Trump threatens over UN Jerusalem move, NZ to vote regardless

President Donald Trump has threatened to cut funding to countries that vote against the US decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

New Zealand is likely to vote against Trump regardless.

AP: Trump threat to cut aid raises stakes in UN Jerusalem vote

President Donald Trump’s threat to cut off U.S. funding to countries that oppose his decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital has raised the stakes in Thursday’s U.N. vote and sparked criticism at his tactics, which one Muslim group called bullying or blackmail.

Trump went a step further than U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley who hinted in a tweet and a letter to most of the 193 U.N. member states on Tuesday that the U.S. would retaliate against countries that vote in favor of a General Assembly resolution calling on the president to rescind his decision.

Haley said the president asked her to report back on countries “who voted against us” — and she stressed that the United States “will be taking names.”

At the start of a Cabinet meeting in Washington on Wednesday, with Haley sitting nearby, Trump told reporters that Americans are tired of being taken advantage of and praised the U.S. ambassador for sending the “right message” before the vote.

Nihad Awad, national executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, tweeted after Trump’s comments: “Our government should not use its leadership at the UN to bully/blackmail other nations that stand for religious liberty and justice in Jerusalem. Justice is a core value of Christianity, Judaism and Islam.”

The Palestinians and their Arab and Islamic supporters sought the General Assembly vote after the United States on Monday vetoed a resolution supported by the 14 other U.N. Security Council members that would have required Trump to rescind his declaration on Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and not move the U.S. Embassy there.

NZ Herald:  NZ likely to vote against Trump and the US in UN vote on Jerusalem tomorrow

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has signalled that New Zealand will criticise US President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in a United Nations vote tomorrow.

But she stopped short of calling him a bully, as Trump threatened to cut US aid money to countries that voted against him.

Ardern was critical when Trump first recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital earlier this month, saying it “will make things difficult” for peace.

Today she said the logistics around tomorrow’s vote were still being ​worked through, but New Zealand’s position had not changed.

“Some of the things we saw by international actors like the US recently, those are decision that should only be made in the context of a [UN] resolution around a two-state solution. It took us backwards, not forwards.”

Asked about possible aid sanctions, she said: “I would push back strongly and say New Zealand has and will always have an independent foreign policy. We base our decisions on principle, not on being bullied.”

She was not concerned by his threats to cut off aid.

“We’ve always made decisions that represent our beliefs and our position, and we’ll continue to do that. We’ve done it on things like nuclear issues before and we’ll continue to do so.”

Asked if she thought Trump was a bully, she said: “People make their own interpretations.”

UPDATE: New Zealand voted in favour.

Previous Post

52 Comments

  1. lurcher1948

     /  December 22, 2017

    Don’t expect a ship visit soon…just saying

    • Gezza

       /  December 22, 2017

      If you want a warship visit & the yanks get all “no way jose” just ask Australia, Britain, or Russia, or China or someone else’s government to send one Lurch. If you want to see an aircraft carrier the Chinese would be the best option I gather?

  2. Historical capital of the jewish people – going back hundreds of years bc…. but I suppose Arab oil money has had its influencing abilities proven ….

    • Gezza

       /  December 22, 2017

      Israel as the state of the Israelites existed for about 300 odd years only. It’s been In Muslim territory for about 1500 years. Their claim to Israel is based on a Bronze Age non-existent mythical God who they claim told them it was theirs to take from others.

      • Gezza

         /  December 22, 2017

        So if you want to argue their claim to Israel as their land is valid because their ancestors the Israelites, who became the Jews, took it from others, so therefore it’s theirs, then you need to recognise that a host of others then took it from them, so therefore it was theirs, including a period when it was the Christians’ and then it was Muslims’. Which is why it is a problem. The Zionists took it from Muslims in 1947. A claim it’s been theirs for 2 milkenia doesn’t stack up unless you’re a Jew or a Christian, in which case you only think it stacks up because you believe the myths of their Gods.

      • blah blah blah.

        Been Jews in continuous residence of the Holy Lands for millennia…. invaders come and go.

        Muslims took by force and re took it by force a few times.

