John Kerry’s speech on Israel: delusional and disgraceful

John Kerry delivers his speech on Israel and the peace process at the State Dept. on 28 Dec. 2016

John Kerry delivers his speech on Israel and the peace process at the State Dept. on 28 Dec. 2016

The Obama Administration’s “January surprise” took its next steps today with John Kerry’s absurd and outrageous speech on Israel, in which he claimed to lay out his vision of Middle East peace but which in practice was simply a screed attacking the settlements as he accused the Israeli government of being led by the most extreme elements:

US secretary of state John Kerry on Wednesday laid out his “comprehensive vision” for the future of Middle East peacemaking, saying that a two-state solution was the “only way to ensure Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state,” but promising that the US would not seek further UN action on the conflict. 

Can we trust him and his boss on that promise that they won’t seek further UN action? I’m not willing to bet on it.

In a speech that lasted well over an hour, Kerry described settlements as a central obstacle to achieving an agreement between the sides and declared that Israeli actions in the West Bank were putting the two-state solution, which he said was the sole path to peace, “in serious jeopardy.”

Kerry argued that settlement construction in the West Bank was being “strategically placed in locations that make two states impossible” and said the “the status quo is leading toward one state, or perpetual occupation.”

Settlement expansion, he declared, “has nothing to do with Israel’s security.”

Castigating the coalition of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he said it was “the most right-wing in Israel history with an agenda driven by the most extreme elements. The result is that policies of this government, which the prime minister himself just described as more committed to settlements than any in Israel’s history, are leading … towards one state. In fact,” he added, “Israel has increasingly consolidated control over much of the West Bank for its own purposes.

With less than a month as secretary of state, Kerry sought to champion the two-state outcome he worked to achieve throughout the last four years, saying it was the only path forward. Incoming president Donald Trump has signaled he may not be committed to the two-state framework.

He rambled on in this vein for the rest of his speech. You can read more at the link, and the entire text is here.

What is much more worthwhile is to watch and listen to Netanyahu’s blistering counter-attack:

David Horovitz of the Times of Israel blasted Kerry, saying that he did everything but call Israel apartheid.

About half an hour into John Kerry’s valedictory lecture from the State Department on Wednesday evening, Israel’s most popular television station, Channel 2, stopped broadcasting it live and switched to other programming. The country’s two other main TV stations, Channels 1 and 10, had already electronically left the building. Given that Kerry’s anti-settlement and anti-occupation address was primarily directed at the Israeli public, the ratings-conscious schedulers’ impatient transition to other material rather encapsulates the climate in which the secretary’s extensive remarks were being received here.

Many in the Israel of 2016 would share some of the arguments they largely didn’t hear Kerry deliver on Wednesday evening. Many recognize the dangers of being permanently intertwined with millions of hostile Palestinians, and fear that the expansion especially of those settlements and outposts that lie to the east of the security barrier increases that risk, and thus puts a two-state solution in danger, threatening Israel’s Jewish character, or its democracy, or both. Kerry’s was a fiery critique, indeed, marked by the allegation that the settlement movement is driving the agenda of the Israeli government, and that Netanyahu has been allowing some of the most extreme voices to draw Israel closer to the Zionist nightmare of a single bi-national state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. Just about the only charge Kerry didn’t lob, this time, was apartheid.

But the secretary and his president long ago lost much of the Israeli public, even many of the settlement critics, by underestimating the depth of Palestinian opposition to the very fact of the Jewish state’s existence. The president and his secretary have underestimated, too, the consequent scarring — physical and psychological — that the Israeli public has accumulated over decades of war, terrorism, and demonization as the Palestinians and those who championed their cause have sought Israel’s obliteration.

… He mentioned terrorism and incitement. But the Obama administration never truly internalized the impact of these endless decades fighting off attempted destruction. And Kerry has self-evidently never been willing to internalize that in the vicious Middle East of the past few years, talking up the possibility of relinquishing control over adjacent West Bank history — with its recent history of suicide bomb factories, with Hamas angling to take control, with a hostile Iran emboldened to the east by the Obama Administration’s own nuclear deal — is just that for most Israelis: talk.

