section of world leaders.

On Wednesday night, Adelson sat in the front row of the gala event with Bush, Peres and Olmert, who sat four seats away from the businessman. Earlier in the day, Peres sat between Olmert and Adelson.

Police reportedly want to know if Olmert asked Adelson to help one of his campaign contributors. Olmert has denied any wrongdoing, but has vowed to step down if he is indicted.

***

Bush: Men are screwing things up

Another open mic picked up part of a chat Bush had with Peres at his Jerusalem office where the two men joked about the central role women are playing in the ongoing peace talks with the Palestinians.

Israel's chief negotiator is Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, who has a close relationship with Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State who is trying to keep things on track.

I'm thinking "this is the first time that two ladies are negotiating peace," Peres told Bush. "I can't recall any other situation with such a combination..."

"The men haven't been able to get it done," Bush replied. "Maybe they will."

"The men are going down, you know," Peres said. "We are in a very unpromising situation."

***

Laura Bush avoids international incident

While Bush met with Olmert and Peres, First Lady Laura Bush toured a medical clinic and a school in Jerusalem that promotes Arab-Jewish understanding.

But, according to one Israeli official, the first lady's visit almost created an international incident.

At first, he said, the plan was to take Laura Bush to a medical clinic in Pisgat Zeev, a massive, disputed suburb in East Jerusalem that Israel has annexed, but is considered illegal under international law.

Israeli organizers cautioned the Bush advance folks that they couldn't take Laura Bush to the contested clinic, so they decided instead to take the first lady to a clinic in West Jerusalem.

***

Israeli Kitsch for Bush

Wednesday night's gala celebration for Israel featured a mix of laudatory speeches, patriotic video tributes and kitschy musical numbers that Peres seems to find fitting.

Last time Bush was here, Peres asked a group of Israeli kids to sing "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" (in English, Hebrew and Arabic) to the US president when he arrived, a tribute that won the appropriate mocking from Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show."

This time around, the Peres conference featured an especially odd performance starring two fit Israeli guys performing a kind of improvisational dance as two singers performed James Taylor's 1971 hit, "You've Got A Friend."

Get it?

"When you're down and troubled

And you need a helping hand

And nothing, whoa nothing is going right.

Close your eyes and think of me

And soon I will be there

To brighten up even your darkest nights...'

In the end, there may have been no better metaphor for the evening's celebration...

(AP photo/Tara Todras-Whitehill)

Bush/Olmert: "A meeting of lame ducks"

Air Force One had yet to touch down at Ben Gurion Airport and the Israeli press was already abuzz with what was likely to happen here once President Bush is gone.

And, if true, the picture isn't pretty.

Israelis are expected to be on their best behavior while the president is here. People will downplay the deepening political corruption investigation of Israeli PM Ehud Olmert by saying that justice should take its course.

But Israel's Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper carried an op-ed, titled "A meeting of lame ducks," that captured the mood.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was particularly candid on the eve of the trip when she said that peace "might be improbable, but it is not impossible."

After keeping mum about talks for months, Olmert is now saying that Israel has made "significant progress" in its talks with Palestinian negotiators, who almost immediately challenged the Israeli PM's view of discussions.

"I don't know what kind of progress he is talking about," said PA negotiator Saeb Erekat.

Rice's final strategic move has been to put more pressure on Israelis and the Palestinians to change the so-called facts on the ground as a way to create a better climate for the peace talks.

One major issue is expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which the US opposes and Israel refuses to completely halt.

Hours before Bush arrived, Israel's Shas party, a crucial coalition partner, said that Olmert would approve hundreds of new homes in the West Bank soon after Bush heads home.

The boast was denied by Israel's Housing Ministry, but Olmert has already unapologetically approved several contentious West Bank projects  that have drawn protests from the US and Palestinian negotiators.

This time around, according to Israel's Maariv newspaper, Bush has given Olmert the OK for the construction.

There are also broad expectations that Israel will soon take more sweeping actions to stop the incessant rocket attacks coming from Gaza.

Two Israelis have been killed by aerial attacks from Gaza in the last six days and the Israeli military is claiming that the mortar that killed one of the civilians was made in Iran.

Hours before Bush arrived, the Israeli military killed two Palestinian civilians and two Hamas militants in an early morning air strike.

Once Bush leaves, Israeli leaders are expected to step up their operations in Gaza.

Maariv reported this morning that a "dramatic change" had taken place in the Israeli military's view of a large-scale operation in Gaza.

The military leadership once opposed a ground operation as a potential tar pit. Now, according to Maariv, they see it as inevitable.

Any decision would have to be approved by Olmert and his security cabinet, which is still waiting to see if Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman can broker a cease-fire with Hamas.

Israel told Suleiman earlier this week that they would not agree to a cease-fire unless the deal includes some movement on freeing Gilad Shalit, the young Israeli soldier captured by Hamas-led militants from Gaza in 2006.

Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar rejected that demand yesterday, but that may not be the end of the negotiations.

Olmert donor speaks out

In spite of the urging of his attorney, the American businessman at the center of the unfolding investigation of Israeli PM Ehud Olmert is speaking out.

Morris Talansky says the money he gave to Olmert wasn't a bribe and dismissed reports that he was afraid that Olmert might try to harm him.

In an interview in English with Israel's Channel 10 news, which you can see here for a few hours more, Talansky calls Olmert the one-time "prince of the Likud" and denied suspicions that he was part of a right-wing conspiracy to sabotage Olmert and his peace talks with the Palestinians.

A full transcript is below.

Meanwhile, a new poll finds that 59 percent of Israelis think Olmert should resign. Olmert's popularity has been in the dumps ever since the 2006 summer war against Hezbollah. so it's not especially revealing that the public is disenchanted with the PM.

The most interesting part of the poll is the election match-ups.

Most recent polls have shown voters strongly favoring the conservative Likud Party and its hawkish leader, Benjamin Netanyahu.

But the latest poll shows that voters would prefer Olmert's centrist Kadima party - if Olmert steps aside and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni takes over.

If that happens, according to the poll done for Israel's Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, Kadima would get 27 seats in the Israeli parliament, Likud would get 23, and Labor, Kadima's largest current coalition partner, would get 15.

If Olmert leads Kadima, the party only gets 12 seats while Likud gets 28.

The numbers could provide a boost for Livni as Kadima leaders weigh whether to try to push Olmert out before he is ready to go...

Interview with Morris Talanksy on Channel 10  

Did you ever think the money that you raised for Olmert was not legal?

No. I never thought in any way that the money I gave him, which was for the purpose of becoming mayor or electioneering, was in way illegal or wrong. He was not the only one who came to America to ask for money for their election campaign, so I thought it was legal.

We have heard from the police and attorney general that the suspicions are of bribery from you. What is your reaction?

I emphatically deny that I had in my mind to do any business in Israel. It never crossed my mind to do business in Israel. I don’t own any land. I don’t own any buildings. I don’t own any factories. I never built anything here. Never never was that my purpose. I have one apartment. That’s all I had. And for me, this was to build the country and it would have been a desecration if that was my intention, to do that. It never crossed my mind. I can say that (un)equivocally and take an oath anywhere that that is far away from the truth.

So you have no financial interest in Israel?

None. Nothing whatsoever. Check all of the records. I have not now and I never had.

None?

Nothing. Nothing. I don’t have nothing here. If you don’t understand about American Jews you won’t understand what this whole country is about. Okay. It’s very important. My generation in the 70’s who remembered the Shoah and see Israel see this as the place where there is perfection, where there is honesty, where there’s integrity. Therefore all these ideas, these accusations are to us is like something that came out of, as the Greeks call it, they have a very nice name for it “Deus Ex Machina," it came from the luft (air) it came from somewhere. There is something special here and that speciality never made me think this was a place to do business. I would never send my children here, or my grandchildren, and my parents lived here, and 125 people of my family, in a place that -- god forbid -- something should happen to make money. That’s where money is not important anymore.

And Olmert was your leader?

Yes. He was the prince of the Likud, he was going to be mayor. He was a man who was respected, and I respected him too, like everybody else.

And that’s why you helped him?.

Yes.

Do you have any idea what Olmert did with the money you gave him?

No. I assume it was for his election campaign.

Do you still assume that?

I haven’t heard any different to this point and I really don’t know any more. It is very very confusing. I’ve been in a state of questions and I don’t know.

Two days ago we learned from a court decision that you are afraid Olmert will send someone to hurt you?

