Showing posts with label P.J. Crowley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label P.J. Crowley. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Quote of the week: P J Crowley

Fresnozionism.org
22 February '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/02/quote-of-the-week-p-j-crowley/

Again, you know, this ultimately and fundamentally an issue between, you know, the Libyan government, its leader, and the Libyan people…

– State Department spokesman P. J. Crowley, after Qaddafi ranted about dying as a martyr, and while goons and mercenaries are killing protesters in the streets of Tripoli

Probably they are afraid that Qaddafi, who is more or less correctly described as a homicidal maniac, will kill every American he can get his hands on if they are rude to him. But still, what a remarkably weak response. Not like Israel got when it ‘insulted’ the US by announcing the construction of some apartments in eastern Jerusalem last year!

There is a lesson in this: evil is power. The worse you are, the better you are treated. Bashar Assad, the Syrian dictator who supports Iraqi insurgents who are trying to kill US troops, now has an American ambassador, previously withdrawn after the Syrian-sponsored murder of Saad Hariri in Lebanon. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who stole an election last year and viciously put down anti-regime demonstrations is doing it again, while at the same time thumbing his nose at the US by introducing warships into the Mediterranean. So far the US has done nothing.

Hizballah and Syria are threatening to kill thousands of Israelis with a massive rocket barrage. Not that Israel can’t defend itself, not that the rocket barrage won’t be met with a massive counterattack that will likely end the Syrian regime and the Hizballah threat as well, but Israel is supposed to be our ally. Our administration’s policy seems to be to single-mindedly focused on getting Israel out of Judea-Samaria and Jerusalem and weakening it strategically, rather than on the serious dangers it faces from the north.

That’s OK — we don’t help our less-savory allies either, like Saudi Arabia, presently shaking in its boots in fear of a possible Shiite takeover in Bahrain (there is a large Shiite presence in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province) or an Islamist regime arising in Egypt. Meanwhile the US encourages ‘democracy’ in the region.

It’s funny, but I’ve recently watched videos of protests from several Arab countries, and the rioting democrats all seem to be shouting “Allah hu akbar.” I presume that means “Liberté, égalité, fraternité” in Arabic.

The turmoil in the Arab world creates both dangers and opportunities for all sides. It seems to me that the Iranian bloc, as well as the Muslim Brotherhood, are taking advantage of the opportunities, while the US is standing by, paralyzed, uttering platitudes about democracy and counseling nonviolence.

By the way, we won’t be able to use the ‘peace process’ excuse for pressuring Israel anymore, because the Palestinian Authority (PA) has resigned from it. Here is what it said in a press release (thanks to Elder of Ziyon for this):

The United States of America’s use of the veto to prevent the passage of a UN resolution condemning Israel’s settlement policy confirms that it is not an honest broker, and it is no longer able to carry out its responsibilities as a sponsor of any future Palestinian – Israeli negotiations.

Mr. Ziyon (who also refers to himself as ‘Eldad Tzioni’), argues that this is outrageous, especially considering that the US financially supports the PA:

The PA is officially calling the United States an “obstacle to peace.” It is saying that the US – a nation that has worked harder than any other to bring about peace, a nation that brokered Camp David – cannot be an honest broker in negotiations. Whether you agree or disagree with the present administration, this press release is an unacceptable slap in the face of the world’s superpower by an entity that cannot conceive of the idea of compromise for peace.

This hateful screed has, so far, been ignored both by the media and by the current administration. There have been no public calls for apologies, no calling out of president Mahmoud Abbas who is responsible for this statement.

But hey, who’s counting insults anymore.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Great News! The Palestinians Have Improved Relations With--The US

Daled Amos
20 January '11

Don't take my word for it.

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley himself explained the US had given permission to the PLO mission to fly the 'Palestinian' flag--despite no change in status:

given the improvement in the relations between the United States and Palestinians.

Of course it's nice to know that the Palestinians have improved relations with somebody, but what in the world does that mean?

(Read full "Great News! The Palestinians Have Improved Relations With--The US")


If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Name That Process

Rick Richman
Contentions/Commentary
13 December '10

In Friday’s State Department press conference, P.J. Crowley rejected a description of the administration’s new peace process as “indirect talks.” That produced the following colloquy:

QUESTION: What’s – why are you allergic to saying, yeah, it’s going to be indirect talks. I mean, it’s obvious from what you’ve described that that’s what it is. They’re not talking to each other, you’d like them to talk to each other sometime, but now, like a tired, weary, and sad marriage counselor, you’re going to shuttle back and forth between them. (Laughter.)

