Trending Topics:

Chris Matthews and David Corn defend Israel against ‘slander’ of apartheid

on 80 Comments

I just saw this on Hardball. Bill Kristol’s group the Emergency Committee for Israel has a new attack ad out against Hillary Clinton. It’s to air on the ABC network tonight during an interview with the former secretary of State. 
The ad scores Hillary Clinton for not condemning John Kerry’s comment that Israel could become an apartheid state. Here’s my transcript of the ad:

When secretary of state John Kerry said Israel could become “an apartheid state,” America’s most prominent Jewish groups condemned Kerry, but not Hillary Clinton. Democratic Party organizations called on Kerry to apologize, but not Hillary Clinton. Democratic Senators and congressman criticized Kerry, but not Hillary Clinton. When John Kerry slandered Israel, Democrats spoke out. So why not Hillary Clinton?

The ad is false inasmuch as Hillary Clinton is more pro-Israel than Obama and Kerry. What I found distasteful is that Matthews and his guest David Corn landed on the Emergency Committee by vigorously defending Israel, and characterizing the apartheid charge as a slander. No video yet, but Matthews used that word. The two said the charge isn’t even germane till the Palestinian population between the river and the sea is larger than the Jewish population– not till 2020, Matthews projected.

But apartheid’s criminal definition has nothing to do with a minority ruling over a majority; it’s defined as a system of legalized racial/ethnic privilege characterized by persecution or other inhumane practices. Right now it’s “apartheid on steroids” in the West Bank, according to The Nation, the magazine Corn used to work for. Palestinian political leader Mustafa Barghouthi says it’s “full-fledged apartheid” right now. Archbishop Desmond Tutu knows what apartheid is; he says it’s apartheid.

How sad that supporters of the Democratic Party have to line up with AIPAC– which is cited approvingly in the Emergency Committee for Israel ad. Sad that Matthews has to come out in such an operatic manner for Israel (the offensive ad was his closing bit too).

I think the ECI ad is about fundraising, a shot across the fundraisers’ bow. And the attack and Matthews’s counter are further evidence of the primacy of Israel in our politics. As NBC states: “it’s noteworthy that this is the first TV ad hitting Clinton — a year and a half before the first 2016 contests begin, and also before we know for sure Clinton will be running for the White House.” 

P.S. Matthews said that Palestinians are Muslims. When many Palestinians are Christian.

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

80 Responses

  1. Jim Holstun on June 9, 2014, 10:00 pm

    You’re right–the question of numerical minority and majority isn’t salient to the discussion of Zionism as apartheid. But there probably is a slight Palestinian majority even now, between the river and the sea. And if one subtracts the emigre Israelis–and the Jewish and Democratic State is pretty cagey about providing an actual count of its wandering sons and daughters–the Palestinian majority is even greater.

  2. pjdude on June 9, 2014, 10:46 pm

    Slander requires 2 things falseness and aim to harm. Referring to the fact israel is an apartheid state is niether

    • Ron Edwards on June 10, 2014, 9:02 am

      It’s bigger than that. Slander applies only to persons. A state cannot be slandered.

    • Zach S on June 10, 2014, 9:49 am

      Actually it fits both, perfectly. It’s false, and people only say it with the intention of “proving” that Israel has no right to exist.

      • Hostage on June 10, 2014, 5:28 pm

        Actually it fits both, perfectly. It’s false . . .

        That’s incorrect. The ICJ findings of fact in the Wall case (paragraphs 132-134) lists violations of international law that include several of the constituent acts of the crime from Article II of the Apartheid Convention. It only takes one of those to indict and convict the responsible Israeli government officials.

      • pjdude on June 11, 2014, 12:28 pm

        obnly to people like you who have lied so much you no longer can tell the differences between truth and your lies. Israel is an aparthied state. and mentioning is used to bring legal force to bear against the crime not as a slur. though please don’t repeat that tired lie of Israel’s “right to exist” I’ll ignore most of the reasons and go to important one you say you believe in the myth of jewish self determination well demand for israel a fake right of existence is a denial of the right of self determination.

