House of Representatives condemns rocket attacks on Israel

[oberliner]

WASHINGTON – The United States House of Representatives endorsed Wednesday a resolution condemning the rocket attacks on Israel, stating that the firing of rockets on civilian population constituted a blatant violation of human rights and international law.

A sweeping majority of 404 House members endorsed the resolution, while one voted against it and four abstained.

In the resolution, the House of Representatives expressed support for Israel's sovereign right to defend its territory against rocket attacks and called on President George W. Bush to instruct the US envoy to the UN to push for a UN resolution condemning the Palestinian terror.

The members also urged Bush to demand that US ally Saudi Arabia publicly condemn the rocket fire.

The resolution stressed that those responsible for the rocket attacks were operating from within civilian-populated areas, while using civilians as human shields.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3515492,00.html

FYI, the only vote against the resolution came from Ron Paul.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

1. They completely ignored Israel's actions to-wards the Palestinians.

Like Israel was just minding their own business when missiles started raining from the sky. Not a word about the disproportionate numbers of dead and injured on each side.

They're BOTH behaving badly, but you wouldn't know that by listening to those floor speeches today. :(

[RC]

2. WHAT? Israel might not be the totally Innocent victim?

Whoda thunk. :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

Bill Clinton had both sides within weeks or even days of signing a peace treaty at Camp David just before bu$h took over. So close and bu$h sabotaged the effort as one of his first acts. War must be good business.

[Dick Dastardly]

3. When Israel pulled out of Gaza

the rocket attacks greatly increased. I guess as you say we should not ignore Israels heinous provocation of pulling settlements and troops from Gaza which the Palestinians had absolutly no choice but to increase rocket attacks for Israels hienous provocation.


How does disproportionate make one right or wrong. Using that logic the US was in the wrong and Japan in the right because many more Japanese died than Americans.
The Palestinian militants hide behind civilians but Israel is to blame for that. Israel should do nothing to protect itself is what I hear.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

4. This didn't start when 'Israel pulled out of Gaza"

This time, or the several times before.

They only withdrew the settlements, not the control over the people of Gaza...
Israel, which occupied the Gaza Strip from 1967-2005, still controls the strip's airspace, territorial water and offshore maritime access, as well as its side of the Gaza-Israeli border. Israel also controls the population registry, entry of foreigners, imports and exports as well as the tax system
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip

[Dick Dastardly]

5. They pulled settlements and troops out of Gaza and rockets increased greatly

You said "when missiles started raining from the sky" which is a recent developement and they greatly increased when they pulled out. Now you are shifting the parameters to 1967 and other issues which still do not support what you say.

So pretty much what your saying Israel was to blame for responding to these increased attacks because they eased up on the Palestinians.


What about the disproportionate deaths I responded to?

[breakaleg]

6. This always amazes me. Did Israel think that 40 years of occupation and oppression would

forgotten in an instant? It's like people here expected a thank-you card or something.

Put it in perspective. They left. After 40 years of a brutal occupation. Surely a reasonable person can expect some kind of reaction. Payback's a bitch.

[Dick Dastardly]

7. He was talking about Israels actions when the missiles started

not 40 years ago. Obviously since you cant find the justification within the stated distance to the goal you must move it.



Just for shits and giggles lets go back your 40 years or how about since Israels birth for perspective. Since Israels birth the Arabs countries and Palestinians have been calling for the destruction of Israel, launching countless terror attacks and numerous wars which is why there is an occupation in the first place.Arab countries outnumber Israel 100 to 1 in population. Surely a reasonable person can expect some kind of reaction. Payback's a bitch.
That is unless you feel Jews should not try to defend themselves.

[breakaleg]

8. "Israel's birth". Did it drop from the sky?

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hifalutin]

10. Was'nt

Solomon King of Israel around 1000 BC ?

Did Moses not lead the Jews to the promised land, Israel?

I thought the Romans (and others) destroyed the Israeli city of Jerusalem many times in history.

These are just a couple of reasons why I don't understand Israel is not supposed to have existed before this past century. I thought Jews had always lived in Israel until one group or another conquered them, but they always seem to have gotten it back.

