PROMOTING PEACE OR SOMETHING ELSE?
by RoseAnn Salanitri, TPATH Contributor, ©2014
Before discussing Kerry’s remark, we would do well to remember the proposed Democratic Platform for 2014. The point of contention regarding the nation of Israel centered on changing the Platform by dropping the assertion that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel. The issue nearly divided the Party and would have seriously threatened the re-election of Mr. Barack Hussein Obama. Hence, the Party walked back its platform to once again assert that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel, much to the vocal disappointment of many Democrats and Palestinians who wanted Jerusalem to be the capital of a Palestinian state.
Barack Obama’s campaign said that the change was done to “reflect the President’s personal point of view.” Really? That might be a plausible explanation for those that don’t know that sitting presidents have quite a bit of influence over proposed party platforms, but not for the well-informed. Perhaps BO can speak wonderful words asserting our loyalty to Israel, but words can mask one’s point of view only for so long. Actions always speak louder than words and tell you what’s really in a person’s heart. And the man now occupying the White House’s actions have shown him not to be a friend of Israel – nor to be a friend of the country he represents, regardless of what he may say. BO’s deeds have been a testament to his obvious disdain for the nation of Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu. Therefore, his appointment of a Secretary of State that is like-minded and also not a friend of Israel should not surprise anyone.
Let’s be fair and ask if it is possible that Kerry misspoke. The definition of the word “misspeak” is to speak a word incorrectly, or to express oneself incorrectly. If we want to be overly charitable – and I mean beyond all reason charitable – then it is almost feasible to allow our SOS to claim he misspoke. However, this is not some elementary school student throwing words around carelessly without knowing their full meaning. The words Kerry used were extremely strong and offensive. If this is the same manner in which our SOS conducts himself during peace talks with the nation of Israel and its enemies, it is no wonder they don’t want to subject themselves to his verbal abuse.
But what about the actual words?
Many of us are familiar with the word “apartheid.” It’s connotative and denotative meanings are very offensive to a liberty-loving people. It is defined as an official policy of racial segregation involving political, legal, and economic discrimination. Since we associate the word with the atrocities of the Republic of South Africa, the connotative meaning of the word conjures up images of extreme cruelty and a type of tyranny that we have never known in these United States – not even during the era of slavery. Misspeaking and calling Israel apartheid is not acceptable coming from a man who is supposed to be an agent promoting peace among nations.
SOS Kerry’s remarks become more indefensible by his use of the word “unitary.” A unitary state is a state that is governed as one single unit in which the central government is supreme and any administrative divisions exercise only powers that their central government chooses to delegate. The central government also exercises all power over rolling back any authority or powers they may have delegated to these sub-national units. SOS Kerry and BO should be very familiar with the definition of this particular word, since they have done everything within their power to change these United States into a unitary state under the Administration’s control.
Perhaps statements can be dismissed as being misspoken if one word is improperly used. However, when two words such as these are used in harmony – especially in an effort to bully an independent nation – asking the public to dismiss them is as utterly offensive as stating them in the first place. If the general public allows these statements to be swept under the rug, their gullibility is damning upon all of us. If John Kerry truly believes he is qualified to be Secretary of State, perhaps he should move to Palestine where his ideologies are in line with the government’s. But for us here in the good ole U.S.A., this man is as much of a disgrace to us as our SOS as he was to the Swift Boat troops he served with in Viet Nam. Unfortunately, we should expect no different from an Administration that shares his ideologies and appointed him to represent their interests. As for me, and I’m sure for millions of other Americans, he sure doesn’t represent ours.
Contact RoseAnn HERE
Contact TPATH HERE