|
... more
The Deception Surrounding the "Jerusalem Bill"
Summary ... The problem is that everybody wants to apologize for Bush even though he specifically says that he will not change the policy on Jerusalem or that he is dedicated to a 'Palestinian' state in the midst of Israel.
On September 30, 2002, U.S. President George W. Bush signed the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for fiscal year 2003. The bill provides $8.6 billion in funding for the State Department for the fiscal year 2003. This includes funding that President Bush needs to use for operations around the globe.
Included in the bill were several provisions regarding Jerusalem. The Foreign Relations Authorization Act (H.R. 1646) includes the following provisions (Sec. 214, 215):
The Congress maintains its commitment to relocating the United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and urges the President, pursuant to the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, to immediately begin the process of relocating the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
No funds may be spent on the U.S. consulate in Jerusalem, which deals mostly with Palestinian issues, until the post comes under the supervision of the U.S. ambassador to Israel. Currently, the U.S. consul general in Jerusalem reports directly to the State Department.
All federal documents listing countries and their capitals must identify Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
American citizens born in Jerusalem can demand that U.S. government-issued documents, such as passports and birth certificates, identify Israel as their birthplace.
The Secretary of State is to report to Congress within 60 days on U.S. efforts to ensure and promote Israel's full participation in the world diplomatic community.
What Bush did was sign the bill but disregarded all the items pertaining to Jerusalem. Following is the excerpt on Jerusalem from President Bush's 30 September statement [distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State]. Pay particular attention to the last sentence.
[--- begin excerpt ---]
"I have today signed into law H.R. 1646, the 'Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003.' This Act authorizes appropriations, and provides important new authorities, for diplomatic and related activities of the U.S. Government. Many provisions in the Act will strengthen our ability to advance American interests around the globe, including nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and to meet our international commitments, including those to the United Nations. Regrettably, the Act contains a number of provisions that impermissibly interfere with the constitutional functions of the presidency in foreign affairs, including provisions that purport to establish foreign policy that are of significant concern?
Section 214, concerning Jerusalem, impermissibly interferes with the President's constitutional authority to conduct the Nation's foreign affairs and to supervise the unitary executive branch. Moreover, the purported direction in section 214 would, if construed as mandatory rather than advisory, impermissibly interfere with the President's constitutional authority to formulate the position of the United States, speak for the Nation in international affairs, and determine the terms on which recognition is given to foreign states. U.S. policy regarding Jerusalem has not changed."
[--- end excerpt ---]
Quoting from a press release from the State Department: "Noting that the section calling for U.S. recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital interferes with his constitutional authority, the President said he would consider such provisions to be 'advisory,' rather than 'mandatory.'"
I am not sure if there is any precedent for a U.S. president signing a bill whereby he accepts part of it but waves off that which does not suit his agenda. While one part of it is a recommendation, the other parts are clearly mandated by Congress, which can be overridden only by a presidential veto of the entire bill. It would then have to be rewritten, eliminating those clauses, and passed by the House and Senate before being signed by the president. This is the main reason that unpopular items are attached as amendments to other bills. Mr. Bush has, in fact, created a line-item veto.
The ridiculous part of this whole fiasco is that many people believe that he didn't really mean it and that a bill regarding Jerusalem was passed and signed by the president. An "Action Alert" sent out by the National Unity Coalition for Israel states: "Thank the President and Congress for passing the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, regarding the status of Jerusalem. President Bush must understand that with his signature this has become the law of the land and is not 'advisory only', as he mistakenly stated."
The fact is that he really did mean it. He even said that he meant it. He did not make a mistake. The problem is that everybody wants to apologize for Bush even though he specifically says that he will not change the policy on Jerusalem or that he is dedicated to a 'Palestinian' state in the midst of Israel.
Deception is not pretty. It takes two to create a deception: one who puts forth the deception and one who is willing to accept the deception without being discerning.
[ Published: October 6, 2002 ]
In Depth Analysis
Where is Palestine?
Where, exactly, might another Palestinian state arise? "Another," because Jordan, constituting two-thirds of Mandatory Palestine, with a "Palestinian" majority population, already is a de facto Palestinian state. And although several international documents clearly state the boundaries of Israel, Netanyahu seems more than happy to change them and give land to Israel's sworn enemies.
Israeli Attack on Iran Won't Follow the American Script
Since Israel's exact capabilities are known only to a handful of senior government officials, it's impossible to predict exactly what an Israeli strike against Iran would look like. But based on past experience, one can confidently predict that it won't resemble the US blueprint. Israel is quite capable of dealing with situations with its limited resources and without provoking massive retaliation.
