Top Menu

The Kind of Stupidity That Fuels Anti-Americanism: US Ambassador Objects to “State of Palestine” Placard

ScreenShot2012-12-02at2.55.12PM

Many cry, “why do they hate us?” and so we reach, once again, the intersection between anti-Americanism and Islamophobia.

Well, when the whole world recognizes Palestine except for the USA it increases the perception that the US is opposed to justice and peace and will continue with a policy of supporting the punishment, disenfranchisement and violence perpetrated upon an occupied people.

US Ambassador objects to “State of Palestine” placard in Security Council’s Mideast debate

(via. Washington Post)

UNITED NATIONS — U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice objected Wednesday to the Palestinians’ latest bid to capitalize on their upgraded U.N. status when their foreign minister spoke at the Security Council while seated behind a nameplate that read “State of Palestine.”

It was the first Palestinian address to the Security Council since the U.N. General Assembly voted overwhelmingly on Nov. 29 to upgrade the Palestinians from U.N. observer to non-voting member state.

Rice said that the United States does not recognize the General Assembly vote in November “as bestowing Palestinian ‘statehood’ or recognition.”

“Only direct negotiations to settle final status issues will lead to this outcome,” Rice said.

“Therefore, in our view, any reference to the ‘State of Palestine’ in the United Nations, including the use of the term ‘State of Palestine’ on the placard in the Security Council or the use of the term ‘State of Palestine’ in the invitation to this meeting or other arrangements for participation in this meeting, do not reflect acquiescence that ‘Palestine’ is a state,” she added.

Canadian Ambassador Guillermo E. Rishchynski also complained later that allowing the Palestinians to sit behind the “State of Palestine” nameplate “creates a misleading impression” and said Canada would oppose the Palestinians’ attempts to upgrade their status in symbolic ways.

The U.N. General Assembly vote to upgrade the Palestinians’ status was important because it gave sweeping international backing to their demands for sovereignty over lands Israel occupied in 1967, including east Jerusalem. But it did not actually grant independence to the 4.3 million Palestinians who live in the West Bank, east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.

In his speech to the Security Council, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Malki reiterated the Palestinian position that a two-state solution be based on the pre-1967 borders.

He also said that if Israel proceeds with plans to build settlements on a contentious tract of land east of Jerusalem, the Palestinians will file a case in the International Criminal Court.

Read the rest…

 

, , , , , , , , , ,

  • Pingback: Anti americanism | Zwazwa

  • AM24

    Are you really a professor or a internet zionist with an Arabic name?

  • Nur Alia binti Ahmad

    In the law, a person who leaves behind property while fleeing a danger zone, such as a natural disaster or war, or is in clear danger of being caught in a place where his life is in dager does not lose his property.
    So…the ‘right to return’ is a legal term, which means the people who thought they were in immediate danger of losing thier lives left the danger area, and have the ‘LEGAL right to return’ to the property they left behind.
    Now…unless you are claiming that ‘Israel’ (the political entity) would ‘cease to exist’ because people who legally have the right to return to thier homes are not Jewish (either ethnicly or religiously) would ruin the intention of the Zionists (to create a non diverse population of Jews, whether ethnically or religously) then you are right.
    The notion that you claim by your statement is probably right as well. That the Zionists (those who intend to make Israel a non diverse political entity for Jews) will not live in peace, and treat those who do not fit into the utopian intention equally.
    This is the REASON the people who left thier property are refused by force the ‘LEGAL right to return to thier homes.
    However, what I stated was this. The WORLD has never endorsed the right of a political entity (a state) over the right of individuals (Palistinians, or Israelis, or Arabs, or Jews, or Christians…etc) to define themselves.

  • Nur Alia binti Ahmad

    Susan Rice should live in America 100 years ago….just like she is now. A time when her fellow countrymen decided by law that she was only three fifths of a woman.

    Funny how struggles for human rights, and people sacrificing thier time, thier treasure, and sometimes thier lives for her as a Black woman to have the posistion she has, and Ms Rice to use it to purposefully deny the human dignity to call themselves what they want.

    Sort of like ‘Never Again’ kind of went wrong here too.

    Oh and, this recognising Israel thing…
    The world has NEVER recognised the right of ANY state to exist over and above the right of the individual…NEVER. Yes, Israelis have the right to exist…within the legal borders of Israel.

  • Nur Alia binti Ahmad

    Sam…

    Susan Rice should live in America 100 years ago….just like she is now.

    Funny how struggles for human rights, and people sacrificing thier time, thier treasure, and sometimes thier lives for her as a Black woman to have the posistion she has, and Ms Rice to use it to purposefully deny the human dignity of thier name to another.

    Sort of like ‘Never Again’ kind of went wrong here too.

  • mindy1

    Good god, the debates should be more substantive than that D:

  • Sam Seed

    “Well, when the whole world recognizes Palestine except for the USA”….I wonder why that is? Susan Rice should live as a Palestinian for a day (in Palestine) and see the reality.

Powered by Loon Watchers