Trending Topics:

‘Untenable one-state reality’ is taking hold, Kerry tells Israel supporters

on 37 Comments

John Kerry’s tough-love speech to a pro-Israel gathering on Saturday suggesting that an “untenable one-state reality” is taking hold in Israel and Palestine represents a new rhetorical step for the quasi-outspoken secretary of state. The speech follows Kerry’s statement from a year ago that Israel could become an “apartheid state” and the White House statement two years ago that Israel faces a “tsunami” of boycott threats if it can’t take steps to create a Palestinian state.

Kerry is getting a lot of criticism in Israel for a number of assertions in the speech: that Israeli “occupation” and settlement construction have “reversed” the promise of Oslo and thereby fostered terrorism, that the Palestinian Authority may collapse, that many in the Israeli government are opposed to a two-state solution, that the “Arab street” will rise up if Palestinians don’t get a state, and that Israel will cease to be a Jewish state in that one-state reality.

And he seemed to challenge the US press when he said, “Palestinian hopes are also being dashed by what they see happening every day. They’re focused on a reality that few others see.”

Here are excerpts of the Kerry speech:

The Palestinians believe this Israeli government will never give them a state and that their land is being systematically taken away and the daily indignations of occupation will never end and that there is impunity for attacks against Palestinians. That’s what they believe.

Here’s what I know: The Israeli and Palestinian people deserve better, but the current path is not leading to a more peaceful future. I am concerned that unless significant efforts are made to change the dynamic – and I mean significant – it will only bring more violence, more heartbreak, and more despair. That’s a fear, not a threat….

This brings us to a broader question. If there is a risk that the PA could collapse, and it is in Israel’s interest for it to in fact survive, as the prime minister suggested, should more therefore not be done to help sustain it? This really goes to the heart of a bigger debate, because the truth is that many of those arguing against the PA simply don’t believe in two states. The prime minister has been clear that he does not want a bi-national state and that he remains committed to the vision of two states for two peoples. But at the same time, many current Israeli ministers have been equally clear that they oppose a Palestinian state – not just now but ever.

So my friends, we’ve got to be clear-eyed about this. We can’t come to a forum like this, we can’t have meetings, we can’t go back and forth and maintain the norms of diplomacy and pretend. We have to be honest about what a one-state solution actually looks like. First, nobody should be lulled into a forced complacency that the PA would still be there under those circumstances. In fact, the chances that it would collapse increase over time every day now, let alone what would happen if that were the direction you’re moving in. And it would collapse sooner rather than later under those circumstances along with all of the risks and worst outcomes.

Let’s focus on a few other critical questions that that approach raises. I’m just asking questions. How does Israel possibly maintain its character as a Jewish and democratic state when from the river to the sea there would not even be a Jewish majority? Then next question: Would millions of Palestinians be given the basic rights of Israeli citizens including the right to vote, or would they be relegated to a permanent underclass? Would the Israelis and Palestinians living in such close quarters have segregated roads and transportation systems with different laws applying in the Palestinian enclaves? Would anyone really believe they were being treated equally? What would the international response be to that, my friends, or to a decision by Israel to unilaterally annex large portions of the West Bank? How could Israel ever have true peace with its neighbors, as the Arab Peace Initiative promises and as every Arab leader I have met with in the last year reinforces to me as recently as in the last month that they are prepared to do?

But how will they do that if there is no chance for a two-state solution? How will the Arab street in today’s world let that go by? And wouldn’t Israel risk being in perpetual conflict with millions of Palestinian living in the middle of a state? I think the answers ought to make it clear to all the one-state solution is no solution at all for a secure Jewish democratic Israel living in peace. It is simply not a viable option. And no less a statesman and one of the men I admire the most in the world, one of the most eloquent people that I’ve ever heard talk and one of the great warriors for peace as Shimon Peres put it himself: Anyone who rejects the two-state solution won’t bring a one-state solution; they will instead bring one war, not one state.

So my friends, that again brings us to a broader question. If the two-state solution is the only real option, what more can actually be done to advance it? These are important questions for all of us who care deeply about Israel, and I do care deeply. I had a 100 percent voting record over 28-plus years and I remember fondly every visit I’ve ever made over there and I have great friends, great friends.

