http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/05/house-overwhelmingly-votes-to-condemn-uns-anti-israel-res

[toomuchtime_]

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted Thursday to rebuke the United Nations for passing a resolution criticizing Israeli settlements.


Lawmakers voted 342-80 in favor of the bipartisan non-binding resolution, which declares unwavering support for Israel and insists that the United States reject any future U.N. actions that are similarly "one-sided and anti-Israel."

A visibly angry House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis. opened debate on the resolution by saying that the Obama administration "abandoned our ally Israel when she needed us the most."

"Do not be fooled," Ryan said. "This U.N. Security Council resolution ... was about one thing and one thing only. Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish, democratic state.

"These types of one-sided efforts are designed to isolate and delegitimize Israel. They do not advance peace, they make it more elusive."

The House measure divided Democrats, 109 of whom joined 233 Republicans in approving the measure. However, nearly 80 more opposed the measure because they said it contained inaccuracies and distorted the complexities of the Middle East peace process. They also accused Republicans of attacking Obama unfairly in the waning days of his presidency.

"The point of the measure seems to be to bash Obama on the way out," said Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., who along with many other Democrats still voiced strong support for Israel. They said Obama deserved credit for engineering last year's new, long-term security agreement that gives Israel $38 billion in U.S. military aid, including $5 billion for missile defenses.

A similar bipartisan measure to reprimand the U.N. has been introduced in the Senate. "Israel is always the bad guy in the eyes of the United Nations," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of the measure's co-sponsors.

Still more evidence that Obama is just a bump in the road and the US - Israel alliance is well and will be getting better after Jan. 20.

 

[montelatici]

Let me preface this by saying that, in my opinion, the two-state solution is dead. However, the members of the Security Council, including the U.S., support the two-state solution as the only solution that can insure that Israel remains a Jewish state and democratic.

The resolution received a unanimous vote and one abstention because the members of the UNSC believed that the continued building of settlements will make a two-state solution impossible to achieve. From that perspective you can see that the UNSC could not vote in any other way. Had they voted otherwise, it would have been an admission that the two-state solution is dead.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Let me preface this by saying that, in my opinion, the two-state solution is dead. However, the members of the Security Council, including the U.S., support the two-state solution as the only solution that can insure that Israel remains a Jewish state and democratic.

The resolution received a unanimous vote and one abstention because the members of the UNSC believed that the continued building of settlements will make a two-state solution impossible to achieve. From that perspective you can see that the UNSC could not vote in any other way. Had they voted otherwise, it would have been an admission that the two-state solution is dead.

First, after Jan. 20, the US will not be supporting a two state solution and second, taking any issue concerning Israel to the UN is like asking the KKK to take charge of all civil rights issues in the US.

 

[montelatici]

Well, if the U.S. stops supporting the two-state solution, a one-state solution will result in the certification of Israel as either an Apartheid state unless the non-Jews under its rule are enfranchised and becomes a secular state.

 

[there4eyeM]

The House supports a religious institution?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Well, if the U.S. stops supporting the two-state solution, a one-state solution will result in the certification of Israel as either an Apartheid state unless the non-Jews under its rule are enfranchised and becomes a secular state.

lol Certified by whom?

 

[montelatici]

Well, if the U.S. stops supporting the two-state solution, a one-state solution will result in the certification of Israel as either an Apartheid state unless the non-Jews under its rule are enfranchised and becomes a secular state.

lol Certified by whom?

By most of the world, I would think.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Well, if the U.S. stops supporting the two-state solution, a one-state solution will result in the certification of Israel as either an Apartheid state unless the non-Jews under its rule are enfranchised and becomes a secular state.

lol Certified by whom?

By most of the world, I would think.

Which is to say, no one.

 

[montelatici]

Well no, Israel would run afoul of the "INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF APARTHEID" and would be subject to the various remedies/sanctions similar to those that were applied to white-ruled South Africa.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Well no, Israel would run afoul of the "INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF APARTHEID" and would be subject to the various remedies/sanctions similar to those that were applied to white-ruled South Africa.

Only in your fantasies. In the real world the only punishment Israel will receive is abusive rhetoric from people like you.

 

[Hollie]

Well no, Israel would run afoul of the "INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF APARTHEID" and would be subject to the various remedies/sanctions similar to those that were applied to white-ruled South Africa.

Actually, you're rather ignorant of the situation. The Arabs-Moslems have already identified their intentions for an apartheid state. Let's have a look at that piece of Islamist apartheid / Islamist fascist lovliness, shall we?

