Showing posts with label Jerusalem as Israel's Capital. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jerusalem as Israel's Capital. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

(Video) Olympic Coverage: The BBC vs Israel

Yarden Frankl..
Honest Reporting..
25 July '12..



BBC Sports has gone political. They omitted listing Jerusalem as Israel's Capital. In fact, according to BBC Sports, Israel has NO capital.



Don't let the media delegitimize Israel's claim to Jerusalem as its capital. Take action now and support Israel's demand that the BBC corrects its error. Send your complaints directly to BBC Sport. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/front_page/3701180.stm

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
.
 

Monday, July 23, 2012

Jerusalem was, is, and will always be the capital of Israel

LOTL..
23 July '12..
H/T Brian of London..

For Immediate Release:

Jerusalem Mayor Sets Record Straight on BBC's Questioning of Jerusalem as Jewish Capital

22/7/12 – In response to the BBC’s decision not to refer to Jerusalem on its 2012 Summer Olympics’ website as the capital of Israel, but rather “the seat of government…though most foreign embassies are in Tel Aviv” Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat issued the following statement:

“Throughout the history of Jerusalem, with over a dozen conquerors, only the Jewish people have called the Holy City of Jerusalem our capital. Jerusalem today, under Israeli sovereignty, has returned to the role it played 2000-3000 years ago. There is unprecedented freedom of movement and religion and the world is welcome and encouraged to enjoy the beauty and majesty of Jerusalem.”

“We will not accept those who deny our history, our sovereignty, and our right to determine our own capital. Irrespective of the BBC’s political agenda, Jerusalem was, is, and will always be the capital of Israel and the spiritual, political, and physical center of the Jewish people.”

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
.
 

Monday, June 25, 2012

CAMERA - AFP: Whence the Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty?

TS..
CAMERA/Snapshots..
25 June '12..

While some are raising concerns about the future of the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty now that the Muslim Brotherhood candidate has won Egypt's presidential race, AFP has a different issue with the historic bilateral agreement. Today AFP refers to "1980, the year after Cairo signed its peace agreement with Tel Aviv." (Emphasis added.)

AFP would hardly be the first to relocate Israel's capital from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv, but the misinformation is all the more jarring in light of then-President Anwar Sadat's unprecedented trip to Jerusalem in 1978, paving the way to the Egyptian-Israeli peace agreement.

Monday, June 18, 2012

Kushner - From Israel: Jerusalem and Jewish Rights

Arlene Kushner..
From Israel..
17 June '12..

Last week, Jacques Gauthier came to town for a conference on who has the rights to Jerusalem. Gauthier, who is a lawyer specializing in international law, says, hands down, the Jews do. What is significant here is that he is not Jewish, and arrived at his opinion not from the basis of religious conviction, but rather from an examination of the legal and historical facts.

His interest in Jerusalem began in 1982, when he traveled here; he subsequently devoted 25 years of study to the subject, culminating in a Ph.D. dissertation on the issue that runs for 1,300 pages and has 3,250 footnotes.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Gurfinkiel - France Wants Israel to Recognize ‘Green Line’ — Yet France Does Not

Michel Gurfinkiel..
pjmedia.com..
12 June '12..

The French government insists Israel must withdraw to the 1949-1967 ceasefire line in the West Bank (the “Green Line”) in order to achieve peace with the Palestinians. France holds it to be an “international border” and deems any Israeli presence beyond it to be an illegal settlement built on foreign soil. Even in Jerusalem, where the Green Line – back then an eerie, barbed wire no-man’s land — cut off one half of the city from the other and deprived Israelis and Jews from any access to the holiest of all Jewish holy places: the Western Wall.

The proper Israeli answer to France should be: We dare you.

It’s a matter of logic, indeed. If the Green Line is an international border, everything located west of it in pre-1967 Israel is indisputably Israeli. This is the case, in particular, of the Kiryah, the hill where the Israeli parliament and government are located. As a consequence, France should acknowledge West Jerusalem as the rightful capital of Israel and transfer without delay its embassy from Tel Aviv to there.

The fact is, however, that the French are not as logical as they claim to be, and that while regarding East Jerusalem as part of some half-born “state of Palestine,” they do not see West Jerusalem as part of Israel, either.

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Ettinger - JerUSAlem - American people vs. White House

Yoram Ettinger..
Israel Hayom..
25 May '12..

