NationStates

Malgrave wrote:

Lamaredia wrote:"Order, I would like to remind the honourable member that calling a foreign leader a 'pig dog' is unparliamentary speech, and will not be tolerated. I will give the member a chance to retract her statement."

"Mister Speaker, I understand the importance of respecting parliamentary colleagues but where is it enshrined that foreign leaders fall under the same protections?"

"Order, I would like to refer the honourable member to §3.d of the Rules and Procedures of the House of Representatives of Galatea Act, where the following is stated 'Senators may not use language unbecoming of an elected official when speaking in the Chamber — such language shall be decided at the discretion of the Speaker of the Senate.'. In my right as the Speaker of the Galatean House of Representatives, I consider calling a foreign leader 'pig dog' violates this clause. I ask the member again, do they retract their statement or is further disciplinary action necessary?"

Lamaredia wrote:

Malgrave wrote:
"Mister Speaker, I understand the importance of respecting parliamentary colleagues but where is it enshrined that foreign leaders fall under the same protections?"

"Order, I would like to refer the honourable member to §3.d of the Rules and Procedures of the House of Representatives of Galatea Act, where the following is stated 'Senators may not use language unbecoming of an elected official when speaking in the Chamber — such language shall be decided at the discretion of the Speaker of the Senate.'. In my right as the Speaker of the Galatean House of Representatives, I consider calling a foreign leader 'pig dog' violates this clause. I ask the member again, do they retract their statement or is further disciplinary action necessary?"

"Mister Speaker, I would like to challenge your ruling. I don't think it is unparliamentary to refer to the deranged President of the United States as a pig dog."

Malgrave wrote:

Lamaredia wrote:"Order, I would like to refer the honourable member to §3.d of the Rules and Procedures of the House of Representatives of Galatea Act, where the following is stated 'Senators may not use language unbecoming of an elected official when speaking in the Chamber — such language shall be decided at the discretion of the Speaker of the Senate.'. In my right as the Speaker of the Galatean House of Representatives, I consider calling a foreign leader 'pig dog' violates this clause. I ask the member again, do they retract their statement or is further disciplinary action necessary?"

"Mister Speaker, I would like to challenge your ruling. I don't think it is unparliamentary to refer to the deranged President of the United States as a pig dog."

"Order. Very well, were this challenge to receive three seconds within a 24 hour period, it will be put to vote for the same amount of time. Should the motion fail to receive the required seconds, or fail in voting, the member once again has the choice to retract their statement. Should this not be done, disciplinary action will be handed out."

"Mr. Speaker, if I may, I must comment that the President of the US is technically still an elected official, just not of Galatea."

"Mr. Speaker, I also second the challenge."

Rhunnland wrote:"Mr. Speaker, if I may, I must comment that the President of the US is technically still an elected official, just not of Galatea."

"Order, I would like to ask the honourable member what significance the US Presidents status as elected official is in this case? If it's referring to the section of law I quoted to your colleague, it merely states that our elected officials shall not act in a manner unbecoming of them, no matter the status of the person, law or other object that they refer to."

"I second the challenge, and add my name to the list of hardworking Galateans who call the illegitimate President of the United States a pig-dog.

Oink oink, Mr Speaker. Oink oink."

Lamaredia wrote:

Rhunnland wrote:"Mr. Speaker, if I may, I must comment that the President of the US is technically still an elected official, just not of Galatea."

"Order, I would like to ask the honourable member what significance the US Presidents status as elected official is in this case? If it's referring to the section of law I quoted to your colleague, it merely states that our elected officials shall not act in a manner unbecoming of them, no matter the status of the person, law or other object that they refer to."

"Mr. Speaker, I must apologize; I misread that section of law."

Rhunnland wrote:

Lamaredia wrote:"Order, I would like to ask the honourable member what significance the US Presidents status as elected official is in this case? If it's referring to the section of law I quoted to your colleague, it merely states that our elected officials shall not act in a manner unbecoming of them, no matter the status of the person, law or other object that they refer to."

"Mr. Speaker, I must apologize; I misread that section of law."

"Order. That's quite alright, even the best makes mistakes when it comes to legalese some times. Are you still seconding the ruling appeal?"

Lamaredia wrote:

Rhunnland wrote:
"Mr. Speaker, I must apologize; I misread that section of law."

"Order. That's quite alright, even the best makes mistakes when it comes to legalese some times. Are you still seconding the ruling appeal?"

"No, Mr. Speaker; I retract my earlier second-ing.

While I share the Honorable Representative's views on the US President, I do think 'pig dog' is unparliamentary speech."

Malgrave wrote:

Lamaredia wrote:"Order, I would like to refer the honourable member to §3.d of the Rules and Procedures of the House of Representatives of Galatea Act, where the following is stated 'Senators may not use language unbecoming of an elected official when speaking in the Chamber — such language shall be decided at the discretion of the Speaker of the Senate.'. In my right as the Speaker of the Galatean House of Representatives, I consider calling a foreign leader 'pig dog' violates this clause. I ask the member again, do they retract their statement or is further disciplinary action necessary?"

"Mister Speaker, I would like to challenge your ruling. I don't think it is unparliamentary to refer to the deranged President of the United States as a pig dog."

The Sarian wrote:"I second the challenge, and add my name to the list of hardworking Galateans who call the illegitimate President of the United States a pig-dog.

Oink oink, Mr Speaker. Oink oink."

"Order, since the motion did not receive the required three seconds within the timeframe, the appeal has failed. I therefore ask you again representative Malgrave, do you retract your statement? To add on this, representative Fotou, I would like to ask you to do the same."

"Order, debate will now start on the Israel Condemnation Motion, and will last for 48 hours.

Representative Malgrave, Representative Fotou, I give you until the end of this debate period to retract your statements, otherwise punishment will be dealt out to both of you."

Ainin wrote:

Israel Condemnation Motion
Author: Ioannis Mitros (Ind.)
Sponsors: Andrea Michelakos (FDP), <Galendia> (DP), Giandomenico Abruzzi (WPG), Eugenia Malgrave, Alexis Gianopoulos (DP)

That in the opinion of the House, this government should:

1. Acknowledge the criminality of the Israeli government in its persecution of the occupied Palestinian territories in defiance of international law;
   
   
2. Support the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israeli companies that contribute to Israeli war crimes;
   
   
3. Condemn the government of Israel and assume a position of international leadership in support of the Palestinian people's right of self-determination.

"Mr. Speaker, the Jewish people have religious and ancestral ties to the land of Israel, and had been deported from their land by the Romans in the first and second centuries CE, and have only returned in 1948, and the Israeli government has only prosecuted Palestinians due to terrorist acts such as the Intifadas and Gaza Rocket launches. The BDS movement acts unfairly to Israeli corporations that have to ties to so-called 'war crimes' committed towards the Palestinian people. How would you feel if your company was boycotted because the government prosecuted terrorists?

I must say, however, that the Palestinian people still have the right to their land. I believe that condemnations and BDS movements are not the solution, but a peaceful resolution between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples to finally return peace to the Levant, or Israel, or Palestine, or whatever you want it to be called."

Rhunnland wrote:

Ainin wrote:

Israel Condemnation Motion
Author: Ioannis Mitros (Ind.)
Sponsors: Andrea Michelakos (FDP), <Galendia> (DP), Giandomenico Abruzzi (WPG), Eugenia Malgrave, Alexis Gianopoulos (DP)

That in the opinion of the House, this government should:

1. Acknowledge the criminality of the Israeli government in its persecution of the occupied Palestinian territories in defiance of international law;
   
   
2. Support the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israeli companies that contribute to Israeli war crimes;
   
   
3. Condemn the government of Israel and assume a position of international leadership in support of the Palestinian people's right of self-determination.

"Mr. Speaker, the Jewish people have religious and ancestral ties to the land of Israel, and had been deported from their land by the Romans in the first and second centuries CE, and have only returned in 1948, and the Israeli government has only prosecuted Palestinians due to terrorist acts such as the Intifadas and Gaza Rocket launches. The BDS movement acts unfairly to Israeli corporations that have to ties to so-called 'war crimes' committed towards the Palestinian people. How would you feel if your company was boycotted because the government prosecuted terrorists?

I must say, however, that the Palestinian people still have the right to their land. I believe that condemnations and BDS movements are not the solution, but a peaceful resolution between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples to finally return peace to the Levant, or Israel, or Palestine, or whatever you want it to be called."

"Mister Speaker, while I completely agree that the Jewish people have ties to Israel, the Honorable Member must remember that neither side is innocent. The Israeli Defense Force killed over fifty Palestinian civilians yesterday. It is important that we consider both sides."

"Mister Speaker,

On Monday over 50 Palestinian civilians were murdered and just over 2 thousand people were injured by members of the Israeli security services, with many children being included amongst those killed and injured being young children. I believe that this horrific act is an example of the systematic abuse of the Palestinian people by the Israeli government, and its desire to crush any notion of an independent and free Palestinian state.

As responsible members of the international community, it is our moral duty to tell the Israeli government that these cruel actions are unacceptable and to work hard to ensure the resumption of talks between Israel and Palestine that will result in a peaceful and viable two-state solution. I have heard the honourable members objection to the BDS movement and I am reminded about those that criticised similar efforts against attempts to boycott South Africa under the apartheid regime, the BDS movement organised against Israels is needed, not only because it is impossible to differentiate between products made in Israel and products illegally made in the occupied territories but but because the profits of these enterprises are partly used to purchase the weapons that were used on Monday's massacre.

I implore every member of this body to support this motion when it comes to a vote, and I say from the river to the sea Palestine will be free."

Roosevetania wrote:

Rhunnland wrote:
"Mr. Speaker, the Jewish people have religious and ancestral ties to the land of Israel, and had been deported from their land by the Romans in the first and second centuries CE, and have only returned in 1948, and the Israeli government has only prosecuted Palestinians due to terrorist acts such as the Intifadas and Gaza Rocket launches. The BDS movement acts unfairly to Israeli corporations that have to ties to so-called 'war crimes' committed towards the Palestinian people. How would you feel if your company was boycotted because the government prosecuted terrorists?

I must say, however, that the Palestinian people still have the right to their land. I believe that condemnations and BDS movements are not the solution, but a peaceful resolution between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples to finally return peace to the Levant, or Israel, or Palestine, or whatever you want it to be called."

"Mister Speaker, while I completely agree that the Jewish people have ties to Israel, the Honorable Member must remember that neither side is innocent. The Israeli Defense Force killed over fifty Palestinian civilians yesterday. It is important that we consider both sides."

Malgrave wrote:"Mister Speaker,

On Monday over 50 Palestinian civilians were murdered and just over 2 thousand people were injured by members of the Israeli security services, with many children being included amongst those killed and injured being young children. I believe that this horrific act is an example of the systematic abuse of the Palestinian people by the Israeli government, and its desire to crush any notion of an independent and free Palestinian state.

As responsible members of the international community, it is our moral duty to tell the Israeli government that these cruel actions are unacceptable and to work hard to ensure the resumption of talks between Israel and Palestine that will result in a peaceful and viable two-state solution. I have heard the honourable members objection to the BDS movement and I am reminded about those that criticised similar efforts against attempts to boycott South Africa under the apartheid regime, the BDS movement organised against Israels is needed, not only because it is impossible to differentiate between products made in Israel and products illegally made in the occupied territories but but because the profits of these enterprises are partly used to purchase the weapons that were used on Monday's massacre.

I implore every member of this body to support this motion when it comes to a vote, and I say from the river to the sea Palestine will be free."

"Mr. Speaker:

I completely agree with representative Fallaci that both sides of the conflict must be considered, and that neither side is innocent. Yes, the IDF killed 50 civilians, but also, the Palestinians have been (among other things) launching rockets into Israel from Gaza. What I believe Representative Malgrave failed to acknowledge is that the Palestinian people are not blameless (as mentioned above). I have proposed an 'Israeli-Palestinian Peace Act' to show Galatea's will to form a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Israel/Palestine, instead of escalating it further by condemning Israel. I implore this House to vote against this motion, and, if condemnations are truly neccasary, to not keep the PLO, Hamas, and other groups without punishment."

"Order, as we have run out of bills to debate on, a vote will now start on the which will last for 24 hours.

Representative Malgrave, Representative Fotou, since neither of you have retracted your statements I am giving you both an official warning for your behavior."

Aye

Aye.

"Aye."

Aye

Aye

Aye

Nay