UN receives Palestine's bid to become Member State

[News_Editor]

UN receives Palestine's bid to become Member State

2011-09-24 09:56:50 GMT+7 (ICT)

UNITED NATIONS (BNO NEWS) -- The United Nations (UN) on Friday officially received an application from Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in order for Palestine to become a UN Member State.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the UN Headquarters in New York received the application from Abbas. Later in the afternoon, Ban submitted the application to the President of the Security Council, as per the provisions of the UN Charter.

"Palestine is being reborn," Abbas told the UN General Assembly's annual general debate as Palestine, which currently has observer status at the UN, applies for full membership of the UN on the basis of the so-called June 4, 1967 borders.

"I call upon Mr. Secretary-General to expedite transmittal of our request to the Security Council, and I call upon the distinguished members of the Security Council to vote in favor of our full membership," Abbas said, hoping it did not have to wait long for the application to be approved. "I also appeal to the States that have not yet done so to recognize the State of Palestine."

Any application is considered by the Council, which decides whether or not to recommend admission to the 193-member General Assembly, which has to adopt a resolution for the admission of any new Member State.

During his address to the Assembly, Abbas also said that Israeli Government policies were responsible "for the continued failure of the successive international attempts to salvage the peace process."

In addition, he cited the construction of settlements in the West Bank, the refusal of permits for Palestinians to build in East Jerusalem, and the extensive number of military checkpoints limiting Palestinian movement and the ongoing blockade of the Gaza Strip as examples of such policies.

"All of these actions taken by Israel in our country are unilateral actions and are not based on any earlier agreements. Indeed, what we witness is a selective application of the agreements aimed at perpetuating the occupation," Abbas stated.

Over the past two years, Abbas went on, Palestinian authorities have worked hard to implement a program of building up State institutions, as well as strengthening civil society, increasing government accountability and promoting the participation of women in public life.

Meanwhile, the Middle East Quartet – a diplomatic grouping bringing together the UN, the European Union, Russia and the United States – is scheduled to hold a meeting at UN Headquarters to discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2011-09-24

[up-country_sinclair]

This isn't over yet, but it was a great day for justice, human rights, and peace.

The Israel problem is not going to end with an extremist like Netanyahu in power. Therefore, this would be a great opportunity for the Israeli people rise up and demand a new way forward that will lead to peace.

[Steely Dan]

This isn't over yet, but it was a great day for justice, human rights, and peace.

The Israel problem is not going to end with an extremist like Netanyahu in power. Therefore, this would be a great opportunity for the Israeli people rise up and demand a new way forward that will lead to peace.

With democracies you vote, no 'rising up' needed.

[up-country_sinclair]

^

Of course you know that's what I meant. But in what proponents of current Israeli policy must see as truly discouraging times, I can understand how one would need to claim even the most minor of to 'victories'.

The Israeli people need to rise up and demand elected leaders who can find a new way forward. The current govt. is beholden to the most radical hard liners, and have put a barricade in front of any path towards peace.

The Israel problem will never be solved with extremists like Netanyahu dictating policy.

Edited September 24, 2011 by up-country_sinclair

[Steely Dan]

All your bombastic distortions ignore the fact that this charade has nothing whatsoever to do with bilateral negotiations. The Palestinians as did the rest of the Arab world opposed the UN partition plan in 1947 and to this day the Palestinians refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state as that would have implications on the so called 'right of return', which is essentially slow jihad versus the quick jihad, and the quick option will only be tactically put aside if the slow one remains.

http://www.hudson-ny.org/2419/un-vote-on-palestine-will-set-back-peace

If the General Assembly recognizes Palestine as a state without the need to negotiate with Israel, it will, in effect, be undercutting many of its own past resolutions, as well as many bilateral agreements reached between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Such recognition would set back the prospects for a negotiated peaceful resolution and would encourage the use of violence by frustrated Palestinians who will gain nothing concrete from the U.N.'s hollow action but will expect much from it.

[chuckd]

^

Of course you know that's what I meant. But in what proponents of current Israeli policy must see as truly discouraging times, I can understand how one would need to claim even the most minor of to 'victories'.

The Israeli people need to rise up and demand elected leaders who can find a new way forward. The current govt. is beholden to the most radical hard liners, and have put a barricade in front of any path towards peace.