Help, please.

[LeftishBrit]

12. Did any country drop from the sky?

[Shaktimaan]

11. so you agree.

Positive acts taken by Israel now will not be responded to in kind, but rather with violence. Israel can not expect peace but rather retribution.

Payback's a bitch?

If the Palestinians prefer to commit to revenge instead of the peace process then there is little Israel can do to dissuade them. What amazes me is that you hold this view, yet seem to think that Israel should continue to make concessions, and just "take its medicine" as you seem to find payback a reasonable reaction. In reality though, the policy of payback will be a bitch for the Palestinians much more so than Israel.

I can't think of any time that peace has developed out of such a policy. Peace will hinge on Palestinian goodwill towards Israel. No nation would make concessions if the result would be harmful to them. Not to mention that your argument is an effective pro-settlement one. Consider them payback for attacking Israel. Or for 1400 years of Jewish oppression by Arab nations. It also excuuses settler violence in places like Hebron. Consider it payback for massacring Hebron's native Jewish population without provocation. Payback's a bitch, right?

Would you find that to be as reasonable a position as the one you make here?

[LeftishBrit]

13. I agree with condemning the rocket attacks...

I hope that the House of Representatives will go beyond that and actively support peace activities and negotiations for peace.

There always seems to be so much more money available for war than for peace.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

14. Does anyone else see the insanity of condemning the resistance to a war crime as a war crime? nt

[Vegasaurus]

15. Condemning attacks on civilians

is rightly called a crime. I applaud congress.

And there would be NO RESPONSE from Israel, if the Palestinian militants would just leave them the fuck alone! Stop the gd rocket fire and their idiotic resistance, even for ONE DAY, and there would be NO RESPONSE from Israel. Those brilliant militants haven't tried that one yet, have they?

Only stupidity keeps up this resistance. And lack of compassion for their suffering people which is unconscionable.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

16. The occupation is a crime against 4 million civilians.

I'm sure there would be NO RESPONSE if Palestinians were passive in the face of their brutal military occupation and siege.

That's Israel's goal, isn't it? Endless occupation with zero resistance?

[Vegasaurus]

17. Israel isn't occupying Gaza

The Gazans continue with their idiotic resistance, which only makes their lives more miserable.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

18. The conditions of the siege, imposed since Hamas' victory, make life WORSE for Gazans

than conditions under occupation.

The settlements with their crystal blue swimming pools may be gone, but Israel has managed to destroy any chance of creating a working economy and society.

Israel continues to occupy the nation of Palestine. Your semantic nonsense fools no one.

[Vegasaurus]

19. Hamas's victory has certainly made life lots worse for Gazans, that's for sure

but that is because Hamas is a violent group of terrorists, who prefer to blow people up than to develop a real life for their people.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

23. Wrong. ISRAEL made life unbearable for Gaza.

No where was it written that a free and fair election had to be overturned.

That was a choice Israel made.

[Vegasaurus]

26. But Hamas has continued its violent and terrorist actions

and continued to make the lives of the Palestinians more and more miserable because they refuse to halt the rockets and other violence. There would be no siege, and Gaza could have been a thriving economy, were the terrorists to let up their horrible ways.

How can you not blame Hamas for the misery it has wrought upon its people?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

29. The problem is not wrong resistance. It's Israel's 40-year reign of tyranny. nt

[ProgressiveMuslim]

30. The West Bank isn't the only Israeli Occupied Terroritory. nt

[Vegasaurus]

31. Look at what life was like for Gazans in 1980 vs now

Do you think resistance is paying off?

It is making life ever so much more miserable.

[azurnoir]

33. They should just close their eyes

and lay still :sarcasm:

What beside stopping the rockets would you suggest?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

34. This is what I've been saying to all who will listen:

Those conditions of the 1980s are what spawned the first Intifadah!!!

It's the basic design of military occupation that denies self-determination that's the issue... the murder of civilians, the siege, the wall, the checkpoints all make it worse.

You Israel-only folks point back to pre-Intifadah as tho it's a goal. That too was unacceptable!!

