Foreign Policy Violating US Law

[slaman]

Hello,

My understanding of democracy is that the judicial, legislative, and executive processes of government are entirely seperate in order to maintain appropriate checks and balances. In essence, the judicial process should prevent the legislative and executive branches from breaking existing laws. One thing I read led me to question why noone has ever brought this up.

Under the US Arms Export Policy it is illegal for the US to export arms to any nation who violates internationally recognized human rights.

The US has provided a large amount of weapons, arms, planes, and helicoptors to Israel. I'm too lazy to find a detailed listing and exact number.

Israel has been condemned internationally by the UN, Amnesty International, and a US State Department report in 2001 stating:

"Israeli security units often used excessive force against Palestinian demonstrators including live fire ... impeded the provision of medical assistance to Palestinian civilians by their strict enforcement of internal closures, which reportedly contributed to at least 32 deaths. Israeli security forces harassed and abused Palestinian pedestrians and drivers who were attempting to pass through the more than 130 Israeli- controlled checkpoints ..."

Israel is the only nation that legalizes the use of torture. So it is globally known that Israel violates human rights. It is also known that the US aids Israel militarily through arms exports. It is also law in the US to prohibit sale of arms to a nation that violates human rights. Am I missing something here?

Can someone make a case of this and present it to the Supreme Court? Why hasn't anyone done this? Would it have legal backing? What would the process be? If the Supreme Court found the sales violated US Law, would the sales have to stop?

To keep this discussion from elevating into an all-out political discussion on the Palestinian issue or other unrelated stuff, please limit the posts to the issues outlined.

The posts I see already are:

-Israel doesn't violate human rights.

Heh. Amnesty International is a very well-respected organization and is one of the MANY that have condemned Israel for their violations. A recent report was released just over a month ago. Read it before posting. I don't think anyone will actually try to claim that Israel doesn't violate human rights, but just thought I'd bring this up.

- The US doesn't supply arms to Israel

Read the newspaper. A recent contract for helicopters totalling over $500 million was signed. The US has been supporting Israel with aid since 1965.

- It's not against US Law to sell arms to a nation violating human rights

http://www.clw.org/atop/uspolicy.html

- The President can do whatever he wants

That is my question as well. Can the judicial system force the government from making these sales?

Thanks, and I look forward to some responses!

 

[DonaldC]

Bet you aren't a Jew.

 

[HappyPuppy]

Sooooooooooooo, what's your point, again?

 

[slaman]

This has absolutely nothing to do with religion. And Mr. HappyPuppy, if you do not care to uphold your nation's own laws, what's the point in making them?

 

[tweakmm]

lol, you make it sound like you expect our government to care about laws and doing what is right

 

[FoBoT]

nm

 

[dullard]

I'm not knowledgeable enough to argue against your points, and I'm too lazy to read a 119 page link you gave detailing the US law. So I'm going to assume everything you said was true. Yet you still can't quite reach that same conclusion.

Here is what you just said (simplified to math terms to get the emotion out of the picture):
A=B
B=C
C=D

E=F
F=G
thus A=G.

That logic looks good when put into a long rambling post. But you failed to present one vital piece of evidence: there is no link from D to E. If you said somewhere that D=E then you would be right in your conclusion. That link may exist, but you didn't present it to us.

What is that missing link? The link is: did the US legally find Israel to be a violator of human rights?

It doesn't matter if the UN says it, or if Amnesty international says it, or even if a small part of the US State Department says it. Until the US has the official, legal stance that Israel is a human rights violator your whole argument is mute. Have they done that yet?




My thoughts: all countries are violators of human rights. Yes ALL. We can go digging into every country and find terrible things have occured - even the US. Thus does that mean that the US cannot buy weapons? I guess we must disband the whole army...or realize that all laws have grey areas. There is a difference between speeding 55.5 mph in a 55 mph zone and speeding 65 mph. Our courts allow for a grey area, and you need a very severe violation to be legally punished.

 

[FoBoT]

wow, dullard , that is such a good thoughtful and logical answer that i am ashamed of my smart @ss comment above

gonna have to go edit that

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
wow, dullard , that is such a good thoughtful and logical answer that i am ashamed of my smart @ss comment above

gonna have to go edit that

Thank you for your compliment.

