Even Bernie Sanders agreed to a unanimous Senate resolution supporting Israel

[Cali_Democrat]

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate unanimously approved a non-binding resolution in support of Israel’s right to defend itself against rocket fire from the Gaza Strip.

The resolution, which had 78 bipartisan sponsors, passed late Thursday by unanimous consent, a week after it was introduced by Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.).

A similar resolution, introduced by Reps. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) and Tom Cole (R-Okla.) and with over 140 cosponsors, passed unanimously in the U.S. House of Representatives on July 11.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which backed both resolutions, praised the Senate for its passage.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.606183

[former9thward]

1. Which only proves Sanders is sane and lives in the real world.

[Puzzledtraveller]

3. I know right?

He probably knows the situation, the history, maybe even some facts and made a reasoned and rational desicion in his support.

[Behind the Aegis]

17. Any proof?

[bigtree]

2. what kind of measure is that?

Has Sanders ever said anything differently about Israel and their responsibility? No. He's always assumed that Israel is acting in self-defense against Hamas.

The closest he's ever come to any sympathy for Palestinians is his admonition to both sides to refrain from violence.

A true measure (using your logic, not mine) would be someone who has made a U.N.-type declaration of Israeli crimes against humanity who had somehow decided that Israel is now somehow justified in these attacks on civilian areas.

A pro-Israel legislator expresses support for Israel. Stop the presses!

[TheNutcracker]

49. Bernie is Jewish

[B Calm]

50. BINGO!

[former9thward]

52. Yes, that could be the ONLY reason Sanders supports Israel.

Bingo to an ethnic slur.

[B Calm]

53. I always try to understand why politicians support any given topic,

don't you?

[former9thward]

57. Yes I do.

Looking at their color or ethnicity or sex is not the first thing I do.

[B Calm]

58. We are talking about religion. .

If a right wing Evangelical politician votes against women's right to choice, I would do the same.

[morningfog]

73. The headline in the OP is inaccurate editorializing.

There was no vote. It was a unanimous consent agreement, meaning no one opposed it. All but 21 Senators sign on in support. Sanders was not one of them. He made this clear on his website:

Israel-Palestine The Senate last week passed a resolution without a formal roll call vote by unanimous consent supporting Israel’s right to defend itself against rocket attacks from Hamas. Writing for Salon, David Palumbo-Liu noted that Sen. Sanders “voted” for the resolution which actually passed without a vote.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/newswatch/072414

The OP is stirring shit.

[bigtree]

80. makes no difference to me

. . .what I think is significant is that you, nor I, can find ANY clear support from Sanders for the Palestinians in the way of the violence and ANY recognition of the Palestinian's right to self-defense against what I think is clearly an unjust assault on their civilian population.

I think that pointing up how he may have regarded a Senate resolution declaring Israel's right to self-defense misses critics' points completely. Where is Sanders' defense of the Palestinian people? Don't they deserve something other than an admonition to refrain from violence?

[morningfog]

82. I agree that there should be recognition of the Palestinians right to self-defense as well.

[bigtree]

85. thanks

[Larkspur]

4. Leaders, including those like Sanders, will stop blindly supporting Israel's slaughter of

Palestinians after the majority of Americans learn the truth about Israel's lies about Palestinians, recognize Palestinians as human beings who have been wrongly treated by Israel, and demand a just peace for Palestinians.

In a democracy, leaders are enabled to lead by the majority of their followers; therefore, leaders mostly lead where the majority of their followers want them to go. Right now, the majority of Americans support Israel because our media is heavily biased for Israel and against Palestinians. But like in Europe, if Americans are given the fuller picture of the problems there and are allowed to hear Palestinians voices against Israel's apartheid policies, American views on Israel and Palestine will change, just like Americans views on other issues, like gay marriage, have changed.

[Purveyor]

5. kick. Thanks for posting. +1 eom

[Puzzledtraveller]

7. Will Hamas's views on issues like gay marriage change also?

Oh wait, Hamas declared homosexuality punishable by death, never mind.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

63. Will Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist?

[morningfog]

66. Sanders does not blindly spport Israel. He advocates a two state solution and does not support

violence as a political means.

[leftynyc]

75. There is nothing blind about his support

and your casually dismissing the fact that the majority of Americans support Israel over Palestine just shows your disdain for your fellow citizens for not agreeing with you. Congress is representing their constituents - a majority of which support Israel. You could say Israel has good luck with their enemies (meaning no matter how bad they are, their enemies are viewed much, much worse).

