The Real Problem With Kerry's 'Apartheid' Myth

The demography apocalypse isn't happening in Israel, and even if it were, it would have absolutely nothing to do with today's peace negotiations.



After The Daily Beast released excerpts of his warning world leaders that Israel would devolve into an "apartheid" state if it failed to agree to a peace deal, Secretary of State John Kerry walked back his comments. "If I could rewind the tape," he explained, "I would have chosen a different word to describe my firm belief that the only way in the long term to have a Jewish state and two nations and two peoples living side by side in peace and security is through a two-state solution."

This shouldn't make anyone feel better. It's not just the incendiary use of "apartheid" that's the problem but the well-worn canard about Israel that Kerry rests his position on. And his position shouldn't really surprise anyone who's been paying attention. President Barack Obama offered basically the same argument only a couple of months ago when he warned that time was running out for "Israel as a Jewish-majority democracy."

Kerry has essentially taken the Jimmy Carter position. The theory goes like this: Arab birthrates in Israel and the Palestinian territories will continue to be higher than those of the Jews. At some point, Arabs will become the majority in all the areas that Israel governs and occupies, and then Jews will be impelled to act like a bunch of Afrikaner brownshirts to survive.

There are two key problems with this theory: 1) The demography apocalypse isn't happening in Israel, and 2) even if it were, it would have absolutely nothing to do with today's peace negotiations or the status of the territories administered by Israel.

Last year, Uri Sadot did a great job debunking the idea that demographics will one day make Jews a minority in Israel. The central point:

"The numbers just don't add up. Demography relies on more than just birth rates, and similar predictions have a long history of falling flat. Israeli Jews have a healthy and largely stable demographic majority in Israel and the West Bank, and developments in the coming years may even enhance this trend. The demographic time bomb, in other words, is a dud."

Israel's population stands at about 8 million people, with 6 million Jews and nearly 400,000 non-Jews related to Jewish immigrants. There are about 1.7 million Israeli Arabs, which includes Christians and Druses. For decades, Jews have been hearing how they will be outnumbered, yet the trends don't change much.

This is why Kerry is forced to create the fictional "unitary" state. There is no unitary state. No Israeli government— not right, left, or center—has ever seriously considered annexing the West Bank or the Gaza Strip. Israel can offer limited autonomy to Palestinians—as it does in the Gaza Strip—and the "unitary" demographics change nothing. The Hamas voting bloc has no impact on Israel's domestic policy today, so why would it matter tomorrow or a decade from now? This situation is hardly ideal, and it would be in the best interest of all to have a workable and lasting peace in place, but no agreement will be palatable to Israelis if it includes Fatah non-starters such as "right to return" or a Hamas-run government eager to make deals with belligerent nations. Israel is prosperous and free enough to carry the cost of judiciousness.

Israel isn't a perfect nation, of course. It's just more perfect than many. The Israeli Arab minority not only fully participates in the nation's democratic process but also is protected by the same laws that govern Jews. As Kerry knows, only one side openly demands ethnic dissection. Saying the West Bank and Gaza Strip should be completely free of Jews is, in fact, the ugly precondition to any peace agreement.

But Kerry suggests that a change of Israeli or Palestinian leadership might offer better conditions for an agreement on the future Palestinian state. This is an interesting assertion, considering Fatah has been the only entity to negotiate for Palestinians while Israel has engaged in peace talks with the left-of-center Labor Party and right-of-center Likud Party and the center Kadima Party—though it has made absolutely no difference in the outcome.

What did Fatah do this time? Put it this way: Kerry's tireless work in the Middle East hasn't been a complete waste. While he's been pressuring Israel, the erstwhile terrorist group Palestine Liberation Organization and contemporary terrorist group Hamas have set aside their long-standing differences and will form a government in the next few weeks so that a corrupt, radicalized, poverty-ridden society can unite to blame their misfortunes on the Jews. So there's always that.

NEXT: Nick Gillespie Talking Donald Sterling, Brendan Eich, the "Politicization of Just About Everything," and More

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. John Kerry. The vinegar and water that keeps on douching.

    1. Somebody has to make Hillary appear relatively competent.

  2. John Kerry is moronic and boring. Has this been posted here?…..y-20140501

  3. John Kerry has a giant head and beady little eyes. His huge hair doesn’t really disguise the massiveness of his head, either.

    1. That’s a dog whistle. You’re basically calling him French.

      1. calling him French.

        Married the Katsup Queen…


        I think not.

        1. The French have banned Ketchup in schools. I don’t think Kerry would be welcome there either as a result

      2. Are big heads a French stereotype? I thought it was just cheese and surrendering?

        1. John Kerry is more French than people from France.

        2. Speaking of the French, I purchased a French military rifle from WW2 on Ebay this last week. It’s beautiful. It’s only been dropped once and never fired!

          1. Did you get that antique joke on ebay too?

          2. “…We’d be happy to trade you some ARVN rifles. Ain’t never been fired, and only dropped once.”
            Cowboy in Full Metal Jacket

  4. Palestine is occupied and yet they have no political power within the state that occupies their lands.

    Not apartheid by a strict definition…but not a good thing either.

    1. I would correct this by saying that there was a time when this was distinctly the case.

      It no longer is.

      So it’s entirely proper to say that Israel once was an apartheid state. I don’t think it’s correct to say that it is now.