I like smart @ss comments. I have a saying: "I'd much rather be a smart @ss than a dumb one like you". I'm not calling anyone here dumb, but anytime I see a smart @ss comment, I think of that saying and laugh. Ok I've got a bad sense of humor.

That missing link may exist, but I'd like to see proof of it. I thought that the US was the only country that didn't vote that Israel was a violator in the UN vote. But I may be wrong, and I'd love to be corrected.

 

[slaman]

That is a very interesting point, and I too thought about before posting, but there is an obvious answer to that.

From the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Israel is the only nation that legalizes torture. This is fact and there can be no argument. Violation #1.

Article 13

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State.

Palestinians are not allowed to move outside their house, let alone within the borders of each State.

2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Refugee Right of Return of Palestinians displaced during the wars of 1948 and 1967 is one of the biggest condemnations facing Israel. Violation #2.

Article 15

1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 17

1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Property is annexed by the IDF for "security reasons". Bulldozing of houses happens on a daily basis without proper justification. Again after 1948, thousands of Palestinian homes were overrun without compensation, and the original owners refused re-entry. Entire Jewish settlements have been created on evacuated Palestinian towns. Violation #3.

Article 26

1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.


Palestinian children in the West Bank have not been allowed to go to school for over 3 months now. Several have been shot/killed on their way to attend "underground" schools. Violation #4.

Granted, a lot of these violations are subject to opinion. It is still fairly obvious that Israel is a gross violator of human rights. Yes, I agree, most nations could also be found to violate human rights, but they have not been pointed out by respected agencies such as Amnesty International. If the law is trivial, why have it in the first place?

And obviously someone prosecuting would need to prove Israel is a violator - I'm just not understanding why no one has taken the initiative seeing as their is a fair amount of protest towards Israeli action in the US.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: slaman
. Amnesty International is a very well-respected organization....

hahahaha, say who???

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: slaman
Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

According to this and Amnesty International, the US also violates human rights by our use of the death penalty. Oh dear, what shall we do

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: slaman
it is illegal for the US to export arms to any nation who violates internationally recognized human rights.

this phrase makes the whole thing... what is and isn't a human right and whether israel is violating said rights is contentious. while the UN declaration of human rights is well and good its more like something to work toward rather than a minimum requirement list, even given all the resources in the world and as many do-gooders as you can find its impossible to provide "free education," someone has to pay for it.

 

[CPA]

One last thing Slaman, your post forgets one fundemental issue and that is a country's right to sovereignty. Of course the UN and Amnesty international cares less about sovereign rights of a country and it would prefer we live under their rule. Last time I knew we don't (or at least we shouldn't) live under UN rule, so stop quoting it.

 

[laFiera]

"I want to tell you something very clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it." -- Ariel Sharon to Shimon Peres, October 3rd, 2001, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio.


well, i guess that graham and nixon's conversation makes sense, eh?


"This stranglehold has got to be broken or this country's going down the drain."
: :
: : In a 1972 conversation with President Richard Nixon, Southern Baptist evangelist Billy Graham

: : expressed disdain for what he saw as Jewish domination of the media. "You believe that?" Nixon

: : asked in response. "Yes, sir," said Graham. "Oh boy. So do I," Nixon agreed, then said: "I

: : can't ever say that, but I believe it." "No, but if you get elected a second time, then we might

: : be able to do something," Graham said. "They swarm around me and are friendly to me. Because

: : they know that I am friendly to Israel and so forth. But they don't know how I really feel about

: : what they're doing to this country, and I have no power and no way to handle them," Graham said.

: : Nixon replied: "You must not let them know."





"We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world - no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men."

--Woodrow Wilson [U.S. President during World War I]

 

[freakflag]

You suck.
Choke on it.

You want to know why the US has exported so many arms?

It was called The Cold War, numbnuts, and the fact that we won is the only thing that allows you to spread your ignorance and jealousy so freely today.


I'd be willing to spend 1 more minute in silence for you.

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: slaman
From the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

ughhh!!
you lost me there buddy, that document isn't law and can't be regarded as even a worthwhile use of paper!!! :Q

what a joke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

you totally missed answering dullard's point, you can't use that crap to show that the US has LEGALLY recongized israel as a violator of human rights

try again!!