The Israel problem will never be solved with extremists like Netanyahu dictating policy.

It wouldn't hurt the situation if the Palestinians also rose up and demanded their leadership find a new way forward. The current government is beholden to their outside leaders, Iran and Syria.

Edited September 24, 2011 by chuckd

[up-country_sinclair]

this charade has nothing whatsoever to do with bilateral negotiations.

If it was a charade, why did Netanyhu travel to the UN to personally speak against it? If it truly were a charade then an extremist like Netanyahu would have stayed home and ignored it. If it was a charade, why was Israel ferociously lobbying nearly every nation to abstain from voting? Because he (and everyone else) knows what this resolution means: It will be on record that the overwhelming majority of the world's nations support Palestinian statehood, and with non-member observer status, Palestine will be able to bring Israel in front of the International Criminal Court to answer for their acts of unbridled aggression.

And secondly, of course this resolution has nothing to do with bilateral negotiations. Why do you feel so inclined to state the obvious? Israel had its chance to engage in sincere negotiations, but chose instead to continue building illegal settlements. Bilateral talks can begin anew on a more level playing field very soon.

to this day the Palestinians refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state

To this day?

Netanyahu is the very first prime minister to introduce this sort of toxic rhetoric into the negotiations. Please stick to the facts.

And this underlines my previous point. Netanyahu has no interest in moving the peace process forward and the Israel problem will never be solved with him at the helm.

[Ulysses G.]

Israel had its chance to engage in sincere negotiations, but chose instead to continue building illegal settlements.

As opposed to shooting rockers at innocent men, women and children instead of negotiating - like Hamas.

Edited September 24, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Steely Dan]

If it was a charade, why did Netanyhu travel to the UN to personally speak against it? If it truly were a charade then an extremist like Netanyahu would have stayed home and ignored it. If it was a charade, why was Israel ferociously lobbying nearly every nation to abstain from voting? Because he (and everyone else) knows what this resolution means: It will be on record that the overwhelming majority of the world's nations support Palestinian statehood, and with non-member observer status, Palestine will be able to bring Israel in front of the International Criminal Court to answer for their acts of unbridled aggression.

And secondly, of course this resolution has nothing to do with bilateral negotiations. Why do you feel so inclined to state the obvious? Israel had its chance to engage in sincere negotiations, but chose instead to continue building illegal settlements. Bilateral talks can begin anew on a more level playing field very soon.

to this day the Palestinians refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state

To this day?

Netanyahu is the very first prime minister to introduce this sort of toxic rhetoric into the negotiations. Please stick to the facts.

And this underlines my previous point. Netanyahu has no interest in moving the peace process forward and the Israel problem will never be solved with him at the helm.

What utter nonsense. You vastly overstate the significance of Palestinians being able to have access to international courts to prosecute Israeli leaders. Firstly it cuts both ways as Hezbollah in Lebanon are now finding out with some of their members indited by the Hague over the murder of Rafiq Harriri. Secondly the realpolitik of the situation is that nobody who counts will be interested in prosecuting Israelis under such legislation as it would set a precedent where their own dirty laundry would be aired. Read the following, slowly.

http://www.slate.com/id/2304407/

The recent history of the ICC suggests that diplomatic and political realities are more important than ICC membership in prompting such indictments. The Goldstone Report on the Gaza War, for example, accused both Israel and Hamas of serious war crimes, but this was not acted on by the ICC. Opposition came not only from traditional defenders of Israel like the United States and France, but also from Russia and China, who were worried about the potential precedent regarding the behavior of military forces acting against guerrillas or insurgents in heavily populated areas.

Of course Netanyahu showed up, in doing so he at least had his point of view entered into the record and he yet again offered talks without preconditions to Abbas who yet again refused.

As for your hollow and false claims that this is a victory for freedom and democracy consider what sort of state Palestine would be. Judenrein, racist, with a law based on Sharia. So bang goes freedom for women gays, bang goes equality for all other faiths, yes we know about it being free of Jews already but the Christians are being driven out in their droves as well. What do you say to that, some freedom eh?