But I ask people to answer this question as honestly as possible. And this is not an abstract issue that you can put off for some distant day. The status quo is simply not sustainable. And the fact is that current trends including violence, settlement activity, demolitions, are imperiling the viability of a two-state solution. And that trend has to be reversed in order to prevent this untenable one-state reality from taking hold. I can’t stress this enough. The terrorist attacks are devastating the hopes of Israelis who want to believe that peace is possible, and the violence must stop. Yes.

But Palestinian hopes are also being dashed by what they see happening every day. They’re focused on a reality that few others see, that the transition to greater Palestinian civil authority contemplated by the Oslo process has in many ways been reversed. In fact, nearly all of Area C which comprises 60 percent of the West Bank is effectively restricted for any Palestinian development, much of it claimed for Israeli state land or for settlement councils. We understand there was only one Palestinian building permit granted for all of Area C all of last year. And settler outposts are regularly being legalized while demolition of the Palestinian structures is increasing. You get it? At the same time the settler population in the West Bank has increased by tens of thousands over just the past five years including many in remote areas.

Settlements are absolutely no excuse for violence. No, they’re not. And we are clear about that. But the continued settlement growth raises honest questions about Israel’s long-term intentions and will only make separating from the Palestinians much more difficult. There are no easy answers, but we can’t stop trying to find solutions that move us closer to peace. And that is why President Obama has called on both sides to demonstrate with actions and policies a genuine commitment to a two-state solution. The Quartet has suggested steps on the ground that would reverse current trends and resume the Oslo transition in ways that do not affect Israel’s security at all. And I want to stress that point. Increasing Palestinian civil authority does not happen at the expense of Israeli security. In fact, strengthening the Palestinian economy will enhance security for Israelis and Palestinians alike. And the Palestinians must also meet their commitments including combatting violence and incitement, improving governance, and building their institutions..

But right now, you’ve got a lot of young people growing up in the West Bank who don’t have jobs, who aren’t – they don’t see a future. And the question is: What choices are they going to make? I think Israel has a vital national security interest in wanting to do more, and I believe – I say this nicely, but I believe there are people within the security establishment of Israel who believe just what I said and who would like to see more done to strengthen the Palestinians…

So what I’m trying to persuade people is you have to go a little further to indicate to the Palestinians a political horizon, something that begins to say to them, “Yes, you can have a state. There is a way to get there. Here’s what you have to do.” And begin to open up some opportunities in the Area C for them to build, to have some agriculture, do some business, and begin to strengthen themselves.

That would begin to send a very different message. And it doesn’t mean you have a big negotiation. It’s not opening up a whole new set of promises for some outcome you can’t produce. But it’s real and tangible in terms of the transition to Oslo and to rights….

Kerry’s comments are especially interesting when you consider Yousef Munayyer’s repeated challenge to the New America Foundation and Peter Beinart last June: the one-state reality is upon us and we must try to imagine just divisions of power under it. Kerry wants none of that. At Harvard in October, he polled the crowd for two-state-believers and said that those who don’t believe in a two-state future aren’t allowed in the U.S. conversation.

Some hands are not being raised. How many of you support – don’t support a two-state solution? Well, you just didn’t vote. You’re opting out. (Laughter.) You’re not allowed to opt out. You cannot go to Harvard and opt out, okay?

Kerry is certainly out of touch with the American street. Shibley Telhami at Brookings reports on his latest poll:

Those who advocate a one-state solution, 31%, are now comparable to those who advocate a two-state solution, 35%.

Also, another sign of the discursive crisis that is upon us, on Sunday in Washington, Hillary Clinton took issue with Kerry by refusing to say a word about occupation and putting the burden on Arab leaders to reup the Arab Peace Initiative– though Kerry said that every Arab leader he meets is behind it already. Clinton:

Right now Arab leaders could send a powerful message by reviving and updating the Arab peace initiative and laying out a process for normalizing relations with Israel and accepting it as a Jewish state alongside an independent Palestine. And Israel could seize the opportunity to directly respond to such an initiative. There’s no magic wand, but there’s a real strategic opportunity worth exploring.

Thanks to Max Blumenthal.



Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is senior editor of and founded the site in 2005-06.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

37 Responses

  1. sawah on December 8, 2015, 1:11 pm

    So the US government is advocating for a jewish state…does that mean the US government will refer to the US as the white christian state? So it can keep stressing shared values?

