Not that I’m cynical but I suspect the (R-FL) after her name may be partly responsible for her stance on the issue. Florida is known to have a few elderly Jews with strong views on the subject and a willingness to vote single-issue.
As post 278 shows, some people think that most anyone that doesn’t line up four square with israel is actually antisemetic. There’s no point in continuing dialogue with these folks.
I like the fact that Israel has condemned the vote as being unilateral. Coming from Israel, that’s rich, but an international vote being qualified as unilateral, that’s deadpan irony.
Funny how the US are prepared to thoroughly burn themselves for Israel though. You dont take back your funding because you dont agree with the vote, even less so when it’s not a direct concern. Let Israel tie its own shoelaces.
There’s no point in continuing dialogue with brazil84 on any subject dude, not that it will keep you from doing it again.
Brave journalist. Anti-Semite no doubt.
My understanding (and it is mentioned in the video above) is that current US law requires the US to withdraw funding based on UNESCO’s “support” of the Palestinians. Anyone know any more detail of the law in question?
You’re probably right but I basically stopped posting to this thread when he admitted that he thinks critics of israel are mostly antisemites and that I am probably an antisemite.
Here’s a run down of said law:
UNESCO, Congress, U.S. Law, and the Palestinians: The Facts
– underline mine. So yes, it would appear Obama’s hands are tied on this one.
The law itself:
Thanks, RF.
I would say probably yes, based on their attempt to falsely claim that Rachel’s Tomb is the " historic Bilal Bin Rabah Mosque"
But here’s a question for you: Has UNESCO offered membership to Transnistria? to Nepal? to Northern Cyprus? To any wannabe state which is not recognized by the UN?
Does this apply to measures endorsed unanimously by the Arab League?
Lol, nice strawman.
Agree, if you aren’t interested in responding to peoples’ actual points but instead prefer to respond to strawman positions you invent.
Well did “Palestine” apply for membership in UNESCO before reaching an agreement with Israel on the issue? If so, it’s completely reasonable to characterize the move as unilateral.
Sure, there’s no point if you want to mischaracterize facts without being called on it.
. . . . 6 months later:
Wow, that Libyan dude said something that is literally no worse than any number of national Republicans.
Has an official United States delegate to the U.N. ever made a comparable statement about gays, addressing the other nations of the world, as an official representative of his country?
Do you really not see the difference, or do you see it but think that everyone else is so dumb that they’ll think you’re making a good comparison?
I’m not talking about the American UN delegates. I’m saying that this dude is as crazy as 30% of our country. I don’t think it’s cause for alarm yet that a religious person in the middle east hates gay people.
If the government of Lybia is as enlightened as America of the 1950s I’ll call that a positive thing. Gay people should have rights of course, but because of the stupidity of the Abrahamic religions anti-gay sentiment is ground pretty deep in there.
As to whether everyone is dumb, I don’t know. I guess we’ll see.
And…so what if BrainGlutton – or President Obama – were too optimistic? We still did the right thing, by standing up for self-determination for the Libyan People.
If they use that self-determination in evil ways, well, that sucks. Would it really be better, philosophically, if they had an unelected tyrant who, by use of the army, compelled everyone to show respect for gays?
(One is reminded of Eisenhower sending troops to Mississippi to compel obedience to the Supreme Court’s ruling on desegregation… But at least he was an elected leader…)
That’s the trouble with freedom: people are likely to do what they want to do, not what we want them to do.
Doing a quick Google on John Bolton, it turns out he was for the repeal of DADT and thinks legal gay marriage is inevitable. Color me stunned. I still think he’s an asshole for other reasons though.
For might makes right,
And till they’ve seen the light,
They’ve got to be protected,
All their rights respected,
'Till somebody we like can be elected.
I think we have to consider the long game on the Arab Spring revolutions. Democracy doesn’t mean instant utopia or even instant America-clone. All we can do is give them the chance to have free and fair elections and trust in the slow march of inevitability to improve things there.
Sorry I missed this earlier:
[Quote=brazil84]
Most people, yes.
[Quote=Damuri Ajashi]
So you must think I am an anti-semite or I support anti-semites?
[/quote]
Probably yes.
[/quote]
So did you not mean what you said? I mean, didn’t you specifically say taht most people that criticize israel are anti-semites? How am I strawmanning you? You simply aren’t worth engaging.
No, I meant exactly what I said. But I did not mean what you (apparently) would like to pretend that I said.
Yes, as far as I recall.
There’s a difference between criticizing Israel and “not lining up four square with Israel.” Duh.
Agree, if you prefer not to debate the actual points I make.
Do YOU really not see the analogy? When you have half the politicians in our country sayingn this sort of shit about homosexuals why is it so much more outrageous when a diplomat from another country does it?
We have a FEDERAL LAW that permits states to disregard gay marriages of other states, we ONLY RECENTLY removed a ban on homosexuals serving in our military.
I’m not apologizing for the homopphobia of fundamentalist muslims but fundamentlist Christians seem to have the same fucking problem except that we have rule of law here and a basic respect for human rights that makes it harder for these crazies to drag the faggots out in the streets and drag them from chains behind their pickup trucks.
If you want more tolerance for homosexuality in the middle east, democracy and rule of law is the only way (short of eternal military occupation) that we are going to get there. So, even if democracy is scary for Israel, it seems a bit odd that we would discourage democracy in the middle east because we want to support another democracy in the middle east. Or are we supporting them because of something else?