McConnell, Schumer sign onto resolution condemning UN Israel vote

[Jose Garcia]

Source: The Hill

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) are signing on to a resolution objecting to a United Nations Security Council vote that condemned Israeli settlements.

The resolution urges all U.S. presidents to "uphold the practice of vetoing all United Nations Security Council resolutions that seek to insert the Council into the peace process, recognize unilateral Palestinian actions including declaration of a Palestinian state, or dictate terms and a timeline for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” according to a draft, obtained by Politico.

It was authored by Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.), the ranking member on the Foreign Relations Committee, and comes on the heels of a controversial Security Council vote on Dec. 24 condemning Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

The Obama administration abstained from the vote and declined to use its veto power on the Security Council to block it. That move sparked criticism of the administration from lawmakers in both parties and from President-elect Donald Trump.

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/international/312708-mcconnell-schumer-sign-onto-resolution-condemning-un-israel-vote

[BlueMTexpat]

1. This is one reason

why Schumer will NEVER be one of my faves.

He is much too beholden to RW Israeli government policy. The settlements are illegal. Period.

[hopeforchange2008]

3. Agreed! /nt

[oneshooter]

9. Why are they illegal? n/t

[BlueMTexpat]

18. My response should have been

to you - not to myself. Sorry about that.

Read a bit here. https://www.afsc.org/resource/israel%E2%80%99s-settlement-policy-occupied-palestinian-territory

[Hulk]

2. Politics...pure and simple

Just more "cover my ass" with the Jewish vote. I am so sick of this shit.

[branford]

24. Are there any other key Democratic constituency or identity groups

you're getting sick of, or is it only those darn Jews? African-Americans? Latinos? Union members? ect.

Republicans already control the White House, the Senate, House and a majority of statehouses and governorships, and we have many more Senate seats at peril in conservative states in 2018. How well do think our Party would do if Jews and their supporters in the party withheld their financial and organizational support? They need not even vote Republican, they just need to quietly sit out. For most of the even the most progressive Jews, support for Israel is a red line issue.

In any event, support for Israel both among the general electorate and our own Party remains unbelievably strong, notwithstanding a very small yet vocal faction of mostly the very far left, and it is actually one of the few truly bipartisan areas of agreement in our country. Republicans would love nothing more than for support for Israel to become a partisan issue, and so many here seem to want to hand one of the most historically active, loyal and politically and financially contributing liberal Democratic constituencies to Republicans on a silver platter. Luckily, the entirety of the elected Democratic congressional leadership and DNC are not prepared to commit political suicide.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/23/5-facts-about-how-americans-view-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict/
http://www.gallup.com/poll/189626/americans-views-toward-israel-remain-firmly-positive.aspx

[Hulk]

50. Your response was both insulting and a total misrepresentation of what I posted

I really get sick and tired of your attacks and misrepresentation of anything I might have stated in my rather brief comments. You don't think it had anything to do with garnering the Jewish vote, i take it.

I'm not anti-Jew, union, Hispanic, black or any other group you pull out of your ass to attack with. You really need to get back on your meds or have someone take your keyboard away from you until you can cool down and respond less like an attack dog and more civil.

I'm sick of politicians giving lip service to groups of any sort, just to pad their voting base, and nothing else. And yes, I am also damned tired of seeing the United States block every objection to bibi's far right political agenda.

You are exactly what I would expect from some pro birth supporter. When it comes to a legitimate debate or opinion different from your own, just scream "baby killer" and attack.

[branford]

54. Your post tersely and explicity accused Schumer, and I assume the vast majority of Democrats

(and probably all Republicans) who will likely sign onto the resolution condemning President Obama's abstention on the recent Israel vote at the UN, of "covering their ass with the Jewish vote."

Did you even remotely consider that they actually sincerely opposed the abstention and/or believe the condemnation represents the wishes of the states and districts they represent? I doubt it. That's precisely why I included the Pew and Gallup polls to demonstrate that the Israeli hostility expressed here among some is definitely not representative of the Democratic Party Platform or overall sentiment of our members, to say nothing of the whole electorate.

If anyone here accused a Democrat of supporting certain legislation just to "cover their ass" for the black, Hispanic, Muslim, gay, etc., vote they would be widely and viciously condemned, and any posts likely removed. However, Jews, with their overwhelming and loyal historic support for Democrats, and overrepresentation in organizational and fundraising activities despite being such a comparatively tiny and concentrated group, are still treated differently and increasingly badly from other Democratic interest and identity groups (e.g., BLM's recent anti-Zionist positions), although the phenomena is thankfully largely concentrated on the far left. This is similar to what's happening in Labour in Britain under Corbyn.