      1. So Palestinians have reps in Israel’s parliament?

        They can vote for Israel’s prime minister?

        1. Two seconds of googling:

          Most of the Arabs living in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967 and later annexed, were offered Israeli citizenship, but most have refused, not wanting to recognize Israel’s claim to sovereignty. They became permanent residents instead.[12] They have the right to apply for citizenship, are entitled to municipal services, and have municipal voting rights.[13]

          Totally apartheid by the dominant power.

          1. The point is that words having meanings. “Apartheid” just doesn’t mean “two groups who don’t get a long”, it means “a system of racial/ethnic separation enforced through legislation”. For fucks sake! Have any of these morons ever, even second-handedly, experienced the quotidian life of an Israeli metropolitan area like Tel Aviv or Jerusalem? Jewish Israelis, Arabs, and others intermingle regularly. They shop in the same supermarkets, eat at the same restaurants, go to the same hospitals, study at the same universities, mingle in the same nightclubs, fall in love with other, and have sex. (Like my cousins Jamal and Yudith) To call the situation in Israel “apartheid” not only insults Israelis, but those Black and “colored” South Africans who actually experienced real apartheid.

            1. Sorry, the last part was sarcasm. I agree. Anyone who thinks Israel has an apartheid system has never really done any research on the bad old days of South Africa. Or the Eastern European ghettos. There is no state policy of keeping Islamic and Jewish peoples separate from each other.

              1. I know. I was supporting your comment.

            2. Heroic, I think you’re talking past each other. When people talk about Israel as an apartheid state they are not shutting their eyes to the minority Arab, Druze, etc., populations treated quite well in Israel, they are of course talking about the millions of people in the Occupied Territories who seem stuck in a limbo of state-lessness.

              1. they are of course talking about the millions of people in the Occupied Territories who seem stuck in a limbo of state-lessness.

                Which is not part of any definition of “apartheid”. And screaming apartheid detracts from recognition of that tragic situation. It also deflects any responsibility of that situation from the utterly corrupt and venal Palestinian Authority, which has seen it fit to continue this situation so that it can have its coffers filled with aid money.

                1. They are just analogizing, HM. Of course two historical things are never EXACTLY the same. They are just saying it shares more characteristics, or more salient ones, than it lacks.

                  Certainly millions of people living under the control of a government they are not citizens of is not an ideal situation morally.

                  1. They are just analogizing, HM.

                    Just analogizing?

                    Fine, you disagreeing with me is like a second Holocaust. A fucking Hiroshima of rhetoric! Every time you post on here Bo, it’s like you raped and then mutilated with a machete 15 young Hutu girls!

                    1. Why do you not block the guy? Why do you talk to it

                  2. Anytime the Peace Loving Palestinians wish to relieve themselves of their situation which you say is analogous to apartheid they can do so by simply acknowledging that Israel actually has the right to EXIST.

                    So, their situation is not analogous to apartheid whatsoever.

                2. Corrupt and venal is how Israel likes its collaborators.

                  1. Patrick what does that mean ?

                    (I’m into my second martini )

                    Martinis, one isn’t enough and three is tooo many.

                    1. Israel wants the worthwhile land and resources on the West Bank and the Palestinians in bantustans but they don’t want to govern them directly.

                      A corrupt and venal PA that is capable and willing to keep Palestinians in check but not challenge Israel’s desires is the ideal situation.

                      The current situation is ideal for Israel. No reason to change it with a peace deal.

                    2. I see.

                      Well I guess the blame for that belongs to the corrupt Pals like Arafat then.

                      If israel wanted corrupt Pals and could’t find them then we wouldn’t have a problem then would we. ?

            3. “Jewish Israelis, Arabs, and others intermingle regularly. They shop in the same supermarkets, eat at the same restaurants, go to the same hospitals, study at the same universities, mingle in the same nightclubs, fall in love with other, and have sex.”

              Sounds like Brooklyn.

            4. Your cousins Jamal and Yudith had sex. Is that incest?

              1. Only if they had it with each other.

                Fucking Lawyers !

                I though you guys were supposed to be the ones who looked for exactness in words ?

        2. Arabs who are citizens of Israel CAN vote for PM and DO have seats in the Knesset. They are also the Arabs with the greatest individual freedoms in the Middle East.

          1. I have read that once in the past an offer of citizenship was made to the Palestinians, but that has not happened recently, has it?

            1. Per Wikipedia (taken with a grain of salt) it says that all permanent residents, which includes everyone in Israeli occupied territory after the Six Days War, are eligible for citizenship. I have no further information on how relatively easy or difficult it may be to achieve it, but there does appear to be a path for those who were born afterwards/changed their mind.

              1. I do not know the answer myself, but I seem to remember a poll in Israel not that long ago about whether Israelis would support offering citizenship in return for Palestinians recognizing Israel or something. That makes me think that there is no current offer of Israeli citizenship for those in the Territories on the table.

                1. Brett, according to this Arab-Israeli citizens who have Palestinian wives can not have their wives live with them in Israel. That leads me to think the Palestinian wives can not easily get Israeli citizenship.