We left south Lebanon. Hezbollah took over. We left Gaza. Now it’s ruled by Hamas. When the secretary expresses his “total confidence” that Israel’s security requirements in the West Bank can be met via sophisticated multi-layered border defenses and such, he quite simply loses Israel.

We left south Lebanon. Hezbollah took over. We left Gaza. Now it’s ruled by Hamas. When the secretary expresses his “total confidence” that Israel’s security requirements in the West Bank can be met via sophisticated multi-layered border defenses and such, he quite simply loses Israel.

He would have had more chance of success — or at least of creating a climate in which prospects of progress would be brighter — had he focused more of his attentions on the toxic climate among Palestinians. They are relentlessly educated on the illegitimacy of Israel, with that narrative hammered home over social media, by their political and spiritual leadership, sometimes in their schools. He never strategically attempted to tackle that process of indoctrination.

Easier to place overwhelming blame on the settlers rather than the Palestinians. Or, heaven forbid, on yourself.

Herb Keinon at the Jerusalem Post had similar harsh criticisms of Kerry’s viewpoint:

Long, and without many new elements in it. What a tired-looking, hoarse Kerry did for more than an hour was pretty much compile the “greatest hits” from numerous speeches he and US President Barack Obama have given over the last number of years on the Mideast.

Nevertheless, two elements of the speech were striking.

The first was the insistence that the only solution to the conflict is either two-states,  or one. This is the mantra that has been repeated for so long, that it has become axiomatic. But it also drowns out any possibility of creatively looking at other options, a different way.

If the efforts to negotiate two states has failed for so long, perhaps it is time to consider whether there may be other options that might bring Egypt and Jordan into the equation. Perhaps what is needed is a reassessment of all the the assumptions over the last 23 years that have ended in the current stalemate — first and foremost that the only option is two states from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River.

For instance, in 2010 former National Security Council Giora Eiland spelled out a plan for a Jordanian-Palestinian federation, in which the West Bank and Gaza would be states in an expanded Jordanian kingdom.

Another idea would see the establishment of a Palestinian state, but it would be based on land swaps between Egypt, Israel and a future Palestinian entity that would significantly expand the size of Gaza, allow Israel to retain a good percentage of the the West Bank, and provide Egypt with a land link to Jordan.

These ideas are too often dismissed as unrealistic, something that the Palestinians would never accept. Kerry reinforces that way of thinking with his stating as truth that it is either two states or one state.

The Kerry speech was also telling in that it included a call for Israel to withdraw from the territories and uproot settlements. This is a demand for Israel to make huge compromises.  There was, however, no comparable demand for compromise on the Palestinian side.

Kerry called, and says that the US has done so on innumerable occasions,  for the Palestinians to stop the terrorism and the incitement, and to build up good governing institutions. But those are not compromises.

A Palestinian compromise would be to recognize that — given everything going on in the Middle East —  Israel must retain security control of the Jordan Valley. A compromise would be for the Palestinians to state that they are giving up on the “right of return,” and that they recognize Israel as the homeland of the Jewish state.

Keinon’s conclusion was absolutely spot-on:

Throughout his career, both in the senate and as secretary of state, Kerry’s speeches on Israel give the listener a sense that he knows what is better for Israel, its future, and security than the Israelis themselves. His speech Wednesday night was true to that rather patronizing form.

The reactions to Kerry’s speech in the United States were similarly scathing. First we have the heart-warming supportive statement from President-elect Donald Trump:

But it’s not only the Republicans who have rejected the Obama regime’s direction. Below is the statement by the House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer:

Steny Hoyer's reaction

Steny Hoyer’s reaction

Thank you for your support, Mr. Hoyer. You are on the right path towards restoring Israelis’ and Jews’ trust in the Democratic Party.