    • Talkback on December 9, 2015, 8:22 am

      Nope. The US goverment will refer to the US as a Noahide state.

    • genesto on December 9, 2015, 12:27 pm

      Exactly! None of these ‘leaders’ ever bother to explain just what recognizing Israel as a Jewish state really means. If you are asking non-Jews to formally recognize Israel as a Jewish state, then you are effectively asking them to formally accept their second-class-citizen status. This would be the same as asking Jews here to formally recognize the US as a Christian country. No self-respecting Jew would do such a thing, so why expect any self-respecting Christian or Muslim in Israel to do so?

  2. US Citizen on December 8, 2015, 1:22 pm

    Hillary is almost just as bad, pro- Israel and old school. She will drag us back to the 20th century with her ” I will call Bibi the first month I am in office ” bullcrap.

    As Secretary of State she did nothing for the Palestinians, as a member of the Quartet she did nothing for the Palestinians, if president she will do nothing for the Palestinians.

    I will not vote for her.


    • Brown-Eyed Girl on December 8, 2015, 5:48 pm

      I am not aware Bernie is progressive on this issue. As far as I know, since he has been in the Senate he has been very quiet on Israel/Palestine. Someone correct me if he has made any recent statements.

      • JLewisDickerson on December 9, 2015, 1:43 am

        Sanders is not very good on Israel/Palestine, but I trust him a hell of a lot more than I do Hillary Clinton.
        For one thing, he’s not owned by Haim Saban.
        For another, he is far less of a ‘liberal interventionist’ than is Clinton.

        But, it mostly comes down to a matter of integrity.
        Bernie Sanders appears to have a considerable amount of it.
        Whereas, Hillary Clinton suffers from a severe deficit of it!
        Kind of like Tiffany’s. ~

  3. Citizen on December 8, 2015, 2:08 pm

    Kerry struggles so hard within his concrete ivy league elitism to spill out something wise but verboten. It was much easier to toss to the dirt his Vietnam War medals than buck Zionists embedded around him in every corridor of American power. The Israelis make fun of him all the time–as the child lummox.

  4. Boomer on December 8, 2015, 3:21 pm

    I don’t read Hebrew and haven’t been to Israel, so I don’t really know what Israelis say about Kerry, or Obama, or anyone else for that matter . . . but from their actions I infer that they ignore any words they don’t agree with, and keep on doing what they want to do. Only action would change that . . . or the passive inaction of withholding our veto in the Security Council. Obama seems capable of uttering fine words (carefully nuanced, with lots of praise for Zionism), but not capable of failing to do what Israel wants him to do at the UN.

  5. Krauss on December 8, 2015, 3:51 pm

    We seem to be moving in two directions at the same time:

    The American public, and especially the liberal base, is leaving Israel and Zionism behind.

    The old rear-guard establishment, personified by Clinton, are clutching their pearls more tightly than ever.

    In the short run the latter will make it seem worse than it is, over the long run, no more than 1-2 decades, the former will establish its primacy and dominance over the other.

  6. ritzl on December 8, 2015, 3:59 pm

    Clearly one state IS “tenable.” Israel is doing it.

    I wonder if mass expulsions or killing residual Palestinians is equally “untenable” in Kerry-speak.

  7. Boomer on December 8, 2015, 4:06 pm

    972 has an excellent article by Michael Omer-Man on the Brookings poll, one-state vs. two, Obama’s position, and related matters

  8. JWalters on December 8, 2015, 4:20 pm

    Thanks for this article. It’s heartening to hear the U.S. Secretary of State inching the conversation toward reality, despite the despotic control of Israeli money. This probably has to be done carefully. It’s like trying disarm a madman who could blow up the whole neighborhood.

    I hope at least SOME in the mainstream media will have the courage to risk reporting on this speech, and use it as a springboard to discuss the issues he raises. The Israeli MIC profiteers will do EVERYTHING in their power to prevent this. Their full-court press for more war is clearly being amped up. Pundits will be threatened. Their hired henchmen (e.g. Joe Scarborough) will rant. But the world cannot succumb to this dictatorship forever. Ultimately, serious jail terms are needed.

    • John Douglas on December 9, 2015, 11:41 am

      JWalters: “It’s like trying [to] disarm a madman who could blow up the whole neighborhood.”

      A brilliant way of putting an issue that should not be ignored.