Is the Peace Treaty Between Israel and Egypt Finished?
The deterioration in relations between Israel and Egypt should serve as a reminder to all that the new generation in the Arab world is not marching toward moderation, particularly when it comes to making peace with Israel or even recognizing its right to exist.
Emet Blog
Benzion Netanyahu and the All Important UN Clause to Save the Jewish State
Benzion Netanyahu, (father of the current Israeli prime minister) who recently died in Jerusalem at the age of 102, along with Irgun activist Peter Bergson (nephew of Mandatory Palestine Chief Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook), and liberal US Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, drafted an article for inclusion in the United Nations Charter that could yet save the Jewish state. Benzion helped to write the fundamental principle of Zionism — the right of Jewish settlement throughout the Land of Israel — into the United Nations Charter.
Bin Laden Lessons for Israel
The US assassinated bin Laden, tried to kill Hitler, and also hunted and eliminated Saddam Hussein, yet nobody said a word. For every targeted elimination carried out by Israel, it was hit with numerous condemnations and protests, yet the daily US surgical strikes in Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, and Iraq are met with silence. Every time Israel unintentionally harm civilians, the world raises a hue and cry, yet if it happens in Libya, Iraq, Serbia, or Kosovo nobody protests.
Murder at Tomb Illustrates the Future of Jewish Holy Sites in a Palestinian State
On April 24, 2011 Jewish worshipers at Joseph's Tomb were attacked by members of the US-trained PA/PLO police. One person was murdered and several others wounded. Rather than keep the peace and root out the terrorists who are a threat to the safety of both Jews and Arabs, the PA/PLO police have yet again proven themselves to be a group that is willing to commit acts of terrorism themselves. And this is not the first time they have done this at Joseph's Tomb.
Views/Commentary
Those Contradictory Militants
The mainstream media, politicians, and others, prefer to use the term "militant" instead of "terrorist," especially in the case of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Doing so fulfills many different agendas, in addition to furthering the user's cause. Whatever the case may be, the usage generally distorts the story and causes confusion for the reader, which many times is its exact intention. As with much post-1970s journalism, the longer news media use such language, the less they sound like journalists and the more they are heard as political partisans.
Who Will Teach Tolerance to the Muslims?
There was a time when police officers told battered wives that they had to be more understanding of their husbands. Today they tell Americans to be more understanding of Muslims. They do work hard you know. And if they try to car bomb you sometimes, maybe it's because you don't please them anymore.
But There is a G‑d in Israel
The Jewish exiles shall be ingathered only through faith. If they have it, if they truly believe in the existence of the Creator and Guider of history, the G‑d of Israel, they can bring the final redemption today. Far from fearing what the Gentile will do if they do such a thing, let the Jew tremble as he considers the anger of the Almighty if he does not.
Selected Reading
Reconciliation (Unity) Agreement Between Fatah and Hamas
Under the auspices of Egypt, delegations from the Fatah and Hamas terrorist groups met in Cairo on April 27, 2011 to discuss the issues concerning ending the political division and the achievement of national unity. Both political parties mutually agreed that the basis of understanding made during the meeting are committing to both parties in the implementation of the Palestinian National Reconciliation Agreement. This is the basis of understanding agreed upon by Fatah and Hamas.
The Arab Pulse: What Policymakers Can Learn From "Palestinian" Social Media 
The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) has released the first-ever study mining the Arabic-language "Palestinian" social media environment to determine Arab public sentiment and its potential impact on US foreign policy. At FDD's direction, the Washington, D.C.-based Web analysis company Constrat viewed approximately 10,000 Arab social media entries between May 3 and August 3, 2010, of which it analyzed approximately 20 percent for relevancy. In the end, the company analyzed 1,788 statements contained within 1,114 unique posts across 996 threads written by 699 authors.
Why Is Israel's Presence in the Territories Still Called "Occupation"?
When an armed force holds territory beyond its own national borders, the term "occupation" is usually used to describe its holding on the land. However, not all the factual situations that we commonly think of as "occupation" fall within the limited scope of the term "occupation" as defined in international law.
Commentaries, Documents, Booklets, and Miscellaneous Materials Relating to the Gaza Strip
These commentaries, documentation, and booklets provide much otherwise unknown information regarding the truth ("emet") about what is really happening in the Arab-occupied/Hamas-controlled Gaza area. Included are weekly and monthly summaries of humanitarian assistance, as well as the infamous Goldstone Report, Israel-related United Nations Resolutions, and miscellaneous materials providing information and analysis of the situation in Gaza.
The History and Meaning of "Palestine" and "Palestinians"
Palestine has never existed . . . as an autonomous entity. There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs. PDF Format