Posted by Curt on 5 June, 2008 at 8:26 pm. 10 comments already!


Just more evidence that this man is an inexperienced rube. Yesterday at AIPAC he tried to act the tough guy and said the following:

“Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided,”

Well, seeing as how the US position on this issue for years has been….no position really. Other then insisting on the two parties work it out themselves. You can see how this got him into some hot water:

Facing criticism from Palestinians, Sen. Barack Obama acknowledged today that the status of Jerusalem will need to be negotiated in future peace talks, amending a statement earlier in the week that Jerusalem “must remain undivided.”


Obama quickly backtracked today in an interview with CNN.

“Well, obviously, it’s going to be up to the parties to negotiate a range of these issues. And Jerusalem will be part of those negotiations,” Obama said when asked whether Palestinians had no future claim to the city.

Both sides are just a bit pissed:

Many on the right of the political spectrum among America’s Jews welcomed Obama’s remarks at AIPAC, but the clarification of his position left several cold.

“The Orthodox Union is extremely disappointed in this revision of Senator Obama’s important statement about Jerusalem,” said Nathan Diament, director of public policy for the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations. He had sent out a release Wednesday applauding Obama’s Jerusalem remarks in front of AIPAC.

“In the current context, everyone understands that saying ‘Jerusalem… must remain undivided’ means that the holy city must remain unified under Israeli rule, as it has been since 1967,” Diament explained.

“If Senator Obama intended his remarks at AIPAC to be understood in this way, he said nothing that would reasonably lead to such a different interpretation.”

Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America and another Jewish activist who had originally lauded Obama’s statement, now called the candidate’s words “troubling.”

“It means he used the term inappropriately, possibly to mislead strong supporters of Israel that he supports something he doesn’t really believe,” Klein charged.


And some groups were pleased by the clarification on Jerusalem provided by the campaign.

“There was reaction from some of our base who were taken aback by it and thought he was undermining the peace process,” said Americans for Peace Now spokesman Ori Nir, who described his organization as “gratified” by the clarified position which seems to follow APN’s policy that sovereignty of Jerusalem could be shared in a final peace settlement.

No experience in foreign policy, diplomacy, and very little experience as a legislator…, you Democrats can pick em’ huh? He does give a damn spiffy speech tho. In a empty suit.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x