  9. Eva Smagacz on December 8, 2015, 5:18 pm

    If politics is an art of the possible, then lets look at the incredible change in the discourse on Israel.

    It’s “democracy”, it’s “pluckiness” and it’s occupation, it’s colonial policies, it’s political move towards far right national neoconservatism they are all being brought to light and unpicked thread by thread in the comments sections of the mainstream media, even as they (media) try to keep valiantly to a party line.

    The truth about Israel has breached the defences and while it may take a generation to show up in the manifesto of the upper echelons of the political greasy pole, this battle is all but won.

    All this happened during Obama administration – I know arguments that Obama could have done more – but look at what Kerry is able to say in a polite society and not be tarred and feathered and run out of town and wonder at the progress on the discourse we are having.

    The next two battles, and possibly more difficult to fight let alone win, are

    the battle where the nastiness of Israel towards its colonial subjects is accepted on a tide of xenophobia and Islamophobia, and

    the freedom of speech on the Internet is severely curtailed in a name of a common front towards common enemy (aka war on “terrorism”).

  10. JLewisDickerson on December 8, 2015, 5:46 pm

    RE: “I think the answers ought to make it clear to all the one-state solution is no solution at all for a secure Jewish democratic Israel living in peace.” ~ Kerry

    MY SNARKASM: Who the the hell cares what John Kerry thinks??? Big money talks while bullsht merely walks!!! Now, sally forth Big Bad John!

    SEE: “Sheldon Adelson’s Dismissal of Israeli Democracy Draws Silence From Groups He Backs” | Josh Nathan-Kazis | | November 12, 2014

    [EXCERPTS] Recipients of casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson’s largesse are dodging questions about his latest salvo against Israeli democracy.

    Adelson, a leading Republican donor, has long stood out among American Jews for his conservative views. He may have stepped farther outside of the American Jewish mainstream than ever before, however, in statements at a conference in Washington on November 9 in which he seemed to write off Israel as a democratic state.

    “I don’t think the Bible says anything about democracy,” Adelson said. “[God] didn’t talk about Israel remaining as a democratic state… Israel isn’t going to be a democratic state — so what?”

    While Anti-Defamation League national president Abraham Foxman has slammed Adelson’s remarks, leaders of groups that have taken money from Adelson have not responded to requests to address his statements.

    “Mr. Adelson is certainly entitled to his views,” said Mark Charendoff, president of the Maimonides Foundation and former president of the Jewish Funders Network. “The question is whether he seeks to impose those views on the not-for-profits he supports, and whether he seeks to determine their educational message.”

    A spokesperson for Birthright Israel, whose group gets $32 million a year from Adelson, did not respond to a request for comment. Neither did the Republican Jewish Coalition, the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, or the Israeli American Council, all of which have received major funding from Adelson.

    Mort Klein, national director of the Zionist Organization of America, which Adelson also supports, suggested that Adelson’s comments may have been an attempt at humor. “I know Sheldom for maybe 15 years,” Klein said. “This is Sheldon Adleson humor, sarcasm, an attempt at humor… Of course he’s a fervent supporter of democracy.”

    A spokesman for the Israeli consul general in New York declined to comment. [LOL! ~ J.L.D.] . . .


  11. msmoore on December 8, 2015, 5:55 pm

    “Settlements are absolutely no excuse for violence. No, they’re not. And we are clear about that.”

    If theft of a people’s native land isn’t, what is a legitimate excuse for violence?

  12. pabelmont on December 8, 2015, 6:01 pm

    OK, Mrs. Clinton, what are you a-gonna say when the Arab states — taking you at your word — again propose the same-old, same-old peace with Israel — explicitly calling on Israel to remove all settlers and remove at least the wall and maybe also all the settlements buildings, and of course lifting the siege on Gaza, and proposing a FULL Palestinian state in WB+G including the old East Jerusalem and also a corridor of some kind between G and WB? And, I forget, also proposing a FULL PRoR?

    Can’t hear you, Mrs. Clinton. What are you a-gonna say to that? In case you forgot, that’s what 2-states means. And, of course, Israel might prefer a smaller Israeli territory in order to reduce the number of Palestinians who might return to that territory under the PRoR.