It was occupation! No self-determination. A half-life for human beings, who worked as slave laborers in Israel.

Do you know that in Gaza in the 1980s there was a nightly 8:00 pm curfew??? Can you IMAGINE yourself having to be in your home at 8:00 or risk being shot on sight? Would you accept that? Not in a million years.

Do you know that water was available for about 30 mins a day? You had to run to the tap to fill your bottles to have potable water and to fill you tank? Can you imagine?

You point to 1980 Gaza as though it's something to achieve.

Your ignorance is staggering.

[azurnoir]

32. Had a weird thought

maybe Hamas or whoever is to blame is taking the wrong approach at least PR wise, maybe they should say something like

"we try not to target civilians, but our rockets do not have guidance systems and we can not help where they land and well we really don't know where the IDF really is, at least when they're not here"

I mean even less works for Israel :sarcasm: (obligatory)

[Dick Dastardly]

42. Which occured due to Palestinian and Arab wars and terror

They need to blame themselves for waging war and terror and losing. Israel has the legal right to administer the WB and Gaza until a full comprehensive peace.

[pelsar]

36. u miss the point..

israeli doesnt give a shit who rules gaza..for all we can they can have virgin sacrifices...

just stop lobbing lame missiles at our citizens... that has got to be the most incredibly stupid thing they can do.....daily 5-40 missiles are launched to kill israelis....

they're lives are hardly going to improve nor will they get any nearer to any kind of independence while they keep on attacking their neighbor.

some history: when israel left there were 3 border points to israel open, one to egypt: all 4 were attacked by hamas and friends at one time or another...today they're all closed.....maybe hamas should have protected them them? dumb dumb and dumber......

[Vegasaurus]

37. Dumb, dumb and dumber is right

It's like they want their lives to be shitty.

Why else continue this stupidity?Just stop the rockets and maybe they would have a chance at a decent life.

[azurnoir]

38. First off

are we suppose to br impressed that Israel left 3 border points open, were the Gazan's allowed to transport goods such as fresh produce out of Israel?
Yes they were open so that goods could get in, but only with Israel's approval, except for what came through Rafah.
The usual and more efficient methods of transporting goods in and out remained and still remain blocked.
There by stunting economic growth and development

Now about those lame rockets, most Israeli's I would say 75 out of 100 want peace and are tired of the tit for tat bloodshed same for the Palestinians, then you have a few more that for what ever reasons perhaps being personally hurt or injured or believing this is Israel's only defense, think what must be done must be done possibly the same for the Palestinians, and then lastly you a few who actually revel in it enjoy inflicting suffering on the Palestinians and value the rockets because it allows them to do that, and now before you say I am claiming Israel/Israeli's are evil I just explained that is not the case or that I am lying I came across a post on another forum were just what I claimed was posted

what are you talking about...gaza is working out great...those 40 kassams? we couldnt ask for anything better.

the Palestenains have to "lose"...and accept that. Those 40 kassams gave us the oppertunity to launch air strikes, artillary strikes and make if very clear whats coming next..they also need their own version of a civil war inorder to have a single authority....to get there the hamas has be shown to be a negative factor..those 40 kassams were perfect!

we dont have to be selective now...we are now at war with the authority in Gaza who ever they are...no more single shell, single bullet, down sized missles....so far this is far better than any other realistic scenario....

after we've flattened several neighborhoods they'll either come to their senses or we'll continue..either way they cant do much to hurt us from gaza.

I will post a link if you wish or you can take my word, I was shocked really but it people on both sides who feel this way that are keeping the bloodshed going

[pelsar]

53. impressed has nothing to do with it.....

its all about taking advantage of a change.....

The usual and more efficient methods of transporting goods in and out remained and still remain blocked.
There by stunting economic growth and development...

i hadnt realized that if the most efficient method cant be used, then it justifies shooting rockets at israeli cities.....more so perhaps Hamas shouldnt try blowing up the terminals when supplies are being brought in? (haartez winter waiting game march 7).

with hamas shooting lame missiles at israeli cities daily, israel owes them nothing....they even shoot at the terminals when supplies are being brought in, they've shot at the egyptians....

i think hamas is going about it wrong....whats amazing is how people still attempt to excuse them....trying to blow up the incoming trucks and terminal with humanitarian aid?.....can they really get any stupider?

