Note that even insincerely the Palestinians could score a lot of points by saying something like, “Of course the future democratic, secular state of Palestine will allow Jews to be citizens, subject to the laws like anyone else.” But that gained territories will be judenrein–I use the term advisedly–seems to be OK with people who would be horrified (justifiably) if Israel said to its Arab citizens, “OK, there’s the Arab Palestinian state there. We’ll help you pack.”

I refer everyone to what Meryl calls the Exception Clause but should more properly be named after its discoverer “the Bensky Corollary to Absolutely Everything.” In brief form it states: Every statement by anyone or any group, any time, on any subject, contains an implicit clause: “except for Jews.”

Here’s the backstory to the AP article.

The preferred NYT narrative is that Israel is an out of control ally about to unleash destruction on the world because it is “nervous” about Iran. Having Gen Yadlin present Israel’s case in a calm, controlled fashion was good. The Pickering op-ed wasn’t bad, as it didn’t seem to condescend towards Israel. But the Indyk op-ed was atrocious and more in line with what I’d expect from the New York Times.