MR. CROWLEY: All right, Arshad, tell us what you really think. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: What’s the problem with – I mean, what’s the problem with saying indirect talks? Why is that – why are you allergic to that phrase? … Why won’t you call them indirect talks?

MR. CROWLEY: I’m not going to put a label on them…

QUESTION: Can you call them parallel talks?

MR. CROWLEY: Samir, I’m not playing a – do we have Middle East labels for $200?

“Parallel talks” is not a bad label, since the two sets of talks — like parallel lines — are never going to meet. But that label does not quite capture the logic of the process.

(Read full "Name That Process")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

The Peace Process Letter(s)

Rick Richman
Contentions/Commentary
16 November '10

Citing “Palestinian sources,” Ynet reports the Palestinians expect their own package of U.S. guarantees and financial incentives to persuade them to return to talks intended to give them a state:

The sources added that the American commitments would include setting the Palestinian state’s borders within three months and solving the refugee problem, including compensation through an international fund comprised of most of the region’s countries (including Israel). The sources also said that the American list of commitment[s] would include financial and diplomatic aid in exchange for returning to the direct negotiations.

At yesterday’s State Department news conference, Spokesman P.J. Crowley seemed to confirm that something is being considered beyond merely restarting the talks (when a question has to be repeated to Crowley three times, you know he is withholding something):

QUESTION: … I’m just wondering, why does the Administration think that three months is enough time to get enough done on borders?

MR. CROWLEY: Well … all I will tell you is that we remain intensely engaged with the parties to try to get them back into negotiations. …

(Read full post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

U.S. Government "Threatens" Syria: Promote Terrorism, Take Over Lebanon, Block Peace, and We Won't Let You Make Apple ipads!

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
01 November '10

If you think I'm exaggerating about the current administration's cluelessness toward the Middle East just read the State Department daily press conference transcripts. Even journalists covering these events are often shocked by what they hear.

Today's topic is Syria, but it's just an example and many others could be found. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley begins by referring to a speech by U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice in which she says:

"We continue to have deep concerns about Hezbollah’s destructive and destabilizing influence in the region, as well as attempts by other foreign players, including Syria and Iran, to undermine Lebanon’s independence and endanger its stability."

In saying this, Rice is praising a UN report about what's going on in Lebanon which reveals, though nobody makes this point, the total failure of the organization and the United States to keep the promises made in 2006 in order to end the Israel-Hizballah war.

So given this situation one would think U.S. policy is now prepared to do something about Lebanon's becoming an Iran-Syria puppet, Syria's continued support for anti-American terrorists in Iraq and sabotage of any peace process, and the obviously failed U.S. effort at engaging Syria.

(Read full article)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Thursday, September 2, 2010

What Washington’s Lame Response to Terror Says About the Peace Talks


Evelyn Gordon
Contentions/Commentary
01 September '10

If more reasons were needed for concluding that the current Israeli-Palestinian talks won’t produce a deal, here’s another: the designated mediator — i.e., the Obama administration — has just proved itself incapable of providing what even Israeli leftists deem an essential condition for peace.

Tuesday night, Palestinian terrorists murdered four Israeli civilians — two men and two women — by shooting them at close range. Yet as even Haaretz, normally the administration’s reliable flack, noted, “State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley didn’t seem to be in a rush to condemn the attack.” In fact, he didn’t condemn it at all: he merely declared it “a tragedy.”

“Any time one human being takes out a weapon and fires and kills other human beings, it’s a tragedy,” Crowley said. “We just don’t know the circumstances under which this occurred. … We are cognizant that there could be external events that can have an impact on the environment.”


The White House finally issued an unequivocal condemnation only hours later, once “the circumstances” had become clear: namely, that it could condemn the attack safely, because the Palestinian Authority wasn’t involved. Until then, Crowley had hedged his bets, hinting at extenuating circumstances that “we just don’t know,” “external events” that could affect “the environment” — any straw he could grasp to excuse the PA if that proved necessary.

(Read full post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Video: Oops! Looks Like Someone Didn't Get The Abbas Memo About Incitement


Daled Amos
30 August '10

On the issue of incitement, Abbas accepted that there was some incitement in official Palestinian media, according to meeting participants. However, he expressed frustration that Israel did not recognize his efforts to end incitement in the mosques, saying he was the only Arab leader to centralize Friday sermons and to remove imams who incited against Israel.
Jerusalem Post, June 10, 2010


Here is a video of Mahmoud Habbash, the Palestinian Authority Minister of Religious Affairs, threatening war over Jerusalem--with Abbas in the audience.



