State Dept. Won’t Say New Diplomat’s Claim Of ‘No-Go Zones’ In Europe Was Wrong

U.S. Ambassador to a Netherlands Peter Hoekstra had a moving news discussion Wednesday when Dutch reporters pulpy him on anti-Muslim comments he done in 2015.

John Thys/AFP/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

John Thys/AFP/Getty Images

U.S. Ambassador to a Netherlands Peter Hoekstra had a moving news discussion Wednesday when Dutch reporters pulpy him on anti-Muslim comments he done in 2015.

John Thys/AFP/Getty Images

A State Department orator on Thursday pronounced anti-Muslim comments done by President Trump’s new envoy to a Netherlands “were not a position of a State Department” — though he also declined to contend a comments had been factually inaccurate.

The prejudiced renunciation came a day after Ambassador Pete Hoekstra’s initial news discussion in a Netherlands, in that he was pulpy by Dutch reporters to redress a fake claims he done in 2015 — when he pronounced a “Islamic movement” was obliged for “no-go zones” and politicians “being burned” in a Netherlands.

“The State Department does not determine with those statements. That is not a denunciation that we would use,” a State Department’s undersecretary for open tact and open affairs, Steve Goldstein, told reporters in Washington Thursday.

Goldstein was responding to questions about an eventuality in Nov 2015, when Hoekstra spoke on a row in Charleston, S.C., that was orderly by a regressive David Horowitz Freedom Center. The organisation describes itself as a “School of Political Warfare” opposite enemies like a “political left.”

Hoekstra’s remarks were prisoner on video:

“The Islamic transformation has now gotten to a indicate where they have put Europe into chaos. Chaos in a Netherlands. There are cars being burned. There are politicians that are being burned. … With a liquid of a Islamic village — and yes, there are no-go zones in a Netherlands. All right? There are no-go zones in France. There are no-go zones. … So there are no go zones in Britain as well, though they are ripping a Dutch detached politically.”

At a moving news discussion during The Hague on Wednesday, Hoekstra told reporters he had already “expressed my regrets and my reparation for a comments that we made. And I’m not revisiting a issue.”

Austrian Muslims Say Religious Intolerance Is Growing

“Are politicians being burnt in a Netherlands in a past? Is that something we believe? Yes or no,” a contributor asked a U.S. diplomat, in an Associated Press video of a conference.

“I’m not revisiting a issue,” Hoekstra pronounced again, adding that he had voiced bewail and apology. After mixed reporters asked identical questions about a 2015 statement, Hoekstra eventually stopped responding.

In December, a Dutch news organisation asked Hoekstra about his 2015 comments, to that he replied that he “never pronounced that.” In a singular move, he after denied his rejection of a comments, according to CNN.

Taking adult a emanate again final month, Hoekstra put out a matter saying, “I done certain remarks in 2015 and bewail a sell during a Nieuwsuur interview. Please accept my apology.”

But observant we “regret” or “apologize” for something is not a same as acknowledging a significant error, a indicate not mislaid on reporters who pulpy Goldstein about Hoekstra’s remarks during Thursday’s State Department briefing:

QUESTION: Why can’t we contend right now that those statements were inaccurate?

UNDER SECRETARY GOLDSTEIN: Well, we did contend that. we pronounced that’s not a position of a Department of State.

QUESTION: No, that’s different. It’s different. Not a position of a Department of State is opposite from those statements are inaccurate.

UNDER SECRETARY GOLDSTEIN: I’ve been really transparent that that’s not the position. That is not denunciation that we would use, and that’s not denunciation we will ever hear me use or Heather use from this podium. …