support for disclosure legislation. this battle is ultimately going to be won. it may take some time but it is going to be won. i will give you one salient reason why it is going to be won. new york times and cbs did a poll. 90% of americans said it was important to require outside spending groups to disclose how much they have raised, where the money came from and how it was used. that is the poll that got 92% on a public policy issue. please let me know. the american people will not stand for secret money controlling their lives. their opposed to it.

republicans and democrats and independents and conservatives and liberals. this fight will be won. ced will play a pivotal role. we greatly appreciate ced. we love working with you and are glad to be back in battle with you. [applause] >> i want to thank ced for the chance to speak to you. as barbara mentioned political contributions are only one element of any public policy advocacy program. we are very aggressive in communicating our position and developing our position and communicating them with legislators and on major policy issues developing innovative

solutions that create win/win solutions for stakeholders. our commitment to transparency and political spending began six years ago. i have to credit bruce freed, an excellent lobbyist on this issue. we have a couple years of issues being debated on transparency. we oppose the first one and the second one and really opposed it on the basis of the administrative cost of disclosing it and the fact that all of our contributions were already disclosed to state authority but we were convinced that is a pretty lame argument for not disclosing and the fact

that these expenditures are disclosed doesn't mean that you are not spending elsewhere in terms of spending that is not required to be disclosed. we disclose our political spending and give contributions through political action committee which fund voluntary contributions from employees as well as corporate political contributions that the state level where that is required. since then on our web site on an annual basis we disclosed those contributions to candidates and groups like republican or democratic governors' association, any ballot initiatives we may be involved in. since then i view our program at the work in progress. always learning and trying to improve what we do and have extended that on a global basis

and report any political contributions made in non u.s. countries. we also agreed to disclose data semi-annual basis because one criticism was if you are disclosing which we had been doing for the calendar year in the first quarter of lot of time has gone by and folks were not able to see what the pattern was so we're doing it now on a semiannual basis and have agreed to archive the data where we have it so that someone could go back in time and look at the contributions. transparency is only part of a process of trying to create accountability. we have a fairly rigorous process by which we make decisions on political contributions that involve the

cross functional committee led by the general council which we feel is important to have the legal oversight and to insure appropriateness and another area that was talked about which we recently made a decision after the u.s. supreme court decision we made a commitment not to contribute to any judiciary election at the state level either supreme court level or underneath that on the basis we may have court cases coming dubee for those courts and would be inappropriate to have contributed to judges as far as the goal of having the courts remain in -- impartial. on citizens united we don't think citizens united will have an impact even before mccain

feingold we did not give money to any political parties. the only thing we did do was contributed to republican and democratic governors association and earmark that spending for administrative purposes but did not give democratic party or republican party so the fact that mccain feingold restraints were removed will not affect our decision. we have a statement on our web site that if we ever do give corporate contributions 501 c 4s were disclosure is not required we made a commitment that we would disclose that contribution whether those committees disclose them or not.

we have evolved the process to impart our experience to other companies while recognizing it is up to every company to decide what makes sense for them. i do co-chair with dan cross from microsoft's conference board polity and with that i welcome any questions. >> you want to anchor? >> my colleague use the word lobbyist and miami lobbyist. the utility company in columbus, ohio has operations in 11 states. i tell you that because as a holding company we were regulated under the public utility holding company act of 1935. that was a result of a scandal in the 30s in the roosevelt administration. as a corporation we were

prohibited from spending corporate money on political action. that was changed in 1992. we didn't realize how lucky we were between 1935-1936. eight tp adopted reforms in our back. i was the last lobbyist for all concerned. i missed the plane and missed the car but it is a better system today in that it is more rigorous in asking people to operate and make a judgment in where we make political contributions. it also helps build support because they're more knowledgeable how government

works. we have seven operating companies and there are judiciary -- one state regulator, public utility commission is elected. we grappled how to approach those issues. it is a case of something we watched with an instance in ohio where there was a significant effort moving forward to change the makeup of the supreme court. we have evolved like the other two companies, agree on transparency. i spend a lot of time with members of congress and at fund-raisers with members of congress. one thing that picked up recently is members are more concerned about the amount of

money to protect themselves. there are probably extremes on either side for raising these committees and the fact that you don't necessarily have to determine who has contributed but quite frankly it is causing greater fracturing in how members operate and how much time to dedicate to fund raising and it undermines the progress we need to make in washington and it is clear we have a lot of progress we need to make. why don't i stop here? >> great place to stop because i want to start with a question along those lines. i am so dependent on my blackberry so i hid it so it won't bring up here. what i was wondering, i will put this to the three practitioners

who are up here. how has life changed? how much pressure are you under from outside groups to give money? lift the veil a little bit and educate the rest of us on how is your life different? >> mine hasn't changed. i run hour operation at the state level, state government relations and have not had any requests. >> is that because your company have a policy? >> probably does. to the extent we haven't done that in the past is true. i can't comment on our washington office. i didn't pose that question before coming here. i think probably the fact that

