Daily Press Briefings

“…the conditions of him being held”… #mais_non_je_l’ai_pas_dit

Department Press Briefing - November 9, 2017
▻http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2017/11/275450.htm

So I addressed the part of U.S. citizens who may be there. I want to mention that our charge d’affaires, who’s serving in Saudi Arabia – his name is Chris Henzel – he met with Prime Minister Hariri yesterday, so had a chance to speak with him. I cannot provide you with a readout of that conversation or any specifics of it, but we have seen him. In terms of the conditions of him being held or the conversations between Saudi Arabia and the Prime Minister Hariri, I would have to refer you to the Government of Saudi Arabia and also to Mr. Hariri’s office.

QUESTION: Sorry. You said the conditions of him being held. Is he in detention?

Les bombardements américains tuent des civils, les bombardements russes et syriens tuent des civils. Je t’essplique la différence :
▻http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2016/10/263030.htm

The difference is when we cause them, it’s unintentional or there was a mistake involved. It’s not a deliberate attempt to put innocent civilians in harm’s way. Again, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. When it does, we own up to it, we investigate it.

What we’ve seen in and around Aleppo specifically with respect to the Syrian regime and Russian military aircraft is a wanton disregard for the safety and security of civilians and an indiscriminate approach to the bombing, which is absolutely not at all in concert with the way we conduct our military air operations.

Rappel : son métier avant, c’était bidasse :

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Pentagon_Press_Secretary_Navy_Rear_Adm._John_Kirby_briefs_reporters_at_the_Pentagon,_March_27,_2014_140327-D-NI589-064.jpg

Syrie : qui sont les « casques blancs », héros anonymes de la guerre ? - L’Express
▻http://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/monde/proche-moyen-orient/syrie-qui-sont-les-casques-blancs-heros-anonymes-de-la-guerre_1739792.html

http://static.lexpress.fr/medias_10685/w_605,h_350,c_fill,g_north/v1448541539/les-casques-blancs-volontaires-de-la-defense-civile-syrienne_5470884.jpg

Syrie : qui sont les « casques blancs », héros anonymes de la guerre ?

Documents à l’appui (mais en arabe) Al-Akhbar (▻http://www.al-akhbar.com/node/257163) montre que ces « héros ordinaires » sont une énième invention des communicants chargés de vendre à l’opinion occidentale la guerre de Syrie. En arabe dans le texte, ces sauveteurs sont nettement moins photogéniques...

#syrie

La réponse de Mark Toner, porte-parole du State Department quand un journaliste lui pose une question sur ce qu’il sait de l’utilisation d’armes chimiques par le groupe Jaych al-islam - qui a admis la responsabilité d’un de ses commandants, sachant que ce groupe fait partie des pourparlers de Genève (Mohammed Allouch est le négociateur du HCN) :
▻http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2016/04/255630.htm

QUESTION: What about the reports that Jaysh al-Islam was involved, who have taken responsibility for this, and they’re one of the parties that have a delegation in the intra-Syrian talks?
MR TONER: Yeah, and I apologize. I just don’t have any information on that at this point. I’d have to look into it." This is the same US government which in the past had covered up the use of chemical weapons by its then ally, Saddam Husayn.

Via angry arab (▻http://angryarab.blogspot.fr/2016/04/how-us-government-is-covering-up-use-of.html)
Pour un rappel des faits : ▻http://seenthis.net/messages/478508

En vidéo, l’intégralité de l’échange (3 minutes). Toner élude une première fois la question en évoquant Da’ich (début de séquence) puis en fin de séquence le journaliste remet le couvert et obtient cette réponse peu crédible : « pas au courant ».
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KruMBzMtYDs

En passant à ma connaissance la presse française n’a absolument pas couvert ceci...

The Angry Arab News Service/وكالة أنباء العربي الغاضب : U.S. position on overthrow of Yemeni president vs. Ukrainian president
▻http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2015/02/us-position-on-overthrow-of-yemeni.html

Question posée à la porte-parole du Département d’Etat étasunien ▻http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2015/02/237795.htm

“QUESTION: Frankly, I had another subject. On #Yemen, how come if this president when he left his capital is still technically president in his country?

MS. PSAKI: That’s —

QUESTION: How come the Ukrainian president was not in the same position?

MS. PSAKI: That’s the Yemeni constitution and what the Yemeni constitution says, so I encourage you to take a look at the Yemeni constitution if you’re interested.

