Oh, courageous Canada at the U.N.!
Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird gave a very strong speech (embedded at bottom of post) yesterday at the United Nations against the “nonmember” status for “Palestine,” in violation of the Oslo Accords.
Damn fine speech by #Canada.
— Act for Israel (@ActForIsrael) November 29, 2012
Canada is following up that rhetoric,Canada recalling diplomats from Israel, West Bank and UN over Palestinian vote:
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird is temporarily recalling senior diplomats from Israel, the West Bank and the UN missions in New York and Geneva.
He says they will be brought home to assess the implications of the UN General Assembly vote which recognized the Palestinians as a non-member, observer state at the world body.
The minister also says Canada will review its whole relationship with the Palestinian Authority.
Baird says he is deeply disappointed by the UN vote.
He says the only way to peace in the Middle East is through negotiations, not what he called unilateral actions.
Baird calls the General Assembly decision an impediment to peace.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Helluva deal when Canada is more “American” than the U.S…
Compare and contrast their economy to ours.
Yeah, turns out I belong in Canada. Who’d a thunk it just 10 years ago.
BTW the comparison of economies isn’t quite fair as they have less of a Defense spending burden thanks to the Ol’ USofA to the South.
I’m mostly referring to the Canadians having principals and standing up for them and their allies.
I was specifically referring to job creation and such.
It’s not just “America, Jr” or our so-called “War on Drugs” which justifies our defense spending. The military is used to secure access to resources, most notably oil, for America but principally our allies and trading partners. The Middle East, and North Africa, is especially important to the Europeans and Chinese.
It’s worth noting a cruel irony, that environmental organizations, either on their own, or conspiring with others, including industry, are creating obstacles to a global drawdown of forces, at least to a strategic stance. It is especially worrisome that Americans harbor an unnatural fear of nuclear processes, which represents the only “alternative” energy source suitable for primary production.
That said, good for the Canadians. Submission is not a virtue.
Who are these great Yanks to the north?
Canada, home of the brave? Well, I haven’t given up on America, but the window of opportunity is closing.
Luke-San Are you calling the Canucks Yanks? The New York Yankees are in N.Y U.S.A
“Yanki” are Japanese juvenile delinquents who bleach their hair blond and are wannabe Yakuza. Please explain your comment.
More importantly, the Tanakh prophet Zechariah 12:2,3 said the people of the world would part (chalak) Jerusalem.
12:2 Behold, x2009 I x595 will make 7760 z8802 x853 Yærûšälaim יְרוּשָׁלִַם 3389 a cup 5592 of trembling 7478 unto all x3605 the people 5971 round about, 5439 when they shall be x1961 in the siege 4692 both x1571 against x5921 Yæhûðà יְהוּדָה 3063 [and] against x5921 Yærûšälaim יְרוּשָׁלִַם. 3389
וְהָיָה בַיּוֹם־הַהוּא אָשִׂים אֶת־יְרוּשָׁלִַם אֶבֶן מַעֲמָסָה לְכָל־הָעַמִּים כָּל־עֹמְסֶיהָ שָׂרוֹט יִשָּׂרֵטוּ וְנֶאֶסְפוּ עָלֶיהָ כֹּל גּוֹיֵי הָאָרֶץ
Joel 3:2: “I will gather all the nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. And I will enter into judgment with them there, on behalf of my people and my heritage Israel, because they have scattered them among the nations and have parted up my land,”
Interesting word used here of “chalak” (Strong’s 2505). Hebrew has several words for “dividing” something. But this word, chalak, is used to indicate dividing or parting YHVH’s land for an inheritance (see Numbers 26:53, Joshua 13:7, 1 Kings 18:6, Nehemia 9:22, Ezekiel 45:1, Daniel 11:39, Amos 7:17). Doesn’t the UN call it the “Partition Plan”?
What is the wider contextual narrative? You can’t just look at a word in a verse and jump to a conclusion. How many times, in that book and throughout the Bible, is that word used and what does it mean when it’s used? What do the lexicons says? Which lexicon did you copy that definition from? What does the LXX say? One word in one verse exegesis is a no-no … unless the word is hapax legomenon, and how did you connect that verse to the U.N. decision?
Baruk Hashem. The answers to your questions are contained in my previous comments. But here are some additional helps for you from the Internet.http://studybible.info/strongs/H2505
H2505 חלק – Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon Number “chalak” I referenced in my comments: (see Numbers 26:53, Joshua 13:7, 1 Kings 18:6, Nehemia 9:22, Ezekiel 45:1, Daniel 11:39, Amos 7:17).
First 30 of 64 occurrences of H2505 חלק chalak
1 Samuel 30:24
2 Samuel 6:19
2 Samuel 19:29
1 Kings 16:21
1 Kings 18:6
1 Chronicles 16:3
1 Chronicles 23:6
1 Chronicles 24:3
1 Chronicles 24:4
1 Chronicles 24:5
2 Chronicles 23:18
2 Chronicles 28:21
King James Version (KJV) Strong’s Concordance H2505
Revised 1833 Webster Version Strong’s Concordance H2505
Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament Strong’s Concordance H2505
The UN partition plan is probably searchable on the various Internet search engines. Hope this helps you.
Can anyone imagine Canada responding like this if the Liberals were still in charge there?
No, me neither.
Leadership makes the difference. Mr. Harper is a leader.
Clarity makes the difference. Mr. Harper is clear.
Reality makes the final difference. Mr. Harper lives in the real world.
Thank God for Canada!
On domestic issues Canada would be the equivalent of our blue states. However, they cleaned up their economy a few years ago and now the average Canadian makes more money than the average American-if I remember the numbers correctly.
And on foreign policy issues they haven’t fallen down the rabbit hole into bizarr-Obama land where shameful behavior is shamelessly practiced.
True enough, Harper is a leader. Keep in mind, however, that his support comes from West of Ontario; the East pines for a return to the liberals who destroyed the economy or the NDP with no recognition of what the newly strong Canadian dollar does for their country.