                  1. Any word on what happens to the Jewish wives of Palestinians on the Gaza strip? I mean since their first order of business was to burn down all the temples and synagogues when Israel voluntarily left, surely these spouses are well treated in Palestinian society…sure…

                2. don’t know about the offer of citizenship but recognizing Israel is something Palestinian leadership has steadfastly refused to do. I just don’t see moral equivalence when one side wants you dead.

                  1. I grant you that.

                    I think the apartheid analogy ultimately fails because there are very difference motivations going on with Israel (security) than were with S. Africa.

                    But there is a problem of having a bunch of stateless people for decades and decades.

                  2. Palestinian leadership recognition of Israel happened over 20 years ago.

                    1. Then why don’t they honor Arafats signature ?

          2. And this is the case only because they have no actual power.

        3. Palestinians don’t even have reps in Palestine’s parliament.

      2. Large numbers of people, accused of no crime, much less convicted of one, are banned from freely traveling, owning property, participating in politics, etc. based solely on their ethnic heritage.

        How is that not apartheid?

        1. gosh, if there was only a way the Palestinians could disassociate from the likes of the PLO and Hamas, and be seen more favorably.

          Meanwhile, those who are citizens of Israel can do everything that you mention along with holding office in the Israeli congress.

          1. So are you personally responsible for every action of the US government?

            1. when the hell did I say that? The Palestinian leadership is and has been the single largest impediment to this being settled.

              1. Why are individual palestinians personally responsible for the acts of “the palestinian leadership” when you’re not personally responsible for the acts of “the American leadership”? I mean other than the fact your islamophobia only allows you to think of muslims in collectivist terms?

                1. Your statement is idiotic and therefore unworthy of response.

                2. We may not be personally responsible for the acts of American leaders but we do have to live with the consequences.

                  When most, probably yourself included, says something about the English, the Chinese, and those damn French ( did they really invent tongue sucking kissing ?) etc etc, they are usually talking about the country and not individuals.

              2. Not for the last 10 years or so.

                1. If your comment is in reply to me could you be more specific ?

                  Are you replying to the first paragraph or the second ?

                  1. Ha! This oomments format is tough. Sorry. I have no idea and I haven’t had anything to drink yet.

                    I was referring to a statement that the Palestinians were (still) the impediment to peace in the conflict. Not sure who made it.

                    1. I think the overall Arab leaders in the Middle East are the problem.

                      They don’t give a rats ass about the Pals. They use them as cannon fodder to fight the Jews to keep their own populations distracted from their own miserable existence.

                      It has always worked until the internet and now some of them can see what the rest of the world is like.

                      I love spell check.

                    2. Patrick D|5.2.14 @ 8:53PM|#

                      Ha! This oomments format is tough. Sorry. I have no idea and I haven’t had anything to drink yet.”

                      Aha ha! you admit that you have no idea !!

                      Even I, who has admittedly crossed the line into three martini dom, knows that you have no idea.

                      I only wish that I knew what you had no idea about !

                      I’m done Patric.

                      Mrs. OneOut has my appetite enhancer ready ( before dinner) and after that I will have NO IDEA also.

                      Nice talking to you, I think.

                      Remind me tomorrow please.

        2. Large numbers of people, accused of no crime, much less convicted of one, are banned from freely traveling, owning property, participating in politics, etc. based solely on their ethnic heritage.

          That is a complete and utter lie. Arab citizens of Israel possess full political enfranchisement.

          Palestinians are not citizens of Israel, so why would they participate in her politics? Palestinians participate in the politics of the Gaza Strip, voting for Hamas and Fatah. Likewise, Arabs who choose a Palestinian identity who live in Judea and Samaria also vote and have representation in the government of the Palestinian Authority; whereas those Arabs who choose to be citizens in Israel have full voting rights for Members of the Knesset (MKs).

          You may disagree with Israel policy towards the Arab residents of Judea and Samaria, but to claim that the Israeli government discriminates towards them based solely on ethnic heritage is, at best, ignorance, and at worst, a vile slur.

          It’s not black and white and sentiments like yours only serve fuel hatred and mistrust.

          1. Palestinians are not citizens of Israel

            Then where are they citizens of?

            1. Umm…Palestine?

              By the way, you realize Israel is no longer occupying the Gaza Strip, right?

              1. But Israel itself insists Gaza is not an independent state, in fact when they and the West Bank have sought such recognition Israel has taken retaliatory measures.

                1. No, you’re conflating the two. Israel has never claimed Gaza has part of her borders. Gaza was not part Israel in the UN Partition and it was never part of historic Israel. Judea and Samaria, on the other hand, is. Judea and Samaria was also claimed by the Hashemites as the “West Bank” of Transjordan. Which is the origin of the conflict.

                  1. Are you denying that when Gaza has recently sought diplomatic recognition as a state that Israel has retaliated against them? Israel in no way recognizes Gaza as a state.

                  2. The origin of the conflict Western anti-Semitism.

                    Zionism/Israel is an Western solution (including Ashkanazi and some Sephardi Jews) to the West’s intense anti-Semitism problem imposed on the people of the Middle East (including Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews who got caught up in the backlash).

                    The people of the Middle East didn’t like that.

                    1. I agree with you about this Patrick.

                      But what are we to do ?

                      My European ancestors left Germany because they couldn’t practice their chosen religion.

                      Will you talk to Merkle for me and see if I can get my ancestral home back for me ?