Here is a selection of other reactions via Twitter:

And one final tweet which includes a map that encapsulates the entire Middle East problem, and at the same time clearly demonstrates Kerry’s (and his boss’s) blindness when it comes to Israel:

This entry was posted in Incitement, indigenous rights, International relations, Lawfare and Delegitimization and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to John Kerry’s speech on Israel: delusional and disgraceful

  1. Pingback: John Kerry’s speech on Israel: delusional and disgraceful – 24/6 Magazine

  2. Pingback: John Kerry’s speech on Israel: delusional and disgraceful |

  3. IG26mTkGjdc2Ylttmp7VbUewN1B3vjTx1gZ4+rHaJL4= says:

    1) Only the self-loathing Jews can remain Democrats now. The liberal party of JFK and LBJ has been hijacked by “progressives” who have an anti-Semitic agenda.
    2) Global jihad is the issue and not giving up land for peace.
    3) Why hasn’t Obama or Kerry demanded Hamas change its covenant that calls for the killing of all Jews (see Article 7)? Only demanding things from Jews smacks of anti-Semitism.
    4) Why hasn’t Obama or Kerry demanded the PLO change its charter to recognize Israel’s right to exist? Only demanding changes from Jews smacks of anti-Semitism.
    5) Why did Obama and Kerry both lie about who was behind the latest UN vote? Why did they lie about the Iran deal? Why did they give away the analysis on Israel’s nuclear capabilities? Why did they interfere with Israel’s election? OK, we know they are either in a desperate push to have one foreign policy issues become successful. If not, it means they are anti-Semitic.
    6) Why should anyone listen to Obama or Kerry? They were wrong to back the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, they were wrong about the Arab Spring, wrong about Libya, they were wrong about befriending Qatar, they screwed up Iraq, they were wrong (and lied) about Iran, they were wrong about having no vetting of immigrants coming to the USA, they were wrong about Europe taking in so many immigrants, and they were wrong about having the Muslim Brotherhood visit the White House. Unfortunately for Israel France’s Holland, with his 4% approval rating, is in the same boat. Both Obama and Holland will attempt to destroy Israel in an attempt to save their legacy.

    • anneinpt says:

      Thanks for your comment mysterious commenter who wants to keep anonymous. 🙂

      You make excellent points, and of course there are no answers because we all know they are the truth, but those with the power are not interested. It’s a very dangerous situation.

  4. Rob says:

    Everyone who was paying attention knew that Obama was going to do this, or something very like it. Recall that he told Abbas to delay submitting the resolution until after November 8th, since a US abstention might (just might) have persuaded even the rusted-on Jewish vote for the Democrats to entertain second thoughts about voting for Clinton.

    And the jury is now in (if it wasn’t long ago) on the question of whether Obama is a fool or a knave. He is not a naif adrift in a world of which he knows nothing, and whose seeming malignancy could be interpreted – charitably – as folly. This man is an enemy of the west and all it stands for. He really is the Manchurian candidate that conservatives fingered eight years ago. Note that he skulks about in his Hawaiian redoubt, saying nothing, but sending his peon, John Kerry – a coiffured fool with the face of a horse – to do his evil work for him

    Thankfully, though, this just might be the darkest hour before the dawn. There is change afoot – witness Brexit, Trump’s victory and even, here in Australia, the rise of the new conservatives. (I’m left speechless by the perfidy of our friends across the Tasman, though.) The left elites sense they are losing their grip on power, and are terrified. It can only get worse for them, or so I hope. 2017 might be a good year, after all – for Israel, for all of us.

    • anneinpt says:

      Most certainly the writing was on the wall, as you say Rob. The Israeli news media were full of commentary and speculation as to if, what and when Obama would launch his “surprise” on Israel. Yet even so, the shock has been resounding.

      Re Obama’s character, yes, at first we thought he was incompetent or stupid or both. But it’s been clear for a long while now that he had a definite agenda: to weaken the West, take America down a peg or two, and weaken America’s allies too, all in order to “level the playing field” for the “poor, oppressed, brown people”. Who are poor mostly through their own mismanagement, oppressed through their own corruption, and hte colour of their skin is irrelevant.

