US stops UNESCO funds over Palestine vote

[gambit]

why not you guys (americans)withdraw from UN?

IF Americans were EVER allowed to vote (democratically) to withdraw from the UN, and kick it the h3ll off Manhattan Island, it would happen in 6 nanoseconds.......

Among the American public, desire to withdraw from the UN is stronger than most people in the world realize, and am not talking about the sentiment being confined to conservatives. The dominant political bias in my neighborhood is Democrat and most of them that I know either favor complete withdrawal or reduced involvement to only UNSC issues. So yes, if the US government is to obey popular vote on this matter, the US would withdraw from the UN, and gladly watch the UN become a shadow of its former self as the notional West, which would include Australia, South Korea and Japan, also leave and join US in a new alliance.

 

[kawaraj]

Among the American public, desire to withdraw from the UN is stronger than most people in the world realize, and am not talking about the sentiment being confined to conservatives. The dominant political bias in my neighborhood is Democrat and most of them that I know either favor complete withdrawal or reduced involvement to only UNSC issues. So yes, if the US government is to obey popular vote on this matter, the US would withdraw from the UN, and gladly watch the UN become a shadow of its former self as the notional West, which would include Australia, South Korea and Japan, also leave and join US in a new alliance.

You know what? I think that's a Great idea.

Let the rest of the world take their own fate, anti-west or not, it's a place where all small nations can voice their humblest opinions, saving all the bullies.

 

[gambit]

You know what? I think that's a Great idea.

Let the rest of the world take their own fate, anti-west or not, it's a place where all small nations can voice their humblest opinions, saving all the bullies.

Hey, no one forced anyone to join the UN. If you actually read up on the UN's history, you will know that a country must PETITION for membership. So what is preventing these smaller countries from creating their own alliances with restrictions as they see fit?

 

[Developereo]

Among the American public, desire to withdraw from the UN is stronger than most people in the world realize

That's because most people, including Americans, have the political intelligence of a mollusc.

The US is not in the UN because of altruism; it's because the UN provides diplomatic and PR cover for many of America's foreign activities. The US is the largest contributor to the UN budget, has the wherewithal to 'convince' other countries to vote alongside it, and generally manages to get its way on most things.

It lets the American administration say to the world, including the American public -- especially the American public -- "we are leading the world in defence of freedom and democracy".

 

[gambit]

That's because most people, including Americans, have the political intelligence of a mollusc.

How refreshingly arrogant. Good to know where you stand.

The US is not in the UN because of altruism; it's because the UN provides diplomatic and PR cover for many of America's foreign activities.

Then we can say the same for Russia, China, or Pakistan.

The US is the largest contributor to the UN budget, has the wherewithal to 'convince' other countries to vote alongside it, and generally manages to get its way on most things.

It lets the American administration say to the world, including the American public, "we are doing this because the world has agreed to it".

Really? If that is so true, then there would not be such a strong undercurrent of 'Get US out of the UN' in the first place. We should be running the world.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Among the American public, desire to withdraw from the UN is stronger than most people in the world realize, and am not talking about the sentiment being confined to conservatives. The dominant political bias in my neighborhood is Democrat and most of them that I know either favor complete withdrawal or reduced involvement to only UNSC issues. So yes, if the US government is to obey popular vote on this matter, the US would withdraw from the UN, and gladly watch the UN become a shadow of its former self as the notional West, which would include Australia, South Korea and Japan, also leave and join US in a new alliance.

Gambit, I remember you telling me ages ago about how the USA should leave the UN, and form the "Concert of democracies" instead.

Now it's the same story again, but without the latter part.

What is the point of saying that when you know it's not going to happen?

 

[Al Bhatti]

واشنطن- (ا ف &#1576: كشفت وزيرة الخارجية الامريكية السابقة كوندوليزا رايس في مذكراتها أن رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي السابق ايهود اولمرت قدم في العام 2008 عرضا سريا يتضمن قيام دولة فلسطينية على اماكن مقدسة تكون تحت وصاية دولية.
وفي مقتطفات من مذكراتها الجديدة (لا شرف أعل&#1609 التي بثتها دار النشر "كراون بابليشرز" الاثنين، كتبت رايس انها دهشت عندما عرض عليها ايهود اولمرت هذا المشروع في ايار/ مايو 2008 خلال زيارة قامت بها إلى إسرائيل.

وقالت رايس إن ايهود اولمرت كان مستعدا لان يعرض على الفلسطينيين بقيادة محمود عباس حوالى 94% من الضفة الغربية مع تبادل أراض بمستوطنات إسرائيلية.

ويتضمن العرض عاصمتين واحدة لإسرائيل في القدس الغربية وواحدة للفلسطينيين في القدس الشرقية مع مجلس مشترك برئاسة رئيس بلدية إسرائيلي ومساعد له فلسطيني.

وحسب مقتطفات وزيرة الخارجية الامريكية السابقة، يتضمن عرض اولمرت عودة خمسة الاف فلسطيني إلى أراض ستعود ملكيتها لإسرائيل.

وبالنسبة للقسم القديم من مدينة القدس، سيكون تحت ادارة "لجنة حكماء" من الاردن والسعودية والسلطة الفلسطينية والولايات المتحدة واسرائيل.

واوضحت رايس في مذكراتها وهي تتذكر ردة فعلها في تلك الفترة "هل انا سمعت جيدا؟ طرحت على نفسي السؤال". وقالت ايضا "هل رئيس الوزراء الاسرائيلي يريد ان يقول انه سوف يقسم القدس وسيقيم سلطة دولة للاشراف على الاماكن المقدسة؟".

وكان ايهود اولمرت كشف في مذكراته التي نشرت مطلع العام 2011 انه عرض عام 2008 على الفلسطينيين وصاية دولية على الاماكن المقدسة والقسم القديم من مدينة القدس.

وقالت رايس في كتابها انها وعدت بنقل اقتراح ايهود اولمرت في اليوم التالي الى محمود عباس. واضافت إن عباس بدأ بالتفاوض موضحة انه لم يقبل بعودة خمسة الاف لاجىء فقط من اصل اربعة ملايين فلسطيني. واشارت إلى انها نظمت لقاء بين عباس واولمرت.

وفي ايلول/ سبتمبر، حسب كوندوليزا رايس، عرض اولمرت على عباس خريطة تحدد ما ستكون حدود دولة فلسطينية.

وجاء في مقتطفات مذكرات رايس ايضا ان "جميع العناصر الاخرى كانت لا تزال على الطاولة بما في ذلك تقسيم القدس. وشدد اولمرت على ان يوقع عباس فورا".

وقالت ايضا "عندما ظهرت من الفلسطينيون اعتراضات وطلبوا استشارة خبراء قبل التوقيع، رفض اولمرت تسليم الخريطة" حيث اعرب اولمرت عن خشيته من عمليات تسريب.

واضافت رايس "قال لي الزعيم الاسرائيلي انه وعباس متفقين للمجيء بخبرائهما في اليوم التالي. وعلى ما يبدو لم يحصل هذا اللقاء ابدا".​

http://www.alquds.co.uk/index.asp?fname=latest/data/2011-11-01-06-19-18.htm

 

[Major Shaitan Singh]

This is what is called Bullying

Western Power always utilised UN for their and their only benefits...... The time is not far when UN will break like League of Nations

 

[Developereo]

How refreshingly arrogant. Good to know where you stand.

Nothing arrogant about it; it's a statement of fact.

I am not talking about general intelligence, but political awareness. Most people are busy with life and can't be bothered knowing the details for most issues. That is why politics around the world is dominated by sound bites and 20-second commercials.

Then we can say the same for Russia, China, or Pakistan.

These countries do not hold the level of influence over UN voting that the US wields. Not even remotely close.

Really? If that is so true, then there would not be such a strong undercurrent of 'Get US out of the UN' in the first place. We should be running the world.