                      I know where it is. It is a castle on the Rhine that once belonged to a man named Charles Redwine ( English version ).

                      Call me !

                    2. I have seen it with my own eyes backpacking between freshman and sophomore years so I know I would like to have it back.

                      You can come and hang one summer if you can get Merkle to say OK.

                      After all, it is mine by history, right ?

                    3. Sorry about your relatives, OneOut. At least they got out and stayed out.

                      A branch of my uncle’s family was almost entirely wiped out in the Holocaust. They returned to Germany sometime in the latter part of the 19th century after deciding the U.S. wasn’t for them. Hard to imagine the regrets on top of everything else going through their minds in the camps.

                      What are we to do? Well, as an American citizen I don’t have any obligation to do anything.

                      But… if I were King, I’d offer American citizenship to any Israeli or Palestinian that agreed to move to the U.S. and refrain from any lobbying for U.S. government support for their respective nationalisms on penalty of loss of citizenship and deportation.

                      Actually, I like that idea for all immigrants… and citizens… or just making them register under FARA would be a nice change.

                    4. Are you sure it wasn’t Rose Wine?

                      I’m off to have some.

                      Enjoy your weekend, OneOut.

            2. “Stormy Dragon|5.2.14 @ 2:33PM|#

              Palestinians are not citizens of Israel
              Then where are they citizens of?”

              Like all Forward thinking progressives they are CItizens of The World !

          2. I think it is a dodge to say the Palestinians can vote in Palestinian elections, therefore, not problem, since the ‘Palestinian government’ exists on terms that few of us here would call ‘an independent state.’

            1. I think it’s awesome, Bo, that you take it upon yourself to speak for all of us using your idiosyncratic definitions!

              Or are you suggesting that Israel secretly controls the Palestinian Authority? And all those missiles launched from Gaza are nothing more than false flag attacks?

              1. Would you argue that a state which has another state control its borders, airspace, customs collection, trade, etc., is a fully independent state?

                1. Saying Gaza isn’t occupied is like saying a teenager is emancipated because their parents call the bedroom they’ve been grounded in “the kid’s room”.

                  1. You’re obviously referring to Egypt’s militarization of its border with Rafah.


                    1. Maybe we’re referring to the fact Israel thinks it has the right to attack a foreign flagged vessel in international waters because they were going to Gaza without Israeli permission:


                      But no, Israel isn’t controlling the borders of Gaza. That would be crazy talk!

                    2. If you don’t think they have the right to “board” a vessel carrying weapons that will be used to attack them then that is the crazy talk.

                      If Israel had “attacked” the vessel like you claim it would be sitting on the bottom of the ocean.

                2. Would you argue that a state which has another state control its borders, airspace, customs collection, trade, etc., is a fully independent state?

                  No, but that’s not the situation between Israel and Palestine. So fortunately, I don’t have to argue against that.

                  1. Interesting, which part do you think is not true here?

                    1. right now, bo, the part about Palestine being a state is not true.

                    2. Right. Israel itself does not recognize Palestine as a state, so the people there are living in some strange Israeli administrative district where they are allowed some level of autonomy.

                    3. How can Israel control the border between the West Bank and Jordan? How can Israel control the border between Gaza and Egypt? Those borders are closed because both Jordan and Egypt saw it fit to limit the immigration of Palestinian refugees.

                      However, you are correct in that Israel attempts to control the airspace. Having missiles repeatedly land in your cities and slaughter your civilians tends to do that to a country.

                    4. Israel controls the Palestinian borders to Jordan. Here is a news story demonstrating that:


                      The Gazan/Egyptian border is controlled by Egypt under a treaty with Israel.

                    5. Israeli citizens are not permitted to use the terminal, except pilgrims to Mecca, the Hajj and Omra. Tourists who wish to travel to Jordan must be in possession of a visa from Jordan in advance. Those who leave Jordan via the Allenby Bridge may return by showing the exit visa. Tourists and inhabitants of East Jerusalem may travel directly to an Israeli terminal, although Palestinians from the West Bank have to start the departure procedure at the special Palestinian border terminal in Jericho city.

                      Yep. Completely under Israeli control.

                      Bo, do yourself a favor and stop half-reading articles and then citing in a effort to cover up your ignorance of the subject.

                    6. Is that a news story along the same lines as the “news story” that Benghazi was the result of a video ?

                    7. How can Israel control the border between Gaza and Egypt?

                      The Philadelphi Corridor, duh.

                    8. The Philadelphi Corridor

                      Are you serious? If Israel maintained any de facto control of the Gazan/Egyptian border, then how are their miles and miles of rat tunnels that are used daily to smuggle arms and men to Gaza?

                    9. That’s like arguing Philadelphia is an independent state because people get mugged there.

                  2. “Such a U.N. designation would give the Palestinian Authority the right over its airspace and territorial waters, which are now under Israeli control”


                    “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has decided to transfer withheld taxes and customs duties collected last month for the Palestinian Authority to ease the deepening financial crisis there”


              2. Or are you suggesting that Israel secretly controls the Palestinian Authority?

                Gaza is basically a big open air prison. Like a big prison, the guards often don’t have control over the gangs some of the inmates perform. That doesn’t change the fact it’s still a prison and that the inmates are pretty much at the guards mercy.