      I hope you’re right about the new direction being taken. It certainly looks that way, at least with Trump at the helm.. yet Britain, led by Theresa May and Brexit, still voted in favour of this resolution. They didn’t even abstain.

      Time will tell if this new direction will be good for Israel, though it could hardly be worse!

  5. len says:

    When it comes to the Obama administration in regards to defending Israel they always seem to talk the talk, but even the new ten year package of Military Aid is not what is needed to keep a “qualitative edge” for Israel to defend itself in this lousy neighborhood especially when a new bully in town, Russia has decided to move in and the U.S. nowhere to be found .When it comes to the Palestinians Obama walks the walk no doubt about it.! He did them quite a “solid” for his goodbye present. For sure they will be using it bringing every issue and every Israeli to some International Court forever! Only a sick vindictive individual would concoct such malfeasance at this time and at this place(U.N) .It seems there are quite a few in this expiring administration.

    • anneinpt says:

      Thank you for noting the military aid package, Len. All those “do-gooders” who want to save us from ourselves reassure us that the “most pro-Israel administration evah” gave Israel this amazing aid package. Yet it’s no more that what we received previously. Saying it’s $38bn makes it sound like that’s the total EVERY YEAR, whereas it’s spread out over 10 years, 3.8bn every year. That’s not to be sneezed at of course, but when it all needs to spent ONLY in the US, and none is allowed to be spent in Israel, that’s actually a downgrade of previous aid packages. It weakens Israel’s own defence industries, and I really didn’t think it was such a great idea. I’d prefer us to be completely independent.

      Your last comment that Obama is a “sick individual for concocting this malfeasance at this time” certainly has merit. I would classify him rather as evil, petty, vindictive and malicious. Maybe that’s the same thing.

  6. YJ Draiman says:

    1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,”
    The U.S. Congress in 1922
    On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine—anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea:
    “Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
    “Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected.” [italics in the original]
    On September 21, 1922, the then President Warren G. Harding signed the joint resolution of approval to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine.
    Here is how members of congress expressed their support for the creation of a National Home for the Jewish people in Palestine – Eretz-Israel (Selective text read from the floor of the U.S. Congress by the Congressman from New York on June 30, 1922). All quotes included in this document are taken verbatim from the given source.
    JUNE 30, 1922
    (Rept. NO. 1172)

    Representative Walter M. Chandler from New York – I want to make at this time, Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House, my attitude and views upon the Arab question in Palestine very clear and emphatic. I am in favor of carrying out one of the three following policies, to be preferred in the order in which they are named:
    (1) That the Arabs shall be permitted to remain in Palestine under Jewish government and domination, and with their civil and religious rights guaranteed to them through the British mandate and under terms of the Balfour declaration.
    (2) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, they shall be required to sell their lands at a just valuation and retire into the Arab territory which has been assigned to them by the League of Nations in the general reconstruction of the countries of the east.
    (3) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, under conditions of right and justice, or to sell their lands at a just valuation and to retire into their own countries, they shall be driven from Palestine by force.