they know -- generally opposed to using corporate funds for federal political offices they are not be seeking as with requests. >> how about you? your company is politically engaged. >> we are. we also have a policy we didn't mention and put in place policy of expenditures. we have not been similarly inundated with requests as well that i know of and i would hope i would know some because they ask if it is something we could or could not do. the landscape has not changed for us. >> it is occurring in states where you have a battle of the budget between municipal units

or state unions. there was a lot of money that went in from organized labor and a counter push back. we are a company with organized labor and work closely so it is complicated. but that is where we're seeing it. >> you are under pressure in ohio to give -- most of you already know the fight over a state law that was passed that curtail collective bargaining rights for state employees and trying to put it on the ballot to have it overturned so there's money on both sides but were you under pressure from both sides? >> we were contacted by both sides. >> how much was this an education for publicly owned

companies? >> the target experience with a major eyeopener for a lot of companies. it was a big risk for companies to go public with an independent expenditure and our decision to put in the policy that we put in place. you have your ceo say i've voted for or against x candidate. not a place the company will feel comfortable. not many companies will feel comfortable playing it. i don't think you will see a lot of companies playing it. >> what little glimpse we got are mostly privately held. but we don't know what about the money out there and to the

donors are. what was distributed to date is one of the most illuminating numbers of the top ten spenders in the last cycle only three exposed who their donors were. will take a scandal to follow this? >> we're going to get a scandal. we are eventually going to get huge scandals but i would point out a couple things. i think what barbara just said is correct. i think the stakes on this are worthwhile for major companies to go out and make independent expenditures. there are many other factors involved. the problem is if you can do this in directly and secretly the stakes start to disappear.

disclosure is simply about letting people know what is going on. as long as we have avenues for secret money we are going to have problems and companies face real pressures. one of the biggest things that happened with the money system was among other things companies and individuals got tired of being shaken down. it is the total shakedown system and the pressures are also there if your competitors are going to give. it is a vicious, not a virtuous cycle. >> you mentioned earlier the secrecy that might give comfort to corporations that that is a false promise. you don't think it will hold.

you think eventually it will crumble. >> you have to be guarded in making any prediction but the spread of the web based community, the hacker community, no one is safe. if there is an eruption of the kind of resentment, malefactors of great wealth, that term was used in the nineteenth century, has been apparently in the riots in the u.k. or even in the arab spring. we are very insulated from most of that. everyone in this room is insulated from these things. we may be surprised. this is one of the reasons it is so troubling to see the growth

of enterprises going private. they insulate themselves from accountability and they have willing partners in this exit from the public sector and the public view and investment bankers. i take it this is another target to get at. the investment of private transactions. this is another challenge. you already have yours. the idea is this going private is a serious challenge to the disclosure regime we badly need. one of the things fred touched on or made a small gesture toward is the role this has been high class black male of less well to do enterprises. once the dominant player in your

industry buys the playing field you are at a huge disadvantage to provide the start of competition, the kind of new ideas in enterprise that this country have long depended on. i said i was a naive idealist about much of this. i still am. i think this is one of the reasons it is important to take up the offensive against all these contributions because they emphasize the power of money and not productivity. this whole focus on giving and you listen to these numbers that have been used, that fred is familiar with and bruised talked-about you don't know the half of it. let me finish this sentence. this issue of how you find out

what is going on that battles me and i defer to everybody but especially fred and bruce to help us figure out how much money is being spent on campaign contributions that might legitimately go to creating enterprise and keeping it here for jobs and well-being of families and neighborhoods. >> sorry i interrupted your thought but it triggered a question for me to ask our three corporate wraps. he raised the point about there's some level that these donations ultimately -- i want to ask what the effect was as you made your decisions and more specifically the corporate competition. in western kenya there were

active coal companies. i wonder if you have seen this internal corporate stress this opening up of political landscape matter at all? >> in regard to whether something was confidential i was taught that in dealing with other folks i can keep a secret. i am not sure about the people i tell. nothing is confidential in washington. you need to go into it knowing it will be discovered. it is a fact of life. in regard to west virginia obviously in reading the case it was a commercial issue. one company wanted to take over another and that was what happened in that circumstance.

companies will try to use the political process to their commercial advantage. when you try to disguise that you will be found out. honesty is the best policy. another thing i was told when i started lobbying is tell the up side of your argument explain what the other side will say to the downside of your argument. that is an effective way of gaining trust. the idea of embracing transparency. >> on the first point that is an excellent point. you have to assume the information at some point will come out if you plan on staying in your job along while you might assume it is coming out. that is a factor.