A great many Jews are not blind to these attitudes, and if they continue, Jewish support for Democrats will begin to dramatically wane, and we cannot afford to hemorrhage any more support, particularly after losses in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. Republicans have been trying to make Israel a partisan issue for the last few decades to further cement their political gains, and it seem obvious than many in our Party want to hand an integral Democratic constituency to them on a silver platter.

Moreover, quite frankly, even if Schumer or other Democrats support the resolution as a means to court favor with Jews and their supporters, that's still fine. Jews have been a damn strong and loyal Democratic constituency for decades and it's important to them. Politicians not only don't seek to alienate their Party's supporters, but they try to express appreciation on occasion through their votes. Apparently, this is only offensive to some when it comes to Jews, but not other identity groups in our purportedly big tent. Again, have you considered Obama's abstention was similarly "politics... pure and simple" as a means to thank some far left supporters as he leaves office (and leave the political mess for other Democrats to clean up)?

You might be "sick of this shit," but as a very politically active Democrat and Jew, I can assure you that the overwhelming majority of people like me are similarly disgusted about how the Party is beginning to take Jewish support completely for granted. If Democrats are further handicapped and Republicans grow more powerful because Jews begin to believe support for Democrats is no longer warranted or deserved, similar to how many union members and working poor abandoned Clinton in the Midwest and elsewhere this election because their interests and priorities were not addressed, the current righteous indignation expressed by you and others will soon turn to confusion and regret.

[Hulk]

57. "Like you"

The one redeeming phrase from you babbling dialogue that i have absolutely no interest in reading. Save it for someone who is willing to waste their time and remotely cares at all.

[Hulk]

58. There seems to apparently be a set group of shills on this thread

I'm going to refrain from interacting with any of them from here on.

Insinuations of what I am thinking, who I am opposed to, how I am racist or anti-some other group, etc. All contrived and manipulated bull shit.

I suspect a particular ME ideology troll any threads having to do with Israeli issues, with the intent of shutting down dessention to the will of bibi and his ilk.

Kma. Not the least bit interested in engaging with your word battles. I'll take a different opinion anyday, but some of the garbage that gets posted on Israeli-subject threads can choke a horse.

[LS_Editor]

4. Schummer sucks. Little faith he won't betray the left by making disastrous deals with Republicans.

[ProudLib72]

5. I'm Jewish

and anti-Zionist. I HATE being lumped together with pro-Zionists. What has happened to the world? Rabin is dead. Arafat is dead. Carter is ancient and has given up. Do you think tRump might have another Camp David?

[Mosby]

6. You don't think Jews should be able to live in their homeland?

[Grey Lemercier]

7. the settlements are NOT in their homeland, they are in occupied territory, they are illegal

They constitute a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

But you knew that.

[Mosby]

13. anti-zionists don't think jews should live in Israel

Is that something you support?

[Grey Lemercier]

20. I made no comment about anti-zionism, I stated a fact about the illegality of the settlements

Do you support the settlements?

I acknowledge Israel's right to exist, btw.

[Mosby]

21. Maybe next time you should let ProudLib72 answer instead of insinuating yourself in the conversation

[Grey Lemercier]

30. it is a discussion board, there are millions of replies from 3rd parties over the years

74,290,270 posts since 2001

Do you support the settlements?

[Mosby]

33. I support the right for Jews to live in their ancestral homelands.

Do you support indigenous rights?

[Grey Lemercier]

34. You have now twice not answered my question.

I already answered yours. I acknowledge Israel's right to exist. The Palestinian people living there in the occupied territories are every bit as indigenous as Jewish Israelis, often much more so than the settlers who are in many cases of European descent.

Do you support the Israeli settlements or not?

[Mosby]

38. There are "settlers" who can show 700-800 years of presence and ownership of their homes

in places like Hebron.

I absolutely support Jews who want to live in their ancestral homeland, this is the second time I have said this.

You seem to be obsessed with the fact that a lot of Israeli Jews came from Europe, but scientific genetic research has shown that they are just as much part of the Jewish tribe as the Mizrahi Jews, who are the largest Jewish group in Israel.