      • eljay on June 11, 2014, 12:35 pm

        >> It’s false, and people only say it with the intention of “proving” that Israel has no right to exist.

        People say it with the intention of underscoring the fact that Israel exists as an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State”.

        Israel has no right to exist as an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State”. No state has a right to exist as an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist state.

        If Israel were none of those things – if Israel were actually a secular and democratic Israeli state of and for all of its citizens, immigrants, ex-pats and refugees, equally; a state that respected its and its neighbours borders – no-one would be using the term apartheid to describe it.

    • just on June 10, 2014, 5:38 pm

      IIIYI, pjdude. They have a whole other set of rules that applies only to them.

      exceptionalism on crack.

      • pjdude on June 11, 2014, 12:29 pm

        I know its one of the reasons I started to oppose Israel. the central viewpoint for me in geo politics is all must be before the law. Israel’s demands to be treated with velvet gloves just rubs me wrong.

  3. Kay24 on June 9, 2014, 10:52 pm

    Chris Matthews lost any sense of decency, fairness, balance, and being an honest journalist, when he accepted the junket trips, and whatever Israel offered him, to buy his devotion, and protection. Not one of these American zionist MSM, EVER talk of the brutal occupation, the years of oppression and blockades, the land thefts, or the suffering endured by the long suffering Palestinians. To mention the word “apartheid” is blasphemy to Matthews and Corn. There is no neutrality when it comes to the I/P issue, and the victim, is always the occupier.

  4. Hostage on June 9, 2014, 10:53 pm

    –and the Jewish and Democratic State is pretty cagey about providing an actual count of its wandering sons and daughters–

    The Israeli press estimated the number is between 800,000 to one million residing abroad, back when Netanyahu and Lieberman wanted to give them the right to participate in general elections.,7340,L-3682918,00.html

  5. Pixel on June 9, 2014, 10:56 pm

    She’ll be running.

  6. Hostage on June 9, 2014, 11:03 pm

    The Prawer Plan for Israel’s Bedouin population is still being refined and is still on the table. There is a twin plan to remove thousands of Bedouins from West Bank lands slated for Jewish apartments and farms. See Amira Hass, “The Prawer plan, special West Bank edition”,

  7. bijou on June 9, 2014, 11:30 pm

    For those who are interested, here is an excellent study on the question of whether Israel is an apartheid state, a colonial state, or an occupation.

    Occupation, Colonialism, Apartheid?: A re-assessment of Israel’s practices in the occupied Palestinian territories under international law Virginia Tilley, Ed. Link:

    EI review of the book here:


    Regarding apartheid, the team found that Israel’s laws and policies in the OPT fit the definition of apartheid in the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. Israeli law conveys privileges to Jewish settlers and disadvantages Palestinians in the same territory on the basis of their respective identities, which function in this case as racialized identities in the sense provided by international law. Israel’s practices are corollary to five of the six “inhuman acts” listed by the Convention. A policy of apartheid is especially indicated by Israel’s demarcation of geographic “reserves” in the West Bank, to which Palestinian residence is confined and which Palestinians cannot leave without a permit. The system is very similar to the policy of “Grand Apartheid” in Apartheid South Africa, in which black South Africans were confined to black Homelands delineated by the South African government, while white South Africans enjoyed freedom of movement and full civil rights in the rest of the country.

    Quoting from the Executive Summary of the report, project leader Dr. Virginia Tilley explained that the three pillars of apartheid in South Africa are all practiced by Israel in the OPT. In South Africa, the first pillar was to demarcate the population of South Africa into racial groups, and to accord superior rights, privileges and services to the white racial group. The second pillar was to segregate the population into different geographic areas, which were allocated by law to different racial groups, and restrict passage by members of any group into the area allocated to other groups. And the third pillar was “a matrix of draconian ‘security’ laws and policies that were employed to suppress any opposition to the regime and to reinforce the system of racial domination, by providing for administrative detention, torture, censorship, banning, and assassination.”

