Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Are We Intended to Believe that John Kerry is a Moron?

Michael L.

{Cross-posted at Jews Down Under.}

xshut up1I voted for John Kerry for president of the United States in 2004.

Of course, I also voted for Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, and the current resident of Pennsylvania Avenue.

In the past Kerry has suggested that unless Israel does what he wants - which apparently is to stop the building of second bathrooms in Jewish homes in the eastern section of Jerusalem -  then the country will likely face delegitimization and BDS "on steroids."

We were to understand that this did not represent a threat, but merely a description of what Israel would likely face if it did not heed Kerry's warnings, although it is entirely unclear what the Jews are supposed to do beyond releasing our murderers and cease building housing for ourselves and our children on historically Jewish land.

Many people took it as a veiled threat because it screams out like a veiled threat and acts as a green light for the Nazi-like BDS movement within the European Union and American college campuses.  If it was not a veiled threat then it clearly represents diplomatic stupidity.  We cannot read John Kerry's mind.  We do not know what he was thinking when he said what he said.  All we know is that he said it.  Now, if he said it with the intention to threaten then he said it with the intention to threaten.  If he did not say it with the intention to threaten, then just why did he say it?

Are we supposed to believe that the current Secretary of State of the United States is just plain dumb?

I find that rather hard to imagine.

And now we have Kerry's "apartheid" hoopla.

Elior Levy and Yitzhak Benhorin write in Y-Net:
After a day of outraged responses, US Secretary of State John Kerry said Monday that he had chosen the wrong word when describing Israel's potential future as an "apartheid state" if it didn't reach a peace deal with the Palestinians.

In a statement released by the State Department, Kerry lashed out against "partisan political" attacks against him, but acknowledged his comments last week to a closed international forum could have been misinterpreted.
He thinks that his words could have been "misinterpreted"?

What part of the word "apartheid" are we supposed to misunderstand, I wonder?

By following Jimmy Carter's slander, Kerry has yet again busted out with a veiled threat.

By suggesting that Israel will become an "apartheid" state unless it acquiesces to an American diktat, he essentially threatened that, like apartheid South Africa, Israel will be dismantled by the world community.

The Obama administration, however, wants us to think that Kerry has foot-in-mouth disease.

I am not so sure.

From the comments:
3. Political correctness + decent manners means  
choosing your words beforehand. But, If I was a barometer of character, I would say that Kerry's spontaneous choice of words are true to his character.  
barbara , Haifa Israel (04.29.14)
I have to agree with barbara in Haifa and I very much wish that I was in Haifa right at this moment!

The man is the Secretary of State of the United States of America.  He is the chief diplomat of the United States of America, and yet he flings around horrendous implied accusations toward the small Jewish minority in the Middle East within the State of Israel and then insists that he was misunderstood.

So, the question remains, is it stupidity or intent?
11. To: No. 6

Amen! We did not ask for war in 1967, but the Arabs waged it -- and lost. Time for them to accept the consequences. Israel will annex Judea and Samaria and its Arab population will be either repatriated to Jordan, or relocated to Gaza. War is not a picnic. And we should not reward those who wage it. West Bank Arabs will never be absorbed into the Israeli body politic; it is time, as you say, for them to move on.

Sarah B, U.S.A. / Israel (04.29.14)
For those of you who actually read the comments beneath Y-Net articles, the name "Sarah B" may not be entirely unfamiliar.  I actually like Sarah.  She doesn't play games.  She says exactly what she thinks.  And she is not trying to make nice with people who have no intention whatsoever of making nice with her.

Agree with her or disagree with her, the woman has integrity.
16. How strange....

.....that it is always a denouncement of the only ones who truly strive for peace, Israel, and never of the palestinian-arabs who have no inclination too compromise, keep no agreement they ever signed and celebrate terrorism and deceit.

mindRider, The Free World (04.29.14)
And that, my friends, speaks for itself.


  1. Caroline Glick weighs in:

    "Anti-Semitism is not a simple bigotry. It is a complex neurosis. It involves assigning malign intent to Jews where none exists on the one hand, and rejecting reason as a basis for understanding the world and operating within it on the other hand.
    John Kerry’s recent use of the term “Apartheid” in reference to Israel’s future was an anti-Semitic act......Kerry’s “Apartheid” remarks are a watershed event. They represent the first time a sitting US Secretary of State has publicly endorsed an anti-Semitic caricature of Jews and the Jewish state. "

    Hmmmm. This is the bare kernel of the truth, whether Kerry himself is or is not an antisemite. I personally don't think he is....at least not consciously. But I'll tell you this. Like many a leftist, he has enabled those who are and from a rather powerful place.

  2. Are We Intended to Believe that John Kerry is a Moron?

    If being a moron is cool, he's Miles Davis.

  3. ...As opposed to the simple and elegant ethnic cleansing of Jews from Judea and Samaria that Kerry is lobbying for? I suppose in a modern society that laws, ethics and morality are only for those who intend to have them and everyone else gets a pass.

    But then again the US State Department is an interested party in a US Supreme Court case that purports to allow the US government to decide where the capital of Israel even is and what its name is.

  4. References to Israel as Apartheid suggests the racial element to Jewish action is primary, a suggestion that itself is antisemitic, so egregious that it can serve to vitiate a right to self-determination and self-defense that is integral to Israel and Jews.

    As for Kerry, he had the hubris to challenge that anyone could even question him. This reaction shows that he cannot understand his statement was offensive and bigoted, or causes great hurt and increased danger to Jews. That is not the type of insensitivity one expects from a someone who boasts of his friendship and dedication.

    Kerry could be wrong, too. Demographics are not settled that Arab numbers or birth rates are accurate, or that Israel would lose its Jewish and democratic character. The fact is that Palestinian Arabs in Israel suffer the least discrimination of ALL Palestinians and prosper most, save the crooks who prey on the backs of the Palestinian people.

    Rejectionism as an aspect of Palestinian identity could make any option futile, but the lure of peace and prosperity might cause a fair number to prefer to live as Israelis or take compensation to live elsewhere. Though their Arab brothers and sisters would likely reject them, one can dream.

  5. "In what he foolishly thought was a safe place to let his hair down, Kerry merely gave voice to what the Obama administration thinks. “Apartheid” trips easily off his tongue because it is part of the Islamist narrative that the administration has internalized...."



  6. Now tell me you didn't see THIS coming:

    "Obama's Middle East adviser says Hamas-Fatah unity 'not necessarily a bad thing' .....Gordon told the Jewish representatives that it would be very difficult to achieve a peace agreement with “half a Palestinian entity” and not with those who are under the rule of Hamas. You can’t make peace with only a part of the Palestinian people, Gordon said. "


    How did I ever get in this alternative universe?

    1. Idealism, ideologies, and the methods of their social enforcement.