Saturday, March 20, 2010

Hillary to Address AIPAC for 43 Minutes

Hillary Clinton is not easily insulted. After Bill's bodily fluids were found on Monica's blue dress, Hillary took it all in stride: forgive and forget, business as usual, let's work together to give me my well-deserved turn in the White House. Jerusalem, however, is another matter. The announcement by the Jerusalem planning commission of the theoretical future construction of 1,600 apartments in a Jewish neighborhood in East Jerusalem, which will remain part of Israel as part of any two-state settlement agreement, had Hillary blind with rage, as Benjamin Netanyahu learned during a 43-minute harangue from the U.S. Secretary of State.

Hillary is proud of this display of "toughness" and has also made it known to all who are willing to listen that the U.S. is interested in seeing regime change involving the Israeli government, as evidenced by this incoherent dialogue with the BBC's Kim Ghattas:

Ghattas: You took a risk in escalating the tone with Israel last week, I understand the relationship is solid but the Israelis could have said we never promised restraint on settlements in east Jerusalem - is the risk paying off?

Clinton: I think we're going to see the resumption of the negotiation track and that means that it is paying off because that's our goal. Let's get the parties into a discussion, let's [get] the principle issues on the table and let's begin to explore ways that we can resolve the differences.

Ghattas: Is the pressure on the Israeli prime minister meant to be a moment of clarity, either he delivers on his commitment to peace, or his right wing coalition falls?

Clinton: We're not taking any position and we have no particular stake in who the Israelis choose to govern them. They're a democracy and they make that choice. I think that different parts of govern make action or statements that are not in the best interest of the government as a whole and I think what the Prime Minister has said repeatedly is that his government and he personally are committed to pursuing these negotiations and he just has to make sure that he brings in everyone else, that's his responsibility it's not something that the United states can or is interested in doing.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/0310/Clinton_Escalation_paying_off_.html?showall

"We're going to see the resumption of the negotiation track"? Excuse me, Madame Secretary, but all that we have seen since your outburst is a renewal of Palestinian rioting, a renewal of rocket fire from Gaza, and a square named after a Palestinian terrorist who murdered 38 Israelis, including 13 children, as well as one American photographer. We don't see any evidence of a resumption of talks - the Palestinians are not willing to sit in the same room with the Israelis - and the United States has made a point of not criticizing any of the recent Palestinian outrages.

Obama stated in the past that Hillary Clinton's foreign policy experience amounted to little more than drinking tea with ambassadors while she was first lady. This was one of those rare instances where Obama, sans teleprompter, spoke the truth, but this did not prevent him from appointing Hillary Secretary of State and allowing all to reap the benefit of her ignorance and narcissism.

I hope it will be possible to hear a pin drop when she concludes her speech to AIPAC.

1 comment:

  1. Oh! I like the title the best.
    Something is very wrong in America, if we had to choose between phony Obama, Clinton and kitschy McCain with Palin. Actually, Clinton is both phony and kitschy.

    ReplyDelete