[enid602]

78. LBJ moment?

Last edited Fri Jul 25, 2014, 01:04 PM - Edit history (1)

These senators know which side of their bread is buttered. Israel is the 'third rail' of Democratic politics; you just don't go there if you are smart. Similarly, the civil rights issue was the 'third rail' in the early '60's. Before signing the Civil Rights Act, LBJ lamented that if he signs the legislation, he will lose the White South forever. He did, and he did. Change in this country is slow, but possible.

[ann---]

6. What a

disgrace. I don't think I will ever vote for a Democrat ever again.

[ReRe]

12. Don't ever say that....

... If you don't vote for the Democrat, and the Republicans win Congress again, they can increase the foreign aid to Israel at will.

[Codeine]

60. Then you don't belong here.

Go away.

[steve2470]

91. you need to read the TOS for this site...then you might wish to leave voluntarily nt

[ann---]

92. Do they state that

I must vote for a Democrat and support everything they do?

[steve2470]

94. go read it....make up your own mind nt

[BeyondGeography]

76. It's ok

He's not a Democrat.

[IronLionZion]

87. Bernie is an independent

and where do you think you are?

Most DUers are hell bent on punishing Democrats and burying them deep Underground!

[IronGate]

93. Then.

[4now]

8. We are all so proud of our do nothing congress.

It is all about the money.
We give money to Israel so they can buy our congress.

[ReRe]

9. I assume the AIPAC is an untaxible non-profit...

... which means you and I (99%) get taxation without representation, and
.................. AIPAC gets representation without taxation.

[joshcryer]

10. Sanders recognizes Israel is the most progressive state in that region.

[Violet_Crumble]

13. Have you seen the text of that one? Not one single word about Palestinian civilian casualties...

That's not something to be proud of. It would be hoped the US could be at least slightly concerned about the deaths of civilians. Instead all it talks about is Israelis...

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. Does anyone have any serious doubt of what would happen to the careers of any politician who didn't

rally behind the Israeli state - no matter what they did?

[Violet_Crumble]

15. No doubt at all, and it's the same reason US politicians won't take a stand on gun control n/t

[JI7]

16. not true about gun control, they have taken stands, but republicans continue to oppose it

and they control the house.

[liberal N proud]

30. Exactly

[Chathamization]

42. That was how J. William Fulbright's career ended. N/T

[treestar]

56. But doesn't that come close to the "Jews control everything" mantra that

is the theme of anti-Semites?

I think the general public is getting tired of the idea of sending money to Israel and starting to sympathize with the Palestinians. The settlements on the land that's left to them are a sign Israel is not just "defending" itself. We know they have politicians who believe the whole area should be Israel.

[Douglas Carpenter]

74. No the Jews do not control everything. That is crazy talk. But when it comes to the grip

the Israel's American supporters - both Jewish and non-Jewish - have on the American politicians and the media - anyone who seriously tries to claim that American politicians or the American mainstream media are able to have an open, frank and honest discussion about the Israel-Palestine conflict and America's almost unconditional support for Israel in that regard - is being disingenuous to the extreme and they know it. They are lying and they know they are lying.

[treestar]

86. They could when public support goes that way

It may be getting there.

[wyldwolf]

18. I try to stay out of the Israeli / Palestinian debate but...

This thread is going to be epic - Bernie Sanders (who I deeply admire) isn't really the subject. The subject is how a 'darling of the left' has just committed a grievance sin in the eyes of progressives and the excuses and reasons that will be made for him.

We've already seen a poster say he only did it to save his political career. Another (which may not qualify as an 'excuse') has said Sanders is 'blindly' supporting Israel - as if being a US senator somehow makes him LESS privy to the events and history of the conflict.

[Violet_Crumble]

19. I've got no idea who Bernie Sanders is apart from being a US politician...

But why do you think someone who's left-wing would sign on to a Resolution that omits any mention at all of Palestinian civilian casualties and focuses only on Israelis?

[JI7]

20. those who actually know Sanders should not be surprised

i think it says more about the type of people who are always attacking democrats. many of them are not very informed .

what they tend to do is make things black/white a lot. they go on about how horrible someone is and say how we need this other person(who they don't really know much about).

and then when the person does something they don't like they will come up with conspiracy theories and some other crap.

this is why i can't take certain types seriously.

[wyldwolf]

21. totally agree.

[freshwest]

70. Likewise.

[Douglas Carpenter]

22. oh come on, even the great former President from Georgia and the dearly departed saintly

Saintly Senator from South Dakota only spoke their minds and stated their honest opinions about the Israel Palestine conflict once they were out of office and had no plans to run for anything ever again. That is the political reality in our current political culture in the U.S. I have no idea what Senator Sanders' private personal opinion is on this matter. Maybe he does really support the resolution. But I find it implausible to imagine that out of one hundred U.S. Senators there wouldn't be at least one who privately has moral reservations about a resolution that reads like a press release from the Israeli State Department.

[Violet_Crumble]

23. The US political system is pretty screwed up, imo...

Back when Kevin Rudd was our PM (he's from our Labor Party for those who don't know), Australia was critical of Israel and was imo even-handed about the conflict. The second our conservatives got into power all that changed and we've even had our Foreign Minister tell everyone that the settlements in the West Bank are legal. She had to back-track on that, but I'm just not seeing any difference in US politics between Left and Right wing politicians when it comes to Israel...

[wyldwolf]

25. so what you're saying is Sander isn't principled in this respect?

I mean, when it comes to so many Democrats who vote certain ways on certain issues, all I hear from the left is how unprincipled they are.

[Violet_Crumble]

26. Have you read that Resolution? If so, do you agree with it? n/t

[wyldwolf]

27. don't divert from the topic. We're discussing Bernie Sanders, US Senator and Progressive....

... not some yahoo from middle Georgia.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. I think you need to read the topic, which is in the OP...

Bernie Sanders voted for that Resolution. I asked you if you agree with it. So, do you?

[wyldwolf]

31. No I don't. This is about Sanders

[Violet_Crumble]

32. You don't what? Need to read the OP, or no you don't agree with that Resolution he voted for?

He being Sanders of course. I just don't understand why left-wing politicians supported that Resolution that made all Palestinians invisible and their deaths not even mentioned...

[Douglas Carpenter]

33. this letter from exactly 6 Congressman (out of 435 members of the House) is a bit weak - but it is

better than nothing I suppose:

Separately, six Democrats in the House wrote President Obama and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry urging them to bring about a cease-fire and return the parties to peace talks, which collapsed in April.

“Ground troops, air strikes, and rockets do not lead to permanent peace in the Middle East,” said the July 17 letter, first reported by Al-Monitor and signed by Reps. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), Jim Moran (D-Va.), John Conyers (D-Mich.), Alan Lowenthal (D-Calif.), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.).

“The United States government, together with international partners, must redouble our efforts to urge all parties to avoid further loss of life on both sides by coming to a cease-fire.”

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.606183

[Violet_Crumble]

34. Yeah, it's a bit weak, and how pathetic that only 6 signed it...

It makes it incredibly hard to take the US seriously when it complains about civilians dying elsewhere...

[wyldwolf]

35. I don't need to read the resolution or give my personal opinion on it or the issue itself.

[Violet_Crumble]

38. Not reading the Resolution or about the issue is a very admirable trait!

I'm not quite sure why yr posting in a thread where you admit you have no interest in knowing what the OP's about, but each to their own I guess. Have a lovely day!

[wyldwolf]

39. I know exactly what the OP is about

- it's about Bernie Sander's voting in a way that will (or, should) piss off 'progressives' if they're consistent. On the other hand, I'm not quite sure why yr posting in a thread where you admit you've got no idea who Bernie Sanders is apart from being a US politician...

[Violet_Crumble]

40. Yeah, ignoring the killing of civilians does tend to piss off left-wingers...

What a shock! Just a hint. You probably should show enough interest in what yr politicians are voting on to take the time to go search out the text of legislation and Resolutions. It's called being informed...

I can post wherever I want to at DU. I've been doing it for over 10 years and learnt a hell of a lot. But that's because I do read up on the stuff I'm talking about...

[wyldwolf]

41. which brings you full circle to the point of the OP - the left is oddly silent about Sander's vote

What a shock! LOL.

[Violet_Crumble]

43. Americans shouldn't be silent about anyone who voted for that crap resolution...

Hopefully what's happening in Gaza now will open up the eyes of the American public and the change will move upwards to the government level.

[wyldwolf]

45. then shout it from the rooftops about how Bernie Sanders and other 'progressives' in the Senate...

... sold out their ideals. Start an OP. Have fun.

[Violet_Crumble]

46. I'm quite happy pointing out that Americans should be critical of any politician who supported it...

I'm pretty certain I said that in the post you replied to. And I'm quite happy to stay here in the thread about the Resolution than start my own. But thanks for caring!

[morningfog]

68. There was no "vote". Sanders did not support it or sign on.

[Douglas Carpenter]

29. I do things to keep my job that I don't agree with and so do politicians

I don't necessarily think it is all about having or not having principles. I have not come across any politicians so principled that they have never, ever went along with something that they likely disagreed with or never modified their once more principled position when put under enormous pressure. I can't even do that on my job.Nonetheless if one is policy oriented - the only way to counterbalance pressure from one side is to apply pressure from the other side. I support politicians that have at least a prayer of a chance to actually win who come the closest to supporting the principles I agree with. What's the alternative?