Jerusalem has been one of the most dramatic issues of discord between the will of the American people and Congress on the one hand, and State Department-driven presidential policy on the other hand.

In contrast to most Americans and their state and federal representatives, who cherish Jerusalem as the indivisible capital of the Jewish state, all U.S. presidents have embraced Foggy Bottom’s denial of Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s capital, or even as part of Israel. Moreover, the U.S. foreign policy bureaucracy has disavowed the 1947 non-binding U.N. General Assembly Partition Plan, but for one segment — Jerusalem, which the U.N. designated as an international city.

Israel is the only country in the world whose (3,000 year old) capital is not recognized by the State Department and by the presidents of the U.S. However, the American people consider Israel to be the second most trusted and dependable ally of the U.S. (after Britain), and 71% support (and 9% oppose) Jerusalem as Israel’s indivisible capital.

President Barack Obama has gone further than any U.S. president in implementing the Jerusalem policy of denial. He is pressing for an unprecedented construction freeze in Jerusalem beyond the 1949 ceasefire lines, and is trying to eliminate any reference to “Jerusalem, Israel” in present and past official documents and communications.

Thursday, May 3, 2012

(Video) Tel Aviv is Israel's Capital (According to the Guardian)

HonestReportingVideo
02 May '12..






Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, but that's not what the Guardian reports.





• The caption on a photograph featuring passengers on a tram in Jerusalem observing a two-minute silence for Yom HaShoah, a day of remembrance for the 6 million Jews who died in the Holocaust, wrongly referred to the city as the Israeli capital. The Guardian style guide states: "Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel; Tel Aviv is" (Eyewitness, 20 April, page 24).
Defending Israel daily from media bias - Visit honestreporting.com

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page. Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand 
.

Monday, November 21, 2011

CAMERA - Ha'aretz Relocates Israel's Capital

TS
CAMERA/Snapshots
20 November '11

http://blog.camera.org/archives/2011/11/haaretz_relocates_israels_capi.html

Now you may have heard about the "State of Tel Aviv," but Ha'aretz took matters in a slightly different direction today. Taking the lead from foreign publications like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, the Israeli daily today relocated Israel's capital to Tel Aviv.

In an Op-Ed, Amir Oren writes:

The bottom line shows that the U.S. is pulling away from Israel, that Washington is making a greater effort to deter Tel Aviv than Tehran.

While Israel's Defense Ministry is located in Tel Aviv, the seat of government is still, at last check, in Jerusalem. Journalists use "Washington" as a shorthand for the U.S. government, as Oren does here, obviously because it is the American capital. (The Pentagon, the headquarters of the American Department of Defense in located in Arlington, Va., and yet Oren correctly refers to Washington, not Arlington, as shorthand for the U.S.)

The Boston Globe commendably corrected this point. Will Ha'aretz? The Globe error and correction follow:

Error (Boston Globe, 7/14/03): The refugees and many other Palestinians publicly say there can be no peace with Israel until Tel Aviv recognizes the refugees’ right to return.

Correction (7/17/03): Because of an editing error, a story on a Palestinian protest in Monday’s World pages incorrectly suggested that Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel. The capital is Jerusalem.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page..

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Weinberg - Fighting for Jerusalem

David M. Weinberg
A Citadel Defending Zion
11 November '11
Posted before Shabbat

http://davidmweinberg.com/2011/11/11/fighting-for-jerusalem/


Americans for Peace Now this week put to pen its opposition to a united Jerusalem. In a shocking and revealing legal brief, Peace Now opposed the designation of Jerusalem as “Israel” on American passports because this would “undermine the establishment of two capitals in Jerusalem,” and Peace Now believes that “any action that undermines the establishment of two capitals in Jerusalem jeopardizes the vital interests of Israel.”

The group presented its opinion to the US Supreme Court in regard to the petition brought to the court by the estimable Washington attorneys Nathan and Alyza Lewin on behalf of my friends, Rabbi Dr. Ari and Naomi Zivotofsky of Beit Shemesh (whose son Menachem was the “delisted” American born in Jerusalem). The case had become an argument about presidential privilege in deciding foreign policy, since Congress has allowed the listing of Israel in the passports of Americans born in Jerusalem.

But Peace Now went far beyond the constitutional technicalities at the heart of the case. The all-knowing, strategic geniuses at Peace Now informed the court that they had investigated and plumbed all the historic, political, military, national and Jewish considerations that can possibly be considered, and concluded that “the vital interest of Israel” is that there be “two capitals” in Jerusalem!