QUESTION: And the Ukrainian constitution said the same thing.

MS. PSAKI: Well, I think —”

#Ukraine #Etats-Unis

Les Etats-Unis ont diffusé samedi des images de #satellites censées montrer des armements et déploiements de forces russes. Mais ce n’est pas d’une très grande précision tout ça…

Ukraine : « We are confident these are Russian military, not separatist systems »
-- US Mission to NATO (@USNATO) 14 Février 2015
▻https://twitter.com/USNATO/status/566531726357188608/photo/1

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9y5lpLIgAEHcro.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9y5mjOIAAAA08w.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9y5lINIIAAf-1f.jpg

QUESTION: Let’s – there’s a lot going on, but let’s start with Ukraine.

MS. PSAKI: Okay.

QUESTION: So the ceasefire is not supposed to take effect until midnight Saturday.

MS. PSAKI: Yes.

QUESTION: But it does not appear that the run-up to this is that – since the deal was done and ahead of the ceasefire, it looks like things are just getting worse, and I’m just wondering what the Administration thinks. Is this a harbinger of doom, or do you still think that this is – that this will work, that the agreement will work?

MS. PSAKI: Well, we are very concerned about continued fighting along and beyond the line of contact, including in heavily populated civilian areas, and reports of additional resupplies of tanks and missile systems coming across the border from Russia in the past few days, and I have a little more detail of that I just want to go into for a moment here. The Russian military has deployed a large amount of artillery and multiple rocket launcher systems around Debaltseve where it is shelling Ukrainian positions. We are confident these are Russian military, not separatist systems. The Russian military also has air defense systems deployed near Debaltseve. We are also confident these are Russian military, not separatist systems.

Russian units along the border with Ukraine are preparing a large shipment of supplies to pro-Russian forces fighting in eastern Ukraine. This is clearly not in the spirit of this week’s agreement. All parties must show complete restraint in the run-up to the Sunday ceasefire, including an immediate halt to the Russian and separatist assault on Debaltseve and other Ukrainian towns. Clearly, the same options that have been on the table remain on the table, and obviously we’ll be watching closely to see what happens over the course of the coming days.

QUESTION: On those – where the information on the Russian equipment is coming from. It’s not coming from Senator Inhofe’s office I hope.

MS. PSAKI: No, it’s coming from our own internal information we were able to make public.

QUESTION: U.S. information, not Ukrainian information?

MS. PSAKI: Correct.

Daily Press Briefing - February 13, 2015
▻http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2015/02/237501.htm#UKRAINE

Les États-Unis exportent la démocratie (suite) : c’est bon, les 21 tonnes de gaz lacrymogène que nous avons exporté vers l’Égypte, c’est le même que nous utilisons pour gazer notre propre population.
►http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2011/11/177861.htm#EGYPT

MR. TONER: Well, it’s – again, as I said, these are – this tear gas is approved for export to many countries around the world. It’s used by police forces in many countries around the world including our own.

Après les prisonniers de guerre qui ne sont pas des prisonniers de guerre (Guantanamo, extraordinary renditions...), les Américains définissent l’organisation médiatique qui n’est pas une organisation médiatique: #Wikileaks. Et #Assange n’est pas un «#whistleblower», mais un «acteur politique» (sans doute un «anarchiste»).
►http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2010/12/152291.htm

“QUESTION: Do you know if the State Department regards WikiLeaks as a media organization?

MR. CROWLEY: No. We do not.

QUESTION: And why not?

MR. CROWLEY: WikiLeaks is not a media organization. That is our view.

QUESTION: So P.J., going back to the answer to your last question, have you contacted governments that have been censoring this to protest that – or sites that they have —

MR. CROWLEY: I’m not in a position to say what governments have done or what conversations have occurred between governments and media. There’s – certainly, there are countries around the world that do not have as robust a focus on these issues as ours does. That’s probably not a surprise to us, and when we do meet with these governments, we talk about media issues among key human rights issues. Our dialogue is not going to change over this.

QUESTION: P.J., on that subject of WikiLeaks, Amazon, as we know, did have them on their server for a time and then stopped doing that. And there’s a human rights group that says that Amazon was directed by the U.S. Government to stop that relationship. Do you know anything –

MR. CROWLEY: All I can say is I’m not aware of any contacts between the Department of State and Amazon.