Here is a great article incidentally which absolutely demolishes the Palestinian case.

http://www.hudson-ny.org/2442/united-nations-palestine

To summarize, the new Palestinian state will be a genuine apartheid state. It will practice religious and ethnic discrimination, it will have one official religion and it will base its laws on the precepts of one religion. Imagine what the status of gays will be under Sharia law!

[Pakboong]

All your bombastic distortions ignore the fact that this charade has nothing whatsoever to do with bilateral negotiations. The Palestinians as did the rest of the Arab world opposed the UN partition plan in 1947 and to this day the Palestinians refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state as that would have implications on the so called 'right of return', which is essentially slow jihad versus the quick jihad, and the quick option will only be tactically put aside if the slow one remains.

http://www.hudson-ny.org/2419/un-vote-on-palestine-will-set-back-peace

If the General Assembly recognizes Palestine as a state without the need to negotiate with Israel, it will, in effect, be undercutting many of its own past resolutions, as well as many bilateral agreements reached between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Such recognition would set back the prospects for a negotiated peaceful resolution and would encourage the use of violence by frustrated Palestinians who will gain nothing concrete from the U.N.'s hollow action but will expect much from it.

When Harry Truman recognized Israel in 1948, he lined through Jewish State. I am sure his objection was a first amendment one but none the less, he refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/truman_stateofisrael_2.jpg

Technically, Palestine does not have a status which allows them to recognize or reject an existing state. They must be politically equal which they are not at this point in time.

[Ulysses G.]

As for your hollow and false claims that this is a victory for freedom and democracy consider what sort of state Palestine would be. Judenrein, racist, with a law based on Sharia. So bang goes freedom for women gays, bang goes equality for all other faiths, yes we know about it being free of Jews already but the Christians are being driven out in their droves as well. What do you say to that, some freedom eh?

There is little doubt that any Palestinian Arab state would adopt Sharia law and be used as a military base against Israel.

When Jordan controlled these areas, the Jordanian government made them Judenrein—Jews could not pray at the Western Wall, visit the Jewish Quarter, or have access to Hebrew University. There is no reason to believe that a Palestinian state would treat Jews any differently if they were to maintain control over these areas.

An Apartheid, Islamic, Judenrein Palestine on the 1967 borders is a prescription for disaster. That is why a reasonable Palestinian state must be the outcome of negotiations with Israel, and not the result of a thoughtless vote by the United Nations. http://www.hudson-ny.org/2442/united-nations-palestine

[up-country_sinclair]

Of course Netanyahu showed up, in doing so he at least had his point of view entered into the record

Hold on.

What did you refer to this resolution as earlier? Oh yes, that's right, "a charade".

So your position is that he traveled all the way to NY to have his view entered into the record---for a charade. You do realize of course that Israel has a ambassador to the UN?

If he simply wanted his view on the record, any number of Israeli diplomats could have entered it quite effectively. Netayahu personally went to NY because he fears this vote and he was trying to apply pressure to other nations to abstain. But it was clearly a wasted trip. An article in Politico this morning noted the thunderous applause for Abbas and the only people clapping for Netanyahu were the Israeli delegation and a handful of spectators in the gallery. Ouch.

The world is finally ready to deal with the Israel problem, and Netanyahu will try anything to derail it.

he yet again offered talks without preconditions

I beginning to think that you don't know what the expression "without preconditions" means.

Netanyhu does, but he was simply lying.

[Ulysses G.]

What did you refer to this resolution as earlier? Oh yes, that's right, "a charade".

So your position is that he traveled all the way to NY to have his view entered into the record---for a charade.

He went to New York to OBJECT to the charade. Surely you can figure that out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PJaETP-8F8

Edited September 24, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[maidu]

I'd be interested to know China's thoughts about the Palestinian bid. From what I've observed of how the Beijing politburo thinks, I can see them being of two minds about it.

Privately, they don't like the 'Member State' application, as it stirs up their fears of Tibet doing the same.

On the one hand, they will probably support the maneuverings of the West Bank president because China likes how the US is isolating itself on this issue. Similarly, China will vote with the majority so it will appear chummy to all the countries which it wants to get contracts with (for their raw materials).

However, if Tibetans ever even hinted at doing the same, there is no doubt China would come down like a million iron fists and kill or jail any Tibetans daring to speak about getting their sovereignty back.

