By Ted Belman
The current Haaretz editorial, Netanyahu should view U.S. veto at the UN as a warning, started with the caption,
-
Once again, the American superpower appeared to lose some of its prestige and international standing in order to defend the Israeli settlement enterprise, which enjoys the support of powerful patrons in Congress.
The left really hates the “settlement enterprise”. It continues,
-
After hesitating until the very last moment, U.S. President Barack Obama decided to have his envoy veto the UN Security Council resolution condemning the settlements. The Palestinian-initiated proposal would have declared the Israeli settlement enterprise in the territories illegal. Fourteen members of the Security Council voted in favor of the resolution, and only the U.S. veto kept it from being passed.
The Palestinians lost the vote, but achieved their goal: They exposed for all to see the international isolation of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration and embarrassed the U.S. administration by revealing it as two-faced.
Netanyahu expresses the will of the people. He is answerable to them not the international community and certainly not the Israeli left.
Unfortunately, many of the asylum inmates are in charge.
Breathtaking.
The United Nations is presently composed of 192 member states.
Of those 192, 191 of them are permitted to serve the Security Council, either on a permanent term or as a rotating member taking a two-year temporary term.
The Jewish State has been a member of the UN for 62 years.
In all that time it has not been permitted — not once — to serve a temporary term on the Security Council: unlike SEVERAL countries which have sat on the Council two (or more) times since 1949, when Israel joined the world body;
unlike several countries which have sat on the UNSC, and which weren’t even members of the UN till long after Israel had entered the UN’s ranks;
unlike several countries which have sat on the UNSC, and which weren’t even COUNTRIES when Israel joined the UN.
And the SECURITY COUNCIL presumes to sit in judgment of ISRAEL’s “legitimacy”? (let alone, her legality?)
LOL
LOLROF.
This is the sheerest horse-pucky.
“The international isolation of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s govt” is HARDLY anything new. It was isolated on the way in. Nu, BFD, so what? The Pali’s “achieved” nothing except to show — by jumping the gun, as they did (in insisting on the “illegal” assertion, despite Amb. Susan Rice’s urgings to the contrary) — that they lack the political & diplomatic sophistication of the American administration, which would have been more-than-content to sign on to an “illegitimacy” resolution (thereby making it unanimous).
Furthermore, GOI doesn’t owe the Oval Office a thimbleful of sugared spit for the veto, because there is no way the Obami COULD have endorsed an “illegality” claim — under any circumstances. It would’ve opened up a can of worms they know they couldn’t close.
The truth is that the legal brief for “illegality” hasn’t got
a legal leg to stand on,
a legal pot to piss in, or
a legal window to chuck the contents of the legal pot out of.
Any properly constituted court of competent jurisdiction would throw out the case as frivolous
and sanction the plaintiff as a vexatious litigant.
And as for Ha’aretz, I think “Ayn Reagan” said it best [as usual; in this instance, maybe a year or so ago?]:
“Ha’aretz is a comic book
for retarded children.”
That about covers it.
It is not the business of the international community where Jews live within their own sovereign nation.
Haaretz can kiss my royal behind. They don’t represent anyone.