  7. YJ Draiman says:

    Facts Arab-Palestinians Would Rather Not Admit About Israel
    In doing my research and writing various articles about the Arab-Israeli Conflict I was asked some pointed questions about my conclusions in some of my recent articles, which dealt – as most of them do – with the history of Israel: biblical, post-biblical and international laws and treaties.
    I had stated in one of my articles the following sentence: “Only one people has ever made Jerusalem its capital and only one people ever established their ancestral indigenous and biblical homeland between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea: the Jews.”
    I had also added that: “the Jews were the remaining aboriginal indigenous inhabitants of the Land for two millennia before the Muslim religion was even created.”
    The commenter, nevertheless, had correctly pointed out that most people, because they have been exposed for such a long time to anti-Israel Arab propaganda, falsely believe that there has not been a continuous Jewish presence in the Land of Israel for the last 2,000 years. Many also have the misconception that the UN created the State of Israel; this is a farce.
    The land of Israel has been in existence for over 3700 years. The Modern reconstituted State of Israel was decreed by post WWI international law and treaties which were executed by the Supreme Allied Powers which allocated the formerly occupied territory by the defeated Ottoman Empire. In said allocation, the S.A.P. specified Mesopotamia, Syria and other territories to the Arabs; in all the Arab/Muslims received over 12 million sq. km. of territory with a wealth of oil reserves; and allocated all of Palestine, the historical ancestral land of the Israelites to the Jewish people as their reconstituted homeland.
    They are thus unaware that the historical territory of the land of Israel, that was never totally cleansed of Jewish presence. Thus, the Arabs would rather you forget also that Jews lived for two millennia in Mesopotamia and in what became later known as British created Iraq.
    Indeed, Jews have resided for over 3,200 years in that territory from the Babylonian Captivity of 586 CE onwards. Jewish communities and towns were established in Aleppo and Yemen during the Days of King David. It was when International treaties executed by the Allied Supreme Powers in 1920, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration as international law and the 1919 Faisal Weizmann Agreement, that the number of Jews in Palestine-Israel became substantial enough to merit the subsequent implementation of those international treaties and guarantees.
    Furthermore, due to the abrogation of its duty and the sudden departure of Britain in 1948, and thus, the desertion of its commitment to implement the Mandate for Palestine, (as agreed by post WWI international law and treaties and help bring about the sovereign Jewish Homeland in Palestine), the Jewish leadership declared independence and Israel sovereignty was re-established in 1948. It cannot be ignored that the UN resolution to advance the sovereignty of the Jewish state was only carrying out some of the terms of the international treaties.
    The post WWI League of Nations and the post WWII United Nations that took over from the League have no authority to create or modify international treaties.
    The UN according to its charter can only recommend its resolutions and the same applies to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), they are only advisory. As such, those recommendations must be adopted by the parties, and if any of the parties rejects the resolution, it has no affect or validity. Such is the factual case of the Arab Israeli Conflict. The Arabs rejected outright the UN resolutions that could have altered the conflict to a peaceful coexistence.
    After the Declaration of independence and sovereignty of the Jewish state and the independence of Iraqi, the Arab countries terrorized and drove the Jews from their ancient homes of over 2,700 years and confiscating all their assets, including: personal property, businesses, homes and over 120,000 sq. km. of Jewish owned Real Estate for over 2,400 years (these confiscated Jewish assets are valued in the trillions of dollars). Furthermore, one Arab state after another in the Middle East and North Africa also persecuted and drove out their Jewish populations, which had resided in those countries for over two millennia. Said persecutors also confiscated all their assets turning them into refugees who found sanctuary in Israel, at that time a fledging impoverished country barely able to support them at the time. Such a great number of Jewish refugees were created that they outnumbered the Arab refugees by a ratio of 2 to 1. It cannot be ignored that such unwarranted persecution and unlawful confiscation of assets is a crime which is never talked about or addressed.
    Arab-Palestinians and their anti-Israel supporters try to deceive and convince the world that the Jews just appeared in the early 20th century after being dispersed for over two thousand years from their biblical ancestral homeland. Such deception is a flat out lie and flies in the face of factual recorded history. But facts never seem to matter to Arabs and pro-Arabs. So the following brief history lesson will be for them an inconvenient truth.
    Let me start by quoting from an article written in The Weekly Standard, May 11, 1998 by Charles Krauthammer:
    “Israel is the very embodiment of Jewish continuity: It is the only nation on earth that inhabits the same land, bears the same name, speaks the same language, and worships the same God that it did 3,000 years ago. You dig the soil and you find pottery from Davidic times, coins from Bar Kochvah, and 2,000-year-old scrolls written in a script remarkably like the one today advertising ice cream at the corner candy store.”
    The Jewish People trace their origin to Abraham, who is called the Holy Convert, the first Jew, who established the belief in only one God, the creator of the universe. Abraham, his son Yitzhak (Isaac), and grandson Jacob (Israel), are referred to as the patriarchs of the Israelites who lived in what was then the Land of Canaan which today does exist; and which later become known as the Land of Israel. They and their wives are buried in the Ma’arat HaMachpela, the Tomb of the Patriarchs, in Hebron, Judaism’s second holiest city. (Genesis Chapter 23).
    YJ Draiman

    • anneinpt says:

      The trouble is that we know all this, and even most of the nations know this. But they choose to ignore it. What do we do in practice in this situation?