The Avalon Project : The Palestinian National Charter

The Palestinian National Charter: Resolutions of the Palestine National Council July 1-17, 1968

Article 1:
Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation.


Not a lot there that allows for anything but Arab'ness in the Arab-Moslem hood.

There's lots more islamo-blustering that follows Article 1 but all of it follows the prototype of Islamist fascism and Arab- Islamist apartheid.

 

[RoccoR]

Hollie, et al,

The application of this convention against Israel is what? It is unenforceable.

Well no, Israel would run afoul of the "INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF APARTHEID" and would be subject to the various remedies/sanctions similar to those that were applied to white-ruled South Africa.

Actually, you're rather ignorant of the situation. The Arabs-Moslems have already identified their intentions for an apartheid state. Let's have a look at that piece of Islamist apartheid / Islamist fascist lovliness, shall we?

The Avalon Project : The Palestinian National Charter

The Palestinian National Charter: Resolutions of the Palestine National Council July 1-17, 1968

Article 1:
Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation.


Not a lot there that allows for anything but Arab'ness in the Arab-Moslem hood.

There's lots more islamo-blustering that follows Article 1 but all of it follows the prototype of Islamist fascism and Arab- Islamist apartheid.

(COMMENT)

This is an attempt by the Arab Palestinians at yet another claim of being the victim.

There is little probability to find the Anti-Israel --- Arab Palestinian conflict of any reasonable discussion. They do not understand the applicability of the Convention or the definition of "Apartheid;" including the Elements of the Offense in the International Criminal Code.

There is little chance that any discussion of an undefined allegation of "Apartheid" with the drama queen style, perpetual victim position taken by the Anti-Israeli activist will bear any fruit. Israel is no more "Apartheid" then the US is relative to Mexico.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[there4eyeM]

Since many equate Zionism with the Hebrew religion, and as the First Amendment prohibits assisting any religion, is the Constitution now to be considered anti-semitic when U.S. tax money to the modern state of Israel is questioned?

 

[Slyhunter]

Let me preface this by saying that, in my opinion, the two-state solution is dead. However, the members of the Security Council, including the U.S., support the two-state solution as the only solution that can insure that Israel remains a Jewish state and democratic.

The resolution received a unanimous vote and one abstention because the members of the UNSC believed that the continued building of settlements will make a two-state solution impossible to achieve. From that perspective you can see that the UNSC could not vote in any other way. Had they voted otherwise, it would have been an admission that the two-state solution is dead.

I support the three state solution.

 

[Phoenall]

Since many equate Zionism with the Hebrew religion, and as the First Amendment prohibits assisting any religion, is the Constitution now to be considered anti-semitic when U.S. tax money to the modern state of Israel is questioned?

Zionism is not a religion, it is a political movement. Unlike islam that is a religion and their money should be stopped

 

[P F Tinmore]

Zionism is not a religion, it is a political movement.

Cool, then criticizing Zionism is not anti-Semitism.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[montelatici]

Well no, Israel would run afoul of the "INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF APARTHEID" and would be subject to the various remedies/sanctions similar to those that were applied to white-ruled South Africa.

Only in your fantasies. In the real world the only punishment Israel will receive is abusive rhetoric from people like you.

No, the process will be similar to the approach taken with South Africa.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Well no, Israel would run afoul of the "INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF APARTHEID" and would be subject to the various remedies/sanctions similar to those that were applied to white-ruled South Africa.

Only in your fantasies. In the real world the only punishment Israel will receive is abusive rhetoric from people like you.

No, the process will be similar to the approach taken with South Africa.

Again, only in your absurd fantasies.

 

[Hollie]

Well no, Israel would run afoul of the "INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF APARTHEID" and would be subject to the various remedies/sanctions similar to those that were applied to white-ruled South Africa.

Only in your fantasies. In the real world the only punishment Israel will receive is abusive rhetoric from people like you.

No, the process will be similar to the approach taken with South Africa.

Well no, Israel would run afoul of the "INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF APARTHEID" and would be subject to the various remedies/sanctions similar to those that were applied to white-ruled South Africa.

Only in your fantasies. In the real world the only punishment Israel will receive is abusive rhetoric from people like you.

No, the process will be similar to the approach taken with South Africa.

Actually, no. The status quo in terms of the Arab-Moslem claims to invented victimhood, their competing mini-caliphates and their forever welfare fraud is too good to pass up.

Your foolish "apartheid" slogans are false and I'll-conceived.

 

[Phoenall]

Zionism is not a religion, it is a political movement.

Cool, then criticizing Zionism is not anti-Semitism.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Yes it is as anti semitism is not anti religion, it is anti Jew