“Some US citizens holding Israeli nationality, possessing a Palestinian identity card, or of Arab or Muslim origin have experienced significant difficulties in entering or exiting Israel or the West Bank. "
United States-Israel strategic partnership act of 2013
This is the name of a strange new law, proposed as part of a number of far reaching acts intended to force the US to abandon all diplomatic efforts to normalize relations with Iran.
The bluster about Iran is simply “window dressing.” The real enemy is now and always has been the United States. The intended legislation is simply a later stage of Israel’s “long game.” The “goyim cow” has been milked, it has been starved and now it will be “finished off.”
Perhaps the cow will not go to slaughter as easily as predicted. Israel’s plan, however, is one used so many times before.
Despite this warning, AIPAC, the American/Israeli Public Affairs Committee, has submitted through Senator Barbara Boxer of California, a bill that would allow any and all Israeli citizens, including terrorists and spies, uncontrolled access to the United States.
Not all terrorists or spies would be allowed, only those defined by Israel as “racially Jewish.”
Over 120 of such “personnel” were returned to Israel on 9/12/2001, under White House secret protocols and violent objections from FBI counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism officials.
The story doesn’t end there, not by a long shot.
An American surrender
The real purpose of the proposed law is two-fold:
1. The United States relinquishes sovereignty over its territories to Israel, giving them the right to decide who may or may not enter the US and eliminating all American control over who can and cannot inter the US where “vital interests of Israel apply.”
2. To rescind US approval of UN Resolution 242 and participation in the Fourth Geneva Convention and International Criminal Court in all areas where “vital interests of Israel apply.”
Making America an official “co-conspirator”
Perhaps even more frightening is that the AIPAC/Boxer bill represents defacto withdrawal by the United States from participation in the Geneva Convention. Other issues regarding participation in the International Criminal Court at The Hague make Boxer’s proposed legislation even more troubling.
Though President Clinton signed the Treaty of Rome, establishing the International Criminal Court, the Bush administration withdrew participation. Many top officials of the Bush administration, including President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and others are subject to arrest and detention by order of the ICC.
In 2009, President Obama agreed to rejoin the court but has thus far failed to recognize either requests for extradition of US officials for war crimes or to comply with the Fourth Geneva Convention, to which the US is fully accountable, violations of which are subject to the authority of the ICC.
Americas “infanticide” of the Palestinian state
This is where the AIPAC/Boxer legislation enters “rough waters.” If the US agrees to exclude Israel from traditional visa reciprocity, the US then, in effect, becomes a full participant in violations of the Geneva Convention as it applies to mistreatment of citizens of illegally occupied territories.
The term “illegally occupied” is not used carelessly. The United Nations Security Council, in passing UNSCR 242 on November 2, 1967, was particularly clear as to the status of territories seized by Israel:
"…affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”
Illegal control of this region and restrictions on travel by residents of these illegally occupied areas, if codified into US law as AIPAC/Boxer intends, makes the US, not just fully complicit in the criminal act of officially recognizing illegal occupation, it also rescinds US participation in the Geneva Conventions whose protection it depends but whose tenets it has systematically violated since 2002.
Occupation as a “war crime” and occupiers as “war criminals”
Were the US to officially recognize Israel’s right to, not just illegally occupy territory but, through restricting travel, engage in “collective punishment” of a people based on religion, race or ethnicity, any and all who “conspire” to encode such statutes are, in themselves, war criminals in accordance with the following statute:
“Fourth Geneva Convention (enacted August 1949) and recognized as having passed into ‘customary international law’ in 1993.”
(I94 nations are fully signatory to the Fourth Geneva Convention)
Part II. General Protection of Populations Against Certain Consequences of War Article 13. The provisions of Part II cover the whole of the populations of the countries in conflict, without any adverse distinction based, in particular, on race, nationality, religion or political opinion, and are intended to alleviate the sufferings caused by war.
Part III. Status and treatment of protected persons
Section I. Provisions common to the territories of the parties to the conflict and to occupied territories
Article 32. A protected person/s shall not have anything done to them of such a character as to cause physical suffering or extermination ... the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their hands. This prohibition applies not only to murder, torture, corporal punishments, mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment.While popular debate remains on what constitutes a legal definition of torture (see discussion on the Torture page), the ban on corporal punishment simplifies the matter; even the most mundane physical abuse is thereby forbidden by Article 32, as a precaution against alternate definitions of torture.
Article 33. No persons may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.