    The Report finds that Israeli practices in the OPT exhibit the same three “pillars” of apartheid:

    The first pillar “derives from Israeli laws and policies that establish Jewish identity for purposes of law and afford a preferential legal status and material benefits to Jews over non-Jews.”

    The second pillar is reflected in “Israel’s ‘grand’ policy to fragment the OPT [and] ensure that Palestinians remain confined to the reserves designated for them while Israeli Jews are prohibited from entering those reserves but enjoy freedom of movement throughout the rest of the Palestinian territory. This policy is evidenced by Israel’s extensive appropriation of Palestinian land, which continues to shrink the territorial space available to Palestinians; the hermetic closure and isolation of the Gaza Strip from the rest of the OPT; the deliberate severing of East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank; and the appropriation and construction policies serving to carve up the West Bank into an intricate and well-serviced network of connected settlements for Jewish-Israelis and an archipelago of besieged and non-contiguous enclaves for Palestinians.”

    The third pillar is “Israel’s invocation of ‘security’ to validate sweeping restrictions on Palestinian freedom of opinion, expression, assembly, association and movement [to] mask a true underlying intent to suppress dissent to its system of domination and thereby maintain control over Palestinians as a group.”

    The research team included scholars and international lawyers based at the HSRC, the School for Oriental and African Studies (London), the British Institute for International and Comparative Law, the University of Kwa-Zulu Natal (Durban), the Adalah/Legal Centre for Arab Minority Rights in Israel and al-Haq/West Bank Affiliate of the International Commission of Jurists. Consultation on the study’s theory and method was provided by eminent jurists from South Africa, Israel and Europe.

    The HSRC serves as the national social science council for South Africa. The Middle East Project of the HSRC is an independent two-year project to conduct analysis of Middle East politics relevant to South African foreign policy, funded by the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Government of South Africa. The analysis in this report is entirely independent of the views or foreign policy of the Government of South Africa and does not represent an official position of the HSRC. It is intended purely as a scholarly resource for the South African government and civil society and the concerned international community.

  8. DaveS on June 9, 2014, 11:34 pm

    I never quite understood the significance of the magic moment, which either already has happened or will happen shortly, that non-Jews outnumber Jews between the river and the sea. Before that time, Jews were in complete control of all the land and the people, with non-Jews divided among various groups, ranging from second-class citizens with inferior civil rights to those suffering under military occupation with virtually no rights at all. Nothing changes when the magic moment is reached. What difference does it make whether the Jewish population is slightly over or under 50%, or even whether it is 20% or 80%? The system that doles out rights and status to different groups depending upon their ethnicity/ancestry/religion would be unthinkable in the US and would merit condemnation if imposed in any other country.

    • Donald on June 9, 2014, 11:48 pm

      “I never quite understood the significance of the magic moment, which either already has happened or will happen shortly, that non-Jews outnumber Jews between the river and the sea”

      The point is to distract attention. It wouldn’t surprise me if there is some fancy name for this type of logical fallacy. I know I’ve seen it used in debates, but can’t think of examples offhand other than this one, but it works like this–if you don’t like a comparison or an analogy between situation A and situation B, you pick out some irrelevant detail where situation A is different from B and grandly proclaim that there can be no valid comparison because that detail is different. The key is to do it with conviction.

      Okay, I did think of another example–people sometimes say Islamophobia can’t be compared to racism, because Muslims aren’t a racial category. Nevermind that everyone sees the similarity between antisemitism and racism. And nevermind that racism isn’t some logically worked out system of thought based on reason and scientific understanding of genetic differences between groups–it’s a way of stigmatizing people according to their membership in a group defined as much by the bigot’s own feelings as by any objective set of standards. Racism isn’t based on biology.

      • DaveS on June 10, 2014, 4:55 pm

        Excellent points as usual, Donald, and excellent example of the logical fallacy. Whenever someone says to me that discrimination against Arabs (or Muslims) should not be called “racism” because Arabs (or Muslims) are not a race, I ask what they would like to call such discrimination. Acceptable?

