GOP plans response to ICC attacks on Israel

 Free Beacon:

The International Criminal Court's decision to issue arrest warrants for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister sparked a flurry of promises from Republican leaders to sanction the court and erode its legitimacy on the world stage.

The GOP-controlled House passed a bill earlier this year that would do just that, though Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) blocked it from coming to a vote in the upper chamber. In a matter of weeks, however, Schumer will be in the minority—and Republicans will control both the House and the executive branch. Incoming GOP leaders in the House, Senate, and White House made clear that, come January, the ICC will face sanctions and other punitive measures.

"The ICC has no credibility and these allegations have been refuted by the U.S. government," Rep. Michael Waltz (R., Fla.), President-elect Donald Trump's incoming national security adviser, said in reference to the court's determination that Netanyahu and former Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant are guilty of war crimes. "Israel has lawfully defended its people & borders from genocidal terrorists. You can expect a strong response to the antisemitic bias of the ICC & UN come January."

House majority whip Tom Emmer (R., Minn.) echoed Waltz, telling the Washington Free Beacon that Republicans in the lower chamber "will continue doing everything in our power to combat this pro-terrorist, illegitimate court."
...

The ICC's irrational attacks on Israel and its leadership are worthy of US sanctions and it makes no sense that Schumer has been blocking a vote on the issue.  By siding with the terrorists, the ICC disgraces itself.

See also:

Sanction the Disgraceful ICC

...

 The ICC said that the warrants were for “crimes against humanity and war crimes,” accusing Israel of intentionally starving the people of Gaza and targeting civilians in its campaign against Hamas in the wake of the October 7 attacks. The charges are without basis, as Israelis have demonstrated the great lengths they go to to limit civilian casualties against an enemy that deliberately hides behind civilians and civilian infrastructure. So by taking this action, the ICC is putting more Palestinian civilians in danger by convincing Hamas that its strategy is working.

...

And:

 International Criminal Court Issues Arrest Warrants for Netanyahu and Hamas Officials

And:

Mark Penn
@Mark_Penn
The ICC needs to be sanctioned and abolished. It is out of control and its leader under investigation. Israel is not a party to the ICC and so it has absolutely no jurisdiction to do what it is doing. Every nation that is a member and follows its dictates should be sanctioned. This is why courts always have higher courts above trial courts to prevent one justice from committing unchecked abuses of authority and power. In this case it is absurd to block Israel from defending itself after attack and the ICC was set up to prevent another Holocaust not to enable those who want to destroy Israel and all Jews.

And:

@HananyaNaftali

The ICC charging Israel with war crimes is like charging a firefighter for using too much water while ignoring the guy who started the fire. It’s absurd, it’s insulting, and it’s dangerous.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more