          3. whereas those Arabs who choose to be citizens in Israel

            “choose”. As though any Palestinian in Gaza or the West Bank can just up and go “You know what? I’d like to be an Israeli citizen. I’m moving to Tel Aviv tomorrow!”

            1. Yes, actually they can, Stormy. Why don’t you read some of the citations?

                1. An temporary executive order passed in 2003 during the height of the 2nd Intifada.

                  So how do you explain the period of 1948-2002, when they could? I await your rationalization justifying your cognitive dissonance with bated breath.

                  1. Heroic, since you were wrong about that period why are you so sure citizenship was allowed in the earlier period? I would think having been shown wrong here the burden is on you to provide evidence that Israeli citizenship was offered to those in the Territories during that period.

                    1. why are you so sure citizenship was allowed in the earlier period?

                      Again, personal experience from my cousins Jamal and Yudith. Don’t attempt to cover up your laziness in research with a laughable “burden of proof” gambit. Only by willful misreading of my comment would you think I was incorrect. Your citation only concerns citizenship through marriage. A Palestinian Arab can apply to reside to Israel, just like any other foreign national. They can apply for citizenship or permanent residency. Of course, like, say, Japan, acquiring citizenship outside of marriage is very, very difficult, but that is not unique to Palestinians, or even Arabs.

                    2. “Your citation only concerns citizenship through marriage.”

                      I was referring to Stormy’s citation, actually. But mine just adds to it. So far all you have put up against it is your ‘personal experience from your cousins.’

                    3. Then you’re an idiot who didn’t read Stormy’s links nor mine. The Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law concerns citizenship through marriage. Just admit it, Bo, you have no clue what you are talking about, yet you feel an unearned sense of moral self-righteousness debating from your ignorance and faulty premises. In addition to my personal experience, I have provided primary and secondary sources. You’ve just ignored them. At this point, through your obstinate to accept the documented truth, you’re just equivocating for the purposes of trolling now.

                    4. You were just arguing that Israeli citizenship was available to any Palestinian who wanted it. Now suddenly they have to apply for it and it’s impossible to get outside of marriage.

                      Notice how the exact status of Palestinians magically shifts from one momment to the next based on whichever is most convenient at the particular instance.

                    5. You were just arguing that Israeli citizenship was available to any Palestinian who wanted it.

                      No, I didn’t. And I am not responsible for your poor reading comprehension. What I said was this

                      Palestinians are not citizens of Israel, so why would they participate in her politics? Palestinians participate in the politics of the Gaza Strip, voting for Hamas and Fatah. Likewise, Arabs who choose a Palestinian identity who live in Judea and Samaria also vote and have representation in the government of the Palestinian Authority; whereas those Arabs who choose to be citizens in Israel have full voting rights for Members of the Knesset (MKs).

                      Now, in the next post I’m going to spell that out for you in monosyllabic Anglo-Saxon.

                    6. “Palestinians are not citizens of Israel”. You understand that sentence, right? “Likewise, Arabs who choose a Palestinian identity who live in Judea and Samaria also vote and have representation in the government of the Palestinian Authority”. If you speak English, then you understand that the subject “Arabs” is modified by the relative clause “who choose a Palestinian identity”, inferring that not all Arabs are Palestinian. Likewise, “Arabs who choose to be citizens in Israel”, refers to Arabs living in Israel who a citizens. I say “choose to be citizens in Israel” because they have the choice to leave Israel and become Palestinians. That I had to spell this out for you is strange as you seem intelligent enough to have a job and read posts on Hit and Run. Therefore, I can only conclude that you either conflated “Palestinian” with “Arab” to argue in bad faith.

                    7. Yes you did.

                      Likewise, Arabs who choose a Palestinian identity who live in Judea and Samaria

                      Implies they can choose a non Palestinian identity and to live outside the West Bank. If they need Israel’s agreement to make that choice than it’s not actually a choice.

                  2. Which was renewed in 2008 and is still in effect today.

                  3. Sounds like a “right of return” to me and would be an easy Israeli concession… yet it is a “non-starter”. Hmm.

                2. Seems some people have some apologizing to Stormy to do.

        3. Stormy Dragon:

          Large numbers of people, accused of no crime, much less convicted of one, are banned from freely traveling, owning property, participating in politics, etc….

          Just imagine that they’re coming in to steal the jobs.

          Then, I assume you’re OK with it.

          1. Uh what? I’m in favor of open borders.

        4. Your premise is off base.

          They are not denied those things because of their ethnicity.

          They are denied those things because they refuse to admit that Israel has the right to EXIST and their people are constantly shooting rockets into civilian areas and have the tendency to have suicide bombers blow themselves and other up when they are allowed to travel freely.

          It’s the suicide bombers and the rockets that denies them these rights, not their ethnicity.

          1. What part of “Jewish State” don’t you understand?

            1. Evidentially more than you Patrick.

              You seem to be saying that the world should undo all of History and trace it’s roots back to pre History. Should we rewrite the borders and existence of every country that exists in this age back to the beginning to right all wrongs.

              Just how far back would you try and re-write history Patrick ? At what time frame would be OK with you ?

              It is what is is Patrick. Going back to a time period that is specified by you solves no problems and would only make things much worse than they are.

              1. Don’t really understand your point, OneOut.

                I thought you were basically saying that if the Palestinians had just welcomed the flood of Zionists into Palestine everything would be peachy. (That would have been awesome but also defies human nature.)