        Now the jews have reclaimed it by force….. see 1947, the 1960’s and 1973…. its theirs now …

        So can you say they have a lesser right than muslims to the land given both have taken it by force?

        /devilsadvocate….

        • Gezza

           /  December 22, 2017

          blah blah blah.
          I accept your inability to dispute the historical facts.

          I accept that Israel exists & Zionists are steadily seeking to make it bigger – & that Israel needs to stop doing that & negotiate with Palestinians to among other things allow the return of the Pakestinian diaspora, & that they have to persuade other Arab countries to accept their presence. I accept that the US is not an honest broker in this matter.

          • artcroft

             /  December 22, 2017

            All fair points, reasonably argued. So an uptick from me.

          • “The Zionists took it from Muslims in 1947″…. Ahhhh the United Nations gave the Jews a homeland Geeza … Is the UN a Zionist conspiracy????

            And the Arabs immediately upon Israel’s formal creation, 14 May 1948, tried to destroy it. And failed spectacularly like they did in 1956, 1967 and really, really spectacularly in 1973. At least 1973 lead to the Egyptians coming to their senses and making a lasting peace with Israel [see it can be done!!!]

            As matter of fact the Palestinians have failed at everything they have tried to do bar 1) killing innocents – both their own and Jews – with their on going campaign to destroy Israel and 2) suck in Lefties with their media campaigns.

            Media campaigns hit on as a means of maybe winning after being repetitively thrashed on the ground…. Is it any wonder that the demise in Journalism in the West following the infection of “cause” & “crusading” journalism being taught in our tertiary institutes and the rise of the Leftie Israel bad/Palestine good meme are so closely aligned??

            Palestinians have failed as a people, failed as an effective military force, failed in peace making… just failed really bar killing innocents and suckering Lefties. Actually lets rephrase that Palestinian LEADERS have failed not the Palestinians themselves. The Leaders have failed to achieve anything for their people, but have succeeded in enriching themselves…

            The Palestinians could make peace tomorrow, the Oil Arabs could fund them into being a shining jewel on the Mediterranean – but that doesn’t suit the Arab mindset of vengeance and blood in/blood out.

            Israel exists as a monument to European guilt – as a monument to the endless massacres and pogroms of Europe from York in the 11th century through the merciless Jew killing rampage in medieval Europe when ever the nobility couldn’t pay their loans back, to the pogroms of Eastern Europe & Tsarist Russia right through to the industrial eradication attempt during WWII…. Israel stands as the one place on Earth Jews have safety from state sponsored attempts to wipe them out, so Israel and Israelis will never go away willingly…

            Personally wish the Israelis would cease settlement building and offer a binding peace… but while the likes of Iran promise fire and death that will never happen

            Accusing others Geeza of ignoring history and then stating this “The Zionists took it from Muslims in 1947” is the height of bombast and doublespeak….

            • Kimbo

               /  December 22, 2017

              “At least 1973 lead to the Egyptians coming to their senses and making a lasting peace with Israel [see it can be done!!!]”.

              Um, Sadat fought the 1973 Yom Kippur War – which was a close-run thing – to bring Israel to her senses. After 1967 the Israelis were arrogant and over-confident, refusing to yield anything, and using the argument “who can we trust the Egyptian (therefore we will not negotiate)”. Shades of that today, and also in the bad faith of continued settlement of the West Bank. No, Israel may not necessarily be the primary impediment to peace, but the current Likud government seems to want everything on its terms. Not a good prescription for the prospects of peace, irrespective of Palestinian provocation. .

              “Israel exists as a monument to European guilt”

              Yes. But then that was always the problem at the heart of Zionism – it was a Middle Eastern solution to a European problem of anti-Semitism, which, as the original founders of the modern state of Israel were advised, would transfer that anti-Semitism to the Middle East. Irrespective, Israel has a right to exist, as too does a Palestinian state. But West Bank settlement makes that prospect highly unlikely.

