Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Protest planned as Senate takes up pro-Israel resolution

By Burt Hubbard, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published February 2, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Colorado Government

More stories »

The Mideast conflict has landed in the laps of Colorado's state senators.

Peace activists and Palestinians today will protest in front of the state Capitol against a resolution before the Senate to support Israel and condemn Hamas in the struggle over a Palestinian state.

"We see that it is very one-sided," said Rima Sinclair, a Palestinian-American who ran unsuccessfully for a state House seat last year.

But the resolution's author, state Sen. Joyce Foster, D-Denver, said it is co-sponsored by 30 of Colorado's 35 state senators and is similar to ones overwhelmingly approved by the U.S. Senate and U.S. House.

"It's got wonderful support from both sides of the aisle," Foster said Sunday. "If they protest tomorrow, it's really their right."

The controversy began Friday after Foster introduced the resolution titled "Concerning the strong expression of support for the state of Israel against recent terrorist attacks and reaffirming the strong support of the Colorado Senate for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process."

It will be voted on today.

Jewish peace activists, however, said the language of the resolution sides too much with Israel, minimizing its bombing of Gaza while repeatedly condemning Hamas for its bombing of Israel.

"We're starting off with the claim that all the evil is on one side and all the goodness is on the other side," said Ira Chernus of Brit Tzedek v'Shalom or the Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace. "You can't make peace that way. It's more complicated than that."

Foster said the resolution mirrors ones passed unanimously earlier this year in the U.S. Senate and by a 390-5 margin in the U.S. House of Representatives.

She said she worked with the state Senate leadership on the resolution's wording. "There are bipartisan actions," she said.

Senate Majority Leader Brandon Shaffer, D-Longmont, said he received e-mails and some calls over the weekend protesting the measure and asking it be delayed.

But Schaffer said he expects the Senate to take it up quickly today since the legislature has more pressing issues to address.

"It may be controversial in some circles outside of the building, but it doesn't look like it's very controversial on the floor of the Senate," he said.

Comments

  • February 2, 2009

    12:42 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Domino writes:

    This is a joke. All legislators know they must support this or they will be labeled ant-Semitic and hounded out of office.

  • February 2, 2009

    5:48 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    knowitall writes:

    ARABS ARE WHO THEY ARE.....ANTI SEMITES

  • February 2, 2009

    6:34 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Aaron writes:

    "Jewish peace activists, however, said the language of the resolution sides too much with Israel, minimizing its bombing of Gaza while repeatedly condemning Hamas for its bombing of Israel."

    By equating Israel's bombing of Gaza with the terrorist Hamas' bombing of Israel, this is where "peace activists", Jewish or not, show their complete lack of moral clarity.

    Let the noisy and irritating leftists and terrorist Hamas supporters now rouse themselves from slumber and begin their shouts of Takfir-Takfir-Takfir. But let them know that if they come to punch me in the nose (kassam rockets) and if I then beat the hell out of them (Israeli Air Force), they should not then run crying, "mommy, mommy, make him stop defending himself!"

  • February 2, 2009

    6:54 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Mikey writes:

    Aaron,

    No one will question the Israeli's right to defend themselves.

    But why does the US have to provide the financial aid and weapons for them to do so?

  • February 2, 2009

    7:10 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    luckyLEW writes:

    No one is supposed to question Israel's right to defend the land they have stolen. And they told us last week they are going to take more land for illegal settlements.

  • February 2, 2009

    7:16 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    ClarenceDarrow writes:

    Hey knowitall, arabs ARE semites.

    But why am I telling you this? You know it all.

  • February 2, 2009

    7:39 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    SheikYurBooty writes:

    Clarence - It is true that Arabs are semites, but the word "anti-semite" does NOT mean "against all semites."
    It specifically means "anti-Jewish." If you want to express hatred of Arabs, you would have to use another expression. "Anti-Arab" would do the trick, but "anti-semite" wouldn't.
    It's a strange and perhaps illogical fact of the language, but that's the way it is.

    Glad to clear that up for you...

    BTW - Ms. Sinclair failed in her stealth attempt last summer to get the GOP nomination for Romanoff's open house seat. She was outed as a stealth Islamist candidate and the GOP, to its everlasting credit, prevented her from getting the nomination. Go crawl back in your hole Rima.