                That ignores the objective reality of Zionism; Jewish domination of a piece of real estate and whatever non-Jews live there.

                Complain all you want about the reaction to Israel, but it is still a reaction. Israel came to them. They didn’t lure it there to destroy it.

                1. “Patrick D|5.2.14 @ 9:21PM|#”

                  “I thought you were basically saying that if the Palestinians had just welcomed the flood of Zionists into Palestine everything would be peachy. (That would have been awesome but also defies human nature.)”

                  If that’s what you are thinking based on what I said then thinking isn’t your strong point.

                  “That ignores the objective reality of Zionism; Jewish domination of a piece of real estate and whatever non-Jews live there”

                  No Patric. The objective reality is that Israel exist and it is the most free state in that area of the World. This is now Patric. This is the objective reality that you incorrectly referred to.

                  You referred to objective historical reality.

                  I thought we already covered this ground in another post ?

                  1. Yes or no Patrick ?

                    Do I get my ancestral castle on the German Rhine back ?

                    If so then I will vote for a Tribe of Arabs to get control of something that they had no more legal ownership to than the people who legally own it now.

                    Seems like an even trade to me.

                    Patrick if you don’t vote for me to get my ancestral castle back but you do vote for the Pals to get that land back you’re an asshole .

          2. When someone is murdered in Philadelphia, we do not wall off the city and condemn its entire population to life in prison. While Israel has a right to fight the specific people attacking it, it does not have the right to translate that into collective guilt for all Palestinians based solely on the ethnic relationship.

            If person A commits wrong to person B, that doesn’t justify C commiting wrong to D just because B & C share one ethnic identity and A & D share another.

            1. When someone compares a murder in a drug gang infested city like Philly to a situation where organized gangs are shooting rockets and suicide bombers ( when they are allowed free travel) into a population area trying to kill as many as possible is a silly comparison.

    2. Personally I say this is BS, but if you really believe this argument, you have to make the exact same argument with regard to Native Americans and the United States.

      1. Nah

        You are thinking of Puerto Rico.

        And yeah they should have reps in congress. Though I think they are allowed to vote for president and they have non-voting reps in congress.

      2. It is analogous. Israel is an immigrant/colonial/settler state. The U.S. is an immigrant/colonial/settler state.

        Understandably, the locals don’t like that and fight back so the immigrants/colonists/settlers have to kill, subjugate, and overwhelm them with numbers until they no longer pose a threat. The euphemism is “nation building.”

        The differences are: while the U.S. could draw its immigrants from a huge swath of humanity, Zionism limits Israel to diaspora Jews (or kind-of Jews). And where the U.S. was surrounded by similar colonial settler states engaged in the same task, Israel is not.

        1. Your analogy fails in that prior to 1947 the locals were offered protection by what you call the colonial state if they stayed at home and didn’t take sides when the Arabs attacked israel and tried to annihilate them. they were told upfront that if they left, or if they took sides, they would not be allowed to return. They refused the offer and left and took sides thinking that the Arab armies would surly win. Now that they have to live with their decisions and suffer the effects of their decision you want to rewrite History.

          You seem to ignore that.

          1. You seem to be giving Zionists the benefit of the doubt. Don’t.

            1. The U.S. government made Native Americans all kinds of assurances that were broken.

              Do you think Israel’s government would have been any better?

              1. Native Americans are all full US citizens, are free to live on or off the reservations based solely on their own personal preference. They are free to own property, vote, and do all the things any of their neighbors are allowed to do.

            2. What does ” a Zionist ” have to do with what I posted ?

              Deflect much ?

    3. Hey dipshit, Gaza ain’t occupied.

      1. Just surrounded with their borders and airspace controlled by another country, right?

        1. Right, dipshit, because Gaza has no border with Egypt. What a stupid fucker.

          *left-clicks rehide*

    4. Perhaps if they quit raising their children to be suicide bombers that might open a window to change in that situation ?

  5. Israel/Palestine: the retarded pointless conflict that will never be resolved until the ginger cow is found, yet it is like the Riemann hypothesis for politicians; they all want to be the one that “solves” it so that they go down in the history books. Fucking egomaniacal scum.

    1. ironically, a couple of politicians have put forth ideas that could have settled this. One side keeps saying no, mostly because one side keeps insisting that other cease to exist.

      1. Sorry, buddy, but it takes two to tango. Nothing is more ridiculous than supporters of one side of this absurd moronic conflict who childishly insist that it’s all the other side’s fault that no compromise can be reached.

        Holy fuck this conflict is tiresome.

        1. never said it was all one side’s fault. But consistently it is one side saying no to various proposed solutions. Like you said, compromise takes two. You acknowledging my right to exist seems reasonable.

        2. Yeah, the Jews won’t compromise by dying. Fuckin’ Jews!

        3. Under Bill Clinton’s efforts the Palestinians were offered 97% of everything they asked for at the bargaining table and said no peace because they had to acknowledge Israel’s right to EXIST.

          When someone sits down to negotiate and gets offered 97% of what they were asking for and says no they never wanted to negotiate in the first place.

          1. Which always leaves me thinking people who defend the Palestinians are grossly uninformed or anti-Semitic. I love Netanyahu’s statement, “If the Arabs put down their weapons there would be peace, if the Jews put down their weapons there would be no Israel.”