Ahhh, forget it. That’s ridiculous.

It’s not serious?

No, it’s not serious.

What is your comment on rumors that you are part of a right-wing conspiracy?

Well I’ve heard many funny stories in my life, but that is the most comical one. I’m not part of a conspiracy. I’ve never been involved in a conspiracy. I’ve never marched in a conspiracy and it’s absolutely untrue.

Can you understand the suspicions against Olmert?

I read the papers like everybody else, I hear the stories, but I have no first-hand knowledge of what they’re talking about.

But you’re cooperating with the police?

Yes. They called me and I’m cooperating. I’m telling them the truth. I’m not hiding anything, they asked me questions and I’m telling them the entire truth. I have absolutely nothing to cover or to hide.

(Transcript provided by McClatchy special correspondent Cliff Churgin.)

The Hamas factor in US election

Could Hamas play a decisive role in choosing the next US president?

Probably not, but the Islamist forces are sparking a new dust-up in the race.

Last month, Hamas political strategist Ahmed Yousef (pictured below) set things in motion when he spoke warmly of Democratic US Sen. Barack Obama.

"We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the elections," said the Gaza-based, Western-educated Yousef.

"I hope Mr. Obama and the Democrats will change the political discourse," Yousef said. "I do believe [Obama] is like John Kennedy, a great man with a great principal. And he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community, but not with humiliation and arrogance,"

(Last June, Yousef told me that he favored US Sen. Hillary Clinton, but the fact that he's changing horses is a footnote at this point...)

It didn't take long for US Sen. John McCain to seize on Yousef's comments to kick up some dust.

"Barack Obama's foreign policy plans have even won him praise from Hamas leaders," McCain's campaign wrote in a fund raising letter. “We need change in America, but not the kind of change that wins kind words from Hamas, surrenders in Iraq and will hold unconditional talks with Iranian President Ahmadinejad.”

McCain has kept the issue alive in various forums, claiming in one chat that he would be Hamas' "worst nightmare."

"If Senator Obama is favored by Hamas, I think people can make judgments accordingly," McCain said.

Obama hit back this week by calling McCain's implications "offensive" and suggesting that the Republican senator was "losing his bearings."

McCain's campaign immediately accused Obama of trying to inject McCain's age (71) into the race.

On Friday, McCain said the whole issue was "a legitimate point of discussion."

Hmm. Well it seems like the general election campaign is getting off to a dignified start...

Olmert: I am not a crook

It probably wasn't how most Israelis wanted to celebrate the 60 years since their nation's founding.

Despite the best effort of investigators to keep a lid on the unfolding investigation of Israeli PM Ehud Olmert so as not to spoil the case or ruin the celebratory mood, the facts blew Thursday night.

Olmert hastily called reporters to his Jerusalem residence to make a blunt statement: I am not a crook.

For the past week, Israeli papers have been filled with ominous, anonymous sources predicting that this case is the beginning of the end for Olmert. And Olmert's unusual decision to deliver the late night statement - televised live - suggests that he, too, sees this investigation as more serious than the others.

The papers here continue to report that the jig is up and that one, if not two, people involved in the alleged scheme are cooperating with investigators.

One central figure is Morris Talansky, the 75-year-old New York businessman who was cornered by a Channel 2 reporter in Jerusalem yesterday.

Wearing dark sunglasses and sporting several days worth of stubble, Talansky appeared bemused by the attention and offered rambling, non-responsive answers to the questions he was asked.

Talansky said he was a longtime Zionist, had known Olmert for 20 years and wasn't involved in politics.

Hours later, Olmert told his nation that Talansky had spent a decade helping him raise money for his political campaigns.

The New York Times went digging in New York and unearthed a pile of legal cases involving Talansky, including allegations that the businessman sent "thugs" to try and collect money he was owed.

One of Talansky's meetings reportedly took place in Scores, a topless bar in Manhattan.

The other person said to be cooperating with investigators is Olmert's longtime law partner, Uri Messer.

In what was almost certainly an indication of his legal defense, Olmert told his nation that it was Messer -- not he -- who handled the money from Talansky.

"The monies raised for these campaigns were transferred to Uri Messer, who organized the financial matters connected to my campaigns," Olmert said. "I have no doubt in my heart that attorney Messer handled the money with all his professional skills and am sure he did this legally."