        As many commenters here already have noted, assignment of different rights and privileges based upon ethnicity is unacceptable, regardless of the relative percentages of the advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Period.

      • Nevada Ned on June 10, 2014, 5:39 pm

        OK, if you object to the term “apartheid”, feel free to call it
        “Jim Crow” instead!

    • michelle on June 10, 2014, 5:53 am

      ” The system that doles out rights and status to different groups depending upon their ethnicity/ancestry/religion would be unthinkable in the US and would merit condemnation if imposed in any other country.”

      that is truly a tongue in cheek statement i.m.o.
      all systems at all levels do just that, just not so openly
      it’s just thatmost are in the dark about this process/pattern
      G-d Bless

      • DaveS on June 10, 2014, 5:02 pm

        michelle, I get what you’re saying, but there is a world of difference between de jure and de facto reality. In the US, everyone is guaranteed equality under the law; while no reasonable person believes that actual de facto equality is the rule in this country, or even that the law is fairly and evenly applied to all, at least the law makes such a guarantee. In Israel, by contrast, the government explicitly treats even its citizens differently based upon their ethnic background, not to mention the millions of non-citizens over whom it rules. If any country treated its Jewish population the way Israel treats its non-Jewish population, there would be vigorous international condemnation, and rightfully so.

      • michelle on June 10, 2014, 9:20 pm

        sure sure i was thinking abit off topic
        injustice/inbalance messes this seesaw
        life up for the lot of us
        ineffective laws are just empty words on bits of paper
        actions speak louder than words
        in America
        most of the true Natives live in deep proverty
        the many prisons are filled mainly with a certain hue
        taxes steal from the poor and give to the rich
        and a living wage by passes most /esp. females
        things are tough all over
        injustice anywhere should never be allowed to rest
        G-d Bless

  9. DICKERSON3870 on June 9, 2014, 11:43 pm

    RE: “I think the ECI ad is about fundraising, a shot across the fundraisers’ bow.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: It might have something to do with fundraising (Hillary’s and ECI’s), but I doubt that many contributors to the Democrats are going pay much attention to an ad produced by a group that is seen as being associated with the one of the most right-wing factions of the Republican Party.
    Personally, I see the ad as being the beginning of an effort by Bill Kristol to make Hillary Clinton completely S-U-B-M-I-T to the Israel/Likud lobby. The goal is to convince her that she must make amends for having been only 98% pro-Israel by promising the Israel/Likud lobby the moon, her ‘first born’ and anything else they might possibly want.
    The ECI ad just happens to have come out at about the same time as Hillary is making the PR rounds due to the release of her new book. Wouldn’t this be an excellent opportunity for her to begin making amends by saying things about Israel and the Middle East that will be truly beautiful music to the ears of the Israel/Likud lobby?

    • Daniel Rich on June 10, 2014, 5:02 am

      @ DICKERSON3870,

      I’m more and more convinced Chelsae’s marriage was prearranged, like back in the day, when kingdoms needed strategic alliances.

    • on June 10, 2014, 7:53 am

      “ effort by Bill Kristol to make Hillary Clinton completely S-U-B-M-I-T to the Israel/Likud lobby”.

      The Clinton’s completely sold out to the Lobby long ago.

    • Citizen on June 10, 2014, 7:54 am

      @ Dickerson3870

      Yes, the Next POTUS battle for who loves Israel more has begun.

      • ritzl on June 11, 2014, 1:15 am

        Citizen- Yep. And the more it’s foregrounded, the more repellant it will be to ordinary voters. HRC kick’s off her campaign with a pledge of support to Israel (at the instigation of the ECI, but even as an “assist” the ECI itself is foregrounding support for Israel as an early, paramount presidential filter).

        I hope this is at least part of why Cantor lost.

      • Daniel Rich on June 11, 2014, 2:14 am

        @ ritzl,

        Q: HRC

        R: Soon to be HRH – Her Royal Highness.

