Libya, Palestinian Statehood to Top UN General Assembly Agenda

[Supersedeas]

Source: Voice of America

<<The question of U.N. membership for a Palestinian state will dominant the conversation during the 66th annual session of the General Assembly. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas will deliver his application on Friday, when he is also expected to address the assembly.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is leading the way, along with the U.S., to block Palestinian efforts for membership. He will take the podium Friday following Abbas.>>





Read more: http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Libya-Palestinian-Statehood-to-Top-UN-General-Assembly-Agenda-130196568.html

---

Susan Rice's job just got a lot more interesting. How will she justify her 'no' vote on Palestinian statehood?

[DissedByBush]

1. No because

Israel at least works with us, while the Palestinians hate us?

They were dancing in the streets on 9/11.

[cpwm17]

3. Yes, because it's the right thing to do

Starting with Truman in 1948, the US has been severely abusing the Palestinians. The US has financed, armed, and given political cover to allow Israel to commit its slow genocide against the Palestinians.

You saw a video with a small number of Palestinians allegedly celebrating some pay back, and now you think they're the bad guys - as if history started with that celebration.

OK, here's a solution: a few Israelis were picked up and held by the FBI for their suspicious, joyful celebration on 9-11. This was on US soil over looking New York City after they saw the first plane hit the World Trade Center. Now both the Israelis and the Palestinians have a few citizens that have bad character. Let's call it even and do the right thing.

[JDPriestly]

2. Palestine needs to comply with UN Resolution 181 of 1947

The terms for its recognition as a separate country and for an economic union between the Jewish State of Israel and Palestine are clearly set forth there. They are sensible and fair, and both sides should respect and comply with them:

. . . .

Freedom of conscience and the free exercise of all forms of worship, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, shall be ensured to all.

No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants on the ground of race, religion, language or sex.

All persons within the jurisdiction of the State shall be entitled to equal protection of the laws.

. . . .

No expropriation of land owned by an Arab in the Jewish State (by a Jew in the Arab State)(4) shall be allowed except for public purposes. In all cases of expropriation full compensation as fixed by the Supreme Court shall be said previous to dispossession.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace%20Process/Guide%20to%20the%20Peace%20Process/UN%20General%20Assembly%20Resolution%20181

It's a good plan, and I will wager that the people who want to rewrite it because they think it was not fair to non-Jewish residents of the area will be surprised if they really read the Resolution. Why Palestine didn't like the terms of that Resolution is beyond me.

[cpwm17]

4. It should be obvious why they didn't like it

Why anyone can't understand that fact is beyond me. The Arabs were the big losers, and it was entirely unfair. Nobody, anywhere in the world would accept such conditions.

If the Jews would have abided by the resolution, the Arabs would become second-class citizens on 54% of historic Palestine, which included much of the best land. The native Palestinians owned 94% of the land, they were the natives, and they were the majority.

It was the Jews in 1947 that started an ethnic cleansing campaign against the Palestinians in an attempt to control it all. After the ethnic cleansing campaign stated, the Arab neighbors intervened. That is how the Palestinians retained the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, until 1967, when Israel started another war and occupied the remainder of Palestine. Israel is in violation of the original (and illegal) resolution, not the Palestinians.

[oberliner]

5. The Palestinians retained the West Bank and the Gaza Strip until 1967?

Are you serious?

[cpwm17]

6. I know, Jordan had the West Bank, and Egypt the Gaza Strip

my wording was a little inaccurate in that part, and I'm perfectly aware that there was no independent Palestine before Israel invade and took control. They lived like many other peoples of the world without democracies, but far better than what was to become (though the Gaza Strip always sucked after Israel chased them off their lands in 1947 and 1948, creating over crowded refugee camps and ghettos). Israel made things much worse for the Palestinians, confiscating their lands and creating an Apartheid state in the occupied territories.

[oberliner]

8. I don't know that the Palestinians were much better off under British or Ottoman rule

Certainly, under Jordanian rule, the situation for the Palestinians was pretty unpleasant - no moves towards establishing independence.

As you point out, there has never been an independent Palestinian state.

Let's hope that is coming to an end in the not so distant future!

[JDPriestly]

10. The area was a British Protectorate at the time.

Prior to that it had been part of the Ottoman Empire -- Turkey.

Three states were carved out. One of them, Jordan, is also a home to Palestinians.

The area carved for Israelis was very small. And since the establishment of Israel, Jews have been expelled or made to feel extremely insecure in other parts of the Arab world in which they had lived, often for many centuries.

I ask again whether you have actually read the 1947 Resolution. There are a lot of good things in there. If the two sides started to negotiate based on that Resolution -- acknowledging the rights of each other set forth in that Resolution 181, I think that peace would be possible.

[Violet_Crumble]

7. That's a non-binding GA Resolution that partitioned Palestine

Whoevers told you that the partition plan must be enforced to the letter many decades later is very wrong. I mean it'd be clear to anyone looking at it that anyone claiming the Palestinians must comply with it mustn't think there was any need for Israel to do so because what's set out in he map to become Israel is a lot smaller than Israel was when it declared statehood.

Do you support the creation of a Palestinian state?

[JDPriestly]

9. I support two states living in harmony, each enforcing agreed limitations

on its own citizens. The two sides need to negotiate more sincerely.

The 1947 Resolution is a good starting place especially with regard to establishing ground rules about the rights of all citizens in the area. Obviously, the parties need to negotiate land for peace, land for internal law enforcement. Neither side should be lobbing the other with bombs and rocks, etc. If the state of Arizona lobbed the state of California with junk and bombs or allowed bulldozers or terrorists to go into the other state and wreak havoc, no one would feel safe in either state.

There is no excuse for the stalemate in the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis. Palestine needs to recognize the existence of Israel as a Jewish State, and Israel needs to recognize the existence of Palestine as a Palestinian state. They need to establish the economic union planned in 1947. They need to insure education for every child as planned in 1947.

UN recognition of a Palestinian State is useless unless Palestine can get along with Israel. To get along with Israel, Palestinians have to be realistic. Nationalism will not necessarily feed your family. The Palestinians need the Israelis and vice versa. The sooner both sides admit that the better.