One crucial thing remains unanswered: If a bribe was involved, who got what for the money?

At this point, it does not appear that investigators know the answer.

The case is likely to drag on for some time before it becomes clear whether the allegations will prove fatal to Olmert. But one piece in particular caught my attention this morning.

In an article for Maariv, Haifa University Professor Emanuel Gross, an expert on criminal law, wrote that an indictment can be issued purely on the testimony of one key participant.

"It is important to know that in offenses of this sort, one testimony is enough, either that of the go-between in the bribery or that of the person who gave the bribe, to incriminate the person who received the bribe," wrote Gross. "It is not necessary that the conviction be supported by other evidence. A government minister who receives money in such amounts, certainly when it comes to alleged cash, must demand to know who the donors are and if Olmert did demand this, we have not heard to this day that he knows who the donors were and what their intentions were."

If that's the case and the burden of proof is so low, it could make it much more difficult for Olmert to survive.

(Photo of Morris Talansky: Yossi Zamir:Flash90/McClatchy Newspapers)

Israel's Britney

As the Israeli tourism ad below reminds us, life in this part of the Middle East isn't all missiles and bombs, death and destruction, sorrow and anger.

You might not, as the ad urges, "think Israel" when you are looking to plan your next vacation getaway, but some people still seem to have the perception that Israel is a nation filled with frightened residents rushing from doorway to doorway as empty buses roll past anxious residents peering out from behind locked doors.

Lives here are not always consumed by incoming Palestinian rockets, rape allegations against the president or bribery scandals dogging the prime minister.

There are other things to occupy one's attention here.

Like, for instance, the ongoing trials and tribulations of Bar Refaeli, the 23-year-old supermodel who is something akin to Israel's Britney.

Refaeli is probably best known for being Leonardo DiCaprio's girlfriend.

(They are on-again, off-again. But, according to the latest People Magazine I could find, the two are "on" and were "hot and heavy" in a New York cafe where she had a regular hot cocoa and Leo had a "heavy" made with vanilla cream... Get it? "Hot and heavy...")

Last year, Bar thought it would be nice to bring Leo back home to meet the parents.

Only, unlike most of us, she had to contend with the swarms of Israeli photogs that treated her the way the paparazzi treat Britney.

Leo and Bar were stalked wherever they went and photogs got in a scuffle at the Western Wall with security guards (which can be seen here) when the couple went to visit Judaism's most sacred site.

Refaeli was so upset that she vowed to never again bring friends to Israel.

Last fall, the model created a kerfuffle by dissing serving in the Israeli military as so, kind of... un-peacelike.

"It's stupid that people have to die so I can live in Israel," quoth Refaeli, who said not serving in the army had "paid off big time."

She didn't win many points with Israelis with those comments, which helped fuel an ongoing debate in Israel about the nation's mandatory military service and those who opt out.

Some who see imminent peril in Refaeli's stance are up in arms about a decision by the Fox fashion chain to hire her as their new public face.

Activists threatened to boycott the fashion line for using someone they've dubbed Bar "Draft Dodger" Refaeli.

But crisis has apparently been averted.

Today's Yedioth Ahronoth reports that Refaeli has agreed to visit wounded soldiers when she comes to Israel and will encourage people to serve in the military (in some way TBD).

How having a proud draft dodger serving as your spokesperson will help the Israeli army remains to be seen...

"Hi, I'm Bar Refaeli. Avoiding military service paid off for me big time. But you should serve because, well, chances are you're nowhere near as beautiful and sexy as I am, so..."

Somehow I can't see a pitch like that working so well.

US man central to Olmert's future

The Israeli courts are keeping a tight lid on disclosures in the unfolding new investigation of PM Ehud Olmert. We are under a gag order in the case that prevents us in Israel from directly writing about the details.

But that doesn't mean that the details aren't leaking out.

The man said to be at the center of the case is Moshe "Morris" Talansky, a 75-year-old New York businessman with long ties to Olmert who apparently was known as "the Laundry Man."

According to The New York Post, Talansky was questioned by authorities when he came to Israel to celebrate Passover.

The story quotes a source who says that Talansky is referred to "the Laundry Man" in financial logs kept by Olmert's longtime aide, Shula Zaken, who has been under house arrest for a week while undergoing repeated questioning.