Edited September 24, 2011 by maidu

[pbay]

A very good day for the Palestinians. Abbas got a standing ovation and the Israeli prime minister got slight clapping with the one guy clapping really loud to try and make it seem there were more of them supporting him. His speech was the same old tripe he has been trotting out for years and I found it very very funny to watch him struggle thru it. Anyway the Palestinians have handed in their letter for recognition but as we all know the Americans will veto it which is good as it shows the entire world what the Americans are really like,if they did not know already.Very embarrassing for them. It does not matter if the Americans veto it as the Palestinians can go to the General Assembly and get advanced observer status in a vote that no one can veto and they can win.When they get that they can go to the World courts with their cases against Israel and that is what the Israelis and Americans do not want. Israel WILL BE held to account. The Israelis have had decades of having it all their own way but that is coming to an end.

Well done Abbas,he withstood all the threats from the Americans and Israeli and went for it. Good work.

Edited September 24, 2011 by pbay

[geriatrickid]

A very good day for the Palestinians. Abbas got a standing ovation and the Israeli prime minister got slight clapping with the one guy clapping really loud to try and make it seem there were more of them supporting him. His speech was the same old tripe he has been trotting out for years and I found it very very funny to watch him struggle thru it. Anyway the Palestinians have handed in their letter for recognition but as we all know the Americans will veto it which is good as it shows the entire world what the Americans are really like,if they did not know already.Very embarrassing for them. It does not matter if the Americans veto it as the Palestinians can go to the General Assembly and get advanced observer status in a vote that no one can veto and they can win.When they get that they can go to the World courts with their cases against Israel and that is what the Israelis and Americans do not want. Israel WILL BE held to account. The Israelis have had decades of having it all their own way but that is coming to an end.

Well done Abbas,he withstood all the threats from the Americans and Israeli and went for it. Good work.

Correction: It was a partial standing ovation. Many countries' delegates stayed in their seats with grim faces. In respect to the possible US veto, other seucrity council members are counting on it. as it means they can make their PC polictically expedient statements and let the US take the heat for doing their dirty work. Neither China nor Russia want to encourage the creation of new Islamic states. They have a bigger political crisis in their own countries with that issue. As for France and Great Britain, they will make political statements to appease their powerful minority groups and secretly hope the motion doesn't carry. Columbia may abstain simply because Canada has put alot of pressure on it not to vote yes and needs Canadian support for the free trade agrement(s) with the USA and Canada. Other countries with a vote have been lobbied hard by some EU countries to abstain. The back toom politicking involves more than the USA but sees some unexpected countries vacilate. India is one of them. If India abstains, then it will earn a favour from the west in its struggle against Pakistani supported terrorist attacks. On the other hand, some Indian diplomats are infected with western notions that if they play nice with the arabs, the arabs will pressure Pakistan to behave. Lots and lots of horse trading going on, none of which concerns itself with the benefit of the Palestinian arabs. Once again, they are pawns in international geo politics.

[pbay]

Correction: It was a partial standing ovation. Many countries' delegates stayed in their seats with grim faces.

You must have been watching a different version to the one broadcast by the UN then. He got a standing ovation and the people who were not standing were also clapping him,the only ones not clapping seemed to be the Americans and Israeli delegation.

[Jingthing]

A very good day for the Palestinians. Abbas got a standing ovation and the Israeli prime minister got slight clapping with the one guy clapping really loud to try and make it seem there were more of them supporting him. His speech was the same old tripe he has been trotting out for years and I found it very very funny to watch him struggle thru it. Anyway the Palestinians have handed in their letter for recognition but as we all know the Americans will veto it which is good as it shows the entire world what the Americans are really like,if they did not know already.Very embarrassing for them. It does not matter if the Americans veto it as the Palestinians can go to the General Assembly and get advanced observer status in a vote that no one can veto and they can win.When they get that they can go to the World courts with their cases against Israel and that is what the Israelis and Americans do not want. Israel WILL BE held to account. The Israelis have had decades of having it all their own way but that is coming to an end.

Well done Abbas,he withstood all the threats from the Americans and Israeli and went for it. Good work.

Agreed, it was a good DAY for Abbas and a bad time for Israel.

Yes, the crowd response to Abbas was very good as expected.