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Richman - “Jerusalem, Israel” Goes Before the Supreme Court

Rick Richman
Commentary/Contentions
04 November '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/11/04/jerusalem-israel-obama-supreme-court/

In “Scrubbing Israel,” Ben Smith notes that the Supreme Court will hear Zivotofsky v. Clinton on Monday, considering the constitutionality of the 2002 law that directs the secretary of state to designate “Israel” as the place of birth on the passport of an American citizen born in Jerusalem, if the citizen so requests.

Smith’s title reflects the fact that a few days after the New York Sun publicized the White House photos of Vice President Biden’s trip to “Jerusalem, Israel” (and hours after National Review Online published one of them), the White House scrubbed “Israel” from the captions. Smith also highlights Omri Ceren’s “startling” report on Contentions that the administration scrubbed references to “Jerusalem, Israel” in official State Department reports published by the Bush administration.

Finally, Smith cites newly discovered documents referencing “Jerusalem, Israel” in prior administrations as well:

A search of the Nixon Library, for instance, turns up his daily diary. A search of the Carter Library turns up ten similar documents. And a search of the Clinton Library finds all sorts of documents labeled “Jerusalem, Israel,” including the classic eulogy of Yitzhak Rabin. Even a search of current .gov websites turns up a spray of bureaucratic products referring to “Jerusalem, Israel.”

The Zionist Organization of America’s amicus brief in Zivotofsky lists references to “Jerusalem, Israel” on documents found on the sites of the Departments of Commerce, Defense, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, State, and Treasury. Hillary Clinton’s brief nevertheless asserts that any U.S. action that would signal “symbolically or concretely” that it recognizes Jerusalem as within Israeli sovereign territory would “critically compromise the ability of the United States to … further the peace process.”

It is ironic that Hillary Clinton became the named defendant in this case. In 2002, as senator from New York, she voted for the law. In 1994, her husband signed legislation allowing American citizens born in Taiwan to have “Taiwan” put on their passports even though U.S. policy – both before and after the legislation — was that there is only one China (the People’s Republic) and that Taiwan was not a separate country.

It is even more ironic (to use the mildest possible word) that the candidate who in 2008 told 7,000 people at AIPAC, at a critical moment in his presidential campaign, that “Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided” is now seeking as president to have the Court hold unconstitutional a similar law with respect to Jerusalem, Israel.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Saturday, August 27, 2011

David Meir-Levi - Jerusalem: Capital of ‘Palestine’?

David Meir-Levi
frontpage.com
26 August '11




http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/26/jerusalem-capital-of-%E2%80%9Cpalestine%E2%80%9D/

Throughout all of history, Jerusalem has been the capital of only one nation: Israel. From the time of Kings David and Solomon, late 11th – 10th centuries BCE, to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 CE, almost 1,100 years, Jerusalem was the capital of the Jewish nation.

From the onset of Islamic rule in 638 CE to its end 1917, except for Crusader rule from 1099 to 1187, Jerusalem was never the capital of any Muslim state, nor even a provincial capital, until late Ottoman times (19th c. CE) when it became a special provincial religious site (vilayet) separate from its larger provincial area [sanjak].

Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Qur’an. “The Night Journey,” in chapter 17:1, recounts Mohammed’s magical flight on the back of the winged horse, el-Buraq, and his landing in “al-Aqsa” (literally, the faraway mosque), which is interpreted by later Muslim scholars to be the Temple Mount in Jerusalem; but Jerusalem is not mentioned in the text. The Temple Mount, however, is acknowledged in Muslim tradition to date back to Solomonic times. In A Brief Guide to al-Haram al-Sharif,[ [i]] published by the Supreme Moslem Council in Jerusalem in1925, Muslim scholars expounded upon the antiquity and sanctity of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, stating that it dates to earliest times, certainly to the time of the Israelite kingdom, and is identified beyond dispute with the site of Solomon’s Temple.