            • Sooo…. we will form an alliance with a large country to the North of Israel and then attack from north and south simultaneously to force “peace”……. Yip has the ring of after the fact defeated leader justification Kimbo…. While Sadat flicking the Rus and chummed up to the Yanks may seem to support that hypothesis don’t you think it sounds just a tad hollow? If the Israelis hadn’t have got a little lucky and been resupplied the old UAR allies would have rolled over the top of them – then “peace” would have been had, because one side would have been obliterated

              The Middle East has always had antisemitism from earliest Islam to today…. Muslims like to cite “golden” ages of tolerance. But read a little and you will see its not as shiny pure as those apologists would have it made out to be…

              And welcome… I had a feeling the discussion would drew you to type…

            • Kimbo

               /  December 22, 2017

              Put it this way, Dave1924: In 1973 the goals of the Egyptians were limited – to recover the territories they lost to Isreal in 1967. And the assessment the Israelis were arrogant and over-confident and dismissive of peace deals after the success of the Six Day War was made by Richard Nixon, the person who more then anyone hauled the Israelis arse out of a sling in 1973. As he instructed when asked how many aircraft should be used to supply the Israelis with arms, “Anything that flies!”

              Early in 1974, when Golda Meir came to the White House to express her thanks, Nixon, reflecting on his experience of exiting Vietnam counselled her that when a nation in a conflict thinks it is strong, it can actually be weak, because if it’s enemy will not give up the fight there is no exit strategy. Wise words that helped coax the Israelis to accept the peace feelers from Sadat they had rebuffed after 1970. And advice that still applies to the ongoing conflict with the Palestinians.

          • Trust and desire for peace.

            Unrelenting Israeli settlement and Palestinian violence and tacit support for terrorists erodes trust and this needs to be addressed, but it’s politically impossible.

            For my part I see ZERO will and commitment from the Palestinians to show compromise, end violence or the huge part of their budget that goes towards sponsoring terrorism. Similarly, Israeli building on disputed lands.

            Like all Trump’s actions, this is polarising but if it shines a light into this horrible corner then maybe it will accelerate a compromise to the two state option.

  3. George

     /  December 22, 2017

    After all the years of endless useless talks the US has had enough of the Arab crap.
    Going to be interesting watching the US stop funding to these opposing this capitol move.
    And we have as much influence as the moon on an iron ingot.
    None!

  4. PDB

     /  December 22, 2017

    If New Zealand wanted to move its capital to Auckland would the UN condemn that too?

    • Gezza

       /  December 22, 2017

      When did the UN Partition New Zealand, PDB?

      • Gezza

         /  December 22, 2017

        PDB? Does your lack of reply indicate you’ve realised the comparison was stupid?

        • PDB

           /  December 22, 2017

          Only just seen your reply Gezza – no difference – Israel wants it to be their capital, US agrees, UN should stick to what they are good at – doing nothing.

          • Gezza

             /  December 22, 2017

            Nobody is considering letting Chinese immigrants & their descendents make Auckland the capital of a divided country under Chinese occupation against the wishes of Pakeha New Zealanders, PDB. I accept your making a completely irrelevant comparison as the evidence you are wasting my time & I have no more time for ya nonsense.

            • PDB

               /  December 22, 2017

              Not as silly as continuing to think that the two-state solution is ever going to happen………..

    • Kimbo

       /  December 22, 2017

      “If New Zealand wanted to move its capital to Auckland would the UN condemn that too?”.

      If we attempted to annex it by conquest and then stealth and increment then, yes. We fought two World Wars to end that era, so new rules apply since 1945, The West Bank and Jerusalem are Israel’s to rightly occupy for her security needs, pending a peace agreement, which may not ever happen. But they are not Israel’s to settle and annex.

      • PartisanZ

         /  December 22, 2017

        An optimistic view of two World Wars Kimbo …

        One could argue that the Second World War – fought over resources and markets much like the First – initiated the present post-1945 era in which this very sort of thing can happen.

        The Oil Age …The Age of U.S., ‘Allied’ [particularly the USSR while it existed] and, by association, Zionist imperialism … with some unintended consequences, mainly economic ones, resulting from the Chinese revolution and successive exploitation of Japanese, South Korean, Chinese, Asian and Indian labour …

        • Kimbo

           /  December 22, 2017

          One could argue that if they ignored the genuine cassus belli for British Empire and New Zealand involvement in both conflicts – the unprovoked invasions of Belgium in 1914 and Poland in 1939. And no matter what mixed or complicating motives were in the play (when are they ever absent from human affairs?!) an end to annexation by conquest was the agreed outcome and, in the main the substantial dividend in the post 1945 world. Israeli settlement of the West Bank being a glaring exception.