Many delegations stood and clapped, many sat and clapped, some just sat. It was clearly a mix in the coverage I saw.

The USA will indeed veto in the security council if necessary to stop it. The clear hope is that a veto can be avoided and that outcome remains very possible.

However, the USA continues to sincerely desire a real two state solution. What is less clear is whether the leadership of Israel and the leadership of the Palestinian people (that includes HAMAS) want that as well. We know for a fact HAMAS does NOT want that.

As far as why there is still not a two state solution there, there is plenty of blame to go around.

[Jingthing]

When Harry Truman recognized Israel in 1948, he lined through Jewish State. I am sure his objection was a first amendment one but none the less, he refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/truman_stateofisrael_2.jpg

Technically, Palestine does not have a status which allows them to recognize or reject an existing state. They must be politically equal which they are not at this point in time.

I suggest everyone actually READ the link you directed us to. It is clear that the document was edited. The first paragraph refers to a Jewish state. The second one edits out Jewish state and replaces with the NAME of the Jewish state, ISRAEL. Otherwise, Jewish state would have been mentioned twice, and the actual NAME of the new nation would not have been mentioned. To recognize a new nation, any editor would be sure to include the NAME of the new nation. Your assumption that there was some kind of American-centric imposition on recognizing the world's only Jewish state just based on the edit of that document is extremely doubtful. If Truman wanted to make it clear that he objected to the Jewish state part, he would have edited the Jewish state language from the first paragraph.

Your second point is simply absurd. Abbas is presenting himself as a legitimate authority of a Palestinian government (even though that is rather a lie when you consider Hamas is not on board). If the Palestinians could unify, they could produce an acceptable recognition proclamation for Israel. That they can't has never been their excuse anyway. That is fictional. They simply are not WILLING to accept an Israel that includes dropping their demand for right of return for Palestinians.

Edited September 24, 2011 by Jingthing

[wellred]

So if this goes ahead will all the would be suicide bombers call it a day? If so then bring it on.

[Jingthing]

So if this goes ahead will all the would be suicide bombers call it a day? If so then bring it on.

That's an odd statement. Since Israel built the big wall there has been a dramatic decrease in suicide bombers. As far as current events, assuming Palestine gets the UN status upgrade (not statehood) the people there will wake up the next day and NOTHING will have changed in their lives. So there is definitely going to be an increased risk of Palestinian violent unrest against Israel. If they are smart they will be nonviolent.

[Ulysses G.]

Correction: It was a partial standing ovation. Many countries' delegates stayed in their seats with grim faces.

You must have been watching a different version to the one broadcast by the UN then.

What a surprise that is - imagine that, the UN being dishonest about Israel - again. The version I saw also had many delegates sitting down and looking disgusted at this attempted lynching of the only real democracy in the region.

Edited September 24, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[johna]

Israel had its chance to engage in sincere negotiations, but chose instead to continue building illegal settlements.

As opposed to shooting rockers at innocent men, women and children instead of negotiating - like Hamas.

1000+ dead Israelis, 7000+ dead Palestinians over the last 10 years

looks to me as if Israel is doing a lot more shooting than the Palestinians.

[Ulysses G.]

Maybe the Arabs should stop attacking and provoking them.

[johna]

As for your hollow and false claims that this is a victory for freedom and democracy consider what sort of state Palestine would be. Judenrein, racist, with a law based on Sharia. So bang goes freedom for women gays, bang goes equality for all other faiths, yes we know about it being free of Jews already but the Christians are being driven out in their droves as well. What do you say to that, some freedom eh?

There is little doubt that any Palestinian Arab state would adopt Sharia law and be used as a military base against Israel.

When Jordan controlled these areas, the Jordanian government made them Judenrein—Jews could not pray at the Western Wall, visit the Jewish Quarter, or have access to Hebrew University. There is no reason to believe that a Palestinian state would treat Jews any differently if they were to maintain control over these areas.

An Apartheid, Islamic, Judenrein Palestine on the 1967 borders is a prescription for disaster. That is why a reasonable Palestinian state must be the outcome of negotiations with Israel, and not the result of a thoughtless vote by the United Nations. http://www.hudson-ny.org/2442/united-nations-palestine

What complete and utter rubbish.