[joshcryer]

36. So in what instance is it unforgivable?

Clearly you forgive Sanders in this instance. How far does it go? I think you've hit on the very real reality of politicians to this day. It's why Obama has to go to Church though he's likely an atheist. It's why Obama invited Rick Warren to his inauguration. Is why none of the leading candidates have advocated for single payer but private insurance. It's why gay marriage only became acceptable in 2012 and everyone talked up civil unions.

[wyldwolf]

37. Exactly - so do most people I'd guess

But that standard isn't applied equally. If Hillary Clinton was still a Senator, there would be no end to the wailing and gnashing of teeth regarding her vote on this. I see a free pass being given to Sanders and other so-called progressives. I KNOW, based on how much people in the Netroots follow this topic, Sander's support didn't go unnoticed. It's just no one wanted to discuss it.

[TBF]

44. I see that as well -

when I tried to defend Hillary with a post on this board I got eviscerated by "liberals". Most know I'd prefer an economic system other than capitalism and that I vote for democrats grudgingly until we can get that accomplished (voting is a very small part of political life as I see it). Yet "liberals" were willing to absolutely destroy Hillary even though she is strong on women's issues and isn't going to rule all that differently than any other dem when you get down to brass tacks. Yet here everyone will say "oh he had to do it to keep his job". Totally a double standard and very telling.

[Douglas Carpenter]

48. If I am in more broad agreement with one politicians such as Sen. Sanders than with Hillary Clinton

I'm going to go with the one I am in more broad agreement with. Believe it or not in 1972 there were a number of people on the left who were calling George McGovern a sellout. He was the first major presidential candidate ever to even give the slightest support to the idea of simply "gay rights," but then toned it down a little bit when he took a lot of criticism for something that at the time was considered a wacko opinion even in mainstream liberal circles. He also spoke up for fair play in the Middle East - but toned that down when the Humphrey campaign tried to organize Jewish voters in California against him as a last ditch attempt to deny him the nomination. I understood that he was between a rock and a hard place given the political culture of the time. That is simply the reality we have to deal with. But I will cut more slack for the more broadly progressive candidate than for a centrist candidate - just I will cut more slack for a centrist Democrat than I will for any conceivable Republican.

[eridani]

47. Shame on him n/t

[Reter]

51. Cynthia McKinney and Ron Paul never would have supported this

If every Democrat and Republican were like them, we'd at least have a real choice going into elections.

[msanthrope]

61. Well, there's the batshit insane caucus!!! nt

[treestar]

54. They always put it in language like that - right to defend

as though people are saying they have not right to defend themselves. People are questioning the extent of the action they take to do so.

[NCTraveler]

55. As usual, he takes the correct action. nt.

[morningfog]

67. His "action" was essentially to abstain. He didn't sign on or oppose it.

[NCTraveler]

84. Please refer to post #55. nt.

[whatchamacallit]

59. Well hell in that case, go on and blow up some more children Israel, Bernie supports you!

Idiotic OP.

[morningfog]

65. Benie didn't oppose it. He also did not sign on to it.

[whatchamacallit]

79. I know. I'm commenting on the bizarre appeal to authority mindset

that often passes for reasoning around here. "If you support Bernie and Bernie supports Israel, you must support Israel" is how the logic goes. In another thread someone tried the same bullshit with Elizabeth Warren: "You like Elizabeth Warren, she thinks Hillary is terrific, so why don't you? You think you're smarter than Elizabeth Warren?" I shit you not. As silly as it is, turd wayers seem to think this is a cogent argument.

[morningfog]

62. Everyone has a right to self-defense. No on has a right to commit war crimes.

[morningfog]

64. Actually, Sanders did not sign on. It was passed by a unanimous consent agreement, which means there

were no objections. And Sen. Sanders was one of only 21 who did not sign onto the bill.

He did not object.

He reportedly said, of Israel's last war in 2009:

"While I fully support Israel’s right to defend itself from the constant barrage of rockets Hamas fires into its homes and urban centers, I have strongly condemned the use of violence by either side as a means for achieving its goals. Leaders on both sides must recognize that the only solution to this conflict is thorough a political process that recognizes the Palestinian right to self-determination and the right of Jews to a safe and secure homeland in Israel.

