Did Ben Shapiro say “arabs like to blow crap up and live in open sewage”

1. What actually appeared on Twitter and why the wording matters

The primary factual anchor is a September 27, 2010 tweet attributed to Ben Shapiro that reads “Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. This is not a difficult issue. #settlementsrock,” recorded by multiple aggregators and media summaries. The difference between “bomb” and “blow up” is a minor lexical shift but does not materially change the demeaning and generalized attribution to an entire ethnoreligious group, which is why the precise wording has been the focus of both critics and defenders ^{[1] [4]}. Contemporary and later reports treat the tweet as evidence of a consistent pattern of inflammatory rhetoric, and media organizations cite the exact tweet to assess whether the comment targeted specific actors or a broad population ^{[5] [2]}. The original tweet’s phrasing is central to evaluating accusations of racism or incitement.

2. How Shapiro and his defenders explained the remark

Following the controversy, Shapiro and those recounting his response said he contended the tweet was taken out of context and that his comments targeted Palestinian leadership, militants, and policies rather than every Arab person. The Boiling Point account records an exchange in which Shapiro clarified his intended referent and framed subsequent tweets as referring to leadership priorities such as sewage repair versus support for families of militants ^[3]. Media Matters and other watchdogs reproduced the tweet verbatim and framed it as an explicit generalization; they also recorded Shapiro’s later explanations and noted the persistent public interpretation that the tweet dehumanized Arabs broadly ^[4]. These dual narratives—literal tweet text versus claimed corrective context—explain why coverage and public reaction remained polarized.

3. How reputable summaries and encyclopedias treated the tweet

Secondary, widely used references like Wikipedia summarize the incident by quoting the tweet nearly verbatim—“Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage”—and noting Shapiro’s later clarification that he meant leaders and militant groups rather than all Arabs ^[2]. Snopes and other fact-checking outlets that catalog viral claims similarly confirm the tweet’s existence and wording while discussing context and intent; they reproduce the tweet as part of their verification and situate it within a pattern of past statements that critics cite when assessing Shapiro’s views ^[1]. These summaries serve as convenient corroboration that the tweet was posted and interpreted by multiple parties, even as debates over scope and intent continued in media commentary ^{[1] [2]}.

4. How journalists and commentators framed the fallout

Opinion and journalistic pieces, including those cataloging the tweet as part of broader critiques of Shapiro’s rhetoric, emphasized the offensiveness and generalizing nature of the phrase and connected it to larger debates over anti‑Arab sentiment in public discourse ^[5]. Some outlets highlighted Shapiro’s clarification to contextualize the remark as targeted at leadership and militants, while others argued the original wording itself carried dehumanizing implications regardless of later claims of nuance ^{[3] [4]}. Coverage from both critical and more sympathetic sources shows clear divergence: critics treat the tweet as evidence of prejudice, while defenders stress corrective context and intent, illustrating how the same primary text can be mobilized to different argumentative ends ^{[3] [5]}.

5. Bottom line: claim verification and lasting implications

The core verification is straightforward: Ben Shapiro did post a tweet very close to the phrasing “Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage,” which substantiates the claim that he said something akin to “arabs like to blow crap up and live in open sewage,” with only minor lexical differences ^{[1] [2]}. Shapiro’s later statements asserting he meant leadership and militants rather than all Arabs complicate the interpretation but do not erase the original language or its public impact; outlets and fact‑checkers document both the tweet text and his clarification, leaving the factual record intact while showing persistent disagreement over intent and meaning ^{[3] [4]}.