    • JLewisDickerson on December 8, 2015, 7:03 pm


      You’ve got to accentuate the positive
      Eliminate the negative
      Latch on to the affirmative
      Don’t mess with Mister In-Between

      You’ve got to spread joy up to the maximum
      Bring gloom down to the minimum
      Have faith or pandemonium
      Liable to walk upon the scene

      But when push finally comes to shove
      Forget everything I just said above
      And triangulate like there’s no tomorrow
      ‘Cause Johnny Mercer didn’t know his patootie from a patootie

      • JLewisDickerson on December 8, 2015, 7:08 pm

        ■ The Andrew Sisters & Bing Crosby – Accentuate The Positive

        ■ Aretha Franklin – Rocksteady

      • Mooser on December 9, 2015, 11:57 am

        “‘Cause Johnny Mercer didn’t know his patootie…”

        Well, wherever he’s going, I’d like to go his way. After having one for my baby, and one more for the road, and so many, many, many others.

  13. JLewisDickerson on December 8, 2015, 8:50 pm

    RE: “Right now Arab leaders could send a powerful message by reviving and updating the Arab peace initiative . . .” ~ Madam Secretary Clinton

    MY COMMENT: Respectfully, I have an even better idea, Madam Secretary. Why don’t you simply blow a “peace initiative” right out your patootie?
    It’s worth a try, isn’t it?

    • JLewisDickerson on December 9, 2015, 12:16 am

      P.S. RE: “Why don’t you simply blow a ‘peace initiative’ right out
      your patootie?”
      ~ me (from above)

      ADDITIONAL THOUGHT: I’m certain that Haim Saban would gladly be of assistance!

  14. John Douglas on December 8, 2015, 10:33 pm

    I guess I have a different view about Kerry’s speech. I don’t know if he really believes the 2SS is still possible. But even if he doesn’t, that speech was the the smartest way to talk to that crowd. What American politician has ever publicly described to a group of very influential American Jews in such clear terms the predicament that Israel is in and has brought upon itself by its settlement policies? I can’t think of one. I don’t mean that these conference goers didn’t know it already, but this seems like the first time the secret has been brought into the open. There was a dream, a Jewish and democratic society. It was, as a dream, exclusionary and essentially undemocratic to be sure. But it was the dream of those Jewish Republicans. Kerry is saying to them, “You’re on the verge of destroying your own dream.” I think that’s a big step in the right direction – which won’t be the 2SS, that time has passed.

    • YoniFalic on December 9, 2015, 1:44 am

      The dream of Herzl, Nordau, and Jabotinsky was an exclusive dominant racist European Jewish society based in white racist European genocidal colonialism. Herzl and Nordau were quite clear about the need for genocide (although the word did not exist during their lives) while Jabotinsky wanted an iron wall between the white racist European invaders and the natives. Jabotinsky paid lip service to democracy for the sake of PR in the UK but also occasionally argued that European Jews were really Aryans in the German Nazi sense.

      Herzl lived in the Hapsburg Empire, Nordau in the Hohenzollern Empire, and Jabotinsky in the Romanov Empire, which was overthrown by the Bolsheviks. The fundamental political experience of the three main Zionist leaders lay with despotic states that had only limited democratic features and in which a ruling ethnonational group controlled and exploited large subordinate populations ethnically and culturally extremely different from the ruling population.

      In all three Empires the “Jewish” population worked extremely hard to blend in or to identify with the ruling population whether Protestant German, Catholic Austrian, or Orthodox Russian.

      • John Douglas on December 9, 2015, 11:31 am

        The dream I referred to was not that of the founding Zionists. It was the dream/myth of an Israel where the desert was made to bloom, where the Jews of Ethiopia were magnanimously rescued and brought to their homeland, an Israel that Jews world-wide could rely upon for safety and where the defense forces of Israel could kick-ass at will (though always and only in Israel’s defense). American Jews of my (advanced) age were raised on that dream/myth and are having difficulty seeing through it to reality.

      • Philemon on January 17, 2016, 8:08 pm

        “American Jews of my (advanced) age were raised on that dream/myth and are having difficulty seeing through it to reality.”

        That’s the problem, though. And it wasn’t just a cheery dream. Underlying it was the paranoia:

        “…. [A]n Israel that Jews world-wide could rely upon for safety and where the defense forces of Israel could kick-ass at will (though always and only in Israel’s defense)…”

        Because they thought Jews “world-wide” needed safety from the “world-wide” threat. Right. Because all the practitioners of the Judaic religion would be so much safer if they all huddled up in one spot.

