Posted on 12/30/2014 5:05:41 PM PST by lbryce
The UN Security Council on Tuesday rejected a resolution on Palestinian statehood, with the Palestinians failing to get the minimum nine “yes” votes required for adoption by the 15-member council: Eight voted for the resolution and two voted against, with five abstentions.
France, China and Russia were among the countries that supported the text setting a 12-month deadline for negotiations on a final peace deal with Israel and an imposed full Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and East Jerusalem by the end of 2017. Argentina, Chad, Chile, Jordan and Luxembourg also voted for the resolution.
Australia and the United States voted against.
Until shortly before the vote, council diplomats had expected the resolution to get nine “yes” votes. Had this been the case, the US would likely have used its veto to block the resolution. But Nigeria, which had been expected to vote “yes,” abstained at the last minute, leaving the Palestinian Authority one vote short of the required number.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesofisrael.com ...
Here is what was said ...
US Ambassador Samantha Power said: “We voted against this resolution not because we are comfortable with the status quo. We voted against it because … peace must come from hard compromises that occur at the negotiating table.”
ALSO ... I read elsewhere that it was said that the resolution only addressed one side of the issue, while the other side’s wasn’t addressed at all.
Huh?? Obama admin voting AGAINST another an Islamic terrorist state?? Something wrong here —— /s
Scary.
The interesting thing here is that the USA did not need to use its veto, but merely vote against it ...
From the article ...
US veto not needed as motion falls one vote short of nine required supporters, with last minute Nigerian change of heart. France votes in favor; US, Australia vote against, five abstain.
an “imposed withdrawl” of Israel from half of her land
would never happen, would never be possible...anyway.
I figure the UnitedNazis finally faced the simple reality that they lack the ability to murder the rest of their “dam*ed Jooos”...as much as they’d love to do it
so why be embarassed by a paper-tiger resolution that just sits there and cannot be implemented?
all the more reason to install a Republican in WH by 2017.
Iruish born Samanth Power (wife of the hated Cass Sunsteen - at least Glenn Beck hates him. LOL) hates Israel, as do her evil bosses O, Moochelle, Kerry and ValJar.
When the diplomatic “hip waders” are high enough (in this case) to temper the sentiments of the general population, somewhere I feel the BS level the world is experiencing at the behest of this manufactured “uniformity” of leadership on this planet is frightening...
WTG Tony Abbott!
Funny how they are not voting for Tibetan independence, despite two prior U.N. votes in 1959 and 1961.
The so-called security council is dangerous.
Britain didn’t vote? What is up with that?
Russia needs to practice what it preaches and stop meddling
The U.S. voted correctly but was not really a voice of wisdom. (just thankful they voted “no” considering the current administration)
With Australia out soon, it may only be a matter of time.
The blathering speech by the Palestinian guy was ludicrous and it is shocking that he has any support at all.
Israel’s statement was understated class and sanity in the midst of lunatics.
Trouble is brewing in the world. I suppose that is always the case, but it seems to be bigger lately.
Just be thankful that for whatever reason, the U.S. voted correctly. I am surprised His Royal Smugness allowed that “no” vote to take place, but I am glad.
Good point in your post #5.
Yep, definitely a one-sided document and not addressing both sides.
I posted this once before, but...
If it’s Not About the Jews... - ©2014 by Trevor Patrick
The keffiyeh-wearing activists all say:
that Anti-Zionism is not Anti-Semitism,
and that antipathy towards Israel,
is not REALLY about the Jews...
It’s about the ‘Illegitimate, Apartheid State’,
that ‘occupies’ the entirety of Palestine,
and that ancient hatreds and blood-libels,
aren’t the things that are shaping their views.
They say that their overarching care,
is for people living as prisoners in their own, stolen homeland,
and in ensuring that ‘silenced’ voices
are finally, at long last heard-
but the mounting inconsistencies in their message,
in talk as well as in deed,
are making some folks realise,
that their actions belie their words.
Because if it’s not about the Jews,
why is Palestine such a cause-celebre,
when there’s dozens of OTHER nations,
whose rightful citizens live as slaves?
And why then is Israel called an ‘illegitimate’ entity,
even though it was recognised by the UN,
and the vast majority of the world’s nations:
most of them in 1948?
And if it’s not about the Jews,
why do the activists insist on referring
to Jerusalem as ‘Al Quds’,
rather than using its proper, 5,000 year-old historical name?
If it’s not about the Jews,
and it’s all about the oppressed Palestinians,
what about the ones living in camps in neighbouring nations:
generations born on foreign soil,
but never allowed basic rights, citizenship,
or much less, a sense of place?
If it’s not about the Jews,
why is there a double standard for the Israelis,
where protecting their safety
is called an act of genocide?
But every attack by Palestinians,
that succeeds in killing Israelis,
no matter what the context,
is ALWAYS justified?
Because if it was truly not about the Jews,
the activists would see the real truth,
that the BIGGEST victimisation of the Palestinians
is not from Israel-
but rather from their own fanatical leadership,
who don’t want peace, but want every Jew dead,
and from all the other Arab nations
that use them as bargaining chips and pawns.
And if it’s not about the Jews,
then maybe you should ask yourself:
can you stare in the mirror, and look yourself in the eyes-
when wherever you happen to live,
you’re standing on land
that often YOUR ancestors
were the ones that seized and occupied?
And if it’s not about the Jews,
would you live by your own standards,
and say that when the bus you’re riding on is blown up,
you deserved to die-
that you have no intrinsic right to protect yourself,
in the land you’ve known from birth,
because your very citizenship
is based upon a lie?
If it’s not about the Jews,
why then is Israel hated more
than any other so-called ‘occupying power’,
on the face of the Earth?
For example, no one’s given a shit since 1974,
about occupied Northern Cyprus:
A so-called ‘country’ that is recognised
by no one, but the occupying Turks.
And it’s ALSO no longer trendy
unless you’re Richard Gere,
to talk about China’s continuing occupation
and cultural despoliation of Tibet;
because, after all, it wasn’t dirty Jew-Gold,
that financed the forced ‘liberation’ of Lhasa,
and the Tibetans don’t strap suicide bombs to their children,
or murder Chinese families in their beds.
But the Chinese occupiers
have single-handedly wiped-out
the centuries-old tradition of the Panchen Lama,
and will do the same to the Dalai Lama,
on the day he finally drops dead.
And if it’s not about the Jews,
why am I supposed to boycott, divest and sanction against Soda-Stream,
but I’m crazy if I do the same against other companies,
whose nations have demonstrably occupied foreign territory,
and treat the people they’ve oppressed far worse yet?
Likewise, every African horror story,
that captures the public attention
for all of five minutes,
but then disappears like smoke,
as all other stories about oppressed brown people
so invariably do...
But Palestine has dominated the discourse,
and WILL continue to do so until Israel is destroyed,
because the plain and simple truth
is that it’s ALWAYS been about the Jews.
Not really. This was just another political kabuki play, strictly for the benefit of policy reaffirmation and reassurance of that segment of their respective domestic audience that pays attention to these things.
Reading closer: supported the text setting a 12-month deadline for negotiations on a final peace deal with Israel and an imposed full Israeli withdrawal ...
There is nothing remotely enforceable about negotiations or withdrawal (how can you impose something that is subject to negotiations, and further, who is going to impose "it"?) The motion was guaranteed to fail and it successfully did.
Everybody did their obligatory show of hands, drank their Perrier or San Pellegrino (both are products of a fine company, Nestlé Waters) and went home happy. A job well and professionally done.
"La commedia e finita!"
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.