American culture does not like bullies. Even if the bully is oneself. Americans may say one thing, but they know they don't want to be a bully. The UN cover for US actions gives a fuzzy feeling of being a "nice guy" who defends freedom and democracy around the world.

In terms of a percentage of the American budget, it's a pittance to pay for this cover.

 

[gambit]

Gambit, I remember you telling me ages ago about how the USA should leave the UN, and form the "Concert of democracies" instead.

Now it's the same story again, but without the latter part.

Are you really that obtuse? Why should I bother to repeat what is obviously necessary?

What is the point of saying that when you know it's not going to happen?

Makes me wonder how this apply to many things people have said about their own countries' policies when they know whatever they want will never happen.

---------- Post added at 01:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:43 AM ----------

These countries do not hold the level of influence over UN voting that the US wields. Not even remotely close.

UNESCO voted against what the US want. So spare US all the hyperbole.

 

[vigour]

These is lot of debate happened in the past on the inclusion of emerging countries in the international organization permanently; the reason for the same is that developed countries, so called winners of the WWII, do not want to dilute their power that they have gained in the past century.

But as the global picture is changing, the current situation demands the inclusion of the new emerging economies to be part of the decision making process in the global picture. Similar to this situation in UNESCO, eventually international organization loose their credibility and status in the long run if they do not evolve and take appropriate steps.

 

[Al Bhatti]

واشنطن- (ا ف &#1576: كشفت وزيرة الخارجية الامريكية السابقة كوندوليزا رايس في مذكراتها أن رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي السابق ايهود اولمرت قدم في العام 2008 عرضا سريا يتضمن قيام دولة فلسطينية على اماكن مقدسة تكون تحت وصاية دولية.
وفي مقتطفات من مذكراتها الجديدة (لا شرف أعل&#1609 التي بثتها دار النشر "كراون بابليشرز" الاثنين، كتبت رايس انها دهشت عندما عرض عليها ايهود اولمرت هذا المشروع في ايار/ مايو 2008 خلال زيارة قامت بها إلى إسرائيل.

وقالت رايس إن ايهود اولمرت كان مستعدا لان يعرض على الفلسطينيين بقيادة محمود عباس حوالى 94% من الضفة الغربية مع تبادل أراض بمستوطنات إسرائيلية.

ويتضمن العرض عاصمتين واحدة لإسرائيل في القدس الغربية وواحدة للفلسطينيين في القدس الشرقية مع مجلس مشترك برئاسة رئيس بلدية إسرائيلي ومساعد له فلسطيني.

وحسب مقتطفات وزيرة الخارجية الامريكية السابقة، يتضمن عرض اولمرت عودة خمسة الاف فلسطيني إلى أراض ستعود ملكيتها لإسرائيل.

وبالنسبة للقسم القديم من مدينة القدس، سيكون تحت ادارة "لجنة حكماء" من الاردن والسعودية والسلطة الفلسطينية والولايات المتحدة واسرائيل.

واوضحت رايس في مذكراتها وهي تتذكر ردة فعلها في تلك الفترة "هل انا سمعت جيدا؟ طرحت على نفسي السؤال". وقالت ايضا "هل رئيس الوزراء الاسرائيلي يريد ان يقول انه سوف يقسم القدس وسيقيم سلطة دولة للاشراف على الاماكن المقدسة؟".

وكان ايهود اولمرت كشف في مذكراته التي نشرت مطلع العام 2011 انه عرض عام 2008 على الفلسطينيين وصاية دولية على الاماكن المقدسة والقسم القديم من مدينة القدس.

وقالت رايس في كتابها انها وعدت بنقل اقتراح ايهود اولمرت في اليوم التالي الى محمود عباس. واضافت إن عباس بدأ بالتفاوض موضحة انه لم يقبل بعودة خمسة الاف لاجىء فقط من اصل اربعة ملايين فلسطيني. واشارت إلى انها نظمت لقاء بين عباس واولمرت.

وفي ايلول/ سبتمبر، حسب كوندوليزا رايس، عرض اولمرت على عباس خريطة تحدد ما ستكون حدود دولة فلسطينية.

وجاء في مقتطفات مذكرات رايس ايضا ان "جميع العناصر الاخرى كانت لا تزال على الطاولة بما في ذلك تقسيم القدس. وشدد اولمرت على ان يوقع عباس فورا".

وقالت ايضا "عندما ظهرت من الفلسطينيون اعتراضات وطلبوا استشارة خبراء قبل التوقيع، رفض اولمرت تسليم الخريطة" حيث اعرب اولمرت عن خشيته من عمليات تسريب.

واضافت رايس "قال لي الزعيم الاسرائيلي انه وعباس متفقين للمجيء بخبرائهما في اليوم التالي. وعلى ما يبدو لم يحصل هذا اللقاء ابدا".​

http://www.alquds.co.uk/index.asp?fname=latest/data/2011-11-01-06-19-18.htm

Main points:

Condoliza kabsa or biryani (sorry, rice) has revealed that Olmert had a secret offer in 2008 as per whch a Palestinian state would be established and religious places be under international mandate

Ehud Olmert wanted the creation of Palestine in 2008 and as per the plan there were to be two capitals, west Jerusalem for "Israel", east Jerusalem for Palestine wit ha joint council headed by the head of the "Israeli" Municipality and an assistant of him who would be a Palestinian.

Palestinians to get 94% of West bank with exchange of lands of the "Israeli" settlements.

The Old City in Jerusalem would be under the administration of a "Council of Nobles" from Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Palestinian Authority, USA, and "Israel".

5000 Palestinians to get the right to come back to the land which will be under "Israel".

Mahmood Abbas started the negotiations but rejected the return of 5000 out of 4 million Palestinians.

As per Condoliza Rice, Olmenrt showed Abbas a map showing what the borders of the state of Palestine be.

Olmert was insisting Mahmood Abbas to sign the agreement soon.

The Palestinians had some objections to the plan and asked for the consultation of experts before signing the agreement. Olmert did not give a copy of the map to the Palestinians fearing it may be leaked.

Olmert and Abbas agreed to meet together along with their respective experts but that meeting never realized.

-----

If the "Israelis" were really so serious about a peace deal why not implement the previous resolutions of UN.

 

[S10]

107 to 14, with 52 abstentions

If Americans keep this up, they will isolate themselves further from rest of the world. Good.

The only thing regrettable is that idiot Harper dragging Canada into this mess. You'd think he would have STFU on supporting Israel so loudly after losing Canada's seat at UNSC, but no. He takes his stupidity a step further to piss off the Arabs. The least he could do was keep his trap shut and abstain.

 

[Developereo]

UNESCO voted against what the US want. So spare US all the hyperbole.

Where did I ever say that the US gets its way 100% of the time?

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/162416.pdf

On non-consensus issues, i.e., those on which a vote was taken, the average overall General Assembly voting coincidence of all UN members with the United States in 2010 was 41.6 percent, increased from 39 percent in 2009. In 2008, voting coincidence was 25.6 percent, and in 2007 it was 18.3 percent.

When consensus resolutions are factored in as votes identical to those of the United States, a much higher measure of agreement with U.S. positions is reached – 85.4 percent, up slightly from 84.3 percent in 2009.

In the UN General Assembly, most matters are decided by consensus, where behind-the-scene deals have already been made. It's only when an issue is particularly contentious and someone insists on an actual vote that voting happens. In other words, voting represents a failure of US behind-the-scenes wrangling, so the numbers will naturally be less favorable.

In other words, the US gets its way 85% of the time without the matter ever going to vote.

 

[bularab]

US is pathetic. Like their China-borrowed money is important. Some other nation will cover the expenses, ha.

Congratulations to my countrymate, Irina Bokova (the chief of UNESCO) for letting it pass