        As a religion, Judaism would go on. Just like Scientology would go on even without John Travolta or Tom Cruise.

        It might not have as much money, though. And Zionists like the money.

        C’mon, those Zionist shysters got relatively poor U.S. American children to contribute their meager spending money towards planting thirsty evergreen European trees to cover up the Palestinian villages they had devastated, after all. No source of cash was overlooked.

        John, I was gulled at one point, too. But somehow the fairytale doesn’t do anything for me now. Well, except that it might piss me off, of course.

  15. David Nelson on December 9, 2015, 1:41 am

    I agree with the sentiments of JWalters, Eva Smagacz and John Douglas, in my opinion some amazing words by Secretary Kerry. I was surprised at the end where Weiss seemed to come down against Kerry (though thank you Phil for using “American street” to even up the language), I’m reading the speech thinking when did we last have a Secretary of State who could’ve possibly said these words? Colin Powell certainly could have, but his boss would have stopped him.

    Maybe it is true that Kerry is out of touch with the American street, but he’s an establishment figure working within the establishment trying to persuade other establishment figures that the status quo cannot maintain. It is a tough job he has, i think he did a damn good job in that capacity. Israel should take this as one of the last warnings they are going to get, if something doesn’t change for the better, soon life will become much tougher for all the parties involved.

    I also cannot help but think Kerry’s and Clinton’s speeches at Brookings were coordinated, in a ‘bad cop, good cop’ sort of way. Kerry’s speech was saying “listen up bubs, or bibi, or whatever, here’s the reality…” Whereas Clinton’s speech was reassuring Israel they would be coddled for a while longer. Or, Kerry bruised the Israelis up, and Clinton performed triage. It is easy for those of us who have bucked the establishment on this issue to leave aside the diplo-speak, but as the current and former chief American diplomats, it is not so realistic to expect them to do so.

    Also, all you all who are mocking the Arab Peace Initiative, i would just like to say that even if a one state solution seems inevitiable at this point, it is not going to be certified as such until a whole lot of bloodletting occurs. I for one do not have any blood to lose, so if there’s a chance with the Arab Peace Initiative, then how can anyone except the Palestinians mock or discourage it? The Saudis have billions to throw into the incentive package, surely some econmic benefit of this inititiative must be seen by Israel.

    • inbound39 on December 9, 2015, 11:15 am

      Lol… it Talknic!

      • talknic on December 9, 2015, 12:34 pm

        US Presidents and their henchmen come and go

        The Zionists have had over a century to practice the art of stalling … new POTUS … start over … stall … new POTUS … start over … stall

        Anyone who thinks a US President/the US is ever going to resolve this issue doesn’t know what the Palestinians are up against

  16. Steve Macklevore on December 9, 2015, 6:13 am

    Kerry’s speech was brave – it would have been very easy for him to mouth the usual platitudes and leave it like that.

    Instead, at least in parts of the speech he dared to tell Israel the truth. Which is unknown from a senior serving White house official.

  17. eljay on December 9, 2015, 8:51 am

    Kerry isn’t concerned about international laws, (war) crimes or the (human) rights of the indigenous population (incl. refugees). He’s concerned about the well-being of religion-supremacist “Jewish State”.

    Kerry is just another hateful and immoral Zio-supremacist.

  18. inbound39 on December 9, 2015, 11:10 am

    If we are going to properly discuss being out of touch I think we need to consider the following. Compared to the American Street,John Kerry, is more likely to be in touch with going on than the American Street which is largely fed and corrupted by the Pro Israeli Lobby and supplied with Hasbara and flat out lies and plenty of money to turn thinking.
    Clinton will isolate America further with her irrational Pro Israel stance given the majority of the World Population abhors what Israel is doing. The longer America continues this special relationship with Israel the more untenable America’s position in Global Politics is going to be because no-one is going to trust a nation that stands with a deceptive and dishonest Nation like Israel.
    All in all the future looks entirely bleak for Israel and Netanyahu has set Israel up to collapse and disappear under a blanket of billions of angry Arabs.

  19. James Canning on December 11, 2015, 1:15 pm

    John Kerry clearly is well aware that the growth of illegal Jewish colonies in the occupied West Bank is a very bad thing for the US, and not a good thing even for Israel itself.

Leave a Reply