Talansky, the story notes, is believed to have passed cash to Olmert in the 1990s when he was serving as mayor of Jerusalem.

Last week, Israel's Yedioth Ahronoth reported that an unnamed US businessman was believed to have passed cash bribes to Olmert in the 1990s.

Photographers have been staking out Talansky's Jerusalem apartment for days and hoped to catch sight of the businessman this morning during a court hearing on the case.

In the court, the judge extended the gag order, but is allowing journalists here to report that a request has been made to hold a special, urgent court deposition of an unnamed "foreign national."

"There is nothing in this to attest that an indictment has been submitted against the respondents in the request – Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Ms. Shula Zaken," the court wrote. "This is an investigation that began in recent days and the request is necessary given the circumstances under discussion."

There's no good time for a political scandal to surface, but this one comes literally on the eve of Israel's 60th anniversary this Wednesday, an event that will draw a long list of foreign dignitaries, including a visit next from President Bush.

It also comes on the eve of Israel's Memorial Day on Wednesday.

Israeli Police spokeswoman Iris Barak said it would be bad for the country to release details now.

"Nobody wants to hear such things on a national day of mourning," said Barak.

Olmert has managed to survive every political scandal and challenge to his leadership so far. But his opponents can smell the blood in the water once again and are trying their best to use it topple Olmert...

(AP Photo of Olmert/Tara Todras-Whitehill)

Israeli prez nixes Hamas talks

This morning began with a jarring, dream-shattering boom that rattled my apartment windows and echoed across the valley below.

I lay there, half-asleep, and listened to the diminishing echoes of the sonic boom as Israeli planes criss-crossed the sky in preparation for the country's 60th anniversary celebrations later this week.

It had been a long time since I was rudely awakened by sonic booms. The last time came two summers ago when Israel was regularly using sonic booms to rattle Palestinians in the Gaza Strip as part of a military campaign after Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was captured by Hamas-led militants.

In those days, the pre-dawn sonic booms came in twos or threes that shattered windows and kept everyone on edge.

The Israeli equivalent of the Blue Angels flew overhead this morning as Israeli President Shimon Peres, one of the nation's last surviving warrior-statesmen, invited the international press to his official residence to talk about his nation at 60.

Peres has long been viewed as one of Israel's pragmatic doves, a political leader who launched secret talks with PLO leader Yasser Arafat in the 1990s that paved the way for the landmark Oslo Accords.

Peres, Arafat and slain Israeli PM Yitzhak Rabin won the Nobel Peace Prize for their initiative, though it ultimately failed to end the conflict.

Peres was asked if he thought the time might be right to launch similar talks with Hamas.

But the Israeli president seemed to see no parallels between the PLO of the 1990s and Hamas of 2008.

"I can't speak to a wall," said Peres, who called Hamas "a catastrophe for their own people."

Peres said it was impossible for Israel to talk to a group the refuses to explicitly recognize Israel, something Arafat eventually as part of talks with Israel.

When asked if he had any regrets about helping to launch the West Bank settlement movement after Israel seized control of the area in 1967, Peres said no.

"I don't think so. It would go on whether we started it or not," said Peres. "I think what we did was on a reasonable level."

Peres said he is not calling for a military strike to stop Iran's nuclear programs, but said allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons would be a "nightmare."

(AP Photo/Sebastian Scheiner)

Is Israel's Olmert finished?

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is one of the Middle East's great political survivors.

He has been buffeted by controversy and near-ceaseless calls for his resignation. His approval ratings have at times sunk into the single digits. He was castigated for bungling Israel's 2006 war against Hezbollah. And yet he still stands.

One of the biggest reasons is that no other Israeli leader has the current clout to topple Olmert.

But this weekend has brought new rumblings that Olmert's political career might be coming to an end.

The rumor mill went into high gear on Thursday when Israeli police announced that they were planning to immediately question Olmert about an unknown investigation.

On Friday, Israel's Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper carried a story with the headline: "Suspicion: Cash bribe from an American businessman."

The story bluntly stated that, before he became prime minister, Olmert had received cash bribes from an American businessman who is cooperating with investigators.

Israeli courts imposed an immediate gag order on the case, a move that has prevented any more significant details from seeping out.

On Sunday, Olmert reportedly called the rumors "wicked and malicious" and suggested that he would be exonerated when the facts come out.

