babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » UN votes in favor of Palestinian sovereignity 140-6 (US, Israel, 4 islands)

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: UN votes in favor of Palestinian sovereignity 140-6 (US, Israel, 4 islands)
The_Calling
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5377

posted 06 May 2004 11:14 PM      Profile for The_Calling   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
UN assembly affirms Palestinian sovereignty right

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED NATIONS, May 6 (Reuters) - The U.N. General Assembly, in a rebuke to U.S. President George W. Bush, overwhelmingly affirmed on Thursday the right of Palestinians to sovereignty over their territory seized by Israel in 1967.

The 191-nation assembly voted 140-6, with 11 abstentions, to adopt a resolution that Arab diplomats said was meant to refute Bush's position that Israel could not be expected to give up all its West Bank settlements or accept the return of Palestinian refugees in a Middle East peace deal.

The resolution also made clear that Israel could not speak for the occupied territories at the United Nations, they said.

Palestinian U.N. Observer Nasser al-Kidwa said the measure was "of extreme importance" as it reaffirmed that Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since the 1967 Middle East War was "territory under military occupation" and that the Palestinian people "have the right to self-determination and to exercise sovereignty on their territory."

The lopsided vote also demonstrated "the total isolation of the Israeli-American position," he said. Only four tiny Pacific islands -- the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru and Palau -- joined Israel and the United States in voting "no."

Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman, however, denounced the measure for failing to condemn suicide attacks against Israel or to recognize that compromise was needed on both sides. The resolution was intended to "undermine the negotiating process and not to further it," he said.

U.S. Deputy Ambassador James Cunningham said he voted "no" because the text was "inappropriate and ill-timed, and would detract from, rather than enhance," ongoing peace efforts.

Bush delighted Israelis but enraged Palestinians last month when he gave Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon letters saying Israel could not be expected to give up all its settlements or accept the return of Palestinian refugees.

But in Washington on Thursday, Bush himself sought to nuance his recent statements favoring the Jewish state, telling Jordan's King Abdullah the United States would not prejudice the outcome of final negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

link


When will the US realize that it would be wise not to officially constantly give the finger to Muslims at the UN??????

Bush continues to do everything possible to create more Al-Qaeda members.


From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 07 May 2004 01:49 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Bush continues to do everything possible to create more Al-Qaeda members.


You are going to have to explain yourself on this one. What do you mean? What exactly is 'everything possible'?

Also, did you read the extent of Gillerman's statement?


From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
The_Calling
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5377

posted 07 May 2004 10:50 PM      Profile for The_Calling   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The number one reason the US is hated by Muslims is its blind support for Israel. Bush has supported everything Sharon has done. The imperial Iraq war was also a disaster in terms of winning the hearts and minds of Muslims. It increased hatred of the US by Muslims dramatically, and also had the same effect everywhere else on Earth.

Israel and the US say that every single time they and a few islands vote against something 140-150 nations support. It is a pathetic excuse. The issue was Palestinian sovereignity. Terrorism against Israel has nothing to do with whether Palestine has a right to be sovereign. The second complaint was laughable. Likud does not want negotiations let alone peace.

Only the US and Israel demand that the other side be denounced each time a resolution Israel doesn't like is passed. No one else does this. For instance, if a resolution is passed condeming Turkey's state terrorism against Kurds, it doesn't demand that Greece be condemned for its role in Cyprus.


From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
NDP Newbie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5089

posted 08 May 2004 12:17 PM      Profile for NDP Newbie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Now if only the UN would tell the Chinese to fuck off and let Taiwan in...
From: Cornwall, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Ranger03
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5302

posted 08 May 2004 03:19 PM      Profile for Ranger03        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
UN votes for the independant state of Quebec

What do you think the Canadian government would say?

It seems to be more posturing from an ineffective UN.


From: bed | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 08 May 2004 04:15 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Ranger03:
It seems to be more posturing from an ineffective UN.

Yes, but why is it ineffective? Could it, perhaps, be because the World's Only Superpower(TM) regularly bullies and manipulates the UN for its own benefit, and into the bargain, jerks the UN around on back dues owing and unilaterally alters its contributions?

No! Can't be! The US would never do that, ever!

[ 08 May 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Joe
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4313

posted 09 May 2004 01:18 PM      Profile for Joe     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
When will the US realize that it would be wise not to officially constantly give the finger to Muslims at the UN??????