    • Mooser on June 10, 2014, 12:51 pm

      I’m sure Hilary Clinton will be just as firm, just as adamant, with the Israel Lobby as she was with her husband. After all she’s already been humiliated in front of the entire nation, how much worse could it be?

  10. Sycamores on June 9, 2014, 11:54 pm

    off topic

    Tom Carper senior United States Senator from Delaware, serving since 2001. A member of the Democratic Party.

    Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

    U.S. security and stature in the global community are significantly affected by the failure of the Israelis and the Palestinians to bring a resolution to their centuries-old conflict.

    how did Carper come up with that timeline?

    • piotr on June 10, 2014, 10:06 am

      This is really unfair. You would require a US senator says something like “centuries-old conflict” only if he knows some historical events, with dates, and correctly performs a subtraction?

      That reminds me a recent column in New York Times where the author was sad because, according to a poll, 42% of Americans believe that God created the world 10,000 years ago. That is of course false. The number 10,000 was in a discussion of poll results, but the question was merely if the Bible should be understood literally. It is far from simple to derive the time of creation from the Bible, but the consensus is less that 6000 years. What this shows that an American with standard college education, perhaps neither in history, nor in mathematics, nor in theology, does not give a damn if he/she refers to 6000 or 10,000 years. You, Sycamores, are guilty of “elitism” = “the wish that politicians, journalists etc. were able to apply skills required from graduates of grammar schools before they say anything”.

  11. Blownaway on June 9, 2014, 11:54 pm

    The purpose of an education is to rise above the herd. Talking heads like Matthews merely glorify the herd. The untold story is how awful Christians are treated in Israel/OPT including Jerusalem. As a Christian Palestinian I have to defend myself against people who say there is no such thing as a Palestinian let alone a Christian one. Those so called Christian zionists have no clue how the religious Jews would spit on them

  12. ckg on June 10, 2014, 12:05 am

    Roger Cohen at NYT is once again attacking BDS and those who describe Israel as apartheid. The comment section is open. Have at it.

    • Philip Munger on June 10, 2014, 12:13 am

      Here’s the final part of one comment to Cohen’s essay:

      BDS is Israel’s and world Jewry’s mortal enemy. It’s time we started treating them as such. The Israeli government has every moral right to order the Mossad to start eliminating the nefarious leaders of BDS.

      • ckg on June 10, 2014, 7:36 am

        …and with 16 recommendations from NYT readers. Yikes.

      • ckg on June 10, 2014, 7:42 am

        How did the NYT comment moderator approve that? Someone should tell Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview).

      • DaveS on June 10, 2014, 9:10 am

        This comment is still up this morning. I chose not to flag it because I think it should stay up to show how morally perverted some people can be, but I’m quite surprised that it survived the night.

      • Jim Holstun on June 10, 2014, 10:05 am

        Margaret Sullivan is frequently–how to put this?–a woman of principle and humanity. Complained and received this:

        Dear Mr. Holstun,

        Thanks for taking the time to write. The above comment should not have been published. I am forwarding your note along to The Times’s Comment Moderation team in order to get it removed.

        Jonah Bromwich
        Office of the Public Editor
        The New York Times

      • Philip Munger on June 10, 2014, 2:25 pm

        No reply button to Jim Holstun’s letter to the Times Office of the Public Editor.

        Thanks, Jim.

      • Henry Norr on June 10, 2014, 3:09 pm

        I chose last night to flag that comment , checking “inflammatory” and “personal attack.” It seems to have been removed now, as best I can tell.

        Probably I should have let it be, for just the reason you cite, David Samel. But I imagine I’m not the only person who flagged it.

      • ckg on June 10, 2014, 2:47 pm

        Yes. Thanks, Jim.

      • DaveS on June 10, 2014, 3:32 pm

        Henry, it’s a tough call. I’m sure you weren’t the only one who flagged it, but it looks like the moderator was asleep at the wheel while Sullivan’s desk saw the problem as soon as Jim Holstun complained. The reason I let it go is that if I were trying to embarrass Israel and its supporters with a faked homicidal lunatic comment, I couldn’t have come up with anything better than this.