            1. Even the other Arabs in the area don’t care for the Pals. Some time ago the then King of Jordan allowed some Pals into his country. Once settled in they started the same rabble rousing with Jordan as they do in Israel.

              The King of Jordan moved artillery up to the town of Hama( IIRC ) and destroyed the town and killed 20,000 men, women, and children. He received no condemnation from the Arab leaders in the Middle East.

              All the bullshit about the motivations of Arabs against Israel is because of the Pals situation is junk.

              Arab leaders use the Pals as cannon fodder against the Jews simply to keep their own people distracted from their own miserable lives.

          2. The Palestinians at Clinton’s party recognized Israel right to exist in 1993.

            1. Arafat did not.

              he wanted to keep the aide commpin so that his wife could become a billionaire, which she is.

              Where did the money to make Arafat’s widow a billionaire come from ?

  6. Shouldn’t we have Secretaries of State who actually have some experience and expertise in foreign policy? I mean, I get how everything is about politics these days, but it’s not an unimportant position.

    1. But he pronounced Genghis Khan like a Brit! He was in Vietnam! Were I the Obama administration, I would have scoured my Ambassadoral ranks for the dog that didn’t bark and found one who had been competently going about the business of being an Ambassador. And interviewed any that I found.

      What I don’t understand is how someone competitive enough to be President just allows these ongoing fuckeries. He should be going through Cabinet members like Linocln went through generals. Of course, the real problem with this is that only a Senator could have gotten through the advise and consent proceedings without major concessions.

      1. To clarify pronouns: “He” in paragraph 1 = John Kerry. “He” in paragraph 2 = President Obama

      2. He should be going through Cabinet members like Linocln went through generals.

        this presumes he is interested in the job of president. He’s not. Obama just likes the title.

        1. Why govern when you can constantly be politicking?

        2. and perks

    2. It’s about having the right people from the right families that went to the right schools. Like our ambassador to Japan.

      1. I expect that from ambassadors. They go to black tie events and have sex with Russian spies. They’ve always been more political than foreign service.

        SoS is different.

      2. Or those who were productive campaign contribution bundlers.

        They get to be Ambassadors as well, even if they don’t speak the local language.

        But hey, after the way Obama dropped the Ambassador to Libya in the grease who the fuck would want to be an ambassador for this administration ?

    3. What difference at this point does it make?

    4. How quaint Pro, the proper way to pick a Secretary of State these days is to pick a failed Democratic Presidential hopeful.

  7. Interesting David that you hold your derision about an apartheid warning only to Kerry.

    “If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights (also for the Palestinians in the territories), then, as soon as that happens, the State of Israel is finished.” – Ehud Olmert

    “The simple truth is, if there is one state” including Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, “it will have to be either binational or undemocratic. ? if this bloc of millions of Palestinians cannot vote, that will be an apartheid state.” – Ehud Barak

    “But the time has come for the same youth to ask, to what kind of state do they want to leave the gas reserves? To a Jewish democratic Israel? Or to a binational Arab state? Or to an apartheid state? It is impossible to deal with economic issues and to ignore the important diplomatic issues related to two states for two peoples.”
    -Tzipi Livni

    And there have been others. All said by Israelis. But no, Kerry should not have gone there…only Israelis can.

    1. Interesting that those quotes only appear on “Thinkprogress” and a few other sites related to the Prog-o-sphere.

      Smells like a Pallywood creation to me. Allow me to hit you with an actual quote.

      The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.

      For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.

      That was Zuheir Mohsen, translated from the original Dutch, in an interview with Trouw on March 31st, 1977.

      Have anymore blood libel that needs debunking, Jackand Hole?

      1. Blood libel? Don’t be so lazy.

        Barak as stated to a national security conference and reported in many places including the Huffington Post:…..46381.html

        Olmert, in Haaretz:…..r-1.234201

      2. And Livni as quoted in the Jerusalem Post:…..ael-318307

      3. Scratch a Zionist, find an Arab Nationalist.


      4. BTW, I believe Mohsen’s faction was in open combat against more mainstream PLO factions at one time or another and ultimately killed by fellow Palestinians who didn’t agree with his view.

    2. Kerry should not have “gone” there, because it’s an inappropriate way to express an opinion. He basically made the same mistake Cliven Bundy made.

      You really think it’s a ideal a secretary of state to characterize a nation as as “apartheid state”? Whether local politicians have used that term is irrelevant. A Japanese politician might call it’s government “an apartheid state” in a political debate or discourse, but it would be stupid for Caroline Kennedy to say that.

  8. le secr?taire d’?tat, c’est moi.

  9. You gotta be all kinds of stupid to believe a 2-state situation would end the animosity. This is typical of Lefties. They start from a ridiculously naive position about the situation. As if Palestinians (and Arab Muslims in neighboring countries, for that matter) will ever accept the existence of a Jewish state ANYWHERE in that region. Hamas, for example, still has it in their charter to destroy Israel. The silly Liberal notion that Jews and Pals (and Arab Muslims) are all the same, that all they want is to live in peace and harmony and hold hands, is beyond idiotic. It’s what the Left WANTS to believe… which for many of them makes it de facto reality.