* * *

Moving forward, the United States must again be a leader in helping bring both sides together to negotiate a final status agreement. We must work with those Israeli and Palestinian leaders who are truly committed to peace, security and statehood rather than empty rhetoric and violence. We must also enlist the help of the United Nations and the international community to lend support for a two-track process that provides the Palestinians with a state of their own while ensuring the security of the Israeli people.

A two-state solution must include compromises from both sides to achieve a fair and lasting peace in the region. The Palestinians must fulfill their responsibilities to arrest terrorists, confiscate terrorists’ weapons, dismantle terrorist organizations, halt all anti-Jewish and anti-Israel incitement, and recognize Israel’s right to exist. In return, the Israelis must end their policy of targeted killings, prevent further Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, and prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes, businesses and infrastructure.

Further, instead of being used as a political football, the Palestinians should be given the financial support of wealthy Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, as well as the rest of the international community. Frankly, I have little respect for the leaders of wealthy Arab countries who express great concern about the plight of the Palestinians, while they put billions in Swiss bank accounts. Economic assistance is desperately needed to help create jobs and improve the desperately low standard of living that afflicts so many Palestinians."

http://bullshitphilosophy.wordpress.com/2009/02/07/statement-from-bernie-sanders-on-gaza/

And, I agree with this sentiment.

[TheSarcastinator]

69. Sycophants apparently only understand appeal to authority

Like I give a f*ck what Bernie Sanders thinks and will change my mind based about the slaughter in Gaza based on this little tidbit.

Let's be clear here: the opinions of PBO, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders or any other elected official means jack shite when calculating the morality of violence. The immorality of both sides of this conflict is completely independent of what your heroes -- or mine -- think. They only become important when persuaders need support for otherwise unsupportable positions and ideas.

This is the problem with the persuasive rhetoric of authoritarian bootlickers & sycophants: the only communications possible for them are one that replicate their own simple thought patterns.

[QC]

71. +1

It's projection. People who view everything in terms of personalities think that everyone else does it, too.

[morningfog]

72. Sanders opposes the slaughter. He does not support Israel targeting civilians.

He did not vote for or sign on to this agreement. Nor did he oppose it.

[whatchamacallit]

81. +1

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

83. His party's statement on Israel/Palestine

Has the Democratic party made a similar statement? Does it oppose the slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza?

http://www.dsausa.org/npc_statement_on_israel_palestine

Statement on Israel-Palestine

Democratic Socialists of America endorses the decision of the United Nations to grant Palestine Non-Member Observer State status. We regard the U.N.’s recognition of a Palestinian state as a vital step forward towards a durable, just, comprehensive, negotiated two-state peace. We regret that Israel and the United States actively opposed the Palestinian application.

As we stated in our 2009 Statement on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and Winning Peace with Justice in the Middle East:

Peace in the Middle East and justice for both the Palestinian and Israeli people can only be achieved through mutual recognition by each side of the right of each people to viable and secure states of their own, in which the rights of minorities are also guaranteed.

We strongly oppose retaliatory measures against the PLO or the Palestinian Authority (PA)–in particular, Congressional efforts to cut funding, which could lead to the collapse of the PA and jeopardize the important progress it has made in recent years. We call on President Obama to swiftly adopt serious and vigorous efforts that promote Israeli-Palestinian peace.

DSA also condemns the recent Israeli military attacks on Gaza that led to disproportionate civilian deaths. These arose in response to Hamas’s unjustifiable rocket attacks on Israeli civilians. Israel, however, is the hegemonic military and occupying power in the region; therefore, DSA believes Israel has the primary responsibility to create pre-conditions for peace–such as a unilateral withdrawal of illegal West Bank settlements and an end to the embargo of civilian goods entering Gaza. Israel should be willing to negotiate with representatives of the Palestinian people, while such representatives should promote the peace process by ending attacks on Israeli civilians.

At this crucial juncture, it is the obligation of the international community, including especially the United States of America, to make sure that the strategy of coexistence and moderation is rewarded, and that the Palestinian people are offered a horizon in which they are able to realize a viable, contiguous, independent state alongside Israel (including a Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem) not through guns and bombs, but via the tools of statecraft and diplomacy.

DSA will work, along with other pro-peace forces in the American Jewish, Palestinian, Arab, and broader progressive community to pressure the United States to adopt a balanced Middle-East approach, including an end to military aid to Israel that is used for occupation purposes, and to support movements in Israel and Palestine that are committed to a two-state solution.

[JI7]

88. that is not his party, Sanders is officially registered as an Independent

there is a reason he is not a member of that party . just because he describes himself as a socialist doesn't mean he belongs to some political party which has socialist in the name.