      • lysias on June 10, 2014, 7:10 pm

        Is it even legal to encourage murder like that?

      • just on June 10, 2014, 7:25 pm

        I wondered the same thing.

        It probably ‘depends’…

      • Daniel Rich on June 11, 2014, 2:17 am

        @ ckg,

        Q; How did the NYT comment moderator approve that?

        R; Most likely because s/he agreed with it?

      • Woody Tanaka on June 10, 2014, 10:18 am

        This is just another example of the fact that Zionism includes with it the absolute negation of morality. It is an ideology of death.

  13. Eva Smagacz on June 10, 2014, 2:28 am

    I absolutely love the ad!

    To have words apartheid and Israel in the same hard hitting ad is a major victory. It will make people question more. It is at such prominent spot, as well. Lets have more ads mentioning apartheid, war crimes, occupation and BDS in the same breath as Israel in the prominent spots on major mass media all paid by pro-Zionist crowd.

    Its jiu-jitsu at its best.

    • just on June 10, 2014, 8:23 am

      It’s something all right. I like how you turned this around, and transformed a negative into a positive.

      It’s very interesting to see what the ECI considers an emergency, as well. How much did that cost? Let them empty their coffers for the Apartheid state, and continue to expose the selected officials who betray the bulk of their constituents, without the constituents’ knowledge. I guess our selected officials have to take a loyalty oath to the Apartheid state……. can we expect a public rebuke of Mr. Kerry, and a teary mea culpa from Hillary tomorrow?

      ‘Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.’
      Nelson Mandela

      ‘The whole purpose of education is to turn mirrors into windows.’
      Sydney J. Harris

  14. Daniel Rich on June 10, 2014, 3:30 am

    Q: How sad that supporters of the Democratic Party have to line up with AIPAC– which is cited approvingly in the Emergency Committee for Israel ad.

    R: Even sadder is the fact that it’s a norm [the line up, the groveling], not an exception. Additionally; where’s the outrage? Where’s the ‘I’m mad as hell!’ speech?

  15. just on June 10, 2014, 5:46 am

    O/T– Well, this is somewhat different:

    “The debate over the size of the Israeli defense budget has reached the U.S. Senate too. In a committee session held at the beginning of June, senators raised, for the first time, the question of whether the United States needs to continue granting such a large amount of military aid to Israel.

    It seems the senators’ questions and comments reflect their being somewhat uncomfortable with the large amounts of aid Israel continues to receive at a time when the troubles of the American economy require cuts in the national defense budget. ”

    ‘somewhat uncomfortable’?

  16. Stephen Shenfield on June 10, 2014, 5:55 am

    It would be of great help to busy politicians if they always kept handy a pile of standard forms: “I condemn … for saying that Israel … ” A form could quickly be scribbled in and distributed to the main media outlets whenever occasion demanded. In fact, an aide could do the job.

    • Ron Edwards on June 10, 2014, 9:08 am

      I suspect the aides already do.

      A standard background-and-clearances check applied across the board to the U.S. congressional and senatorial staff would be a wonderful thing.

  17. michelle on June 10, 2014, 5:58 am

    people should ‘defend’ Israel from itself
    G-d Bless

  18. Ellen on June 10, 2014, 7:35 am

    Fascinating discussion going on right now at the The Brookings Institution’s Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World.
    Palestinian Panel speaking now on the Unity Government.

    Praise for Kerry and his attempt “to jump in the ring.”

    Discussion very forward looking.

    • Ellen on June 10, 2014, 7:54 am

      Correction, about the Technocratic government, government of consensus.

  19. just on June 10, 2014, 8:35 am

    One wonders what glowing praises CM will sing about this tonight:

    “Israeli Parliament Selects Reuven Rivlin as Country’s Next President
    JERUSALEM June 10, 2014 (AP)”

    He’ll probably crow about the “democracy” at work in Israel…….