There is nothing peaceful about what Habbas says:

(Read full post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Rapid Unraveling in the Middle East


JINSA
Report #: 1,010
27 July '10

1) The PLO flag is flying in Washington. The administration downplayed the change - it is a "delegation" office not an Embassy. The change implies "no enhancement in diplomatic status," and does not provide "any diplomatic privileges or immunities," said State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley. It is about the same as the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office (TECRO) that represents 27 million democratic Taiwanese. That is, by its nature, an enhancement for a terrorist organization.

White House spokesman Thomas Vietor added, "This decision reflects our confidence that through direct negotiations, we can help achieve a two-state solution with an independent and viable Palestine living side by side with Israel. We should begin preparing for that outcome now, as we continue to work with the Palestinian people on behalf of a better future."

The best way to give the Palestinians a better future would be to liberate 1.2 million of them from Hamas in Gaza. Hamas is NOT a member of the PLO - the flag of which is flying in Washington - and it ousted Fatah from Gaza in a bloody and ongoing civil war. This appears to be why we are building Fatah an army. The State Department is busy executing its two-state vision while the Palestinians are busy executing one another.

(Read full report)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Sunday, July 18, 2010

P.J. Crowley, Have a nice weekend.



Philip J. Crowley
Assistant Secretary
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
July 16, 2010

(Daily press briefings can sometimes be a source of great humor.)

.....
QUESTION: On Assistant Secretary Shapiro’s “The Obama Administration loves Israel; please vote Democratic in November” speech this morning –

MR. CROWLEY: Say what?

QUESTION: You heard me. He said that the Obama Administration has taken action to expand security cooperation and assistance with Israel to an unprecedented level. But I’m wondering, he also refers to the 2007 memorandum of understanding with the – between – it was signed by the Bush administration and Israel to increase – to provide 30 billion in assistance in Israel – security assistance over 10 years. I’m wondering if what this Administration has done is anything more than what would have been done anyway regardless of who had won the last election. In other words, if the unprecedented level to which he refers would have happened anyway based on the 2007 memorandum of understanding.

MR. CROWLEY: Well, let’s say, first of all, that there is broad continuity in U.S. foreign policy and across Democratic and Republican administrations. We all have recognized the value and importance of the U.S.-Israeli security relationship. As Andrew Shapiro said in his speech today, and I think he’s quoted this morning in the paper, we think it’s important and a secure Israel will be better positioned to make the difficult decisions that it faces on peace with its neighbors. So it is in our interest to work significantly with Israel to ensure not only its security, but also in the projects – the wide range of projects that we have with Israel. We share information, technology, and this, in turn, benefits the United States. So there was a lot – there’s been a lot going on on this front going back several administrations to Israel’s foundation. And security cooperation has intensified over the past 15 or 20 years.

I think all we’re saying is how we found it in 2009 – we have continued to aggressively work and nurture this relationship. A lot of these – there have been new program starts since 2009. There’s been a maturation of programs that were started not only by the Bush Administration, but by the Clinton Administration, and probably going back to the first Bush Administration. So this is an indication of the continuity, but I think in the story in today’s paper, we got high marks from one individual who doesn’t normally go out of his way to commend a Democratic administration for its handling of this particular dimension of our relationship. So this is something we put a lot of emphasis in – on over the past 18 months because security is a fundamental dimension of the – our efforts to achieve lasting security and peace in the region.

QUESTION: So you don’t believe it’s a bit disingenuous for the Administration --

MR. CROWLEY: No, not at all. Not at all.

QUESTION: -- to take credit for bringing this to an unprecedented level when it would have been brought to an unprecedented level anyway based on an agreement that was signed in – three years ago?

MR. CROWLEY: That’s – I don’t think that’s hyperbole at all.

QUESTION: But if you can’t --

MR. CROWLEY: We’ve placed great emphasis in this. We can – we have tangible accomplishments that Andrew pointed to in his speech. And what’s crucial is that this cooperation is mutually beneficial and it reinforces what we’re doing with George Mitchell in the region as we speak.

QUESTION: Fair enough, but can you point to anything specifically that wouldn’t – that this Administration has done that wouldn’t have been done anyway?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, tell you what. Let me go back and review his speech and see if there’s anything I want to flag for you.

Have a nice weekend.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.