In a 412-10 vote, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a resolution expressing support for Israel and condemning terror attacks perpetrated against the Jewish state. But one Republican and nine Democrats voted against the resolution, while six other Democrats voted present.
The resolution declared, among other things, that the chamber “reaffirms Israel’s right to self-defense,” “condemns Hamas’ brutal war against Israel,” and “stands ready to assist Israel with emergency resupply and other security, diplomatic, and intelligence support.”
Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan were two of the Democrats who voted against the measure.
“I voted against this resolution because it is a deeply incomplete and biased account of what is happening in Israel and Palestine, and what has been happening for decades. This resolution rightly mourns the thousands of Israeli civilians killed and wounded in the horrific attacks but explicitly does not mourn the thousands of Palestinian civilians, including over 2,000 children, killed and wounded in the collective punishment of Palestine,” Tlaib said in a statement.
“While the resolution rightly acknowledges and mourns the lives taken by Hamas, I cannot support a resolution that fails to acknowledge and mourn the lives of Palestinians taken by the Israeli military. The resolution also fails to acknowledge the Israeli government’s military bombardment of Gaza, especially after Israeli officials openly admitted to implementing collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza,” Omar said in a statement.
Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky was the one Republican lawmaker to vote against the resolution.
“I condemn the barbaric attack on Israel and I affirm Israel’s right to defend itself,” Massie noted, before going on to explain why he rejected the resolution. “It calls for sanctions on a sovereign country,” he noted. “It asserts the necessity of foreign aid commitments which I have voted against,” he wrote. “It contains an open-ended promise of military support that is so broad that it could be interpreted to commit US soldiers to the conflict,” the lawmaker asserted. “It tends to broaden the conflict to other countries when it would be better to keep the war contained geographically.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!