  20. Talkback on June 10, 2014, 8:45 am

    Philip Weiss: But apartheid’s criminal definition has nothing to do with a minority ruling over a majority.

    But it still aplies in this case, too, because Israel keeps millions of Nonjews and their descendants expelled (segregated) and disenfrenchized (denationalized) ONLY to maintain a Zionist regime. It’s all about keeping Nonjews out of Israel’s “democracy”. The Zionists knew right from the get go that they were a minority even in the allocated partition territory and Zionism would have been simply voted off or be a dictatorship like Lehi envisaged it to be in it’s alliance proposal to the Nazis a few years before.

  21. Boomer on June 10, 2014, 9:24 am

    I agree that “apartheid” is a relevant term now, regardless of disputes about percentages. But I also think that arguments about the term, and the percentages, are mostly distractions from the ugly reality that the U.S. has enabled. Regardless of what one calls it, it is a reality of dispossession and oppression that the U.S. continues to support. The U.S. should end that support. It is immoral and contrary to U.S. values and interests. We should instead do what we can to make amends.

    PS: kudos to Phil for his eloquent “Let it Go” cri de coeur. We are fortunate that he is willing and able to do what he does. (I tried to post this comment on that thread, but wasn’t able to do so.)

  22. chinese box on June 10, 2014, 9:33 am

    Chris Matthews is not a serious person. He’s a blowhard who lives in a dream world of baby boomer nostalgia where time stopped in 1963.

    • wondering jew on June 10, 2014, 6:15 pm

      chinese box- Time didn’t stop in 1963 (for baby boomers). for the political types it died in the ambassador hotel in los angeles in june or in august in chicago 1968 or in the polling booths across america in november 68. for cultural types it went to heaven in woodstock 1969.

      • Woody Tanaka on June 10, 2014, 6:43 pm

        Ugh. This conflation of the Baby Boomers with liberalism (as if an entire generation were supporters of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King) drives me nuts. Rush Limbaugh and George W. Bush are as much Baby Boomers as any of the liberals and that generation was the core of the Reagan/Gingrich horrors of the 80s and 90s. And, indeed, the Baby Boomers who were liberals seemed to all check out (or “drop out” or whatever silly label they used) from political life and were replaced by the likes of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

        (yonah, this is not directed specficially to you; it’s a pet peeve of mine…)

      • chinese box on June 10, 2014, 7:22 pm


        You’re right about that. I stand corrected.

  23. HarryLaw on June 10, 2014, 10:06 am

    Apartheid or persecution, ethnic cleansing or settlement building, theft [pillage] or any of the other war crimes and crimes against humanity the Israelis commit every day against the Palestinians, will continue, until those crimes committed by Israel in Palestine are investigated by the ICC, and the Palestinian leadership insist on that investigation.

  24. Kay24 on June 10, 2014, 10:17 am

    Chris Matthews may find it slanderous, but apparently according to Merriam Webster:

    “Apartheid is currently in the top 10% of lookups on”

    Right now the biggest culprit eligible to be under the “apartheid” label, is none
    other than Israel, Matthews is out of touch with reality, and disgustingly biased.

  25. seafoid on June 10, 2014, 10:29 am

    It looks like they are pushing too hard. Kerry is fairly senior and he said what he said knowingly.

    • just on June 10, 2014, 10:49 am

      True, seafoid.

      Here’s the link to the video from last night’s Hardball:

      • Kay24 on June 10, 2014, 11:21 am

        Thanks for the link. It seems Bill Kristol and his zionist gang are trying to make Hillary look LESS devoted to Israel than others. Hard to imagine, that at this stage of the game, they are more concerned about a “possible” Presidential candidate not showing her patriotism and love for an alien nation, instead of discussing her record and policies about their own nation first. According to Kristol and other Israel loving Americans, it seems any future candidate MUST prove their love for Israel even before their own country. We must look strange to the rest of the world.