Until then, Olmert vowed to soldier on.

The rumors and questioning have generated a new round of doom-saying and predictions that Olmert would be quickly forced from office.

Israel's attorney general made it clear that there has so far been no talk of forcing Olmert from office.

And Olmert isn't likely to leave without a fight.

Olmert's tenure has been clouded by at least three investigations, including one suggestion that he got a sweetheart deal on a house in Jerusalem in exchange for helping a businessman.

But none of the investigations have led to charges. And investigators have said there isn't enough evidence to charge Olmert in a fourth investigation.

Olmert also faced significant calls for his resignation after a special committee lashed out at Olmert and his government last year for failures during the 2006 war against Hezbollah.

There were front-page calls for Olmert to step aside. Members of his own party said he should go. Lawmakers in his coalition joined opposition leaders in urging Olmert to resign.

And yet he managed to hang on.

Now the ominous whispers are once again sweeping from Israel to Washington.

Once the gag order is lifted it may become more clear just how serious things are for Olmert this go-round.

For the moment, expect Olmert to fight on.

Israeli military video raises questions

The Israeli military has wrapped up its investigation into last week's killing of the Gaza mother and her four kids.

In short, as expected, the Israeli military concluded that it was not to blame for the deaths.

The centerpiece of their investigation is the surveillance video -- posted below -- of the twin IDF air strikes on the militants in Beit Hanoun.

While the video provides a critical view of the attack, it actually leaves lots of questions unanswered.

The Israeli military concluded that the mother and her children were killed by a secondary blast created by some sort of explosives carried by the militant hit in the second air strike.

In the video there is clearly a second, larger blast during the first air strike. But there is no clear, larger, secondary explosion in the second.

According to the Israeli military, the four militants posed an imminent threat to Israeli soldiers who had entered Gaza and were sweeping the area about 400 yards from the air strikes.

But it is not clear from the video that the four men posed an imminent danger to Israeli forces when the first strike was ordered.

And it is even less clear that the man targeted in the second strike posed an imminent danger to Israeli forces, as the militant appears to be lying down near the house of the family killed in the attack.

Maj. Avital Liebovitz, an Israeli military spokeswoman, said the Israeli air strike used the smallest type of missile in their arsenal in an effort to avoid killing innocent bystanders.

I've seen such attacks up close. One time I was doing an interview when the Israeli military tried to hit a car carrying militants in Gaza City.

The single missile missed its target and instead hit the adjacent apartment building. It left a big hole in the roof and damaged part of a room on the top floor. But the damage was remarkable contained.

In the video, you can actually see other people within yards of the targeted militants who are able to flee without apparently being seriously injured by the blast.

Israel constantly blames the militants for operating from within civilian areas and accuses them of using innocent Palestinians as human shields.

Militants most certainly operate from within towns and cities in Gaza, which is one of the most densely populated places on the planet. But international law still calls for Israel to weigh the risks to innocent civilians when it stages such attacks.

The video offers a valuable view of the controversial strike. But it is not the end of the story.

One of the flaws with Israeli military investigations of its controversial attacks in Gaza is that they rely almost entirely on video like this and testimony from their own soldiers.

The Israeli military is unable to gather eyewitness testimony, talk to survivors, interview doctors or examine the scene.

That means that any Israeli investigation is going to start and end without providing a complete understanding of the attack.

Various groups, including Human Rights Watch, are calling on Israel to launch an independent investigation. But Israel is almost certainly not going to do so.

That means that this video is about as far as the IDF will go in addressing the controversy.

Unfortunately, it leaves too many questions unanswered.

Israel's wall divides Tel Aviv

(Photo: Lisa Goldman/On The Face)

Check out Lisa Goldman's latest post over at On The Face about a guerrilla street artist who erected a large, faux section of Israel's separation wall in the middle of a popular, bucolic Tel Aviv sanctuary.

The wall generated an interesting, if expected, cross-section of reactions.

Some people were upset by the inconvenience. Others wrote protest messages on the wall. And the wall stood for more than five hours before police came around and asked the artist to take it down.

"I do think there is something very cowardly about building a wall," said the artist, Ehud Segev. "It’s like sitting in a reinforced room in your house all day, wearing a helmet and bullet proof vest. Who wants to live like that?"