another advantage of transparency is the discipline it creates. when you know it will see the light of day on your web site. it certainly adds some discipline to the process. we have not really done contributions in terms of competition with other members of the industry. >> tony stole my notes. i don't have much to add to the question. i would be reiterating what they said. in terms of our decisionmaking of the fact that it comes to light -- let's go this way because it may come out. it is not a mind set of hours so

the answer is no. transparency is part of our culture. it works into everything. all of our decisionmaking the. >> ten minutes left. i want to open it up to the audience. there's a new rookie with a rookie question. [inaudible] almost all corporations are members of trade associations, regular members and contributors -- one of the features of the current lack of disclosure and political spending is you have c

6s and c 4s spending money on political activities. that is not their major purpose. if you including your disclosure policies and policies concerning political spending contributions and how that fits in. >> part of our disclosure is trade associations where is 100,000 or more. we request from them specifically every year information to post on our web site the amount of the dues spent on political activity. we ask that they give us that information. some do and some don't. the one that do we post with other information.

that is the extent of our disclosure in terms of trades. we have and extended that to other organizations. just with our membership organizations so far. >> we have done the same. we posed for trade associations $25,000 or above. that portion of our dues used for political expenditures. but that data doesn't break down. it doesn't break down what it is used for. we don't have access to that data. i would say the issue of trade association is something with respect to our transparency policy that is under review and what we should do in that area. >> we report we received from the trade association. >> congressman jim moody is with

us. you want to offer any comments or raise questions? >> from the point of view of someone at the other end. >> go ahead and join us in that chair. >> just a couple points. i was on the way from a number of terms. we received a lot of what we are talking about. i saw a lot of it first hand. something that got taken into account is some rivals for the house or the senate, private money is a huge element. there was $3 million on the table. lord nelson never spent more than $400,000 and bills than $200,000 and shook every hand in

wisconsin. personal money put pressure on the member to take outside money. that is that point remember and also the most precious commodity member has is time. you can go home and shake hands or take money. you can never shaking of hands to overcome a millionaire with no personal money. if you have your usual group of supporters it won't be enough. if someone wants to take you out or you are convening the same district. personal wealth is on the mind of a member. think about these as you put together a package. i coauthored state legislative

races -- when i ran for congress by was very lucky. i only had to win the primary. with open season and eight people jumped in. and knocked on 20,000 doors and won the primary. i was an economics professor. it is contingent -- it is different. money has a huge role in some districts. those issues are very much personalized to the member. your time constraint puts tremendous pressure and taking money. >> you tried to accommodate other legislation. the courts have been hostile. are there ways the issue could be incorporated in a package? >> the only way to deal with that is through some form of

what mr. kangas mentioned. matching funds. small contributions. the internet has enormous potential bringing vast numbers of citizens and providing some balance to all of the big money over the wealthier money. ..

>> you can't depend on it and you certainly can't be sure that everything is going to come out. so with all due respect to the future of a world of wikipedia, we will continue to press until we get legislation that requires any entity that wants to make independent expenditures to disclose who's putting up the money. that is just a cardinal rule. it's the basic rule when you start looking at the role of the money in politics. citizens have a right to know, and this extremely conservative on campaign finance issues, supreme court, recognize without having any problem at all. >> just another point. i'm on the board of something

called global organization parliamentarian's against corruption, a canadian organization but it's now a number of countries that have chapters. it's picking up a lot of steam. people around the world realize this is an issue but to look to the united states as a model. you think we have problems, you should look at problems in other countries. >> that was a point that landon was making earlier. there's another question, allow him to close with some observations. and on that point, american world leaders. >> it is hard to talk about being a world leader if you're concerned about making payroll and producing quote, shareholder value, end quote. and so why i acknowledged fred's point about wikipedia, and it's wonderful we got to mention it three times in the same talk, fred, but it is clear that disclosure is not timely.

what all of us are talking about is timely transparency, something that makes it possible for decision-makers of every sort, shareholders, government leaders, to have information on a timely basis. as to the origin of contributions and the amount of contributions. had to summarize the ideas that came from the work. they are included in the pampas, the brochures you have at your table. it's important that those be given attention. it's important that they be given feedback, that they generate feedback because this is a work in progress, not only for disclosure but meaningful disclosure. and there are so many distinctions here between private and nonprivate, between monopoly or oligarchic industries where the whole issue

for the corporation, even if publicly held, is so different. it's a different because of the point that has been addressed your to some extent, the difference between public and nonpublic enterprises. so, my own view is this is hugely important to those of us who believe that what made this country great was a system of enterprise generation, enterprise regeneration, all kinds of innovations that come from such, such even a chaotic ground for business and enterprise formation and activity. and money corrupts that creativity, corrupts that fertility. and we have to find a way to either stop it, get a handle on it, or make sure it is -- its

disclosure disables its harmful effects. and in that respect, i am respectful of everything all of you are doing, to include greater disclosure but also we have to continue to collaborate, whether it's with our congressman who is saying something important coming from offshore from canada, this is a very important initiative that people offshore see this as important to i don't know whether there's any such group in russia or in the former east bloc countries, or any arab states, but it's that kind of thing that if we can all encourage together to build a global commitment to disclosure and transparency, it will all work to the global marketplace we live in. thanthank you very much. >> and we will allow the last word, congressman. >> thank you. remember, public is really angry in the current situation. the public is furious, and they're open to changes.