    Not to mention it would require the Israelis to give up coveted areas in Jerusalem, which has always been the real thorn in the 2-state model. Who will suddenly change a centuries-old belief to allow that on either side? Nobody. This is a non-starter. Always has been.

    1. I have a totally new and absolutely cunning plan: The three-state solution.

      1. Let’s go with that.

        Can’t be any worse than decades of American Presidents kissing both sides ass to no avail.

    2. indeed. The “we’re all the same” stuff is tiresome.

      HAMAS’ charter rejects Israel. The Likud charter rejects a Palestinian state. Who cares?

      The West imposed its solution to its antisemitism problem on the Middle East and is upset they resist it. Aww.

      I doubt sub-Saharan Africa would have reacted much better if the Zionist project in what is not Uganda would have panned out.

      1. oops. “now”

      2. Actually, the Arab League has put forward peace plans that included recognition of and normalization of relations with Israel at least a couple times in the last 14 years.

        Israel basically ignored them, dismissed them as “unilateral declarations”, etc. instead of treating them as openings and engaging. Even if they were bluffs, it was important to call them.

        I doubt they were bluffs, btw. The Sunni Arab states probably see Israel as a potential ally against Shia Iran. Israel probably dodged them because it would have meant settling with the Palestinians before absorbing all the West Bank land and resources they can and dealing with some domestic political ugliness.

        I’m sure Israel calculates that since the American sucker has their back, peace is not in their net best interest.

  10. That picture… that’s a zombie, isn’t it.

  11. Is this Reason or the AIPAC site? It’s sad to see Reason recycling Jennifer Rubin’s talking points.

    1. Wow, this brought out the Jew-haters big time.

      1. Leave Anal alone. I’m surprised he took time away from working on his new instructional book entilted “Torah”.

  12. Israel is already an apartheid state for the left. But Obama can’t treat it like it’s South Africa or North Korea, because Jewish people are sympathetic figures and don’t fit neatly into established image of rogue states.

    To Obama and his crew, Israel is a cumbersome ally who’s not doing enough to promote peace. They’ll pay lip service to the Jewish state but quietly place all burden of making progress on their shoulder. Kerry “apartheid” comment is a Freudian slip. He would never say anything of that sort in the Egypt, Venezuela, and other nations where freedom is in short supply.

    1. How many billions of U.S. tax dollars has Venezuela received as aid as it defies U.S. policy? Does anyone associate Venezuelan policies with the U.S.?

      Do American politicians lovingly guarantee the safety and security of North Korea?

      Israel has received billions of U.S. tax dollars in aid even as it defies U.S. policy on civilian settlements in the occupied territories.

      Israel’s activities are associated with the U.S. because of the “special relationship.”

  13. John Kerry’s comment is profoundly ignorant and it shouldn’t surprise anyone it comes from this administration. Didn’t he make other foreign policy statements that left people confused? Like Russia using ’20th century military tactics?’

  14. All that aside, Israel and its issues with its neighbors are irrelevant to the vital interests of the United States. The “special relationship” is a strategic liability to the U.S. and absurdly one-sided in favor of Israel.

    Israel pursues its national interests. Time for the U.S. to do the same for a change and stop being Israel’s freier.

    No more aid. No more diplomatic cover.

    … which squares nicely with what these guys want.

    “We don’t want anything from America. That’s it.”


    1. Way to go Patric.

      it’s about time you started putting America first in your thoughts instead of Palestine and it’s problems.

  15. The true Lefist

    The Left has a barrier they cannot cross if they do then they go on shooting rampages. This is more common in the younger Left. When they see the path they are on and where it leads they flip out plane and simple!
    To the Left it is all about the Cause nothing gets in the way of the Cause!!
    There can be no reality with the Cause because reality stops the Cause!
    Been this was since the beginning of man. Man is to foolish to see the paths ending until they are over the cliff!

  16. Israel has a moral duty to treat the Palestinians better than it has, regardless of demographics.

    Looking over Gaza, Israel and the West Bank, Palestinians will be in the majority some day. Israelis have quietly told me this for years, adding that Israel will one day have to choose between being a Zionist state and a democratic one.

    Given what Zionists have done in Israel, it is entirely understandable if Palestinians do not want Jews in their midst. Jewish residence tends to evolve into a demand for Jewish control.

  17. Why are we talking about this? The US has no business getting involved in the Israeli/Arab conflict in any way. We shouldn’t send money to either Israel or Arabs. The various demographic, religious, racial, and historical theories used to justify this or that policy aren’t our business, we don’t understand them, and we have no connection with them.

    The US isn’t even responsible for the Jews having to flee Europe and settle in Israel again. If anybody has any responsibility for the mess in the Middle East, it’s Europeans, who created it both through imperialism and through massive antisemitism and genocide in Europe. And Israel is in Europe’s backyard, not ours.

    I’m as tired of the right-wing pro-Israel lobby as of the left-wing pro-Arab lobby. The libertarian position is to stay out of this b.s. because it isn’t our business.

    1. ^This. A thousand times this.

  18. US Mideast policy:

    Headline policy – Meaningless silly comments on Israel.

    Hardly worth mentioning – Funds and enforces anti-democratic coup in Egypt. Supports factional government infighting in Libya. Backs rebellion in Syria. Long-term close US allied states Saudi Arabia and Bahrain gun down peaceful pro-democracy marchers.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.