Obama: no objection to anti-Israeli resolution

It's high time we stopped pretending to be "brokers" of peace,
Seeing realities instead of seeing things is, indeed, a refreshing occupation for "we".
when all prior efforts have benefited Israel.
How so?
Either the US is a true arbitrator of a peace process or, if not, it needs to get the hell out of the way.
Drivel. Peace is not a process - it's a state. Making careers is "peace process".
 
Israel will just ignore any Resolution issued by the UN anyway
56 wanker-states of the organization of the islamic conference have turned the UN into a gay pub not to be taken seriously in any way, of course.
 
Israel will just ignore any Resolution issued by the UN anyway[/size]
56 wanker-states of the organization of the islamic conference have turned the UN into a gay pub not to be taken seriously in any way, of course.[/size]

Could you stop resizing everyone's posts. It's very rude. And, there really is no need to use a large size for your own.... or do you have little penis syndrome? We can all read your posts without you needed to seek attention. You're making yourself look foolish.
 
Could you stop resizing everyone's posts.
Who could've thought that, my bandwidth-hugging, web-pasture conservation efforts would elicit such consternation?
It's very rude. And, there really is no need to use a large size for your own.... or do you have little penis syndrome?
Muchly apologizings for striking a raw nerve, stirring memories, and what not, of course.
We can all read your posts without you needed to seek attention.
See, all's, indeed, readable, and no penis magic is involved.
You're making yourself look foolish.
How so?
 
In a charitable response to the popular wish of the bipedal primates, having language and ability to make and use complex tools and reading glasses, inhabiting the sunny California, I raise the original font 1 point! You applaud. Now, back to our sheep.
The settlements are illegal.
Palistanians should've had a state first, for so-called "settlements" to be "illegal", of course.
What is there to debate? Why do we need a resolution?
56 wanker-states of the organization of the islamic conference, infesting the UN, just have to have an occupation.
 
56 wanker-states of the organization of the islamic conference, infesting the UN, just have to have an occupation

One might say that they are resolved to have an occupation.
 
sorry, worldnutdaily is not a credible link.

qft

The Obama administration told the Palestinian Authority it will not veto an upcoming United Nations resolution condemning all Jewish construction in the West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem, a senior PA official told WND. If the U.S. does not veto the resolution, such abstention largely would be unprecedented. Traditionally, the U.S. has vetoed such resolutions, which have been deemed anti-Israel.
The senior PA official also told WND the U.S. signaled to the European Union it would not object if the EU follows the recent lead of Latin American countries in unilaterally recognizing a Palestinian state outside of negotiations with Israel.
Obama will not veto U.N. assault on Jewish construction

US Rep. Howard Berman called it "a bold demonstration" of US support for Israel and for peace between Israel and the Palestinians."
According to a press release sent by the WorlJewishCongress Leader President Ronald S. Lauder called the Palestinian-proposed resolution "one-sided" and criticized the countries which sponsored it.

Lauder said: "The issue of settlements needs be negotiated bilaterally, in final-status talks, between Palestinians and Israelis. It is exclusively an issue for the two parties. The resolution text that was proposed to the Security Council further promoted the fallacy that the 1967 borders have any basis in law or history. They never existed nor were they ever part of any agreed upon documentation concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict and have no basis whatsoever, neither in law nor in fact. The World Jewish Congress therefore urges the United Nations to stop undermining, condoning, and abetting efforts to assault Israel's legal and diplomatic rights in ongoing negotiations over the future of the disputed territories."

PA says it will reevaluate peace process after UN vote

"I commend the Obama administration for using its first veto at the United Nations to do the right thing and block today’s anti-Israel resolution," said US Congressman Steve Rothman (D-NJ), Member of the US House Appropriations Subcommittees on Defense; and State and Foreign Operations.

Once again. JBeukema is frequenting rag sites that disseminate B.S. Oh, where would you get your daily fill if you didn't then? :razz:

61093069-security-council.jpg
 
The Obama administration told the Palestinian Authority it will not veto an upcoming United Nations resolution condemning all Jewish construction in the West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem, a senior PA official told WND. If the U.S. does not veto the resolution, such abstention largely would be unprecedented. Traditionally, the U.S. has vetoed such resolutions, which have been deemed anti-Israel.
The senior PA official also told WND the U.S. signaled to the European Union it would not object if the EU follows the recent lead of Latin American countries in unilaterally recognizing a Palestinian state outside of negotiations with Israel.

Sorry, WorldNutDaily is not a credible link.

You beat me to it :p It's like sourcing a blog :D
 
Last edited:
Who is oftentimes the U.S.'s only ally in the UN inre: Israel? Is it Mauritius or Mauritania? The vote is often 190-2 inre: Israel.

The vote came out just like I said the votes inre: israel turn out.
US vetoes UN condemnation of Israeli settlements | Ed Pilkington | World news | The Guardian
The US stood alone among the 15 members of the security council in failing to condemn the resumption of settlement building that has caused a serious rift between the Israeli government and the Palestinian authority and derailed attempts to kick-start the peace process.
 
Who is oftentimes the U.S.'s only ally in the UN inre: Israel? Is it Mauritius or Mauritania? The vote is often 190-2 inre: Israel.

The vote came out just like I said the votes inre: israel turn out.
US vetoes UN condemnation of Israeli settlements | Ed Pilkington | World news | The Guardian
The US stood alone among the 15 members of the security council in failing to condemn the resumption of settlement building that has caused a serious rift between the Israeli government and the Palestinian authority and derailed attempts to kick-start the peace process.

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!!!!!
 
It's high time we stopped pretending to be "brokers" of peace,
Seeing realities instead of seeing things is, indeed, a refreshing occupation for "we".
when all prior efforts have benefited Israel.
How so?
Either the US is a true arbitrator of a peace process or, if not, it needs to get the hell out of the way.
Drivel. Peace is not a process - it's a state. Making careers is "peace process".

The peace process shouldn't be influenced by monied "brokers" like the United States. We give Israel more foreign aid than any other country. Do you think that fact goes unnoticed by the Palestinians? How does that improve the "state" of the peace process? Before Hamas won majority seats in the PLO, the US gave it a few million every year, but every dime had to be accounted for. Now they get nothing, just because they did what the US encouraged--held democratic elections--but we didn't like the outcome.

I have Jewish American friends who also wish we would stop spending $3 billion on Israel, because they're US taxpayers and Israel doesn't need the support, or, as at least one of these friends says, Israel would reshuffle it's own budget to account for the loss of the windfall from the United States. We will always be Israel's ally, support them militarily, but we do NOT need to prop up their economy.
 
Israel will just ignore any Resolution issued by the UN anyway[/size]
56 wanker-states of the organization of the islamic conference have turned the UN into a gay pub not to be taken seriously in any way, of course.[/size]

Could you stop resizing everyone's posts. It's very rude. And, there really is no need to use a large size for your own.... or do you have little penis syndrome? We can all read your posts without you needed to seek attention. You're making yourself look foolish.

I wondered that myself. It's the first time I've ever seen anyone imply that Muslims are gay. I do believe the Qu'ran forbids homosexuality and if caught, it's off with their heads!!
 
Who is oftentimes the U.S.'s only ally in the UN inre: Israel? Is it Mauritius or Mauritania? The vote is often 190-2 inre: Israel.

The vote came out just like I said the votes inre: israel turn out.
US vetoes UN condemnation of Israeli settlements | Ed Pilkington | World news | The Guardian
The US stood alone among the 15 members of the security council in failing to condemn the resumption of settlement building that has caused a serious rift between the Israeli government and the Palestinian authority and derailed attempts to kick-start the peace process.

The vote came at a very inopportune time, with all the unrest currently occurring among several Arab countries and the US doing a delicate dance not to piss off anyone by taking a firm stand on supporting their mission for democracy while supporting Israel at the same time. The vote doesn't surprise me at all.
 
What makes the proposed resolution so awkward for the United States is how closely its text is to U.S. rhetoric slamming Israel for its continued settlement activity over the past two years.
Indeed, on Nov. 2, 2009, Secretary Clinton declared that "the United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements," a position she reiterated in a speech to the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC on March 22, 2010 and again in a speech to the Saban Center Forum on Dec. 10, 2010.
Will the Obama Administration Veto UN Resolution Critical of Israel? - ABC News
And there we have it, The Governments stated policy and it's actions do not match up
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top