and remember the search for term limits a couple years ago? that was a product of people being angry at a much less level than that. this is a key moment to do something to push forward on this and really publicize what we are doing. thank you. >> thank you, and thank you all. [applause] >> before we adjourned i'd like to make a few points. first, i'd like to thank our moderator, jeanne cummings, and also our panelists, and once again ed kangas and landon rowland. i want to close with four brief points. first, i'd like to salute the company that are here with us today. i like to salute which were doing and your commitment to transparency and disclosure. [applause] and also want to point out that ced is fortunate to have excellent leadership from each of your companies. i think pfizer with hank and

fred, mark, and now your current ceo has been a long friend, a longtime friend, equally committed to ethics. research on the board of the ethics forum center a number of years ago. and, finally, mike morris, the ceo of american electric power is going to be co-leading our work on energy policy a long with fred smith from fedex. so thanks to each of you for what you're doing, your leadership. second point, this issue came up a couple times in conversation. i think tony raised a. if members of congress feel that they have now to raise more money to protect themselves from outside groups, at the same time they say they don't like a system, why don't they fix it? they can do it. they can do it immediately. third point, ced is back in again. as fred mentioned. and we're going to look forward to continuing and deepening the relationship we have with each

other partners that we've had for many, many years. and forth, what are we going to do about it? first we're going to continue the campaign around the company, excuse me, around the country. we want more companies to do exactly what these three leading company's are doing and i would point out that the statement that charles made about no money going to state courts, that is extremely important. if more companies in this country would just say no to putting money into state judicial elections we would be much better off and safer as a country. my final point, and this is a message to journalists, to jeanne and her colleagues in any who may be in the room are watching. we heard a lot about money coming into the system, about a doubling an increasing. the journalists and political scientists follow this issue can do us all a favor, they can start ask the question, where is this money going?

fortunately, fred, it's not going directly to the politicians. it is going to a cottage industry that has grown up around the system which frankly stands in a way of reform. these are good people. they raise money. they place ads and buy time. they do all sorts of things, but i suspect by the time we get to the 2012 election and the billion or more dollars, i think the american people be fed up with the amount of money that basically buying ads, and boring them. so do the journalists and political scientist, start asking the question now, where's the money going? help identify this cottage industry which frankly is one of the impediments to reform. on that point on behalf of ced i would like to thank all of you for joining us, and we are adjourned. [applause] >> should always start with the assumption that when a politician or a ceo is saying

something, they're not telling you the truth. they may be telling you the truth, but the burden should be on them to prove it. >> he's an eagle scout, held a brief stint as editor, produce three of the top 10 grossing documentaries of all time. and also a best selling author. 's latest a memoir is here comes trouble. sunday on in depth your chance to call, e-mail and tweet michael moore live at noon eastern on book tv on c-span2. >> now get regular updates with c-span now on twitter. get tweets once now with quick program information including which events are live and links to help you watch. is easy to sign up. go to twitter.com/c-span now. >> the u.n. security council this morning will consider a

palestinian request to be recognized as an independent state. their application was submitted last friday. that they palestinian president mahmoud abbas address the u.n. general assembly. we'll also show you israeli president benjamin netanyahu's speech from later that day. this is an hour and 20 minutes. [speaking i[speaking in native ] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: my sincere, to

the government and people of south sudan for its deserve it admission as a full member of the united nations wishing them progress and prosperity. i also congratulate the secretary-general, his excellency, mr. ban ki-moon for his election to a new term at the helm of united nations. this renewal of confidence reflects the world's appreciation for his efforts which have strengthened the role of the united nations. excellencies, the question of palestine is intricately linked with the united nations by the resolutions but its various agencies and to the essential and largest role of the united nations relief and works agency

for palestine refugees in the near east which embody the international responsibility towards the plight of palestine refugees who are the victims of the catastrophe that occurred in 1948, we aspire for and seek a greater and more effective role for the united nations in working to achieve a just and comprehensive peace in our region that ensures the inalienable, legitimate national rights of the palestinian people as defined by the resolutions of international legitimacy of the united nations. mr. president, ladies and gentlemen, a year ago, at this same time, and in this hall, distinguished

leaders address the stalled peace efforts in our region. everyone had high hopes for a new round of final status negotiations, which had begun in early september in washington under the direct auspices of president barack obama and with participation of the quartet, and with egyptian and jordanian participation, to reach a peace agreement within one year. we entered those negotiations with open hearts and attentive ears and sincere intentions, and we were ready with our documents, papers and proposals. but the negotiations broke down just weeks after their launch. after this, we did not give up and did not cease our efforts