          • PartisanZ

             /  December 22, 2017

            Yes, so glaring as to almost appear ‘licensed’ by someone, or some power or powers …?

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 22, 2017

              And what’s “an end to annexation by conquest” compared to Britain [particularly] clinging to pre-war annexation by conquest as long as they possibly could, including by using military force, ie Malaya, and compared to especially American but also Russian and Chinese interference in the internal politics of smaller nations, ie Vietnam …?

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 22, 2017

              I’d also question the use of the word “genuine” along with cassus belli …

              Casus belli is a Latin expression meaning “an act or event that provokes or is used to justify war” (literally, “a case of war”).

              The Latin covers the field perfectly adequately …

              False Flag operations have been used to justify war.

  5. David

     /  December 22, 2017

    Great way for the UN and all its fans to prove how ineffectual and useless they are.

    • Gezza

       /  December 22, 2017

      What will be interesting will to see if Trump will now break the contracts to arm the Saudi Arabians to the teeth when they are pumping so much cash into the US arms manufacturers & creating jobs to help make America grate.

      Probably not. The arms manufacturers wouldn’t be happy. They’re busy selling weapons to both sides. It’s only business, eh?

  6. David

     /  December 22, 2017

    Aside from the usual anti Israel virtue signalling of what concern is it of anyone where the US has its embassy and the capital is a logical place for it. That part of Jerusalem will never be handed over to the Palestinians ever under any peace agreement ever proposed by anyone sane, the move doesnt preclude East Jerusalem being part of an agreement.
    The Palestinians need to actually come to the table which they have refused to do, perhaps because they are being used by Iran and the top brass in Hamas are making hundreds of millions out of the conflict.

    • Gezza

       /  December 22, 2017

      All Israel probably has to do to get the Palestinians to the table is agree to allow the return of the Palestinian diaspora (as they constantly encourage the immigration of Jews who are actually citizens of other countries) and abandon their illegal settlements.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  December 22, 2017

        This is the diaspora who were going to be part of the new state but who fled or were evicted when Arab violence erupted against the Jews and Arab nations attacked the new state?
        Israelis / Jews were also slaughtered and evicted from Arab held areas.
        To say they were displaced by the Jews is at best highly debatable, but more likely false.
        Why should they be repatriated when they left due to Arab violence, and now live under a regime that still wants to destroy Israel and the Jews?

        • Gezza

           /  December 22, 2017

          Well it also includes all the surviving ones who were forced to flee when the Iraelis attacked their villages & slaughtered them. There were massacres on both sides and these are well enough documented to be credible.

          They need to be allowed back for the same reason the Jews whose ancestors haven’t lived there for millenia are encouraged to return to Israel. When this is agreed Hamas will disappear. Hamas is the product of Israel’s occupation.

          • High Flying Duck

             /  December 22, 2017

            Your last comment is patently false. The violence existed well before Hamas.

            Hamas is simply the latest iteration of the continuous violence perpetrated since Israel was formed.

            Every act preventing peace can be traced back to Arab aggression. Did Israel take advantage of this – of course they did, it was a war, and they were the victors. What they were not was the instigators.

            Jerusalem was originally going to be a separate state not part of either Israel or Palestine to be managed as a religious area for all. Israel accepted this – Palestinians did not and started a war.

            The Arab population in Israel has full citizenship rights and is growing every year. There were polls when a land swap deal was mooted and the Arabs in Israel overwhelmingly wanted to remain in Israel as Israelites:

            “Various polls show that Arabs in Israel do not wish to move to the West Bank or Gaza if a Palestinian state is created there.[145] In a survey conducted by Kul Al-Arab among 1,000 residents of Um Al-Fahm, 83 percent of respondents opposed the idea of transferring their city to Palestinian jurisdiction, while 11 percent supported the proposal and 6 percent did not express their position.[133]

            Of those opposed to the idea, 54% said that they were against becoming part of a Palestinian state because they wanted to continue living under a democratic regime and enjoying a good standard of living. Of these opponents, 18% said that they were satisfied with their present situation, that they were born in Israel and that they were not interested in moving to any other state. Another 14% of this same group said that they were not prepared to make sacrifices for the sake of the creation of a Palestinian state. Another 11 percent cited no reason for their opposition.”