[geriatrickid]

Correction: It was a partial standing ovation. Many countries' delegates stayed in their seats with grim faces.

You must have been watching a different version to the one broadcast by the UN then. He got a standing ovation and the people who were not standing were also clapping him,the only ones not clapping seemed to be the Americans and Israeli delegation.

Let's watch a Russian TV newscast that described it as a standing ovation shall we? At 1.32, we have images of the standing ovation. Look closely. The countries standing are Lebanon, Kuwait. Now look across the asile. No one is standing. Then look to more crowd shots at 2.08. More uncomfortable sitting, particularly from some African countries. Because the arab block and its muslim nation allies along with bastions of human rights like Venezuala and Cuba enthusiastically applauded does not mean everyone else did.

This brings to mind the old Soviet era parades where everyone gave a standing ovation lest they get sent to the gulag.

Sorry but the embrace was not from everyone. Restraint was shown by multiple western, African and Latin American countries. Not everyone is getting onboard the bandwagon of lunacy.

This goes far beyond statehood for the arabs. it calls into question many countries ongoing border conflicts and territorial disputes. Africans have a lot to worry about. India with its illegal occupation of Kashmir has a lot to worry about. China with its annexation of Tibet has a lot to worry about. Russia with its simmering muslim nationalist movements and ongoing terrorism has lots to worry about. Thailand should be concerned as the land it seized at the turn of the last century wants its independence too,

[maidu]

If you want to gauge popularity by the amount of clapping, the early days of the Nazi Party, Syria's Bashar Assad, and Kiss would all get high approval rating.

I personally admire Mr. Netanyahu. He's in a small country, surrounded by people who swear oaths to destroy it and its people. His generation and their fathers fought several recent wars and won them all, yet only took a small amount of the territory they could have taken from those victories. Plus, they didn't banish or destroy the vanquished - as their neighbors would have done if the tables had been turned.

[Wallaby]

Correction: It was a partial standing ovation. Many countries' delegates stayed in their seats with grim faces.

You must have been watching a different version to the one broadcast by the UN then. He got a standing ovation and the people who were not standing were also clapping him,the only ones not clapping seemed to be the Americans and Israeli delegation.

Let's watch a Russian TV newscast that described it as a standing ovation shall we? At 1.32, we have images of the standing ovation. Look closely. The countries standing are Lebanon, Kuwait. Now look across the asile. No one is standing. Then look to more crowd shots at 2.08. More uncomfortable sitting, particularly from some African countries. Because the arab block and its muslim nation allies along with bastions of human rights like Venezuala and Cuba enthusiastically applauded does not mean everyone else did.

This brings to mind the old Soviet era parades where everyone gave a standing ovation lest they get sent to the gulag.

Sorry but the embrace was not from everyone. Restraint was shown by multiple western, African and Latin American countries. Not everyone is getting onboard the bandwagon of lunacy.

This goes far beyond statehood for the arabs. it calls into question many countries ongoing border conflicts and territorial disputes. Africans have a lot to worry about. India with its illegal occupation of Kashmir has a lot to worry about. China with its annexation of Tibet has a lot to worry about. Russia with its simmering muslim nationalist movements and ongoing terrorism has lots to worry about. Thailand should be concerned as the land it seized at the turn of the last century wants its independence too,

You are suggesting the nations that do not give a standing ovation disagree with Abbas. Is that how you judge whether countries agree with what is being said?

Ok, what is the standing ovation count when Netanyahu spoke?

At least the Palestinians stayed when Netanyahu spoke, I believe certain Israelis walked out before Abbas had spoken a word. How juvenile of them. How can they expect to give a considered explanation of what happened when they refuse to listen, and then have the nerve to say they want direct negotiations. While that is happening build a few more settlements to ensure they have what they want.

[Ulysses G.]

The Palestinian Arabs were violating a treaty that they signed with Israel by trying to do an end around negotiating with Israel about a state. Why wouldn't they walk out on Abbas?

Edited September 25, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

Obama should put it to an American citizen vote before committing to a jewish lobby that which is not likely the choice of the American people.

Horse manure.

63% of Americans support Israel over the Palestinian Arabs and only something like 2% of Americans are Jews.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/126155/support-israel-near-record-high.aspx

Edited September 25, 2011 by Ulysses G.