for initiatives and contacts. over the past year we did not leave a door to be knocked or channel to be tested or path to be taken and we did not ignore any formal or informal party of influence and stature to be addressed. we positively considered the various ideas and proposals and initiatives presented from many countries and parties. but all of these sincere efforts and endeavors undertaken by international parties were repeatedly wrecked by the positions of the israeli government, which quickly dashed the hopes raised by the launch of negotiations last september. the core issue here is that the

israeli government refuses to commit to terms of reference for the negotiations that are based on international law and united nations resolutions, and that it frantically continues to intensify building of settlements on the territory of the state of palestine. settlement activities embody the core of the policy of colonial military occupation of the land of the palestinian people and all of the brutality of aggression and racial discrimination against our people that this policy entails. this policy, which constitutes a breach of international humanitarian law and united nations resolutions, is the primary cause for the failure of the peace process, the collapse of dozens of opportunities, and

the burial of the great hopes that arose from the signing of the declaration of principles in 1993 between the palestine liberation organization and israel to achieve a just peace that would begin a new era for our region. the reports of united nations missions as well as by several israeli institutions and civil societies convey a horrific picture about the size of the settlement campaign, which the israeli government does not hesitate to boast about and which it continues to execute through the systematic confiscation of the palestinian lands and the construction of thousands of new settlement units in various areas of the west bank, particularly in east

jerusalem, and accelerated construction of the annexation wall that is eating up large tracts of our land, dividing it into separate and isolated islands and cantons, destroying family life and communities and the livelihoods of tens of thousands of families. the occupying power also continues to refuse permits for our people to build in occupied east jerusalem, at the same time that it intensifies its decades-long campaign of demolition and confiscation of homes, displacing palestinian owners and residents under a multi-pronged policy of ethnic cleansing aimed at pushing them away from their ancestral homeland. in addition, orders have been

issued to deport elected representatives from the city of jerusalem. the occupying power also continues to undertake excavations that threaten our holy places, and its military checkpoints prevent our citizens from getting access to their mosques and churches, and it continues to besiege the holy city with a ring of settlements imposed to separate the holy city from the rest of the palestinian cities. the occupation is racing against time to redraw the borders on our land according to what it wants and to impose a fait accompli on the ground that changes the realities and that is undermining the realistic potential for the existence of the state of palestine.

at the same time, the occupying power continues to impose its blockade on the gaza strip and to target palestinian civilians by assassinations, air strikes and artillery shelling, persisting with its war of aggression of three years ago on gaza, which resulted in massive destruction of homes, schools, hospitals, and mosques, and the thousands of martyrs and wounded. the occupying power also continues its incursions in areas of the palestinian national authority through raids, arrests and killings at the checkpoints. in recent years, the criminal actions of armed settler

militias, who enjoy the special protection of the occupation army, has intensified with the perpetration of frequent attacks against our people, targeting their homes, schools, universities, mosques, fields, crops and trees. today they killed one palestinian who was peacefully protesting. despite our repeated warnings, the occupying power has not acted to curb these attacks and we hold them fully responsible for the crimes of the settlers. these are just a few examples of the policy of the israeli colonial settlement occupation, and this policy is responsible for the continued failure of the

successive international attempts to salvage the peace process. this policy will destroy the chances of achieving a two-state solution upon which there is an international consensus, and here i caution aloud, this settlement policy threatens to also undermine the structure of the palestinian national authority and even end its existence. in addition, we now face the imposition new conditions not previously raised, conditions that will transform the raging conflict in our inflamed region into a religious conflict and a threat to the future of a

million and a half palestinians, citizens of israel, a matter which we reject and which is impossible for us to accept being dragged to. all of these actions taken by israel in our country are unilateral actions and are not based on any earlier agreements. israel has reestablished the administrative and military authority in the west bank with unilateral decisions, and decided that its military authorities are the ones that determine the right of any of the citizens on whether to resign -- reside in any area of palestinian land. and israel is the one that this dives to confiscate our land and our water and to obstruct our movement as well as the movement

of goods, unilaterally. and yet they speak of unilateralism. despite our agreements, and these agreements were good unilateral and individual actions. ladies and gentlemen, in 1974 our deceased leader came to this hall and assured -- [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: and he assured the members the general assembly of our a from purdue the pursuit for peace. he urged the united nations to realize inalienable national rights of the palestinian people.

