Think Tank Calls For Selling U.N. Votes In Move To Stop Palestinians From Obtaining Statehood

The Intel Hub
By Michelle Jones
August 14, 2011

A recent think tank document suggests that the United States “sell” it’s  foreign aid for secure votes in United Nations initiatives.

At a time when the economy in the U.S. is teetering and both major political parties are pointing fingers, this very revealing study helps the average American understand where their tax dollars are really going and makes one stop to wonder why is foreign aid continuing in the first place when aid at home is so clearly needed.

“Selling” foreign aid for UN votes is certainly not going to strengthen the economy nor will it win the US any favorable support from other UN Nations.

The Heritage Foundation study found that since 2000, about 87 percent of recipients of U.S. development aid have voted against the U.S. most of the time on non-consensus votes in the General Assembly.

That is a very high number of non American supporters receiving foreign aid from American’s.

It doesn’t take an analyst to see that cutting foreign aid is imperative and would be most likely a favorable cut in the current deficit with the American tax payers and would preserve and help maintain policies that benefit those who live in America instead of furthering the development of other nations that are not supportive to American policies or initiatives.

Instead this think tank advises not to get rid of our foreign aid but to give aid based strictly off of UN votes! In other words, we can still give out billions to our nations, but only the ones that due the bidding of America’s globalist masters.

“Despite the potential to positively influence U.N. voting through the disbursement of U.S. foreign aid, current law does not specifically link U.S. aid to U.N. voting or even instruct the State Department to include U.N. voting when considering foreign assistance.

Congress should link disbursement of U.S. development assistance to support for U.S. policy priorities in the U.N. and instruct the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to inform aid recipients of this policy through their missions in New York and explain that opposing U.S. priorities at the U.N. will make Americans, especially Congress, less inclined to continue providing aid. “

This suggestion undermines the very principles our country was founded on via a mafia boss style mentality urging congress to “sell” foreign aid for votes in the UN, further destroying the image of America and her people by using strong armed politics and rigged voting.

Pure Effect Water Filters – Filter Radiation And Fluoride From Your Drinking Water(Ad)

When did humanitarian funding become an underground program that runs money for votes ?

Included in this think tank document is this outlandish statement:

“Washington should communicate U.S. policy priorities at the U.N. directly to foreign ambassadors in Washington, D.C., to ensure that that message is faithfully conveyed to decision makers in their governments and not suppressed in New York. “

Again in mafia style thinking, we see the twisted thought of how to implement such a policy and carry it out. Bi-passing the very structure that is in place to prevent such abuse as that of the abuse being suggested.

But the real truth behind the think tank document becomes real clear when you read further into it.  This is not about UN votes and international aide. This is about stopping Palestine from obtaining statehood in the UN.

Israeli and US mafia bosses are using a smoke screen by suggesting that this is directed at all the nations as a possible new policy but really it’s a very tactful, respectful, disgusting and under handed threat to other nations for one vote and one vote only, No on Palestine.

If the countries that regularly vote against US interests want to receive foreign aid they are expected to vote no in the UN bid for Palestine to be recognized and admitted into the UN statehood. As verified in the following taken from page 3 of the document.

“the U.S. was isolated even from its allies on significant issues, such as a vote calling on the “Security Council to take steps to establish an independent Palestinian state in the Israeli occupied territories, to create it by fiat and impose it on Israel.” Only the U.S. and two other nations stood by Israel to oppose the resolution, even though America’s NATO allies knew the resolution would only exacerbate an already tense situation.”

I would think that those who analyze this information would look as to why there was so little support for Israel.  Certainly one can not claim it’s for hatred of the Jewish people as many of the nations who voted against Israel are not part of the mentality of Nazism nor do they have any hatred for Jewish people in general, they simply see the oppression of Palestine and it’s right to be admitted into statehood.

Of course political history within the White House shows us that if you are not with Israel you are against EVERY nation. Simply a narrow and dangerous thought for our country to stand on.

To further cement the true meaning behind this document one only needs to look at international headlines.

On June 29th,  Al Arabiya News sported the headline, ” US Senate warns Palestinians on statehood bid at United Nations General Assembly”

The article goes on to express how in arm twisting mafia style the US has openly warned the Palestinian Government that if they continue to pursue UN Statehood they would not receive any foreign aid from the US.

This article derived out of statements from the White House made to Palestine in hopes of discouraging it’s political UN quest for statehood.  The White House desires further  peace talks with Israel claiming it’s the only acceptable solution to the Palestinian conflict.

So if peace talks are the only acceptable solution, what actions will the White House assure Palestine if Israel fails to keep it’s agreements forged through peace talks?

Will the White House consider cutting off foreign aid to Israel if they break the peace talk agreements like they did in September of 2010 in which Israel failed to renew a partial freeze on settlement construction in the occupied West Bank?

In fact, Israel broadened it’s occupation and bull dozed many Palestinian settlements declaring them now Israel occupation territory even though previous border resolutions deemed it Palestinian land.

How can the US expect a country to come back to the table and continue peace talks if there is no penalty for both parties if one or both fail to negotiate or keep the negotiated agreements?

The White House needs to fulfill it’s obligation to it’s people and be impartial to both political parties in this matter.

So who receives foreign aid?  Has it helped develop and stabilize the nations who receives it?

According to the July 12, 2011 Foreign Aid PDF , it appears nothing has changed much in the nations we have been giving development aide too.  I encourage you to look at the list of nations we fund and the amounts.

It is hocking to see so many nations receiving our tax dollars when we have American’s here loosing their homes by the thousands.  How about cutting a huge portion of the foreign aid and funnel it into redeveloping all the land that has been ruined by natural disasters right here at home?

We don’t have to be financial wizards to see that this would be a more acceptable use of these funds.  America was once a very wealthy nation, but as our demoted credit score shows, that is no more and it’s time to tighten the apron strings and start worrying about the folks at home.

You can view all foreign aid information here:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11727.pdf

It was quoted in the document that Washington needs to communicate to nations that their votes, their attitudes, and their actions inside the U.N. system inevitably must have consequences for their relations with the United States outside the U.N. system.

Might I suggest that Washington take some of their own advice and listen to we the people who are communicating the same message to them,  their votes, their attitudes, and their actions in Congress inevitably must have consequences for their relations with we the people inside and outside of Congress.

Follow @IntelHub