  • February 2, 2009

    8:39 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Marshdale writes:

    Domino;

    You are exactly correct.

    While I believe Israel has the right to exist, the unconditional support the US offers Israel is rediculous. Israel has the best military technology in the world, thanks to the US, and is fighting people who have for a lack of a better comparison sticks and stones. Not litterally, but you get the drift. To Israel and most of the western world Hamas is nothing but low life terrorists, but to those Palestinians who have lost innocent children and family members to the Israeli military, Hamas is a group of freedom fighters fighting for independence and a national identity. This Continued battle will never end until the US makes their support for Israel conditional and radical Zionists like Netenyahu back off. Hamas and other terrorist (freedom fighter) organizations must also discover the fine art of diplomacy. This will be difficult for them though because they are not on an equal playing field with the Israeli military and with leaders like Netenyahu espousing expansionist policies, the world is not likely to see an end to conflict any time soon.

  • February 2, 2009

    8:46 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    ClarenceDarrow writes:

    Sheik,
    You're wrong. That is not what "anti-semite" means. That is simply how it is most often used because whenever anyone dares to question anything about Israeli foreign or domestic policy, the knee-jerk reaction by Israeli apologists has always been to throw out the "anti-semite" label. This rhetorical strategy is very effective because it forces the accused to stop criticizing Israel and begin defending themselves from this baseless and ugly charge. It also allows Israeli apologists to completely avoid having to confront whatever substance is contained in critics' allegations.

    Just because a population has successfully hijacked an expression for political purposes, that doesn't change the actual meaning of the term -- at least not for those of us who can still consult a dictionary.

    Glad to clear that up for you.

  • February 2, 2009

    8:48 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Darwin writes:

    Mikey writes: ...No one will question the Israeli's right to defend themselves.
    But why does the US have to provide the financial aid and weapons for them to do so?

    To counter-balance the financial aid given to their opponents by a number of Arab nations, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia in particular.

    luckyLEW. Same old "stolen land" argument. Far greater minds than you debate this without agreement, yet you are able to resolve it all by yourself. Good grief.

  • February 2, 2009

    8:53 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    ColoNative writes:

    MIkey - your isolationist lunacy is very similar to Chamberlain's "Peace in our time" statement. Well meaning, but ignorant. Get a grip people. This is not just a Jewish issue. It is an issue of peace, which if you have studied history, never comes through consessions. You make consessions from a position of weakness. Peace comes from being able to back your proposals with strength.

    It is the weak, vulnerable, and unprepared that get raped by those who are inclined to do the raping.

  • February 2, 2009

    8:57 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    ColoNative writes:

    Marshdale - it is the innocent women and children who are having bombs strapped to them. Hamas is not only screwing Israel, they are killing their own. Does that make sense? I certainly hope that you are not blind to that. So, if they have no respect for their own weak and young, then how can you pull the women and children card with a clear conscience?

  • February 2, 2009

    9:02 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Willy writes:

    This is not a State Issue. it is a national issue. Colorado legislature - stop grandstanding and get to work on Colorado issues. That is what we pay you to do.

  • February 2, 2009

    9:24 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Mike_In_Hartsel writes:

    Do you suppose the Boulder City Council will pass a resolution backing Hamas and condemning Israel to retaliate?

  • February 2, 2009

    9:25 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    T1anda writes:

    Thumbs up Darwin,ColoNative! Thumbs DOWN Marshdale! Calling Hamas "freedom fighters" is like calling Osama bin Laden an American patriot.

  • February 2, 2009

    9:37 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    SheikYurBooty writes:

    Clarence - you didn't clear up anything - you obfuscated (Lied???).
    Here's a dictionary reference for you:

    http://dictionary.reference.com/brows...

    I can support my claims. Can you???

  • February 2, 2009

    9:49 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    rage_against_the_stupid writes:

    Why is it that so called "peace activists" always side with anti-american interests. I guess any other wars or aggressions are to be, at best ignored, or maybe even supported. These "peace activists" have an agenda and Peace is way down on the list.