and he said, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. in 1988, president arafat again addressed the general assembly which convened in geneva to hear him. there he submitted the palestinian peace program, adopted by the palestine national council held that same year in algeria. when we adopted this program, we were taking a painful and very difficult step. for all of us. especially those, including myself, who were forced to leave their homes and their towns and their villages, caring only some of our belongings, and our grief and our memories, and the keys

to our homes into camps of exile and diaspora in the 1948. in one of the worst operations of operating destruction and removal of a vibrant and cohesive society, that had been contributing in a pioneering and leading way, and cultural, educational and economic renaissance of the arab middle east. yet because we believe in peace and because of our conviction and international legitimacy, and because we have the courage to make difficult decisions for our people, and in the absence of absolute justice we decided to adopt the pack of relative justice, justice that is possible, a chassis that could correct part of the great

historical injustice committed against our people. the us, we agreed to establish a state of palestine on only 22% of the territory of historical palestine. on all the palestinian territory occupied by israel in 1967. we, by taking that historic step, which was welcomed by the state of the world, made a major concession in order to achieve a historic compromise that would allow peace to be made in the land of peace. in the years that followed, from the madrid conference and the washington negotiations, the oslo agreement which was signed 18 years ago, in the white house garden, and was linked with the letters of mutual recognition,

mutual recognition between the palestine liberation organization and israel, we persevered and acted positively and responsibly with all efforts aimed at the establishment of a lasting peace agreement. yet as we said earlier every initiative in every conference and every new round of negotiation and every movement was shattered on the rock of the israeli settlement expansion project. mr. president, ladies and gentlemen, i confirm on behalf of the palestine liberation organization the sole legitimate representative of the palestinian people which will remain so until the end of the conflict in all its aspects and until the resolution of all

status issues i affirm the following. number one, the goal of the palestinian people is a realization of the enable national rights and independent state of palestine with east jerusalem as its capital on all the land of the west bank, including east jerusalem and the gaza strip with israel occupied in the june 1967 war in conformity with the resolutions of international legitimacy and with the achievement of a just and agreed upon solution to the palestine refugee issue in accordance with resolution 194, stipulated in the arab peace initiative which presented the consensus arab and islamic vision to resolve the core of the arab-israeli conflict and to achieve a just and comprehensive peace that we are committed to and work towards.

to this we adhere, and achieving this decide peace also requires a release of kashmir release of political prisoners and business of freedom, and palestinian detainees in israeli prisons without delay. number two, the palestine liberation organization and the palestinian people adhere to the announcement of violence and rejection and condemnation of terrorism in all its forms, especially state terrorism, especially state terrorism and the terrorism by settlers. and we adhered to all agreements signed between the plo and israel. third, we adhere to the option

of negotiating a lasting solution to the conflict in accordance with resolutions of international legitimacy. here i declared that the plo is ready to return immediately to the negotiating table on the basis of the adopted terms of reference based on international legitimacy and a complete cessation of settlement activity. fourth, our people will continue their popular peaceful resistance to the israeli occupation. we continue the popular peaceful resistance to the israeli occupation and its settlement and apartheid policy, and its construction of racist annexation wars. and they received support for the resistance which is consistent with international humanitarian law and international convention, and

has the support of peace activists from israel and around the world. reflecting an impressive, inspiring and courageous example of the strength of this defenseless people, armed only with their dreams, courage, hope, and slogans in the face of bullets, tanks, teargas and bulldozers. six, when we bring our plight and the case to the international podium, it is a confirmation of our reliance on the political and diplomatic option, and is a confirmation that we do not undertake unilateral steps. our efforts are not aimed at isolating israel or delegitimizing it. rather, we want to gain legitimacy for the cause of the people of palestine.

we only in two we legitimize the settlement activities, the occupations and apartheid and the logic of fruitless force and we believe that all the countries of the world stand with us in this regard. i am here to say on behalf of the palestinian people, and the palestine liberation organization, we extend our hands to the israeli government and the israeli people for peacemaking. i say to them, let us urgently build together a future for our children where they can't enjoy freedom, security and prosperi prosperity. let us build the bridges of dialogue instead of checkpoints and walls of separation. let us build cooperative relations based on equity and

friendship between two neighboring states, palestine and israel, instead of policies of occupation, settlements, war and eliminating the other. mr. president, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, despite the unquestionable right of our people to self-determination and to the independence of our state, as stipulated in international resolution, we have accepted in the past few years to engage in what appeared to be a test of our worthiness, entitlement and eligibility. during the last two years, our national authority has implemented a program to build our state institutions. despite the extraordinary situation and the israeli occupancy on us, a serious extensive project was launched that has included the implementation of plan to enhance and advance the

apparatus for the maintenance of order and security, the development of administrative, financial and oversight systems, of creating the performance of institutions, and enhancing self-reliance in order to reduce the need for foreign aid. with the thankful support of arab countries and donors from friendly countries, a number of large infrastructure projects have been implemented, focused on various aspects of services with special attention to world and marginalized areas. in the midst of this project, we have been strengthening what we saw the be the future of our state. our future state.