[Vegasaurus]

66. Hamas seems to win the stupid prize

Why else would they jeopordize the lives of their citizens like that?

[Tom Joad]

20. Yes, Gaza remains under occupation, and yes,

many restrictions were in place even before Hamas took power in Gaza.

[Tom Joad]

21. for 60 years Israel has been attacking Palestinians. Taking their homes and their land.

the manner of Palestinian response has never changed Israeli aggression.

[Vegasaurus]

22. Can always count on Tom

to trot out his "60 years" of Israeli whatnot.

We know what you really think of Israel, and how it occupies Arab land. It's a crappy opinion, but you are welcome to it.

[Tom Joad]

24. Why am i not surprised this resolution says nothing about 40 Palestinian kids

killed by the Israeli terror forces in the last week?

[oberliner]

25. From the Resolution

From the preamble:

Whereas the inadvertent inflicting of civilian casualties as a result of defensive military operations aimed at military targets, while deeply regrettable, is not at all morally equivalent to the deliberate targeting of civilian populations as practiced by Hamas and other Gaza -based terrorist groups

From the clauses:

2. expresses condolences to the families of the innocent victims on both sides of the conflict

4. expresses sympathy and support for innocent Palestinian civilians who reject all forms of terrorism and desire to live in peace with their Israeli neighbors but who continue to be utilized as human shields by terrorist organizations

[Tom Joad]

27. It also excuses and supports Israeli military actions.

These actions are sure to bring more violence.

It would be understandable to express concern about the people of Sderot, but this resolution goes beyond that and supports unconditionally the war crimes committed by the Israeli Occupation forces.

[msmcghee]

28. Congratulations to the Democrat led US House of Reps!

This is one of the more productive and honorable things that politicians can do to end the suffering of both the Palestinians and Israelis and bring about a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

Hamas needs to see that the world is not falling for the phony victimhood and Pallywood productions. When Palestinians see this - only then will there be a chance that Hamas and the other jihadis will lose the support of their Arab / Persian sponsors and their own people - only then may they reconsider their fanatical need to kill Jews.

Israel is not leaving. The only path to peace includes recognizing Israel's existence and seeking peace through negotiation - as Res 242 has called for since 1967. When that happens and they stop violently attacking Israel - the killing on both sides will stop.

Resolutions like this are one sure way to bring that day closer. Now let's see the senate do one of these too. :thumbsup:

[number6]

35. context

totally one sided

Palestinians just don't count ....

[totodeinhere]

39. The House resolution was quite moderate and reasonable...

under the circumstances. It expressed support for both peace loving Israelis and Palestinians.

[Violet_Crumble]

40. Could you post a link to this resolution?

I noticed you posted a snippet of it without a link to argue that it's not one-sided, but I'd like to read the entire thing...

[Violet_Crumble]

41. Kick...

I've searched for this resolution and can't find it. Can anyone help me out with a link?

[oberliner]

43. Here is a link to the resolution

This should link to the resolution as agreed to by the House (it is slightly different from the one that was initially introduced):

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/hr951_eh.xml

If that link doesn't work (as that site tends to be weird sometimes), just go to thomas.loc.gov and do a search for "Gaza". As of now, this is the first resolution that shows up on that list.

Edit to add: It's House Resolution 951

[Violet_Crumble]

44. Thanks n/t

[oberliner]

46. What are your thoughts on the resolution?

Would you have voted for it?

[breakaleg]

48. I find it interesting that Israel claims to have the moral high ground given the events from day one

of this conflict.

[oberliner]

49. When was "day one" of this conflict?

How far back do you mean?

[Violet_Crumble]

51. I'm wondering why anyone would even try to argue it wasn't incredibly one-sided...

Do you think it's very one-sided?

[oberliner]

57. I would not try to make that argument

I only dispute the claim that it "said nothing" about the innocent Palestinians who were also killed.