  • February 2, 2009

    9:54 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Triumph writes:

    T1anda
    These are the same type of people that were whinning about the murderous terrorist's so-called rights being violated at Gitmo. They must be from the Ward Churchill school of non-thought. They never met a terrorist they didn't love. I wonder if they would feel the same way if they had lost a loved one in the 9/11 attacks?

  • February 2, 2009

    9:55 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    fmikey writes:

    Domino said it all.....this is exactly the issue. There is such a strong pro-Israel lobby in this country, financed by American tax dollars and our Hollywood "elites", that it is political suicide to go against it....the Israeli propaganda machine continues to label ANYTHING remotely criticizing Israel as anti-semitic, which somehow in their mind equates to a higher level of hatred, or bias, or whatever.
    Israel has a right to exist, but they don't have the right to wage a war of extermination, which is such a hypocritical postion given the real and terribly unfortunate actions taken against the Jewish peoples in WWII.
    However, money buys politicians, and nowhere else do we see more evidence of this than in this particular issue.

  • February 2, 2009

    9:57 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    rickg19611 writes:

    Who cares if a handful of irrelevant whiners show up to complain. The clueless 1/10,000th of 1% of the population of this state that will be there protesting/complaining about this are not relevant anyway.

  • February 2, 2009

    12:41 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    ClarenceDarrow writes:

    Sheik,
    Here is a reference from your own source:

    http://dictionary.reference.com/brows...

    and another:

    http://dictionary.reference.com/brows...

    What you describe as a "strange . . . perhaps illogical fact of the language" is not a fact at all, although your (and others') interpretation is certainly illogical (though not without political value).

    Tell you what, you keep using words based on the meanings that Fox News and AIPAC tell you to apply to them, and I'll keep using words based on their actual meanings.

  • February 2, 2009

    12:54 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    SheikYurBooty writes:

    Clarence - your first proves my affirmation that "arabs are semites" and your second link proves my statement "It's a strange and perhaps illogical fact of the language, but that's the way it is."

    Thanks for the backup.

    What say you about the link I posted, which is contradicted by neither of your links and which affirms my original statement that "anti-semite=anti-Jew, and not "anti all semite peoples???"

    ???

  • February 2, 2009

    1:16 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    GladysKravitz writes:

    ClarenceDarrow...I have no apologies here...you are an anti semite if you hate Israel and Jews! Reality check. The Nazi's and Jew haters certainly made anti-semitism what it is..JEW/ISRAEL hatred. You want to debate semantics to sanitize and and hijack the phrase..only shows your ignorance and deguise anti-semitic bigotry. And let's not forget what Hamas stands for : Hiding Among Mosques And Schools!

  • February 2, 2009

    1:16 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    SheikYurBooty writes:

    Clarence - reread my first post - it's saying that what the term means, per common usage and per dictionary definition, is different from what logic tells us it should mean. You've simply posted what logic says the term **should** but which I have noted it doesn't mean. Is that too complicated???

    And that meaning is per quotidien use of the English language and not per some loaded definition from the "Zionist Dictionary of Propagandized English" or some such.

  • February 2, 2009

    1:23 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    GladysKravitz writes:

    The RMN quotes Rima Sinclair. I know this woman personally and she is an 100% nutbag! I have seen her mentally imbalanced behavior first-hand at lectures at DU and in the community. She has become a pariah at the DU campus, disrupting even Palestinian speakers who are striving to work for peace among Israelis and Palestinians. Any effort or group that brings Jews, Chrsitians and Muslims in common cause of peace is poison to her becuase it takes the wind out of her (and her ilks') hateful and vitriolic sails. They are never happy unless they have something to complain about.

  • February 2, 2009

    1:29 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    GladysKravitz writes:

    What did one Hamas mother/suicide bomber say to the other?
    "Does this bomb make me look fat?"

  • February 2, 2009

    2:34 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    SheikYurBooty writes:

    Gladys - nods. That woman gives nut jobs a bad name.

  • February 2, 2009

    3:39 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    drumman writes:

    I have to chime in, too. Rima Barakat Sinclair is nuts!

  • February 2, 2009

    5:33 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Sivvy writes:

    Perhaps if Ira Chernus has a few bombs thrown at his house, he will then able to lecture the rest of us about good and evil. Of course, by then he might have changed his views on the subject.