I hope the UN doesn't wonder too long or too hard why they have lost all moral authority they ever had.

Last edited Fri Oct 14, 2016, 04:47 AM - Edit history (1)

....for anything?

Better than 0%?

And I wouldn't blame them. Just read a great story - tying in Bob Dylan's Nobel prize with this hideous, disgusting, repulsive vote.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/tangled-up-in-boos/

And he sang that last week at Desert Trip!!!!

which the people under occupation there can attest to.

While there are strong Jewish claims to the Holy sites in East Jerusalem, Israel has no claim whatsoever. However, I suppose the resolution is somewhat one-sided, as they usually are when it comes to occupied East Jerusalem. But two wrongs never make a right, and neither side on this issue is doing the right thing.

Last edited Fri Oct 14, 2016, 05:06 AM - Edit history (6)

Antipathy towards Jews, remember?

They're denying Jewish history in order to deny Jewish rights to worship or be there (basic human rights).
It's cultural appropriation and identity theft.
UNESCO is no better than the birther movement now.

against it?

If the resolution was anti-Semitic, surely more countries would've voted against rather than just abstaining...

All 6 nations were western democracies. The UN is majority ruled by authoritarian non-democracies and UNESCO only has 58 voting members.

Not strange at all.... it's Jewish history.

Cowardly abstentions is nothing to boast about for scientifically advanced, sophisticated civilized nations like France which is on the fence over this one.

No reason whatsoever they should cooperate with that repulsive soulless group.

it occupies - not much to alert on.

I bet George Bush thought that it was "his" oil in Iraq too...

Nationalism is a bitch...

that shows how repulsive and ahistorical this vile vote is - nothing more, nothing less. Not even the leader of UNESCO wants to have a full vote - even Worbs knows how DISGUSTING it is. And you can't even bring yourself to admit how anti semitic it is. Pathetic.

source: Haaretz

Contrary to Israeli criticism, UNESCO's resolution on Temple Mount has nothing to do with staking religious claims, and even includes some wins for Israel. If Israel wants the world to recognize Judaism's link to Jerusalem, it must sit down and talk to the Palestinians.

Israeli politicians rushed to condemn the resolution adopted by the UN's education, science and culture agency on Thursday with regard to the Temple Mount. The bulk of the criticism touched on the motion's terminology and was largely justified. But a close reading of the resolution shows that in fact, it includes a few positive revisions from the last such resolution passed by UNESCO. More importantly, it calls on Israel to enter negotiations with Jordan and the Palestinians to improve the situation on Temple Mount for everyone involved.

Contrary to Israeli claims, the document isn't a declaration as to the rightful owner of Temple Mount and its surroundings, or as to which religion has sacred claim to the site and its wall. The resolution is about determining how to maintain and nurture a world heritage site recognized by UNESCO. The agency has set rules for the preservation of Jerusalem's Old City, and these rules are being violated, according to the writers of the document. 

Israel is recognized by international law as an occupier, so the document's repeated reference to Israel as such shouldn't raise eyebrows. However, the terminology does have a clear slant toward the Islamic narrative. For example, the term Western Wall appears in quotes throughout the document, while the Arabic term for the site, Al-Burak, does not. The document refers to the Temple Mount by its Arabic names, Haram Al-Sharif and Al-Aqsa, while making no mention of its Jewish names.

But the first achievement for Israel comes early in the document. In section 3, UNESCO's executive board affirms "the importance of the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls for the three monotheistic religions." The implication is that Judaism is one of the three religions that consider Jerusalem's Old City holy. This assertion does not exist in the previous version of the resolution that UNESCO approved in April. 

Read more: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.747529

Note: Haaretz Premium article. Google title for access.

liberated?

Moroccan Quarter
Source: Wikipedia

By using your logic, do you think that the Moroccan quarter belongs to Morocco in the same way that the Jewish quarter belongs to Israel? I don't.

And do you think that razing the Moroccan quarter was the right thing to do? I don't.

It's one of the dumbest arguments I've heard. There is no comparison between Jews claiming their ancient capital, in a country where they have lived for millennia, and a part of a city that is populated by people from some other country that has never had a sovereign relationship to the territory. Completely lacking credibility.

Should any non-Jewish persons, including those who already live there have equal rights to Jews and perhaps even claim it as their capital?

And since it was so obvious, no points for the diversion. This is about the legitimacy of the Jewish connection to East Jerusalem and Israel's sovereignty over it. I's about malice and craven politics of UNESCO, and by extension, the entire UN system.

there wouldn't have been any UNESCO resolution, not that I actually support it.

While I think that razing any person's house in Jerusalem or forcing people to leave is wrong regardless of ethnicity, you seem to be a bit uncaring when it happens to non-Jews.

In a way, my point is that everyone should have the same rights regardless of religion or ethnicity.

The resolution issues because there is a war going on, and the Palestinians have the ability to enlist the UN on their side. You ascribe moral purpose to an organization that has none.

Source: Haaretz

Israel may be accepted behind the scenes, in back-channel dealings, but when the lights go on, legitimacy belongs to the Palestinians.

The UNESCO executive board’s resolution on the Old City of Jerusalem was a searing diplomatic defeat for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s foreign policy. In recent months, Netanyahu has told journalists and cabinet ministers that Israel’s international standing has changed; that “the world” is tired of the Palestinian problem; that Israel’s military and economic power are attracting conservative Arab states that share its fear of Iran and radical Islam; that Israel has an alternative to American support in the form of other world powers like Russia, China and India. Soon, Netanyahu promised, even the “automatic” pro-Palestinian majority at the United Nations would crumble. In less euphemistic language, Netanyahu claimed that Israel had received the world’s permission to continue the occupation and the settlements, and the Palestinians could go to hell.

But now along comes UNESCO’s approval of a resolution that described the Temple Mount and its environs in accordance with the Muslim narrative and reminded Israel that even the Western Wall is occupied territory according to international law. Humiliatingly, the Western Wall Plaza was called Al-Buraq, with the Hebrew name in parentheses.

This resolution was supported by Netanyahu’s new friends from Egypt, Russia and China, as well as Chad, which has grown closer to Israel, and Vietnam, which buys a lot of Israeli weaponry. Greece, with which Netanyahu is proud of nurturing an alliance, abstained, as did India. And who voted against? Our old friends: the United States, led by Barack Obama, along with Britain and Germany.

It turns out the world hasn’t changed. Israel may be accepted behind the scenes, in back-channel dealings, but when the lights go on, legitimacy belongs to the Palestinians. And Israel’s old friends are the only ones that still give it backing, even though Netanyahu has rejected their efforts to bring about a diplomatic solution.

Read more: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.747657

In international politics what counts is what happens behind the scenes. The UN is just theater.