      • just on June 10, 2014, 11:27 am

        “We must look strange to the rest of the world.”

        We do. We certainly look strange to me! Our hypocrisy on Israel and many other issues is a root of a lot of our problems. So is our enabling of the Apartheid state. So is our own disregard for international law. I could go on, but then it would be a rant. ;)

      • Kay24 on June 10, 2014, 12:55 pm

        The world does notice. I have had many conversations with citizens from other nations, and they all know this sick relationship we have with Israel, and how much we keep supporting it, and defending it’s numerous crimes, and how hypocritical we are when we condemn other nations. How the rest of the world differs to Americans, and how well informed they are, is mostly due to the media coverage, and also the void in the influence by Israeli lobbies, in other nations. We seem to infested by Israeli influence in all major institutions, and government bodies. We are doomed.:))

      • AlGhorear on June 10, 2014, 3:27 pm

        I witnessed the same nauseating argument on Crossfire yesterday, with the Republican side questioning Clinton’s loyalty to Israel due to the part of her book where she talks about Palestinians under occupation being denied dignity and self-determination. Instead of supporting her statement, Paul Begala said something to the effect that no one is more pro-Israel than Hilary Clinton. *Gag*

      • seafoid on June 10, 2014, 1:28 pm

        Certain members of the Israeli leadership have mentioned in several interviews that they want to ease their dependence on the US. Bennett especially sees the change in the US debate and thinks they can offset it by trading with Asia.

        Bukra fi mishmish.

      • Kay24 on June 10, 2014, 2:29 pm

        Meanwhile in the US the Senate also wonders if sending so much aid is worth it:
        “The debate over the size of the Israeli defense budget has reached the U.S. Senate too. In a committee session held at the beginning of June, senators raised, for the first time, the question of whether the United States needs to continue granting such a large amount of military aid to Israel.” Haaretz

        Most probably AIPAC is making that frantic call right now, to remind their puppets just who controls them, and calls the tune. Most probably Israel will keep getting the billions we keep giving, or maybe even more. If the American people made a concerted effort to pressurize their senators into cutting that aid, perhaps it may be different.

      • adele on June 10, 2014, 4:17 pm


        I love how the zio-fascists think their pronouncement is a threat to the U.S.

        Israel is not an asset, and without the U.S. as its backer is but a bit player – and if Israel feels the need to form new alliances who is to say that the CIA and their paid mercenaries in the region won’t be used to destabilize the Israeli regime…..after all, we’ve destabilized/control most of the nations in the region anyway, what is one more. All threats without conviction….the geo-political soap opera continues….

      • seafoid on June 11, 2014, 1:00 am

        “Israel is not an asset”

        you said it. It’s a wedge issue.

  26. John Douglas on June 10, 2014, 2:12 pm

    Chris Matthews is always blathering on about his alma mater Holy Cross College, a truly great liberal arts college, where he was a year behind me. I once wrote to its president to defend Matthew’s right to be commencement speaker in the face of anti-abortion attacks. But what a disgrace he is. If not the greatest PEP in the world certainly the loudest. The word ‘whore’ keeps trying to push its way onto my keyboard, but I resist.

  27. pabelmont on June 10, 2014, 6:12 pm

    Conservatism (and AIPAC has learned all the lessons of other conservative groups) thrives on manufacturing or retaining unearned privilege, and does it by any means that come to hand. Decency and honesty and making-sense and listening to other views are all seen as weakness and play no role.

    (This is one problem for liberals who as a class play fairly, are honest, and are willing to listen to all sides of a question. the deck is stacked against them, because conservatives see no reason to “play fair.”)

    So liberals must be on the attack at all times. And since Israeli occupation IS ALREADY apartheid, and Kerry was just being polite (actually kow-towing) to Israel, we must say so.

  28. James Canning on June 10, 2014, 6:51 pm

    John Kerry clearly is correct, and Hillary Clinton should strongly endorse Kerry’s comments. And scr*w Chris Matthews.

Leave a Reply