      And those who don’t know this are utterly convinced by the Palestinians’ “narrative” which has become the received wisdom throughout much of the world. How can we combat this efficiently?

  8. DP-PT says:

    Even though Kerry’s speech has been parsed to death above, I would like to add three personal insights.
    Firstly, he laments the fact that Israel’s government is the most right-wing ever. Hello, Mr Kerry! This is known as “democracy”. This is the government that the people of Israel voted in, despite your attempts at interference, possibly davka because of your efforts at interference. We see that just as in America you so-called Democrats can’t accept that “The People have Spoken”, so here too you would rather change the people. Tough luck, moron!
    Secondly, you urge us to relinquish territory so that all the Arab states in the region will help us guarantee our borders. Seriously, how delusional can you be?! These are the same failed states that can’t even guarantee their own borders without help from others, including Israel. For example: Jordan. And what can be said about the military prowess of Egypt struggling to contain a rebellion in Sinai, Turkey unable to deal with domestic terrorism and coup attempts, Syria that no longer exists, Lebanon taken over by Hezbollah and Iraq tearing itself apart. These are our putative defenders? Puhlease!
    Thirdly, while on the subject of guarantees, what exactly is the value of an American guarantee today? They guaranteed our exit from Sinai. Meanwhile they have betrayed Mubarak’s Egypt, Syria’s undefended masses from chemical attacks, Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States vis-à-vis Iran, not to mention Israel.
    Mr Kerry, please be on your way to the dustbin of history and don’t dirty our TV screens any more!

    • anneinpt says:

      Very well said! Especially the part about the utter worthlessness of American guarantees. Not to mention the patronizing arrogance – we will protect you.Don’t worry your pretty little head about it. Grr!

  9. Pingback: What’s wrong with Resolution 2334? | Anne's Opinions

  10. Muslims represent just one percent of U.S. population (3 million of 300 million), but their political influence, propaganda, media attention and impact on our universities is “huuuge”, as witness the silence from Sen. Bernie Sanders, plus John Forbes Kerry’s fawning defense by major media.
    While Arabs actively pursue their philosophy to change America, many of this country’s Jews have convinced themselves “to go along to get along” with whatever passing trend that allows them to be anonymous in their religion and blind to a heritage their grandparents perished to preserve.

    • anneinpt says:

      Very good point Fred about the political influence of the Arabs in the US (and Europe for that matter). But no one talks about the Arab lobby, just the sinister Jewish lobby.

      I think you’re partially right regarding the US Jews keeping a low profile, but that’s not the entirety. There’s a huge proportion, the vast majority I think, of American Jews who are Jewish in name only. Their religion is liberalism, it’s prophet is the Democratic Party.

  11. Earl says:

    And let’s never forget the seminal Nekama’s Troll Hammer (TM), as acute and perceptive today as when s/he penned it a decade ago; a very good refutation of the progressive Jew-hatred that Kerry spews out.

    Slainte mhor, Nekama!

    Are you aware that the Disputed Territories never belonged to the “Palestinians” and only came into Israeli possession as a result of the 1967 six day war in which Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon all massed forces at Israel’s border in order to “push the Jews into the sea”. The Arabs lost and Israel took control of the land. Do you agree that if the Muslims don’t want to lose territory to Israel, then they shouldn’t start wars? Do you agree that there is justice that Israel, who as far back as 1948 has always sought peace with her far larger neighbors, should live in prosperity – making the desert bloom – while the residents of 19 adjacent Arab countries who are blessed with far more land as well as oil wealth live in their own feces?