Pillage is prohibited.(Bulldozing of homes is “pillage,” see Article 53)
Reprisals against persons and their property are prohibited.
(Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment.)
Section III. Occupied territories
Articles 47-78 An occupier may not forcibly deport protected persons, or deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into occupied territory (Art.49).
Art. 53. Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, or to the State, or to other public authorities, or to social or cooperative organizations, is prohibited, except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.”
Israel claims its occupation is “military necessity.” Five hundred thousand illegal settlers, 250, 000 bulldozed homes, and 7 million refugees soundly destroy that argument.
Can congress, even a congress “AIPAC controlled,” be it blackmail, bribery or threats of mysterious illnesses or plane crashes, pass legislation not just diminishing America’s control of its own territorial integrity but laws both morally repugnant and based on acceptance of practices long recognized as criminal?
When is “reciprocity” not reciprocity?
In accordance with the required reciprocity, as outlined in the proposed legislation, Israel will allow some Americans, excluding:
1. Those of African descent, unless they agree to sterilization and/or “chemical castration,”
2. Americans whose political beliefs are “unacceptable” to Israel
3. “Non-Jews” seeking to visit their native homeland.
The bill is clear as to why Israel is to be allowed the unique right to send anyone they choose to the US including literally thousands of Israelis who are subject to indictment as war criminals or who have long been residing in Israel to avoid extradition for crimes ranging from fraud to serial murder.
The wording of the bill is particularly disturbing. The apparent rationale for America “bending over” for AIPAC is because of the threat of Iran. From the Guardian:
“The bill begins by reciting the standard narrative favored by the Israeli government: "the Government of Iran continues to pose a grave threat to the region and the world at large with its reckless uranium enrichment program and defiance of multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions."
At a time when American citizens are facing severe budget cuts, the bill vows, "to continue to provide Israel with robust security assistance". The bill accomplishes its pro-discrimination goal by mandating Israel's entrance into the visa-free program provided that Israel "has made every reasonable effort, without jeopardizing the security of the State of Israel, to ensure that reciprocal travel privileges are extended to all United States citizens'".
That is the special exemption that no other country in the program is permitted: Israel, alone in the world, is not required to reciprocate for US citizens but merely will make "every reasonable effort, without jeopardizing the security of the State of Israel, to ensure that reciprocal travel privileges are extended to all United States citizens."
Barbara Boxer/ AIPAC seek to codify Israel's right to discriminate against Americans.
The Guardian going further explains more of the significance of this proposed act:
“…the bill sponsored by these American senators would exempt Israel from a requirement that applies to every other nation on the planet, for no reason other than to allow the Israeli government to engage in racial, ethnic and religious discrimination against US citizens… In sum, it is as pure and blatant an example of prioritizing the interests of the Israeli government over the rights of US citizens as one can imagine, and it's being pushed by AIPAC and a cast of bipartisan senators.”
Lara Friedman of Americans for Peace Now explains:
"It takes the extraordinary step of seeking to change the current US law to create a special and unique exception for Israel in US immigration law….(overlooking) Israel's regular and arbitrary denial of entry to US citizens . . . in particular US citizens of Arab descent or US citizens viewed as sympathetic to the Palestinians "
Mike Coogan of the US Campaign to End Israeli Occupationis quoted in the Guardian’s article:
"given that Israel views the mere existence of Palestinians as a threat, the [Boxer/AIPAC bill] would essentially codify Israel's discrimination against Palestinian-, Muslim-, and Arab-Americans into US law…”
Fool me once…
Increasingly, the Israel lobby is being seen as a Chimera, part lion, part goat and part snake, perhaps “mostly” snake.
When Senator Chuck Hagel was nominated as Secretary of Defense, the Israel lobby had the Republican Party stand up and walk out of the senate chambers, every GOP member, even though Hagel is a respected member of their own party.
When it served the Israel lobby to disarm Americans, their “friends” in the Democratic party introduced legislation, not just restricting gun ownership but diminishing other constitutional rights as well.This legislation, characterizing religious, veterans, and patriotic groups as terrorist threats was clearly aimed at disarming Americans likely to resist martial law after another “false flag” 9/11 type attack, one an increasing number of Americans are certain is being planned.
The only question many have is how many “Sandy Hook” type incidents are scheduled before something even more “iconic” is scheduled?
Boxer’s bill, should it sneak past an increasingly vigilant America, will make our next “9/11” free of the hundreds of embarrassing inconsistencies of the last one.