from the preservation of security for the citizens and public order, to the promotion of the judicial authority and the rule of law, strengthening the role of women, legislation allows and participation, to ensuring the protection of public freedoms and strengthening the role of civil society institutions, to institutionalizing rules and regulations for ensuring accountability and transparency in the work of our ministries and departments, to entrenching the pillars of democracy as the basis for the palestinian political life. when divisions struck the unity of our homeland, our people and our institutions, we were determined to adopt a dialogue for the restoration of our unity. we succeeded months ago in achieving national reconciliation. and we hope that its implementation will be

accelerated in the coming weeks. the pillar of this reconciliation was to turn to the people through legislative and presidential elections to be conducted within a year. because the state we want will be a state characterized by the rule of law, the exercise of democracy, and the protection of freedoms and equality of all citizens without any discrimination and the transfer of power through the ballot box. the reports issued recently by the ad hoc liaison committee, the united nations, the world bank, and the international monetary fund, we believe have confirmed and lauded what has been accomplished and have considered it a remarkable and

unprecedented model. the consensus conclusion of the ad hoc liaison committee of donor countries a few days ago, here in the city, describe what has been accomplished as quote, a remarkable international success story, unquote. and confirmed the palestinian people and the institution for the immediate independence of the state of palestine. that was the statement of the international community. i cannot believe that anyone with a shred of can't such passion a shred of conscience can reject our application for a full membership in the united

nations and our admission as independent state. [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: mr. president, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, it is no longer possible to redress the issue of the blocked horizon of the peace talks with the same means and methods that have been repeatedly been tried and proven unsuccessful over the past year. the crisis is far too deep to be affected, and it is far more dangerous to be simply circumvented or its explosion performed -- postpone.

it is neither possible, nor practical, nor acceptable to return to conducting business as usual, as if everything is fine. it is futile to go into negotiations without clear parameters and in the absence of credibility and a specific timetable. negotiations will be meaningless as long as the occupation army on the ground continues to entrench its occupation, instead of rolling it back, and continues to change the demography of our country in order to create a new basis on which to alter the borders. this is totally unacceptable. [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: ladies and gentlemen, this is a moment of

truth. our people are waiting to you the answer of the world. will it allow israel to continue the last occupation in the world? we are the last people to remain under occupation with the world, allow israel to occupy us for ever and will it allow israel to remain a state above the law and accountability? will it allow israel to continue rejecting the resolutions of the security council and the general assembly of the united nations, and the international court of justice and the positions of the overwhelming majority of countries in the world? is this acceptable? mr. president, the heart of the crisis in our area is very, very simple and obvious. either there is those who believe that we are an

unnecessary people, unwanted people in the middle east, or those who believe that, in fact, there is a missing state that needs to be established immediately. [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: mr. president, ladies and gentlemen, i come before you today from the holy land, the land of palestine, the land of divide messages, from the prophet mohammed, peace be upon him and the birthplace of jesus christ, peace be upon him. to speak on behalf of the palestinian people in the homeland and in the diaspora. to say after 63 years of suffering of an ongoing tragedy, enough, enough, enough. [applause]

[speaking in native tongue] >> translator: it is time for the palestinian people to gain their freedom and independence. the time has come to end the suffering and the blight of millions of palestinian refugees in the homeland and the diaspora, to end their displacement and to realize their rights, some of whom were forced to take refuge more than once in different places of the world. at a time when the arab people affirmed their quest for democracy in what is called to the arab spring, the time has come also for the palestinian spring, a time for independence. [applause] he. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: the time has come for our men and women and children to live normal lives.

for them to be able to sleep without waiting for the worst the next day will bring, from others to be assured that their children will return home without threat of being killed, arrested or humiliated. for students to be able to go to their schools and universities without checkpoints of instructing them. the time has come for sick people to be able to reach hospitals normally, and for our farmers to be able to take care of their good land without fear of the occupation seizing their land and water, which the war prevents access to. or the fear of the settlers. with their guard dogs. who attacked the palestinians. they build on our land their

homes and uprooted and burned all the trees that it existed in palestine for hundreds of years. the time has come for the thousands of prisoners of conscience the freedom to be released, to return to the families and their children, to become a part of building their homeland for the freedom of which they have sacrificed so much. might people decide to exercise their right to enjoy a normal life, like the rest of humanity. they believe in what was said, standing here -- standing here, staying here, permanently, eternal here, and we have one goal, one goal, one goal, to be,

and we shall be. [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: ladies and gentlemen, we profoundly appreciate and value the positions of all states that have supported our struggle and our rights, and recognize the state of palestine following the declaration of independence in 1988, as well as the countries that have recently recognized the state of palestine, and those that have -- the representation, i also, the secretary-general mr. ban ki-moon who said a few days ago a word of truth. that the palestinian state should have been established years ago.

be assured that their support for our people is more valuable to them than you can imagine. for, for someone that is listening to their narratives and that, and does not try to ignore the tragedy and the horrors of the occupation from which they have so suffered. and it enforces their hope that extends from the belief that justice is possible. for the loss of hope is the most ferocious in any of peace, and the state is the strongest ally of extremism. i say the time has come for my courageous and proud people, after decades of displacement and colonial occupation and

since the suffering, to live like other people of the earth, free in a sovereign and independent homeland. mr. president, i would like to inform you that before delivering this statement, i come in my capacity as president of the state of palestine, and chairman of the executive committee of the palestine liberation organization, submitted to his excellency, mr. ban ki-moon, secretary-general of the united nations, an application for the admission of palestine on the basis of the borders of june 4, 1967, as a full member of the united nations.

