Posted on 11/25/2015 11:30:59 AM PST by Olog-hai
In a move dubbed "surreal" by a leading UN watchdog, and as a campaign of daily Palestinian terrorist attacks continues to target Israelis, the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday adopted six resolutions - all of which bar none condemned Israel.
Not a single mention was made of the Palestinian attacks, which have left 22 Israelis dead and hundreds wounded, nor did any other countries - even serial human rights violators such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia and others - receive any of the General Assembly's attention. More disturbingly still, five of the the UNGA resolutions were sponsored by the Palestinian Authority, while the sixth was sponsored by none other than Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria. [...]
One resolution condemned the Jewish state for retaining the Golan Heights, demanding Israel hand it over to the Syrian regime. [...]
Another vote - which passed 153 to 7 - claimed that Israel has "no right" to "impose" its sovereignty over "the Holy City of Jerusalem." ...
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
No, the UN needs to be destroyed; see post 12. From its beginning it was an abomination, even as it claimed to “establish” the state of Israel (it didn’t).
That’s just what I wanted to know. Thanks. I always hear that stuff in pieces so it is nice to have it there in a long view but a concise length. This stuff gets argued about and pulled back and forth so much that I lose perspective. I need to work harder at understanding all the many factions. Mostly it just looks like 100 variations of crazy plus one rational state that is Israel. To me anyway.
Insane.
If it is anti-Israel, it is also anti-West.
Sheesh, do not put those thoughts in their heads or we shall have another wave of muzzies on our doorstep.
I don’t get why Israel should “give back” even an inch of real estate when no one else in the world ever has to do that.
When Trump is elected, I hope he goes and addresses the United Nations and read them the riot act.
How dare they side up against Israel like they do.
Israel runs a tight ship and it does what it has to do in the face of terrorism. I has since 1948.
The Union and it’s members sure lost a great leader in Hitler. Anyone remember Waldheim?
What an ugly organization.
Sanity has died.
Thanks - but I don’t see a specific reference about the right to carry or conceal.
Several months ago, a Palestinian started shooting people on a bus.
The bus driver was unarmed, which was a real shock to me.
Here are several links which may address some of what you are saying here. Apparently one of the Paris bombers was allowed to slip back into Belgium. The purpose may be to get populations used to martial law (lockdowns), and it is also aimed at Israel in a convoluted way. Conspiracy buffs, have fun interpreting.
An unarmed bus driver was likely unarmed by personal choice.
The background of this was Israel’s adoption of most British laws upon independence, as well as some of the Brit’s Turkish predecessors. Unauthorized firearms carried a death sentence under the Brits, and I don’t think many were authorized other than to government employees. So it was a matter of liberalizing zero tolerance laws, a long process. And while from 1948 Israelis with firearms were common due to the necessity of survival. Due to mandatory military service, I suspect a far higher percentage of Israel’s population is comfortable with and has fired a firearm than the US. But a culture of private ownership can’t develop under circumstances where private ownership is severely restricted.
In my earlier response I unfortunately just emphasized the unarmed bus driver.
No one on the entire bus had a gun! That's what shocked me.
You may recall the photograph of the female Israeli school teacher with an automatic rifle slung over her shoulder that went viral a few years ago?
There was instant political blowback from the American Left on that.
Bottom Line - the American Left claimed that personal gun ownership in Israel was much more restricted than the American Right implied, and I wondered if those “restrictions” had anything to do with a bus load of unarmed Israelis.
Probably did, though that would likely happen in many parts of the US as well. Only 5% or so of the population have permits, many don't carry all the time, and the number is likely lower in urban areas. In Illinois it's illegal for a permit holder to carry on public transportation. I suspect other shall issue states have the same restriction.
If you'd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Only six?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.