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Maybe the US SHOULD recognize Israeli violations of human rights then.

 

[Balthazar]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
Sooooooooooooo, what's your point, again?

Hahaha, keep tabs on this dorkwad, every stupid thread he makes, post in it

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
Maybe the US SHOULD recognize Israeli violations of human rights then.

won't happen in the next year, i'll guarantee that.

 

[slaman]

Well you obviously don't understand a single thing about this thread.

The US LAW is that it disallows the sales of arms to governments violating human rights. There is no need for a LAW that states Israel violates human rights. Do you even know what a LAW is? The point is that the internationally recognized human rights that is referred to in the US Arms Export Policy is outlined in that UN document. No that document isn't law. I never said that. Nor does it have to be law. It simply states the internationally recognized human rights. Do I have to reiterate this again or do you finally understand?

To recognize Israel as a violator of human rights, the prosecutor would simply has to prove that Israel violates things outlined in that document. It hasn't proven that because noone has brought the issue before a court - at which point, it would be impossible to prove that Israel wasn't.

 

[AndrewR]

The US LAW is that it disallows the sales of arms to governments violating human rights.

And the laws, WHICH YOU CITE, also contain provisions for the President to nevertheless sell military weapons and equipment if such is in the interests of national security. If you would actually read what it is that you cite, you might have seen this. I refer to Section 502B (2) on page 196 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (the first PDF doc on that page).

Further, that law states that a government must be in engaged in a, "...consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights," not merely "violating human rights". The law continues to flesh out the particular violations of human rights, among which could be considered: war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, coerced abortion and involuntary sterilization, and severe violations of religious freedom. The law references "relevant findings" of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) but only specifically mentions the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Also, the extent to which the government in question allows investigations into alleged human rights abuses is taken into consideration. As I recall, when accused of a "massacre" in Jenin, Israel allowed international investigators to go in and attempt to substantiate those claims, which proved false.

Who is the one who doesn't understand the subject?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: slaman
Well you obviously don't understand a single thing about this thread.

The US LAW is that it disallows the sales of arms to governments violating human rights. There is no need for a LAW that states Israel violates human rights. Do you even know what a LAW is? The point is that the internationally recognized human rights that is referred to in the US Arms Export Policy is outlined in that UN document. No that document isn't law. I never said that. Nor does it have to be law. It simply states the internationally recognized human rights. Do I have to reiterate this again or do you finally understand?

To recognize Israel as a violator of human rights, the prosecutor would simply has to prove that Israel violates things outlined in that document. It hasn't proven that because noone has brought the issue before a court - at which point, it would be impossible to prove that Israel wasn't.

like i said, the UN declaration of human rights is something to work towards and many of its points are impossible to implement anywhere. "internationally accepted" would probably be ruled as unconstitutionally vague if anyone actually brought suit agains the gov't based on this law.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: slaman
To recognize Israel as a violator of human rights, the prosecutor would simply has to prove that Israel violates things outlined in that document. It hasn't proven that because noone has brought the issue before a court - at which point, it would be impossible to prove that Israel wasn't.

Right, that is the missing link. No one has taken it to court and it still isn't in US official standing - thus they are innocent until proven guilty. It doesn't matter if they are guilty or not, they have to be proven guilty. The key is what the US considers violations of human rights - not what the UN considers violations of human rights. There is a fine and blurry line there, do you have anything showing what the US considers violations? Next once you do that, you need to find which specific government body is in charge of enforcing these rules on human rights violations. Finally you have to convice them to force the US to recogonize these as violations. If you do all that, then the US must either (A) change it's weapons selling laws or (B) stop selling them. I guarantee if you could ever get that far, they will choose route (A).

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: slaman
...that UN document. No that document isn't law. I never said that. Nor does it have to be law. It simply states the internationally recognized human rights. Do I have to reiterate this again or do you finally understand?

i understand that i disagree with some of the things you are presenting as "givens"

i don't believe that the UN document you refer to is recognized "legally" or "officially" by the United States Govt. as a OUR legal/official definition of human rights standard

you are trying to assert that that document is somehow "official" because the UN published it. not so, in my book. its a UN document, not a US document, therefore it has no bearing on our actions. we are a sovereign nation, not a UN vassel

we don't take our standards from UN documents