[applause] [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: this is a copy of the application. [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: 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. i also, have not yet done so, to recognize the state of palestine. ladies and gentlemen, the support of the countries of the world for our endeavor is a victory for truth, freedom, justice, law and international legitimacy. and it provides tremendous support for the peace option and enhances the chances of success of negotiations. excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, your support for the establishment of the state of palestine, and for its admission to the united nations as a full member is the greatest contribution to peacemaking in the land of peace, and

throughout the world. mr. president, i have come here today carrying a message from a courageous and proud people. palestine is being reborn. this is my message. may all the people of the world stand with the people of palestine as it marches steadfastly disappointment with history with freedom, with independence right now. and i hope that we shall not wait for long. thank you all. [applause] >> i invite him to address the general assembly. thank you, mr. president.

ladies and gentlemen, israel has extended its hand in peace from the moment it was established 63 years ago. on behalf of israel and the jewish people, i extend that hand again today. i extend it to the people of egypt and jordan, with renewed friendship for neighbors with whom we have made peace. i extend it to the people of turkey, with respect and good will. i extend it to the people of libya and tunisia, with admiration for those trying to build a democratic future. i extend it to the other peoples of north africa and the arabian peninsula, with whom we want to forge a new beginning.

i extend it to the people of syria, lebanon and iran, with awe at the courage of those fighting brutal repression. but most especially, i extend my hand to the palestinian people, with whom we seek a just and lasting peace. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, in israel our hope for peace never wanes. our scientists, doctors, innovators, apply their genius to improve the world of tomorrow.

our artists, our writers, enrich the heritage of humanity. now, i know that this is not exactly the image of israel that is often portrayed in this hall. after all, it was here in 1975 that the age-old yearning of my people to restore our national life in our ancient biblical homeland, it was then that this was braided -- branded, rather -- shamefully, as racism. and it was here in 1980, right here, that the historic peace agreement between israel and egypt wasn't praised.

it was denounced. and it's here year after year that israel is unjustly singled out for condemnation. it's singled out for condemnation more often than all the nations of the world combined. twenty-one out of the 27 general assembly resolutions condemn israel, the one true democracy in the middle east. well, this is an unfortunate part of the un institution. it's the theater of the absurd. it doesn't only cast israel as the villain, it often casts real villains in leading roles. gadhafi's libya chaired the un commission on human rights.

saddam's iraq headed the un committee on disarmament. you might say that's the past. well, here's what's happening now, right now, today. hezbollah-controlled lebanon now presides over the un security council. this means, in effect, that a terror organization presides over the body entrusted with guaranteeing the world's security. you couldn't make this thing up. so here in the u.n., automatic majorities can decide anything. they can decide that the sun sets in the west or rises in the west. i think the first has already been pre-ordained. but they can also decide -- they have decided that the western wall in jerusalem, judaism's holiest place, is occupied

palestinian territory. and yet even here in the general assembly, the truth can sometimes break through. in 1984 when i was appointed israel's ambassador to the united nations, i visited the great rabbi of lubavich. he said to me -- and ladies and gentlemen, i don't want any of you to be offended because from personal experience of serving here, i know there are many honorable men and women, many capable and decent people serving their nations here. but here's what the rabbi said to me. he said to me, you'll be serving in a house of many lies. and then he said, remember that even in the darkest place, the light of a single candle can be seen far and wide.

today i hope that the light of truth will shine, if only for a few minutes, in a hall that for too long has been a place of darkness for my country. so as israel's prime minister, i didn't come here to win applause. i came here to speak the truth. [applause] the truth is, the truth is that israel wants peace. the truth is that i want peace. the truth is that in the middle east at all times, but especially during these turbulent days, peace must be anchored in security. the truth is that we canno achieve peace through u.n. resolutions, but only to direct

negotiations between the parties. the truth is that so far the palestinians have refused to negotiate. the truth is that israel wants peace with a palestinian state, but the palestinians want a state without peace. and the truth is you shouldn't let that happen. ladies and gentlemen, when i first came here 27 years ago, the world was divided between east and west. since then the cold war ended, great civilizations have risen from centuries of slumber, hundreds of millions have been lifted out of poverty, countless more are poised to follow, and the remarkable thing is that so far this monumental historic shift has largely occurred peacefully. yet a malignancys