    Did you know that the “Palestinians” could have had their own country as far back as 1948 had they accepted the UN sponsored partition plan which gave Israel AND the Palestinians a countries of their own on land which Jews had lived on for thousands of years before Mohammed ever had a wet dream about virgins? The Arabs rejected the UN offer and went to war with the infant Israeli nation. The Arabs lost and have been whining about it ever since. Do you agree this is like a murderer who kills his parents and asks for special treatment since he is now an orphan?

    Can you tell us ANY Arab country which offers Jews the right to be citizens, vote, own property, businesses, be a part of the government or have ANY of the rights which Israeli Arabs enjoy? Any Arab country which gives those rights to Christians? How about to other Arabs? Wouldn’t you just LOVE to be a citizen of Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, or Syria?

    Since as many Jews (approximately 850,000) were kicked out of Arab countries as were Arabs who left present day Israel (despite being literally begged to stay), why should Arabs be permitted to return to Israel if Jews aren’t allowed to set foot in Arab countries? Can you explain why Arabs can worship freely in Israel but Jews would certainly be hung from street lamps after having their intestines devoured by an Arab mob if they so much as entered an Arab country?

    Israel resettled and absorbed all of the Jews from Arab countries who wished to become Israelis. Why haven’t any Arab countries offered to resettle Arabs who were displaced from Israel, leaving them to rot for 60 years in squalid refugee camps? And why are those refugee camps still there? Could it be that the billions of dollars that the UNWRA has sent there goes to terrorist groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, El Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, or Hezbollah? How did Yassir Arafat achieve his $300 million in wealth? Why aren’t these funds distributed for humanitarian use?

    Did you know that the Arabs in the disputed territories (conquered by Israel in the 1967 war which was started by Arabs) and who are not Israelis already have two countries right now? And that they are called Egypt and Jordan? [per Draiman above and Howard Grief (RIP, PBUH)]

    If your complaint is about the security fence which Israel is finally building in the Disputed Territories, are you aware that it is built solely to keep the “brave” Arab terrorists out so that they can no longer self detonate on busses, in dining halls or pizzerias and kill Jewish grandmothers and schoolchildren? Why are the Arabs so brave when they target unarmed civilians but even when they outnumber their opponents they get their sandy asses kicked all the way to Mecca when they are faced with Jewish soldiers? Why do Arab soldiers make the French look like super heroes?

    Please explain why you are so concerned about Arabs, who possess 99% of the land in this region and are in control of the world’s greatest natural resource, which literally flows out of the ground? Can’t their brother muslims offer some of the surplus land and nature’s riches to the “Palestinians”? Or is it true that Arabs are willing to die right down to the last “Palestinian”?

    Why do you not exhibit the same level of concern for say, people in Saudi Arabia who are beheaded, subject to amputation, stoning, honor killing etc.? What about women who are denied any semblance of basic civil rights, including the right not to be treated as property for the entertainment and abuse of her father, brothers, or husbands? What about the Muslims in Sudan and Egypt who are still enslaved, or the women there whose genitalia are barbarically cut off? How about the oppression of Shiites by Sunnis, the gassing of the Kurds by Iraq, or the massacre of “Palestinians” by Jordan (Black September)? Why doesn’t this concern you?

    Did you ever stop to wonder how much better off everyone in the region would be if Arabs stopped trying to kill Jews and destroy Israel? What would happen if the Israelis gave up their weapons and disarmed? Would they live to see the next day? But what would happen if the Arabs completely disarmed? You know the answer: They would all be AT PEACE! And if there is no war to rile them up, the Arabs would be forced to look at their own repressive, pre-medieval societies. Why would they want to do that when there are Jews to kill?

    Have you heard “People who define themselves primarily by what they hate, rather than who they love, are doomed to failure and misery”? Can you see the parallels to the Arabs, who are blessed with land and oil, but still gladly train their children to kill themselves in order to kill Jews? Have you heard Golda Meir’s words to the effect of “There will be peace when the Arabs love their children more than they hate ours”? Why do the Arabs hate so much?

Comments are closed.