QUESTION: Or the U.S. Government or just State?

MR. CROWLEY: I’m not in a position on this particular issue to talk about the entire government. I’m just not aware of any contacts directly.

QUESTION: From your perspective, what is WikiLeaks? How do you define them, if it is not a media organization, then?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, as the Secretary said earlier this week, it is – one might infer it has many characteristics of some internet sites. Not every internet site you would call a media organization or a news organization. We’re focused on WikiLeaks’s behavior, and I have had personally conversations with media outlets that are reporting on this, and we have had the opportunity to express our specific concerns about intelligence sources and methods and other interests that could put real lives at risk.

Mr. Assange, in a letter to our Ambassador in the United Kingdom over the weekend, after documents had been released to news organizations, made what we thought was a halfhearted gesture to have some sort of conversation, but that was after he released the documents and after he knew that they were going to emerge publicly. So I think there’s been a very different approach. And Mr. Assange obviously has a particular political objective behind his activities, and I think that, among other things, disqualifies him as being considered a journalist.

QUESTION: What is his political objective?

QUESTION: The same letter —

MR. CROWLEY: Hmm?

QUESTION: What is his political objective?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, his – I mean he could be considered a political actor. I think he’s an anarchist, but he’s not a journalist.

QUESTION: So his objective is to sow chaos, you mean?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I mean, you all come here prepared to objectively report the activities of the United States Government. I think that Mr. Assange doesn’t meet that particular standard.

QUESTION: But just so I understand, P.J., what – I mean you just said the – that you thought he was —

MR. CROWLEY: Well, but I mean – let me – he’s not a journalist. He’s not a whistleblower. And there – he is a political actor. He has a political agenda. He is trying to undermine the international system of — that enables us to cooperate and collaborate with other governments and to work in multilateral settings and on a bilateral basis to help solve regional and international issues.

What he’s doing is damaging to our efforts and the efforts of other governments. They are putting at risk our national interest and the interests of other governments around the world. He is not an objective observer of anything. He is an active player. He has an agenda. He’s trying to pursue that agenda, and I don’t think he can – he can’t qualify as either a journalist on the one hand or a whistleblower on the other.

QUESTION: Sorry. What is that agenda, that political agenda? Can you be more —

MR. CROWLEY: I’ll leave it for Mr. Assange to define his agenda. He has been interviewed by some of your news organizations. He has the ability to talk for himself. But you asked — I was asked a specific question, “Do we consider him a journalist?” The answer is no.”

Pour le Département d’État, pour être journaliste ou whistleblower, il ne faut donc pas avoir d’«agenda politique».

#cablegate

Avant hier, conférence de presse au Département d’État. Un certain Philip J. Crowley répond aux questions des journalistes.
►http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2010/11/152148.htm

M. Crowley se fend d’une déclaration officielle condamnant une déclaration par un officiel palestinien, qui n’a pas l’heur de plaire aux Israéliens et aux Américains. Et là, tout déraille.

Un journaliste teigneux lui demande d’expliquer pourquoi un officiel américain, à Washington, prend le temps de condamner publiquement une déclaration d’un officiel palestinien, alors qu’il n’a pas condamné publiquement, la semaine précédente, la reprise des constructions juives à Jerusalem Est, les É-U se contentant d’évoquer la question en privé avec les israéliens.

“QUESTION: Before moving on, P.J., on that, if you recognize that the Jerusalem – status of Jerusalem is so important to all sides, why were you so noncommittal when I asked the other day about the Israeli approval of new Jewish construction – new Jewish housing in East Jerusalem?”

“QUESTION: Well, you’re right. There’s absolutely no equivalence between some guy mouthing off and giving his opinion, whether you agree with it or not, and actual bricks and mortar going up in an area that’s disputed. I mean, the equivalent – you come out and denounce this statement, which is mere – simply words, and it took a question from a reporter to get you to say anything about the actual, physical, on-the-ground construction there. So I don’t understand the equivalence that you’re – your idea of equivalence here. One seems to be much more serious than another.”

“QUESTION: In the city of Hebron, which is home to 220,000 Palestinians and 600 settlers, there is an area called the Martyrs Street that is completely closed to Palestinians where they have to traverse on rooftops. Are you aware of a situation like this? Is this something that you would raise with the Israeli Government to sort of relieve the hardship of the Palestinians in Hebron?”

#Palestine #Israël #Jerusalem #États-Unis