In a description of the Temple Mount area known as “Solomon’s Stables,” which Islamic Waqf officials in Jerusalem converted into a mosque in 1996, the guide states: “…little is known for certain about the early history of the chamber itself. It dates probably as far back as the construction of Solomon’s Temple… According to Josephus, it was in existence and was used as a place of refuge by the Jews at the time of the conquest of Jerusalem by Titus in the year 70 A.D.”[ [ii]]

And the above is consistent with Muslim tradition. Islamic post-Qur’anic texts recount that originally Muhammed prayed toward Jerusalem (and not Mecca), making Jerusalem Islam’s first Qibla (direction toward which Muslims should pray). This tradition is based upon the account on the Qur’an’s chapter 2, verses 144 &149-150, where we read that Mohammed changed the direction of prayer to Mecca. The Qur’an does not state where the first Qibla was, and Jerusalem is not mentioned in the text; but later tradition preserved in biographies of Mohammed and in some Hadith collections (especially Sahih al-Bukhari) indicates that the original direction was toward Jerusalem. However, today there is some rather acrimonious debate among Muslim scholars of Islamic history about when and why the change came about, and if it came about at all; but what is important for this study is that the change, if it did happen, effectively nullified any religious significance that Jerusalem might have had for Islam. If it did not happen, then Jerusalem had no religious significance for Islam, ever.

For centuries thereafter, Jerusalem played little or no role in the religious affairs and development of Islam. In the 13th century, Ibn-Taymiyya, a major Muslim cleric and ideological godfather to later Saudi Wahhabism, wrote extensively about Jerusalem, demonstrating from Muslim sources that there were only two holy cities in Islam – Mecca and Medina. Ibn Taymiyya went to great lengths to explain that the veneration of Jerusalem was nothing more than the “Judaization” of Islam.

So how did Jerusalem become Islam’s third most sacred place? — By subterfuge.

(Read full "Jerusalem: Capital of ‘Palestine’?")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Ceren - Obama Re-Writes History on Bush and Jerusalem

Omri Ceren
Commentary/Contentions
16 August '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/08/16/obama-bush-jerusalem/

Now this is just getting silly. The Obama White House is gearing up for a Supreme Court case in which it will defend its refusal to list “Jerusalem, Israel” on the passports of Americans born in the Israeli capital. As part of its preparations the administration recently scrubbed all the captions on a White House photo gallery of Vice President Biden in the city, changing “Jerusalem, Israel” to “Jerusalem.” The optics of methodically erasing the word “Israel” from the White House webpage caused a predictable uproar.

Those who make it their business to rationalize White House hostility toward Israel were relieved, then, when the Washington Jewish Week’s Adam Kredo published an article claiming that the Bush administration had enforced an identical policy. Kredo cited a “search of the Bush White House’s archives” and photos of Laura Bush touring the Western Wall to conclude that the Bush White House webpage “never explicitly labeled [Jerusalem] as part of Israel.” Though he was otherwise unsparing in criticizing the White House’s “horrible, simply ridiculous… photo mistake,” Obama’s defenders latched on to his article anyway. The NJDC and J Street found particularly grating and obnoxious ways to pass along the article. You should read them because they’re about to become deeply embarrassing.

Elliot Abrams responded in a quote he gave to Jennifer Rubin, forcefully insisting that Kredo was “just wrong” and that the Bush White House “did not have a hard and fast rule that prohibited referring to Jerusalem” as part of Israel in documents and captions.

Basic Google searches are enough to show that Abrams is right and Obama’s defenders are flat wrong.

Sometimes Bush-era White House photos explicitly identified Jerusalem as being in Israel and sometimes they didn’t, just like sometimes they explicitly identified Tel Aviv as being in Israel and sometimes they didn’t. A naive “Jerusalem, Israel” Google search on the Bush White House archives is sufficient to turn up this 2002 photo of Vice President Cheney captioned as “a press briefing in Jerusalem, Israel.” It also turns up this photo labeled “Mrs. Laura Bush visits the Western Wall Tunnels… in Jerusalem, Israel.” That’s from the exact, precise, identical tour that Kredo linked to in order to “hammer home the point” that the Bush administration “never explicitly labeled [Jerusalem] as part of Israel.”

Getting beyond photo captions, Bush-era documents show that the previous White House was indeed able to correctly identify the city of Jerusalem as being inside the state of Israel. The record shows that the President even acknowledged that the Jerusalem consulate – the same one that won’t issue passports referencing “Jerusalem, Israel” – was located in Jerusalem, Israel. Bush’s statement nominating Jeffrey Feltman to be ambassador to Lebanon, for instance, explicitly described Feltman’s previous position as “Deputy Principal Officer at the U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem, Israel.”

It gets worse for Obama’s defenders, though, than merely being demonstrably wrong. It turns out that while they were insisting that the Bush administration consistently refused to reference “Jerusalem, Israel,” the Obama State Department was busy scrubbing documents in which Bush administration referenced “Jerusalem, Israel.” Straight down the memory hole. That’s kind of amazing when you pause and think about it, no?

The “Jerusalem, Israel” captions and statements from the Bush-era White House are digitally archived and frozen, and so beyond the administration’s reach. But Bush-era State Department reports are stored on the Obama State Department’s servers. Two old documents in particular – the State Department’s FY 2002 and FY 2003 Performance and Accountability Reports – come up quickly in searches. When they were originally written they both had appendices identifying the location of the Jerusalem consulate as “Jerusalem, Israel.” Some time in the last two weeks that location was changed to “Jerusalem.” Whoever made the changes even went back and scrubbed the old “hard copy” PDFs. You can do the compare and contrast yourself. Click on these links for scrubbed versions of FY 2002 HTMLFY 2003 HTMLFY 2002 PDFFY 2003 PDF, and on these links for cached original versions of FY 2002 HTMLFY 2003 HTMLFY 2002 PDFFY 2003 PDF.

The Bush White House was simply not as hostile to Israel as the Obama administration. It simply did not engage in the same consistent, systematic efforts to undermine Israel’s diplomatic positions. Efforts to rewrite history, which at this point have become quite literal, won’t change that basic fact. Those who continue to grasp for pretexts to believe otherwise – and you really should go back to see the sneering smugness with which the NJDC and J Street approached this controversy – will continue to get embarrassed. Facts are not only stubborn things but, in a digital age, fairly easy for anyone to find.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Thursday, August 11, 2011

(Video) The White House Cleanses Israel from Its Website

Love of the Land
10 August '11







It began with Daniel Halper's article in the Weekly Standard, "What Nation Does the State Department Think Jerusalem Is In?" :

Quick question: According to the State Department, what nation is the city of Jerusalem in? If you answered Israel, you'd be wrong. The State Department just issued the following press release:

QUESTION: What is the State Department’s position regarding American persons born in Jerusalem who wish to have passports issued that indicate their place of birth as Israel?

ANSWER: Current U.S. Government policy is that U.S. citizens born in Jerusalem may not have “Israel” listed in their passports as their place of birth. See the U.S. Department of State’s Foreign Affairs Manual 7 FAM 1300 Appendix D for further details.

Hmm. You kind of have to wonder why no one thought to inform the White House! When Vice President Biden visited Jerusalem, Israel last year, the White House helpfully provided the following caption: "Vice President Joe Biden laughs with Israeli President Shimon Peres in Jerusalem, Israel, March 9, 2010."


But now that this has been brought to the White House's attention, a true believe or not moment occurs. Welcome to the White House Zone!



Uploaded by RobtKraft on Aug 9, 2011


Visit http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/white-house-cleanses-israel-website_58812...

For those who are familiar with the classic, Animal Farm, by George Orwell, the following lines in the tenth chapter might come to mind:

"Benjamin felt a nose nuzzling at his shoulder. He looked round. It was Clover. Her old eyes looked dimmer than ever. Without saying anything, she tugged gently at his mane and led him round to the end of the big barn, where the Seven Commandments were written. For a minute or two they stood gazing at the tatted wall with its white lettering.

‘My sight is failing,’ she said finally. ‘Even when I was young I could not have read what was written there. But it appears to me that that wall looks different. Are the Seven Commandments the same as they used to be, Benjamin?’"

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page..


Sunday, August 7, 2011

Richman - Jerusalem Case at Supreme Court May Pit White House Web Site Against the President

Rick Richman
New York Sun
04 August '11

http://www.nysun.com/national/jerusalem-case-at-supreme-court-may-pit-white/87446/



In a major constitutional case over whether Congress can require the State Department to put “Israel” as the country of birth on the passport of an American citizen born in Jerusalem, it is possible that pivotal evidence may lie in some pictures on the White House website.

On the official website are a series of pictures from Vice President Biden’s trip last year to Israel, where he met in Jerusalem with Prime Minister Netanyahu and other Israelis. In cutlines associated with the pictures the vice president is described as being in “Jerusalem, Israel.”

Menachem Binyamin Zivotofsky v. Hillary Rodham Clinton involves the constitutionality of a statute directing the State Department to record “Israel” as the country of birth on the passport of any American citizen born in Jerusalem who so requests. The procedural issue is whether the case presents a “political question” from which the courts abstain; the substantive issue is whether Congress’s law impermissibly infringes the President’s power to “recognize foreign sovereigns.”

Master Zivotofsky was born in 2002 at Shaare Zedek Hospital in West Jerusalem to American parents (making him an American citizen). Two months later, his mother went to the American embassy at Tel Aviv to apply for his passport, requesting his country of birth be listed as “Israel.” The embassy refused, citing longstanding State Department policy that such passports list only “Jerusalem,” with no country added. American citizens born in Tel Aviv or Haifa have “Israel” designated on their passports; those born in Jerusalem do not.

Would the required designation of “Israel” on Master Zivotofsky’s passport really interfere with the president’s constitutional powers? Does it really present an issue of constitutional proportions, necessitating a Supreme Court decision? The White House acknowledges on its own website that Jerusalem is in Israel -- as does the State Department and the CIA on theirs; so what is the problem with Zivotofsky having it on his passport?

In other words, why is the Obama administration making a federal case out of this?

President Bush signed the law in 2002, but issued a “signing statement” refusing to comply with it, alleging it interfered with his authority to conduct foreign affairs and supervise “the unitary executive branch.” In the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama, a former constitutional law professor, criticized Bush for allegedly abusing the Constitution with his frequent signing statements. Mr. Obama asserted a president generally has only two choices: sign a bill or veto it. Now Mr. Obama is defending Bush’s signing statement in the Supreme Court.

This is not an issue of first impression. In 1994, Congress enacted a law directing the State Department to permit American citizens born in Taiwan to have “Taiwan” as their place of birth on their passports, despite official American foreign policy that there is only one China and that Taiwan is not a separate country. Previously, the State Department had refused to do so on grounds it would adversely affect relations with the Chinese communist regime — but the department complied with the law once it was enacted, despite vigorous protests from the communists.

In the present case, Jerusalem is not part of any state other than Israel; it is in fact its capital, and has been since 1950. But the State Department, while following the passport law with respect to Taiwan, refuses to comply with respect to Jerusalem.

One would think the Obama administration might have responded to this case by saying something like this: “Everyone knows Jerusalem is in Israel; check the websites of the White House, State Department and CIA; we are not going to defend a Bush signing statement to avoid acknowledging that someone born in a Jerusalem hospital established in 1902 was born in Israel; and we do not need a Supreme Court decision when we already have the precedent of Taiwan.”

On August 3, 2011, Master Zivotofsky’s lawyers, Nathan Lewin and Alyza Lewin of Lewin & Lewin, participated in a conference call sponsored by an organization called One Jerusalem. During the call, Anne Lieberman of Boker tov, Boulder! (which ran a lengthy post on the case earlier this year) asked Mr. Lewin to describe the protests that supposedly supported the foreign policy concerns of the executive branch. He read from a State Department description of Palestinian statements “across the political spectrum” that “strongly condemned” the U.S. law in 2002:

Lewin: … [State is] relying on the fact that there were protests by public statements at the time the law was enacted and therefore, says the State Department -- in what I would call a self-fulfilling prophecy and an invitation to condemnation by the State Department -- they say “okay, so now if this thing takes effect we expect everybody is going to condemn it.” Well, that can’t be a reason for overruling a congressional statute -- that because we are afraid that enemies of Israel are going to make public statements …

Lieberman: Well, let me see if I get this straight: that means that the government’s position elevates the opinions of the PLO, Fatah and the Palestinian Authority above congressional legislation.

Lewin: Well -- that’s right. They say that if you implement the congressional legislation we are going to get protests, like we did for the enactment of the statute, so therefore you can’t implement the legislation, because the President or the State Department says we’re going have this harm to foreign policy, that enemies of Israel are going to condemn the fact that we’ve changed the policy. But you’re right -- essentially what that does is elevate concern about [the Palestinian] protest over congressional correction of a mistake.

Lieberman: Incredible.

Master Zivotofsky’s brief was filed on July 29. The administration’s brief is due September 23, and the case will be argued in November.

Mr. Richman is editor of the Web log Jewish Current Issues.


If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Ceren: Obama’s East Jerusalem Stance Rewards 1948 Ethnic Cleansing

Omri Ceren
Commentary/Contentions
06 June '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/06/06/obamas-east-jerusalem-stance-rewards-1948-ethnic-cleansing/

Last month the State Department weirdly declared that Jerusalem is separate from Israel. This month the Obama administration declined to move the U.S. embassy to Israel’s capital. Jonathan decsribes the notification as a symbol of Obama’s hostility to a united Jerusalem. The Palestinian Authority crowed that “the world and the U.S. don’t recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel,” a followup to their calls for Arab “resistance” throughout the city.

You’d expect at least the PA to be underwhelmed, since Presidents Clinton and Bush also used to issue twice-a-year notifications declining to move the embassy. That’s certainly what Obama’s defenders are pointing out. What they’re leaving unsaid—in a rhetorical and argumentative move that neatly repeats the line that they took during the “1967 borders” dust-up—is that previous Presidents also included wording implying that the embassy would eventually be moved. Obama’s statement removed that wording, leaving only the anti-Israel part of the statement intact.

Denying Israel’s right to its united capital, of course, rests upon the idea that East Jerusalem is some kind of “settlement.” That’s the position the President took when he demanded a halt to Israeli construction in the eastern part of the city, forcing the Palestinians to follow suit and bringing the peace process to a grinding halt. It ignores how Jews have indisputably been the majority in Jerusalem since at least 1853, to saying nothing of the ancient heritage of Jewish Jerusalem. Instead, it picks out the brief period between 1949 to 1967, when Jordan ethnically cleansed East Jerusalem of Jews to interrupt a continuous 1,000-year Jewish presence.

Taking the Palestinian position means installing that atypical 18-year historical blip as the baseline for negotiations. It’s a strange choice even for someone with pretensions toward being even-handed between the victims and perpetrators of ethnic cleansing. It means siding with and rewarding Israel’s Arab enemies, who aimed for exactly this goal when they leveled the Jewish Quarter:

Colonel Abdullah el Tell, local commander of the Jordanian Arab Legion, with whom Mordechai Weingarten negotiated the surrender terms, described the destruction of the Jewish Quarter, in his Memoirs: “The operations of calculated destruction were set in motion. . . . I knew that the Jewish Quarter was densely populated with Jews who caused their fighters a good deal of interference and difficulty. . . . I embarked, therefore, on the shelling of the Quarter with mortars, creating harassment and destruction. . . . Only four days after our entry into Jerusalem the Jewish Quarter had become their graveyard. Death and destruction reigned over it. . . . As the dawn of Friday, May 28, 1948, was about to break, the Jewish Quarter emerged convulsed in a black cloud—a cloud of death and agony. . . .”


The Jordanian commander who led the operation is reported to have told his superiors: “For the first time in 1,000 years not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter. Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews’ return here impossible.”

The Jordanians then went on to destroy 34 out of the 35 ancient synagogues in the Jewish Quarter and to use them as hen-houses, to desecrate the ancient cemetery on the Mount of Olives and to use the gravestones as latrines, and to deny Jews access to the Western Wall and to turn the courtyard into a garbage dump. But because they succeeded in doing that for almost 20 whole years—in contrast to 1,000 years of continuous Jewish life—the Obama administration insists that the Jewish State needs to cede portions of East Jerusalem to a future Palestinian entity on demographic grounds. Very even-handed!

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

(Video) Jerusalem: The Media Myth of Two Cities

HonestReportingVideo
May "11


The history of Jerusalem did not start in 1967. Thousands of years of Jewish history took place in what is now called "Arab East Jerusalem." Only when the Jewish residents were driven from their homes in 1948 was the city divided between East and West.

This video shows the reality of Jerusalem today and includes interviews from survivors of the fall of Jerusalem.



To discuss the issue of Jerusalem, join our Facebook Group "The History of Jerusalem Did Not Start in 1967."

To read more about the issue of Jerusalem, check out the Jerusalem resources section of the HonestReporting website: http://www.honestreporting.com.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Friday, April 9, 2010

Seven ways to defend Jerusalem

We cannot and must not sit back and passively watch events unfold. Each of us has a role to play to ensure that Jerusalem is never divided again


Michael Freund
Fundamentally Freund/JPost
08 April '10

On Saturday, Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad threw down the gauntlet. Speaking to Christian pilgrims during Easter celebrations in Bethlehem, he vowed that Israel’s capital would be divided again within 12 months.

“Next year,” Fayyad said, “we shall celebrate in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in east Jerusalem, capital of the Palestinian state.” Then, as if to underline the point, he added that “our people, joined by all humanity, will celebrate the creation of the independent Palestinian state on all 1967 borders – a state whose capital shall be Jerusalem.”

It would of course be easy to dismiss Fayyad’s remarks as more of the same tired old rhetoric. After all, he isn’t the first Palestinian leader to cast a covetous eye on the jewel that is Jewish Jerusalem, so why should we take his bluster any more seriously than that of his predecessors?

Yet as the recent international uproar over the capital made clear, this time things might just be different. Never before, it seems, has the simple act of building Jewish housing come under such withering criticism from an American administration, nor has the pressure ever been greater to impose a freeze on Jewish life in the city.

Clearly, the battle lines over Jerusalem’s future have been drawn, and the last thing we can afford to do is to adopt a sense of complacency. Now is the time for each of us to stand up and join the struggle to keep Jerusalem safe and under Israeli control.

FOR THOSE of you who cherish the Holy City as I do and wish to see it remain strong and united, here are a few simple and practical things that you can do to help. They are what I have referred to in the past as the “Seven ‘P’s” of Jewish activism:

(Read full article)
.

Saturday, April 3, 2010

Exploiting the crisis with Washington


Caroline Glick
Carolineglick.com
03 April '10

There is an element of irony in the current crisis of relations between the Obama administration and Israel. On the one hand, although US President Barack Obama and his advisors deny there is anything wrong with US-Israel relations today, it is easy to understand why no one believes them.

On the other hand on most issues, there is substantive continuity between Obama's Middle East policies and those his immediate predecessor George W. Bush adopted during his second term in office. Yet, whereas Israelis viewed Bush as Israel's greatest friend in the White House, they view Obama as the most anti-Israel US president ever.

This contradiction requires us to consider two issues. First, why are relations with the US now steeped in crisis? And second, taking a page out of Obama's White House chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel's playbook, how can Israel make sure not to let this crisis go to waste?

The reason relations are so bad of course is because Obama has opted to attack Israel and its supporters. In the space of the past ten days alone, Israel has been subject to three malicious blows courtesy of Obama and his advisors. First, during his visit to the White House last Tuesday, Obama treated Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu like a two-bit potentate. Rather than respectfully disagree with the elected leader of a key US ally, Obama walked out in the middle of their meeting to dine with his family and left the unfed Netanyahu to meditate on his grave offense of not agreeing to give up Israel's capital city as a precondition for indirect, US-orchestrated negotiations with an unelected, unpopular Palestinian leadership that supports terrorism and denies Israel's right to exist.

(Read full post)
.

Thursday, April 1, 2010

Woe will be a divided Jerusalem


David M. Weinberg
Op-Ed/JPost
01 April '10

The upshot of last week’s Obama-Netanyahu confrontation is that the White House wants to move Israel rapidly towards a division of Jerusalem.

However, the widely held presumption that splitting Jerusalem will lead to prosperity for the city and to peace for Jews and Arabs is an egregious error. Partitioning Jerusalem will destroy the city. It will die, in every way – culturally, religiously, economically and more. And politically, the shearing of Jerusalem into Arab and Jewish sovereignties will turn it into the bull’s eye of Mideast battle – a city that will make Belfast at its worst look like paradise.

The main reason for this is that any section of the city handed over to Arab rule will immediately become ground zero for the fierce war being waged within the Arab world over Islamic lifestyle, ideology and legitimacy.

Just who is going to rule in Arab eastern Jerusalem? Will it be the declining secular Palestinian national movement (whose sway in the West Bank is tentative at best), or the radical Islamist Hamas (which openly seeks Israel’s destruction), or the annihilationist al-Qaida affiliated forces (who are growing in strength in the territories), or the increasingly radical and violent Israeli Arab Islamic movement (which has been the main force behind recent unrest on the Temple Mount), or the Jordanians (who have a superior claim to Arab leadership in Jerusalem under the 1994 peace treaty with Israel), or the Moroccans (who head the Arab League’s Supreme Jerusalem Committee), or the Saudis (who see themselves as the true custodians of Islamic holy sites)?

EACH OF these forces will seek to prove its supremacy and bolster its legitimacy in the Islamic world through control of Arab Jerusalem and aggression against what remains of Jewish Jerusalem. What better way to prove one’s loyalty to the Islamic cause than to attack the rump Israeli presence in the city? And with bases of operations to work from in the eastern half of the city (whose neighborhoods will no longer be under Israeli security control) – locations that are bare meters away from Israeli homes and government and commercial centers – such terrorism will be oh, so very easy, so irresistibly tantalizing.

(Read full article)
.