Bush continues to do everything possible to create more Al-Qaeda members.
**************************************************

When one considers the fact that the goal of the islamics is to eliminate the lawful and historical state of israel, whos borders are smaller today than they were over two thousand years ago, and taking into consideration that there is no historical people known as the palestinian's with no legitimate claim to the non existant country known as palestine,a people who are actually mainly from gordan, who cares what these muslem butchers think. Be that they operate under the name al-Qaeda, or cast a vote at the cesspool of corruption known as the UN.


From: alberta | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 09 May 2004 01:34 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Glad to hear the "non-existent Palestinians" hail from Gordan, or is that Gordon, or Gordian?

Gordie, the dad of the Palestinian "non-people"....


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Joe
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4313

posted 09 May 2004 02:13 PM      Profile for Joe     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, that would be jordan. However it does not change the historical facts. Unless you have new historical facts.
From: alberta | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 09 May 2004 04:35 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
About "Muslim butchers"? There are lots of good ones in my neighbourhood - several at the Jean-Talon market itself, though my favourite is a little one a block north, at the corner of Henri-Julien and de Castelnau. He has lovely lamb and chicken, from a nearby farm. And lots of interesting non-meat items for the veggies among us. Over the viaduct in Park-Extension, there are quite a few decent South Asian Muslim butchers. Love the chicken keema at the one at the corner of Jean-Talon and de l'Épée.

But then, I'm not Muslim, so I enjoy my halal lamb chops with a nice glass of plonk.


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
The_Calling
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5377

posted 09 May 2004 05:10 PM      Profile for The_Calling   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

This is the cost of inflaming the opinions of the Muslim world. We must fight Al-Qaeda, they are fanatics, but recognize that there are many legitimate grievances against the US in the Muslim world and elsewhere, especially Latin America.

Joe, why did only one country and 4 specks in the ocean vote with Israel?


From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Joe
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4313

posted 09 May 2004 06:28 PM      Profile for Joe     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is the cost of inflaming the opinions of the Muslim world. We must fight Al-Qaeda, they are fanatics, but recognize that there are many legitimate grievances against the US in the Muslim world and elsewhere, especially Latin America.

Joe, why did only one country and 4 specks in the ocean vote with Israel?
**************************************************
No, that is the cost of appeasement. I would suggest there is one country and four specks, that realize that appeasement never works. What possible legitimate grievance for eliminating the lawful and historical state of israel, could they, or for that matter you, make. A goal that can not be based in any legitimate historical facts that would favor turning israel into another islamic state. The islamic conquest is now in britian, seeking to turn that into another islamic state. I'll really be interested to hear you legitimize that grievance. At the beginning of the times of the crusades, the islamics controlled spain and were poised to take over all of europe. Perhaps that could form the basis for another grievance. The fact that they were turned back by the crusades. After all, we must not mention the word crusade around a muslem for fear they might highjack some planes and fly them into some towers.


From: alberta | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 10 May 2004 03:31 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The islamic conquest is now in britian, seeking to turn that into another islamic state.

Cool.

The Queen could then be both head of the Anglican Church and Caliph.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 May 2004 04:12 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
No, that is the cost of appeasement. I would suggest there is one country and four specks, that realize that appeasement never works.

Absolutely right Joe. No to appeasement! We must oppose GWB's constant appeasement of Sharon's plans for Israeli expansion. GWB's agreement to expanded settlement in the WB and his denial of the right of return for Palestinian refugees is nothing but a mini-Munich, a surrender to expansionism as much as Chamberlain's treaty with Hitler after the invasion of Czechoslovakia.

quote:
The Queen could then be both head of the Anglican Church and Caliph.


[ 10 May 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Joe
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4313

posted 10 May 2004 07:35 AM      Profile for Joe     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What right of return. The arab refugees left israel in 1948 at the urging of the surrounding arab states who promised to rid israel of all the jews. The same number of israeli refugees were forced by the arabs to leave arab land. Does the same imaginary right of return exist for them. Or would that be called jewish expansionism.
From: alberta | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 10 May 2004 08:15 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Jews left Israel 2000 years ago. They have a right of return. What's your problem?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 May 2004 08:22 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Joe, make a racist generalization like "muslim butchers" one more time, and you're outta here.

[ 10 May 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Joe
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4313

posted 10 May 2004 09:27 AM      Profile for Joe     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Joe, make a racist generalization like "muslim butchers" one more time, and you're outta here.

Kiss my ass.


From: alberta | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 10 May 2004 09:45 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oooh. That's worth getting tossed.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 May 2004 10:21 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Joe, I think this might be the thread you're looking for.

By the way, that's "toss my salad", not "kiss my ass". You're welcome.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca