Resolution Against BDS Passes House 398-17

That would be the anti-Semitic “Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions” movement, not Bush Derangement Syndrome. CNN thinks the vote was “divisive”

The vote was 398-17

The House of Representatives on Tuesday voted to approve a non-binding resolution that opposes the boycott movement against Israel, a measure that won broad bipartisan support but faced pushback from some high-profile progressives.

The vote was 398 to 17.

The resolution was introduced in March, not long after Democrats faced a bruising internal debate over how to handle comments and tweets by Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar that were criticized as being anti-Semitic, exposing the divide within the Democratic Party over Israel and US policy towards the country.

Oh, they meant it was divisive because a few of the people who voted against it are high profile Israel haters, including Ilhan Oman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Rashida Tlaib. Most of the rest who are Israel haters, and, in some case, Jew haters, were wise enough to not vote against the resolution

(CNS News) Sponsored by Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.), and co-sponsored by almost 80 percent of the House (175 Republicans and 174 Democrats), H.Res. 46 passed by 398 votes to 17.

The measure opposes the BDS movement, calls on Israelis and Palestinians to resume direct negotiations, reaffirms support for the so-called “two-state solution” to the conflict, and – in response to a key complaint of opponents – affirms U.S. citizens’ constitutional right to free speech.

Schneider has called the BDS movement anti-Semitic (it is) and stated “There are a lot of people who support the BDS movement, but they may not necessarily understand the intent or the expression of … the BDS movement.”

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Resolution Against BDS Passes House 398-17”

  1. formwiz says:

    Election next year and the newbies don’t want to lose their sinecure.

  2. Professor Hale says:

    Is is anti-semitic to suggest that Israel and the PLO work things out on their own? I suspect American interferrence over the past 50 years may be perpetuating the problem instead of solving it. How many presidents have we had with photo ops on the White House lawn shaking hands with PLO and Israeli leaders? How many peace prizes have been awarded for peace efforts in this area that have resulted in… not much peace?

    At some point, we should just accept that our efforts in the past may, MAY have been the wrong approach and try something new. Something that doesn’t involve us writing checks for people on the other side of the planet.

    • Kye says:

      I concur, Professor and await the charges of being anti-Semitic. At one point Arafat was given every demand and that STILL was not good enough. Only the elimination of Israel will suffice. I say let them go to war and may the best country win and take all. But we need to keep out. We also need to get the hell out of the Middle East. Seventeen year is long enough.

      Trump 2020 Bring our men home!!!

      • Professor Hale says:

        This is mostly already happening. At the height of 2008, the USA had 129K in Iraq. Another 30K in Afghanistan and 10K in various other places like Africa.

        Last year there were fewer than 5K in Iraq, Syria and Kuwait (HQ troops) combined and a similar small number in Afghanistan. Since then ISIS collapsed in Iraq/Syria so there is even less cause for those troops to be there. Just announced last week was Pakestan taking a leading role in negotiating with Taliban to make Afghanistan “stabile-ish” so we can abandon it without feeling “TOO” guilty about running away.

        Of course, that doesn’t count Navy afloat forces.

    • Dana says:

      The only way the Israelis and the Arabs will ever work things out on their own is on the battlefield. That might be an ugly truth, but it’s still the truth.

      • Professor Hale says:

        Reminds me of the old Star trek episode where the wars were fought by computers and random people are selected to go to incineration centers. The point was, war became so “clean” that no one objected to it any longer. Kirk (famous for ignoring the Prime Directive), destroyed the computer and the shock and fear of real war compelled the parties to finally negotiate real peace. The PLO leaders don’t get paid if there is no conflict. If we stop paying them (by what they can skim from our donations), the dynamics change. payments by the US government ALWAYS crates perverse incentives to continue the payments rather than seek healthier solutions.

        In my own experience, I have discovered that most “generational hatreds” are artificial and propagated by those in power, for their own benefit. Different people in power could propagate a different message and get different results.

  3. alanstorm says:

    In no universe does a 398 – 17 vote indicate “broad bipartisan support”.

Bad Behavior has blocked 10897 access attempts in the last 7 days.