Trump's embassy move to Jerusalem 'self-destructive'

It will be interesting to see how it goes. I hope the resolution is signed by everyone but Israel and the US. We need to be taught a lesson diplomatically.

Just curious to hear your response to this question. If I went to town and had sex with a woman, but first told her that I was German when in fact I was American, and she soon learned that I was American, should I go to jail for that?

I say that this is untrue.

As I said, they took the first opportunity that fate presented to them. This was that opportunity.

I don't see why someone should go to jail for that.

14 Delegations in Favour of Resolution 2334 (2016) as United States Abstains

The Security Council reaffirmed this afternoon that Israel’s establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity, constituting a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders.

https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm

itisapartheid.org

He was convicted of "rape by deception" following a criminal trial that has drawn criticism from across Israel.

Donald Trump’s threat to cut U.S. funding to countries that oppose his decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in a U.N. vote on Thursday has set the scene for confrontation with countries already bridling over the president’s approach.

Amid accusations of bullying and blackmail, the U.S. and Israel have continued their furious efforts to persuade countries to back Trump’s position, amid predictions that more than 150 of 193 countries in the general assembly could vote against the U.S.

Trump made his threat to cut U.S. funding on Wednesday as he gave his wholehearted support to his U.N. ambassador, Nikki Haley, who had sent members a letter warning that the U.S. would be “taking names” of those who opposed it.

The draft resolution reaffirms 10 security council resolutions on Jerusalem, dating back to 1967, including requirements that the city’s final status must be decided in direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

It also “demands that all states comply with security council resolutions regarding the holy city of Jerusalem, and not to recognize any actions or measures contrary to those resolutions.”

In an indication of the scale of defeat anticipated by Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he launched a pre-emptive attack denouncing the U.N. as a “house of lies” on Thursday morning.

In the wake of US President Donald Trump's controversial decision to declare Jerusalem the capital of Israel, Evangelical Bishop Munib Younan calls for a diverse Jerusalem where the rights of all are respected.
[...]
First of all I would like to say: Jerusalem is also dear to us Christians. And we think that any change of the status quo will not bring peace to the area. On the contrary, you are touching the nerve of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Jerusalem must be a place for peace, justice and reconciliation. Secondly, we believe that the historic status quo for the holy places must be maintained and not changed. And thirdly, we, Muslims and Christians, believe that the custodianship of the holy places in Jerusalem are in the hands of His Majesty King Abdullah II of Jordan. Had Mr. Trump said West Jerusalem is the capital for Israel and East Jerusalem the capital for Palestine, things would have been normal. But once again he ignored the Palestinians.
[... ... ...]

The UN is infested with anti-Semites.

Obama is an anti-Semite.

Anti-Semites like falsely accusing Jews of imaginary crimes.

The Palestinian refusal to make peace with Israel means that Israel has no obligation to return to 1967 borders and is free to do with the land as they wish.

An obvious neo-nazi website just from the title.

So in other words the Israeli people are speaking out against what they see as injustice. Good for them!

Vote and Majority Required

Article 27 of the UN Charter states that:

Each member of the Security Council shall have one vote.
Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members.

Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of Article 52, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting.

The Right to Veto

The creators of the United Nations Charter conceived that five countries — China, France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) [which was succeeded in 1990 by the Russian Federation], the United Kingdom and the United States —, because of their key roles in the establishment of the United Nations, would continue to play important roles in the maintenance of international peace and security. They were granted the special status of Permanent Member States at the Security Council, along with a special voting power known as the "right to veto". It was agreed by the drafters that if any one of the five permanent members cast a negative vote in the 15-member Security Council, the resolution or decision would not be approved.

All five permanent members have exercised the right of veto at one time or another. If a permanent member does not fully agree with a proposed resolution but does not wish to cast a veto, it may choose to abstain, thus allowing the resolution to be adopted if it obtains the required number of nine favorable votes.

The US has the power of the veto, but the US is a party of the dispute. So what is the result of the resolution? 128 isn't bad for a vote against the US, regardless.

Uh, no. That's a law that Zionists have made up.

The actual, real-world law is covered in the Geneva Convention and plain old international law.