U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry does not apologize for suggesting that Israel might become an apartheid state but simply regrets not having used a different word to say the same thing, his spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters Tuesday in a half-hour tragic-comedy media briefing.
At least five different reporters hounded Psaki on Kerry’s statement earlier in the day that he “if he could unwind the tape,” he would have used a different word when saying that a two-state solution is necessary to keep Israel from becoming guilty of apartheid.
Coincidentally or not, today is what was supposed to be the last day of nine months of talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority to bring about a final status agreement to establish a new Arab country smack in the middle of Israel. Kerry took the lead last July to resurrect the dead and buried peace process, which the Obama administration says is needed for the security of the United States.
Supposedly, the United States is in more danger now because there is no Palestinian Authority country.
Reporters questioned Psaki why Kerry retracted the word “apartheid” when that is exactly what he meant, and the only explanations they received was that a whole bunch of Congressmen, including Democrats, “distorted” his comment and that his public record shows he really is pro-Israel.
Psaki constantly defended Kerry be arguing that several Israeli politicians have previously said that Israel will become an apartheid state if it does not accept a Palestinian Authority state, which would not be apartheid for the simple reason that Mahmoud Ababs won’t let Jews live there, in direct contrast to United Nations conditions for admission.
So does Kerry still believe Israel can become an apartheid state, in a very loose definition of the word, one reporter asked Kerry’s spokeswoman?
Well, she said, Israel will face “challenges” without “two states for two peoples living side by side.” Perhaps she meant Ashkenazim and Sephardim.
Once again the reporters asked, “He does not intend to apologize?”
Psaki answered -he made it clear he would use a different word… The use of the word is a problem.”
Now that it is settled that Kerry apologizes for using the word apartheid and does not apologize for saying that is what he meant, what does the State Dept. have to say for the peace talks that, as reporters noted, have left things a lot worse than they were nine months ago?
Well, actually progress was made because both sides talked about the core issues, according to Psaki.
The Palestinian Authority has shunned the talks in favor of going to the U.N. for recognition, it has announced it and the Hamas terrorist organization are two of a kind in a new unity regime, it failed to win the release of the last batch of murderers – the only reason that Abbas agreed to talks to begin with – and Israel plans to build thousands of more homes in Judea and Samaria where the United States does not recognize Jews as illegitimate or legal residents, but not to worry because both sides talked.
How’s that for progress?
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry does not apologize for suggesting that Israel might become an apartheid state but simply regrets not having used a different word to say the same thing, his spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters Tuesday in a half-hour tragic-comedy media briefing.
At least five different reporters hounded Psaki on Kerry’s statement earlier in the day that “if he could unwind the tape,” he would have used a different word when saying that a two-state solution is necessary to keep Israel from becoming guilty of apartheid.
Coincidentally or not, today is what was supposed to be the last day of nine months of talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority to bring about a final status agreement to establish a new Arab country smack in the middle of Israel. Kerry took the lead last July to resurrect the dead and buried peace process, which the Obama administration says is needed for the security of the United States.
Supposedly, the United States is in more danger now because there is no Palestinian Authority country.
Reporters questioned Psaki why Kerry retracted the word “apartheid” when that is exactly what he meant, and the only explanations they received was that a whole bunch of Congressmen, including Democrats, “distorted” his comment and that his public record shows he really is pro-Israel.
Psaki constantly defended Kerry be arguing that several Israeli politicians have previously said that Israel will become an apartheid state if it does not accept a Palestinian Authority state, which would not be apartheid for the simple reason that Mahmoud Abbas won’t let Jews live there, in direct contrast to United Nations conditions for admission.
So does Kerry still believe Israel can become an apartheid state, in a very loose definition of the word, one reporter asked Kerry’s spokeswoman?
Well, she said, Israel will face “challenges” without “two states for two peoples living side by side.” Perhaps she meant Ashkenazim and Sephardim.
Once again the reporters asked, “He does not intend to apologize?”
Psaki answered -he made it clear he would use a different word… The use of the word is a problem.”
Now that it is settled that Kerry apologizes for using the word apartheid and does not apologize for saying that is what he meant, what does the State Dept. have to say for the peace talks that, as reporters noted, have left things a lot worse than they were nine months ago?
Well, actually progress was made because both sides talked about the core issues, according to Psaki.
The Palestinian Authority has shunned the talks in favor of going to the U.N. for recognition, it has announced that it and the Hamas terrorist organization are two of a kind in a new unity regime, it failed to win the release of the last batch of murderers – the only reason that Abbas agreed to talks to begin with – and Israel plans to build thousands of more homes in Judea and Samaria where the United States does not recognize Jews as illegitimate or legal residents, but not to worry because both sides talked.
How’s that for progress?