Frankly it's not my problem that the conqueror/colonialist British gave more than half the mandate to the Hashemites. Maybe they should fix what they did.

[Grey Lemercier]

39. I am adamantly against your beliefs, then, you sound like the Netanyahu supporters tbh

They need to get out of these illegal settlements. I am so glad Obama stood against these criminals and criminal acts.

I also have to LOL at you calling me "obsessed" about the european nature of many of the settlers when I only mentioned it once. I also completely dispute your statement that they genetically just as much part of the Jewish tribe as Mizrahi, that is simply false. They are not indigenous.


Genetic Roots of the Ashkenazi Jews

Most Ashkenazi Jews, traditionally believed to have descended from the ancient tribes of Israel, may in fact be maternally descended from prehistoric Europeans.

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/37821/title/Genetic-Roots-of-the-Ashkenazi-Jews/

The majority of Ashkenazi Jews are descended from prehistoric European women, according to study published today (October 8) in Nature Communications. While the Jewish religion began in the Near East, and the Ashkenazi Jews were believed to have origins in the early indigenous tribes of this region, new evidence from mitochondrial DNA, which is passed on exclusively from mother to child, suggests that female ancestors of most modern Ashkenazi Jews converted to Judaism in the north Mediterranean around 2,000 years ago and later in west and central Europe.

The new findings contradict previous assertions that Ashkenazi mitochondrial lineages originated in the Near East, or from mass conversions to Judaism in the Khazar kingdom, an empire in the north Caucasus region between Europe and Asia lasting from the 7th century to the 11th century whose leaders adopted Judaism. “We found that most of the maternal lineages don’t trace to the north Caucasus, which would be a proxy for the Khazarians, or to the Near East, but most of them emanate from Europe,” said coauthor Martin Richards, an archaeogeneticist at the University of Huddersfield in the U.K.

Richards and colleagues’ story “seems reasonable,” said Harry Ostrer, a human geneticist at Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University in New York City who was not involved in the study. “It certainly fits with what we understand about Jewish history.”

The Ashkenazi Jews make up the majority of Jews today and most recently have ancestry in central or Eastern Europe. Previous work has demonstrated that just four mitochondrial types, pass down from four mothers, account for 40 percent of variation in Ashkenazi Jews’ mitochondrial DNA, and some researchers have published evidence of Near Eastern origins for these Ashkenazi mitochondrial types.

snip

[Mosby]

40. "Some scientists...." Thats some classy shit right there.

Euro Jews are Kazars, where have i heard that before? I know, racist web sites!


http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/09/19/a-brief-history-of-the-talmud-and-the-jewish-people/comment-page-1/

http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/jews_and_reptilians

http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/israeli-report-admits-descendants-khazars/

Great company you have there.

EVERY ONE OF THOSE LINKS MENTIONS YOUR JEW HATER KATE YANDELL

Ashkenazim Jews are every bit as much Jews as all of us, regardless of your Antisemitic bullshit.

When are the British going to fix what they did? Where did the Hashemites come from dude? What the fuck is Jordan?

[Grey Lemercier]

41. you just said the OPPOSITE of what the study says, do not try and twist anything I said

I NEVER said they were Khazars, I (and the article) said the opposite, that they were not

The new findings contradict previous assertions that Ashkenazi mitochondrial lineages originated in the Near East, or from mass conversions to Judaism in the Khazar kingdom,

Your attempted, disingenuous linking of legit mainstream scientific journals like The Scientist and Nature Communications to crackpot shit is truly wrong.


Kate Yandell is not a "jew hater", that's a truly ridiculous charge. She is a science writer and editor of the scientific journal Cancer Today. Her name only come up in ONE of your crazy link's actual articles (in one of you nutter links she isnt mentioned at all, and in the 3rd article she is NOT mentioned in it, ONLY in a in a comment from a poster, NOT in the article) as being the author of an article about medical research.

here is the article your crazy link mentioned

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/40956/title/Jewish-Heritage-Written-in-DNA/

Fully sequenced genomes of more than 100 Ashkenazi people clarify the group’s history and provide a reference for researchers and physicians trying to pinpoint disease-associated genes.

You really are off the deep end.

[Mosby]

42. So Euro Jews are indigenous to the middle east

Israel, Judea and Sameria in particular. According to your link these Jewish women converted TWO FUCKING THOUSAND YEARS AGO. That's before Islam and Christianity even existed.