            • Blazer

               /  December 22, 2017

              so convincing….’“Various polls show ‘

            • High Flying Duck

               /  December 22, 2017

              It was a quote, and was sourced in the document I copied it from…

            • Gezza

               /  December 22, 2017

              Hamas is simply the latest iteration of the continuous violence perpetrated since Israel was formed.
              The modern state of Israel was created by violent Zionist terrorists who went on to became part of successive Israeli governments. You choose to ignore any other history and present the Israeli version of events. When the Israelis offer to withdraw from their illegal settlements & allow the return of the Palestinian diaspora is when they make a genuine peace offer.

              The biggest problem with the UN Partitioning Palestinine has always been that it was never theirs to give & simply gave effect to a British government decision to ignore promises they had made to Palestinians of independence & instead agree to the establishment of a Jewish state in Muslim lands.

              It was never wise & all the rest is simply where we are now.

              Arab citizens of Israel do not have all the same rights as Jewish citizens of Israel.

            • Blazer

               /  December 22, 2017

              you just regurgitate..Zionist..propaganda.

            • Gezza

               /  December 22, 2017

              You’re very selective in your quotes, HFD.

              “The Arab population in Israel has full citizenship rights and is growing every year”

              You’re quoting a tiny part from this whole extensive wikipedia article:
              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

              and quoting none from this, further down in the same page:
              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel#Legal_and_political_status

              Are you a religious believer HFD, & if so, which religion?

            • High Flying Duck

               /  December 22, 2017

              I am agnostic Gezza. Religions all leave me cold although I believe they give comfort to some.
              Israel was a UN construct not a terrorist action. It was from this base the violence came.
              I try to read from all angles but as you well know finding information without bias on this subject is not easy.
              I am not unaware of Israeli atrocities. I just tend to the view they operate under provocation.
              I have also read the links you posted.
              I look at it in the same way I’d look at Muslims.
              Given a very explicit charter to destroy Israel among West Bank Palestinians a high threshold needs to be met.
              Due to on going attacks in Israel there is distrust.
              I cannot see how this can change in any way until attacks stop and the destruction of Israel is removed from the charter.
              This can only come from the Palestinian side.
              Israel did hand back settlement land under Ariel Sharon and that was a disaster that led to rocket attacks and conflict.
              Do you have information on Jewish citizen rights in other Middle Eastern countries?

            • High Flying Duck

               /  December 22, 2017

              I will add that from what I have read, the vast majority of Arabs in Israel despite the issues still would not want to live in any other middle eastern country.
              If you’ve seen different let me know.

            • Gezza

               /  December 22, 2017

              Do you have information on Jewish citizen rights in other Middle Eastern countries?

              That’s “whataboutism” HFD. I posted you the Wikipedia link on whataboutism in our Thursday Open Forum debate. It’s not relevant to the Israel/Palestine debate.

              The simple answer is that Jews & Christians and any non-Muslims have inferior rights to Muslims in any Middle Eastern Muslim country. Be ause this is clearly mandated in the Koran & Hadith.

              The other fact is that the UN Security Council was and is dominated by the victors of the 2nd World War, which included Britain & the US, and because of their guilt simply gave effect to the British decision to give Europe’s Jews & the Zionist movement land that was not theirs to give smack bang in the middle of what had long been Muslim territory.

              The world has ever since been dealing with the end result of this decision, and other with the many other incidences of Western Countries controlling, divvying up & meddlng in Muslim countries since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

              Muslims belong in Muslim countries. They don’t belong in non-Muslim countries. Their medieval Islamic religion, culture, customs & Islamic laws don’t mesh with non-Muslim countries’s laws, cultures, customs & laws. Similar problems arise with Orthodox Judaism. The most sickening & bizarre thing about the whole situation is that the entire conflict & all of the believers in the 3 bullshit Abrahamic religions fighting over these lands comes from reinterpretation of the nature of Jaweh, who is a Bronze Age God, who doesn’t even exist, only was only ever invented to justify the leaders of the generally ignorant Israelites invading & conquering land they only held & controlled as an independent state for around 300 years.