[Tom Joad]

45. Rep Ellison's remarks: This resolution is not enough...

This is part of the Congressional Record, from Representative Keith Ellison of MN.

Ellison: Speaker, today I voted in favor of House Resolution 951 to condemn rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel and the death and fear those attacks have caused. These rocket attacks must be condemned, and they must be stopped. I’ve been to Sderot, and I have seen how these rocket attacks cause fear and suffering among the people there, where it is extremely difficult to carry on anything approaching a normal life. The residents of Sderot and now Ashkelon face a daily barrage of rockets, and that is intolerable. Terrorists are bombing citizens, not soldiers. There is nothing in Islam to justify hurting innocent civilians. Bombers cannot use religion to justify what they’re doing, and I condemn it.

But this resolution is not enough. If we want to be morally consistent, we must condemn rocket attacks on Israel and also condemn the humanitarian crisis in Gaza too. The 1.4 million inhabitants of the Gaza Strip exist in a state of dreadful isolation, quite literally cut off from the world. Basic supplies and necessities are at a minimum. Ninety percent of the industry has closed down. Unemployment is rampant, and poverty and disease are endemic. Only a few weeks ago, the people of Gaza broke through walls to buy groceries in Egypt. I regret the resolution we voted on today did not devote adequate attention, in my view, to the plight of the people of Gaza.

To suggest that this is the Gazans’ just desserts for voting the wrong way in the Palestinian legislative elections in January 2006 does nothing to improve the quality or alleviate the human suffering on either side of the border. We in Congress need to show compassion for the people of Gaza, Sderot, and Ashkelon and the tremendous human suffering they are undergoing. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says he does not want the humanitarian crisis in Gaza to continue, and the Bush administration should do all it can to help him meet that commitment.

This resolution criticizes one of the leading advocates for stability and peace in the region: Egypt. The Egyptian Government has made it clear that it is doing all it can to close off smuggling. What’s needed is a greater degree of cooperation with Egypt. This resolution does nothing to advance that cooperation. We need to engage Egypt, not pass resolutions that publicly offend or diminish our relations with them. Absent strong evidence that Egypt is complicit in allowing weapons smuggling to occur, I am not in favor of Egypt bashing.

I understand Egypt is doing what it can to control the border despite restrictions on its security forces imposed by Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel. If Egypt had direct contact or diplomatic channels with all parties involved in the conflict, the United States should prevail upon Egypt to help effect a prisoner exchange, stop the rocket attacks on Israeli citizens, and improve the humanitarian conditions for citizens of Gaza.

It’s a fortunate coincidence that the Secretary of State is in the region right now, and I am supportive of her taking an active role in resolving this conflict. Beyond resolutions and expressions of sympathy, we need real actions from the Bush administration to solidify and advance the commitments of leaders in the Middle East to a lasting peace through the two-state solution envisioned well before Annapolis. I ask my colleagues here in the House to join me in urging the Secretary of State to highlight the humanitarian needs of ordinary citizens of Gaza alongside the fear and death among ordinary Israelis as she seeks to mediate the situation so tragic for all involved.

Finally, as a Member of Congress, I am concerned about the resolution’s references to Iran. Now, I agree that Iran is playing a negative role in the region, but we have seen what the Bush administration has done with past congressional resolutions. I want to repeat that there is nothing in the resolution that should be construed as a justification for military action. I remain opposed to military action against Iran. We need to start a bilateral dialogue. That has been and will continue to be my position. The most effective way to stop Iran’s harmful activities is to engage them directly.

Mr. Speaker, though I wholeheartedly condemn the rocket attacks on Israel, I urge my colleagues to consider the suffering of all of the people, including the people of Sderot, Ashkelon, and Gaza.

[azurnoir]

47. Thank you Mr Ellison

about freakin' time you said something

[Violet_Crumble]

52. I don't understand why he voted for it...

If he saw the major flaws in it that I spotted on just reading it once, why vote for it?

[LeftishBrit]

54. The way I interpreted it...

he voted for it, because he thinks that the rocket attacks SHOULD be condemned; but he also thinks that other issues need to be raised, with regard to the actions of all sides. I don't see an inconsistency there. One can be critical of some of Israel's policies, and still condemn terrorist attacks on Israelis.

[Violet_Crumble]

55. No, that interpretation doesn't work...

He had specific issues with the wording of the thing, not that he merely thought some things should be raised....

btw, do you think this thing is incredibly one-sided? Do you think the criticism of the rockets is disproportionate to other things happening round the world?

[LeftishBrit]

58. I agree with the criticism of the rockets; BUT I would certainly like to see more Congressional

criticism of other people worldwide - and in particular the American government's own actions.

A near-unanimous condemnation of the Iraq war would be great for example!!!

Doesn't need to stop them criticizing Hamas, however.

[Violet_Crumble]

59. I asked if you thought the thing was one-sided...

Don't you think something like that which mentions violations of international law and human rights only against one side and which goes on to basically condone what Israel is doing as self-defence to be one-sided?

[LeftishBrit]

61. I agree with Ellison's criticism of violence on *all* sides.

More generally, I think that the American government has tended *only* to criticize the Palestinians; and the UN has tended *only* to criticize Israel (though I note that recent UN resolutions have criticized both). Neither way works. All violence needs to be condemned, and there needs to be a serious push for peace.

[Violet_Crumble]

63. Okay, you answered my question in yr edit. n/t

[LeftishBrit]

64. See my last post; where I address this very issue.

As I said in that post, both are one-sided.

[Violet_Crumble]

65. I saw yr edit.... n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

67. I don't recall any UN Resolution condoning Palestinian violence...

And that's what this US House of Reps thing has done when it comes to Israel's attacks on Gaza. I think it's kind of a cop-out to reply when asked if the House of Reps thing is one-sided to make out that the UN is just the same...

[azurnoir]

56. politics, election year, only Muslim in Congress ever

what I do not understand is why he didn't sign the statement about Israel's blockade of Gaza in January 2 of the 6 Congress people that did are from Minnesota

[ohio2007]

50. one voted against it ( Ron Paul ) and four abstained. Any guess as to who didn't vote ?

[oberliner]

62. Here is the list of those who didn't vote

12 Democrats and 7 Republicans:

Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buyer
Cardoza
Conyers
Doggett
Gonzalez
Johnson, E. B.
Keller
Kucinich
Marchant
Ortiz
Pence
Rangel
Renzi
Reyes
Rush
Tanner
Weldon (FL)
Woolsey

[IndianaGreen]

60. It would be more credible if the House had also condemned Israel's actions in Gaza

America must break from this co-dependency with the worst elements in the Israeli body politic.

[Tom Joad]

68. Rep. Moran attacked by anti-Palestinian group for not favoring war on Gaza

this resolution was nothing less than a full endorsement of Olmert's strategy of making war on the people of Gaza, though it included understandable concerns about the people of Sderot (the only real concern the Govt of Israel has about the people of Sderot is how best to use their plight to continue the attacks on Palestinians, as it continues to oppose talks with Hamas that will lead to a cease-fire, as most Israelis support).

Now we see this:
SRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT

Jewish Group Condemns Rep. Moran's Vote

A regional Jewish organization criticized Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) yesterday for voting "present" recently on a resolution condemning Palestinian-sponsored attacks against Israeli civilians.

"It is unfathomable that Congressman Moran could not vote in support of this simple, overwhelmingly passed bipartisan measure," the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington said in a news release. "Unfortunately, this is just the latest in an established multi-year pattern of votes and outbursts expressing antagonism towards Israel."

Moran said the resolution did not address all of the issues.

"I strongly condemn the Qassam rocket attacks and express great sympathy with those Israelis affected by them," he said in a statement. "Any resolution regarding this ongoing conflict, however, needs to also recognize the current humanitarian crisis facing the people of Gaza and the hundreds of innocent Palestinians who have died. The two events are inextricably intertwined, yet the resolution failed to consider the latter. Therefore, I voted present, because in my view, it was an incomplete resolution that failed to advance the cause of peace."

Moran was criticized last year after he said in a magazine interview that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee played a strong role promoting the war in Iraq.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/06/AR2008030603593_pf.html (may need to scroll down a bit)