So we agree then, the euro/American Jewish settlers are living in their historic homelands.

It was the British, French and Arabs who conquered and colonized the Middle East.

They created the Arab/Israeli conflict, they should fix it.

[Grey Lemercier]

44. NO, now you twist again, Ashkenazim are not indigenous to Palestine, they are European

Saying that white europeans are "indigenous" to the Levant is going down the same line that yields blonde hair, blue eyed "jesus" paintings. They share a religion with a part of the inhabitants of Israel, that is all, for the most part. Those settlers who are actually Ashkenazim do NOT have a historical claim on the land. Furthermore that land we discuss is land that the modern state of Israel stole during the Six-Day War of 1967. That land is NOT legally Israel's, in the modern sense of legality. I refuse to accept that some "god" ordained that now illegally occupied land to them 3500 or so years ago and thus they can just do whatever the hell they want to that part of the world.

I do not know what more to say, you misrepresent every single angle to fit your convoluted political beliefs about illegal settlements that the rest of the world, including the United Nations, have deemed illegal and in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

The Hebrews themselves were invaders too, around 1300 BC. They were not the original inhabitants at all. Abraham, upon whom the entire claim is based, was probably born in present day Nasiriyah, Iraq.

Also, if you really want to talk about indigenous people of the Levant, you need to go back at least to the Canaanites (the founders of Jerusalem), whose genetic markers still remain, although vastly diluted, all over the area.

[Mosby]

46. You don't understand indigenous rights

There is really nothing more to say.

Usually people like yourself have more informed views but whatever.

Clearly you have been well indoctrinated.

[Mosby]

43. International Law: San Remo conference

Where is Arab Palestine?

It was supposed to be part of Jordan.

"The “Mandate for Palestine,” an historical League of Nations document, laid down the Jewish legal right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, a 10,000-square-miles3 area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

The legally binding document was conferred on April 24, 1920 at the San Remo Conference, and its terms outlined in the Treaty of Sèvres on August 10, 1920. The Mandate’s terms were finalized and unanimously approved on July 24, 1922, by the Council of the League of Nations, which was comprised at that time of 51 countries,4 and became operational on September 29, 1923.5

The “Mandate for Palestine” was not a naive vision briefly embraced by the international community in blissful unawareness of Arab opposition to the very notion of Jewish historical rights in Palestine. The Mandate weathered the test of time: On April 18, 1946, when the League of Nations was dissolved and its assets and duties transferred to the United Nations, the international community, in essence, reaffirmed the validity of this international accord and reconfirmed that the terms for a Jewish National Home were the will of the international community, a “sacred trust” – despite the fact that by then it was patently clear that the Arabs opposed a Jewish National Home, no matter what the form."

http://www.mythsandfacts.org/conflict/mandate_for_palestine/mandate_for_palestine.htm

Legally, the West Bank is not Palestinian land, it's disputed pending resolution of UNSCR 242 and 338.

[Grey Lemercier]

45. that San Remo set of borders is from 1920 and is has been invalid for almost 70 years

I personally think think the 1949 Green Line should be the 2 sate map borders, but will accept the pre 1967 borders that president Obama favours.

[Mosby]

47. It is binding and was adopted by the UN.

[Grey Lemercier]

48. 2 points that render the San Remo Agreement utterly obsolete and invalid

1.Britain received the mandate for Palestine and Iraq; France gained Syria and thus Lebanon, so if you try to hang your hat on THAT (unless you are going to play pick and choose) GOOD LUCK!

2. The United nations never officially endorsed those borders, as they did not exist in 1920, it was the League of Nations, which the US NEVER officially joined. Notice the dodgy wiggle-words from your own article

the international community, in essence, reaffirmed the validity of this international accord

Much of the world was (including the US) was not even in the League when the San Remo accords were signed.

THIS is the ACTUAL UN Map as to how it was to be divided up, but then the war broke out and it was never put into place

a far cry from your "The Jewish inhabitants get the whole thing, screw the Palestinians" statements

[Mosby]

49. The Arabs REJECTED the Partition Plan

which is why the San Remo Agreement is still in force.

Britain didn't "receive" a fucking thing, they stole the Middle East from it's indigenous inhabitants, including Jews, and then ran for the hills after WWII. Their colonialism caused this whole thing. Own it.

[Grey Lemercier]

52. San Remo borders are NOT in force anymore, also you want it both ways

You say the we (I am a UK citizen as well as US) "stole" the land, but you also know that without the UK's Balfour Declaration, there would be no Israel, no Jewish homeland today. You also fall back onto onto a defunct global entity (the League of Nations) that is "gave" you the very San Remo agreement you now trumpet, a League of Nations that included colonial powers that you rail against. Most all inhabited land was "stolen" if you go back far enough. The Hebrews stole the land from the Canaanites 3300 plus years ago. The US stole the land it is on from actual indigenous peoples as well. The UK is on stolen land, as is pretty much most of the world.

We can but deal with the present day situation, and that is this: Israel is illegally settling land that they should not be on, as per the most recent United Nations legal rulings and decisions over the years. The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories illegal under international law, because the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 prohibits countries from moving population into territories occupied in a war. The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention does apply.

You strike me as someone who brooks no truck with anything that is short of 100% removal or subjugation of all Palestinians from your perceived "Greater Israel" and also probably supports the moving of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

If you actually want peace there, there is ZERO chance you can have the settlements as they are, or even worse, expand them, it just isn't going to happen.

[Mosby]

60. Most of Israels borders are not defined and that's OK for now

I'm not a lawyer but most of the opinions I have seen say that the San Remo Resolution and the ensuing clauses of the Mandate for Palestine are like a treaty and are still in force today. Just because the League of Nations was dissolved and replaced by the UN doesn't make it any less binding. Obviously the borders don't exist anymore since the British gave away most of the mandate area to the Jordanians.

FWIW, here is the Israeli position on the occupation and settlements.

http://jcpa.org/article/status-of-settlements-in-international-law/

ETA: Just noticed the 342-80 vote condemning UNSCR 2334:

House Resolution 11 declared the UN motion a “one-sided” effort that is an obstacle to peace, placing disproportionate blame on Israel for the continuation of the conflict and discouraging Palestinians from engaging in direct, bilateral negotiations.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/us-house-passes-repudiation-of-un-security-council-resolution-on-israel

[Bradical79]

35. You don't support indigenous rights -nt

[Mosby]

37. LOL, is that all you got?

I most certainly support indigenous rights.

The Jewish people have been living in Israel, Sameria, and Judea for 3000 plus years.

[cab67]

8. It's not a simple matter.

I'm not Jewish, but I regard myself as pro-Israel. I've also been to Israel and gone through the West Bank. And for these reasons, I think the West Bank settlements are a terrible idea.

Suppose Israel annexes the West Bank - that would suddenly draw a large number of Palestinians (mostly Muslim) into the Israeli population. How, exactly, does that promote the Jewish character of Israel?

The alternative is a Trumpian-scale deportation program. And the problem is that too many Israelis (esp. ultraorthodox) think that's a perfectly good idea. Where would they go? And how would this encourage acceptance of Israel by countries hostile to it?

You should see what the settlements have done to the area. If you get in trouble in the West Bank, you literally have to know exactly where you are before calling the police. Israeli police will only respond in some areas, and Palestinian police will only respond in others. And there's a network of bridges and tunnels over/under freeways allowing Palestinians to commute without entering the settlements.

The settlements have done great harm to Israel's security.

[hollowdweller]

10. Why not let the settlements stand but let the occupants be under Palestinian rule??

If Palestinians live under Israeli rule why not the other way around?

[Mosby]

12. That's a great question

The answer is that the Palestinians don't want Jews living in their country.

Will Jews be Able to Live in a Future Palestinian State?
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/01/will-jews-be-able-to-live-in-a-future-palestinian-state/251059/

Abbas: 'Not a single Israeli' in future Palestinian state
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Abbas-wants-not-a-single-Israeli-in-future-Palestinian-state-321470


And they don't accept a Jewish Israel:

Palestinians: We Will Not Accept a Jewish Israel
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7849/palestinians-accept-jewish-israel

[geek tragedy]

15. The answer is also that the fundamentalist settlers would never agree

to be citizens of a Palestinian state, bound by its laws.

[hollowdweller]

16. Well if we aren't going to have a 2 state solution both sides need to get over it

The Palestinians could use some money Israeli settlers would bring and the Israelis would be able to use some Palestinian laborers again.

Sadly a one state solution will probably only come about when Trump and Putin occupy the country and impose it.