              There is the source of the problem. 3 Bullshit religions.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  December 22, 2017

              I how you read the sledge article I posted in that same open forum post. It gave good correct of what happened and why including similar actions in Europe.
              Anyhow I think we have well and truly exhausted this discussion… until next time :-).
              My final word is:
              Happy Christmas Gezza. You’re a good man to debate with and you bring some wonderful humour and insight to Pete’s blog.
              Take care.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  December 22, 2017

              I bloody hate predictive text!
              Slate article.

            • Gezza

               /  December 22, 2017

              Ditto HFD. (I sadly post enuf screwed up poorly proof-read sentences without adding predictive text or auto-correct to the mix. 😀)

  7. duperez

     /  December 22, 2017

    For a minute there I thought I saw United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and South Korea voted as New Zealand did. Off the Specsavers. Again.

  8. David

     /  December 22, 2017

    The UN is Mos Eisley, you will never find a greater hive of scum and villainy

    • Gezza

       /  December 22, 2017

      Wait a minute. What about the US Democrats & Republicans?

      • David

         /  December 22, 2017

        Last time I checked, not even they governed a country they had driven to eating dogs to stay alive.

        • Gezza

           /  December 22, 2017

          Oh. well that’s different. If you’d said that at the outset we would have probably been able to agree on Saudi Arabia in Yemen.

  9. Heidi

     /  December 22, 2017

    Gezza, you are so ignorant about the history of this area which had always been known as Judea (guess why!) until the 2nd Century when the Greeks arrived and called the whole area Palestinia (but was still commonly called Judea, and the name was not reactivated until the British in the early 19thC) that I encourage you to watch this 15 minute history lesson by a non-Jewish anthropologist-historian with footage and direct quotes from an Arab leader in how the FOUR LAWYERS who created Israel (i.e. in a lawful manner – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12KJa4a0d64) legally bought all the land from absentee owners (mostly Arab). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9ReF4UUa4E&t=451s

    You must be very disappointed in the distinct lack of interest that the vast majority of Muslims have in protesting Jerusalem’s ‘new’ status. For the Israelis, nothing has changed. The Koran mentions Jerusalem twice, with no great importance as it was a far-flung village; the Torah mentions it hundreds of times!
    Around 1700BC was the time of Abraham. At 900BC was when the first temple was built (and Al Aqsa is built over the temple of Herod).
    You should know that the PLO’s first Charter didn’t claim Gaza or Jerusalem.. why? Because both were controlled by Arab nations (Egypt and Jordan). They quickly included them in their SECOND Charter after Israel was attacked (again) but conquered the areas, and one of the founding leaders admitted to a Dutch interviewer that there was no such thing as a Palestinian but the lie was kept up for propaganda purposes.
    The Jews accepted a two-state solution FIVE times – the first in accepting only 20% of the land but the Muslims refused to share any part of the area. Arafat has been squarely blamed for refusing to settle a great deal for the Arabs. Again – if you dare – listen to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76NytvQAIs0

    Question: how can the Israelis talk peace with a people whose Charter is aimed at the destruction of Israel and all Jews? The U.N. is anti-Semitic solely because there are many Muslim nations to influence the vote (and have oil!)
    “If the Muslims put down their guns, there would be peace. If the Jews put down their guns, there would be no more Israel” !
    Proof? Heard of Mosad Hassan Yousef ‘Son of Hamas’? Last challenge. Listen to this guy who knows both sides, and has chosen one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9sCvyOE_ys
    I’ll finish with Col.Richard Kemp of the British Forces, who called Israel’s army “the most moral army in the world”.
    Your uninformed opinion over Yousef’s factual knowledge? No contest, sir. You should refrain from sounding more anti-Semitic than you do already and retire from this subject.

  10. Darcy

     /  December 24, 2017

    Aredern claims independent NZ vote against on another nations independent sovereign
    decision is questionable given how her likely Drinking Buddies voted.

  1. Trump threatens over UN Jerusalem move, NZ to vote regardless — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition