(Your Voice in a World where Zionism, Steel, and Fire have
turned Justice Mute)

by Nabila Harb\FAV Co-Editor

October 2002

Recently, the issue of Jerusalem and its status has resurfaced in the American government, as a result of H.R. 1646 which augments the 'Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Implementation Act of 1995'. It is a fact that the new resolution is more far-reaching than the 1995 Act, but what is not generally understood is that the 1995 Act is the pertinent legislation mandating the move of the U.S. Embassy to the Zionist entity from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Moreover, one can understand the legal mechanism involved only if one has some familiarity with the 1995 Act.

The 'temporary' status of Jerusalem according to international law is embodied in U.N. Resolution Resolution 181 of 1947 which placed the city under U.N. trusteeship as a 'corpus separatum'. As a matter of fact, the U.S. not only voted for this resolution and supported all subsequent U.N. resolutions pronouncing the Zionist entity's purported 1967 'annexation' of East Jerusalem illegal, and its activities there as null and void. In 1980, the U.S. voted for Security Council Resolution 465, criticising the Zionist entity's settlements in Jerusalem. In 1990, the U.S. reaffirmed the illegality of Jewish settlements created in East Jerusalem.

Despite this, in 1995, the U.S. Congress passed the infamous 'Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Implementation Act of 1995. In that Act, Congress having begun with the undeniable declaration that 'Each sovereign nation, under international law and custom, may designate its own capital', then proceeded to veer off into the realm of fiction, with 'findings' that embodied nothing more than spurious claims and illegal actions on the part of the Zionist entity.

Recounting the history of Palestine according to Zionist propaganda, the U.S. Congress announced that 'In 1967, Jerusalem was reunited during the conflict known as the Six Day War, and that, 'Since 1950, the city of Jerusalem has been the capital of the state of Israel.' On the basis of these spurious claims, the U.S. Congress declared that: 'Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of the State of Israel; and the United States Embassy in Israel should be relocated to Jerusalem no later than May 31, 1999.'

The reason why the move has not been made prior to this date is that, pursuant to the 1995 Act, the President of the United States was given the power to postpone the move at six-month intervals. Clinton possessed no real interest in Palestinian rights but as he wished to be known historically as the U.S. President who succeeded in engineering peace between the Zionist entity and Palestine, he repeatedly postponed the move. Bush who has no real interest in justice for the Palestinian people either, but with a desire to manipulate the Arab Nation into acquiescence in U.S. global ambitions pursuant to his endless 'war on terror', intends to postpone the move as well.

The powerful Zionist interests in Congress, becoming impatient with the delays, created a new Bill in 2002 known as H.R. 1646, the 'Foreign Relations Authorisation Act Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003. Section 214 of the Resolution, defines U.S. policy with respect to Jerusalem as follows:

SEC. 214. UNITED STATES POLICY WITH RESPECT TO JERUSALEM AS THE CAPITAL OF ISRAEL. (a) CONGRESSIONAL STATEMENT OF POLICY.--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 (Public Law 104-45; 109 Stat. 398), to immediately begin the process of relocating the United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.'

As is evident from the wording of the Resolution, it was created primarily as an attempt to force the implementation of the original 1995 Act.

H.R. 1646 goes much farther, however, in seeking to dictate U.S. foreign policy by ordering that:

'None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be available for the publication of any official government document which lists countries and their capital cities unless the publication identifies Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.'

Moreover, '-For purposes of the registration of birth, certification of nationality, or issuance of a passport of a United States citizen born in the city of Jerusalem, the Secretary shall, upon the request of the citizen or the citizen's legal guardian, record the place of birth as Israel.'

Section 215 concerns 'Efforts to promote Israel's Diplomatic Relations with other countries' and declares that: 'The Congress makes the following findings: (1) Israel is a friend and ally of the United States whose security is vital to regional stability and United States interests. (2) Israel currently maintains diplomatic relations with approximately 160 countries. Approximately 30 countries do not have any diplomatic relations with Israel. (3) The State of Israel has been actively seeking to establish formal relations with a number of countries. (4) The United States should assist its ally, Israel, in its efforts to establish diplomatic relations. (5) After more than 50 years of existence, Israel deserves to be treated as an equal nation by its neighbors and the world community.'

Finally, Section 215 (b) forces the Executive branch of the government to report to the U.S. Congress as to its progress in enforcing the provisions of this Resolution:

'(b) REPORT CONCERNING UNITED STATES EFFORTS TO PROMOTE ISRAEL'S DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees that includes the following information (in classified or unclassified form, as appropriate): (1) Actions taken by the United States to encourage other countries to establish full diplomatic relations with Israel. (2) Specific responses solicited and received by the Secretary from countries that do not maintain full diplomatic relations with Israel with respect to the status of negotiations to enter into diplomatic relations with Israel. (3) Other measures being undertaken, and measures that will be undertaken, by the United States to ensure and promote Israel's full participation in the world diplomatic community.'

Although legislative documents may be considered dry material, it is important to familiarise oneself with the actual laws that are being passed, especially when a piece of legislation will affect the entire world.

Most Acts of Congress, although bearing a single title in terms of subject matter, actually embrace a multitude of topics. This particular Act, apart from its primary focus on the Zionist entity, provides funding and aid for a number of foreign governments. Funding, therefore, will be withheld if those foreign governments fail to bow to U.S./Zionist pressure to recognise Jersalem as the capital of the illegal Zionist entity.

One can appeal to the people of the United States to rectify this terrible injustice, but the fact of the matter is that the government of the U.S. is not and never was a true democracy and the people are powerless. The government of the U.S. was designed as a Republic rather than a Democracy, which means essentially that the people elect representatives purportedly to act as their agents. There is very little direct interaction between the masses and the passage of laws in the United States, except at the local level. To complicate matters, the United States is actually a Federation of Republics, rather than a simple Republic, which means that government is separated between the individual government of every State and the Federal Government.

As far as foreign policy is concerned, in reality, power is held by the Federal Government. The individual States elect representatives and Senators to serve in Congress, but the relationship between these representatives and the masses is as remote as the relationship between the Earth's Moon and Alpha Centauri.

The sad reality of the situation in the U.S. is that, due to the promotion of capitalism as a philosophy, the ideal Republic quickly degenerated into an oligarchy. Power is held by the rich, and political influence is bought. That is the reality of government in the U.S., pure and simple.

Although the masses did involve themselves in a call for revolution during the 1960s and early 1970s, unfortunately, most of the impetus for revolution and reform has vanished, and the majority of those revolutionary activists ultimately were seduced by capitalist values into becoming part of the problem rather than the solution.

In terms of Palestine and the Zionist entity, moreover, the communist movement in the United States from the very start was tainted by Zionism, as American Jewish Communists were led to believe that the Zionist movement essentially was an idealistic socialist philosophy, and that the Zionist entity represented a sort of utopia, a shining example of hope for the rest of the world.

It really was a short step, therefore, for American Jewish Communists, from embracing a revolutionary agenda to becoming persuaded that buying influence for the Zionist 'utopia' in Congress would be more practical and effective.

The 1995 Act for the 'relocation' of the 'Jerusalem Embassy' therefore should come as no surprise to any one. It is a piece of legislation bought and paid for by the Zionist political lobbies, whose wealth and influence far outweighs that of any other interest group in the U.S.

The only hope for justice with respect to this particular issue is the ongoing struggle between the U.S. legislative body and the Executive. George Bush is determined to shift the traditional balance of power and to concentrate government in the hands of the Executive. Although his aim is alarming, dangerous and actually criminal in nature, in this particular instance it may work to the temporary advantage of Palestine by postponing the implementation of the 1995 and 2002 Acts indefinitely.

It is interesting to note that, although he signed the new Act on 30 September 2002, he declared very officially and emphatically that he considered the provision on Jerusalem, as well as certain other provisions, to be 'advisory' rather than 'mandatory'.

In Bush's own words: '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. The executive branch shall construe as advisory the provisions of the Act...' Specifically, he declared that:

'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.'

In effect, Bush again has postponed the actual move, but quite clearly, his reasoning does not include any considerations of international law or justice for Palestine. Moreover, his statement that: 'U.S. policy regarding Jerusalem has not changed', is ambiguous, given the fact that he has emphasised his belief that U.S. policy should be the prerogative solely of the Executive branch of the government. He will use the issue of the proposed move of the U.S. Embassy to further his own ambitions and aims, and no doubt he would be willing to lay the cornerstone of a new U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem tomorrow if he decided that it would benefit his foreign policies.

On the other hand, as far as any considerations of American legislation with respect to Jerusalem is concerned, the Zionist entity is illegitimate in any and every form, no matter what legislation or policies are dictated in the U.S. or in any other country of the world. Rather than protesting against this further evidence of Zionist influence in the U.S. government, it is perhaps more important to continue to reaffirm an unconditional repudiation of the Zionist entity itself. However the Zionist entity and its U.S. 'ally/satellite' attempt to label Jerusalem, it remains Al Quds al Sharif, the eternal capital of the Palestinian homeland. For Muslims throughout the world, Jerusalem is our first Qibla and a holy place that cannot be polluted by the presence of the Zionist invader and Zionist claims. For the Arab Nation, Jerusalem is and must remain the very heart of Arab identity. If the heart fails, the body dies. No U.S. Act of Congress, no Presidential decree, no Resolution or policy declara tion from ANY ONE can change the fundamental, inalienable nature of Jerusalem. That is the real truth.

At the end of the day, U.S. legislation dealing with the status of Jerusalem is merely an obvious manifestation of the bias that rules the U.S. government. The Jewish lobbies really do own much of the government, and there is no threat in the U.S. so effective as the threat of withdrawing financial support. Without money, no one can even aspire to political office in the U.S. It is money that rules not only the government, but the official media as well. The American people have been paralysed politically by the ancient Roman policy of 'giving the people bread and circuses.' In this decade, what should be news is of no interest to the masses unless it is transformed by the media into dramatic entertainment. Joy and suffering alike are simply fodder for the circus to keep the masses in bondage, while giving them an illusion of knowledge.

Rather than calling upon the American people to oppose this particular piece of legislation, it would be more realistic to call either for a revolution or for a major reformation of the U.S. government and its policies.