[Spider Jerusalem]

22. I think there's a bitter irony in some Jews' fervent embrace of blood-and-soil ethnic nationalism

[branford]

25. Do you also object to Palestinians' fervent embrace of blood-and-soil nationalism,

or only Jewish self-determination?

Keep in mind that the Israeli / Palestinian dispute began well before 1967 in the Six Day War when Israel first occupied the territories, or even the formation of the State of Israel in 1947 (and the Jews agreed to the UN Partition Plan before the Arabs embarked on an actual genocidal war of annihilation).

[Spider Jerusalem]

29. Settler colonialism isn't exactly "self-determination"

And noting irony isn't "objecting", as such (learn to read, pls).

[branford]

28. You find it offensive being associated with the overwhelming majority of your fellow Jews

who are unquestionably very pro-Zionist (along with most of the country and our Party)? Really?

If true, I have no doubt that the feeling is mutual.

[Trust Buster]

11. Israel's population growth has created a serious housing problem. I believe that

Israel's long term strategy is to continue building settlements until Palestinians are marginalized out of the territory. Israel has never had a serious interest in a two state solution IMO.

[geek tragedy]

14. Pretty strong, and repeated language, in there about a two-state solution.

Interesting ...

[WhiteTara]

19. FU Schumer.

You live in the US, not Israel.

[HoneyBadger]

51. Then why do you care about any position the US has on Israel

[MurrayDelph]

23. There's a reason

I have always referred to Schumer as "The Senior Senator from Tel-Aviv."

And, for the record, I am Jewish, anti-Zionist, and believe in getting rid of Netanyahu because I am pro-Israel.

[branford]

27. Senator Schumer represents New York, besides being the Senate Minority Leader.

Your own political views notwithstanding, do you believe Schumer's positions are in any way even remotely unpopular with a anything approaching a majority of the electorate in New York?

Also, how do you reconcile being anti-Zionist, i.e., against Jewish national and ethnic self-determination, particularly in light of historical worldwide genocidal discrimination against Jews, and being purportedly pro-Israel? Your support seems questionable, at best, and is not representative of Jews generally, Democrats as a Party or the general electorate.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/189626/americans-views-toward-israel-remain-firmly-positive.aspx
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/23/5-facts-about-how-americans-view-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict/

[Jose Garcia]

31. New York voters seem to like him

[Grins]

32. After that vote I got a couple of "those" emails...

...the ones we all get from the Reich-wing Cheeto-eaters.

What they forget is the Security Council has 15 members. The vote was 14 in favor and one abstention. Well, the U.S. is the one abstention, so who the fuck else voted FOR it? Oh! Along with others, New Zealand, China, France, Trump's new BFF - the Russian Federation- the United Kingdom, Italy, Japan, Sweden, and Trump/Putin's other puppet state, the Ukraine.

The last time I looked New Zealand, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Japan, and Sweden were democracies and allies with whom the U.S. has cordial political affiliations. Had to be a reason for their vote. What do they know or have that we don't?

I used to be pro-Israel, but over the past decades I have flipped. I don't like them or their policies, and I don't trust them. It's not the Israeli's themselves or Jews - it's the Likud. And Bibi.

Israel has been mucking in U.S. elections and policy FAR more and FAR longer than the Russians.

[Hulk]

59. I agree with your comments

To hell with the shills clogging this thread with their accusations and baggage intended to shut down any desent against Net and his ilk.

[ProudLib72]

36. There were

Jews living peacefully in Ottoman Palestine. Herzel was shortsighted and eurocentric. What hubris to think that hundreds of thousands of people settling in Palestine would be greeted with joy from natives just because these new arrivals were culturally and technologically "superior"! The British bought into the idea of a homeland and set up the Jewish people for failure in 1948. At that point, yes, I would argue that fighting was justified. It was a matter of survival. But that does not excuse the eurocentrism that Zionism was premised on. Nor does it justify the building of settlements beyond the green line. The simple fact is that Palestinians are getting screwed left and right. What neighboring Arab country is in any position now to seriously help the Palestinians? Those countries have their own internal struggles to deal with. The U.S. has the power to mediate. It has the power to push Netanyahu for an end to this b.s. manifest destiny settlement building scheme.

[former9thward]

53. Cute re-write of history bro.

Arafat would be proud.

[burrowowl]

56. Schumer is not

DOING THE RIGHT THING.
What else is he going to cave into?