See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Who and What is “Israel”?
Source:
We The People Foundation
URL Source: http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/Update2007-04-15.htm
Published: Apr 15, 2007
Author: We The People Foundation
Post Date: 2007-04-19 00:15:52 by robin
Keywords: None
Views: 135
Comments: 6
Preface We have received a second round of emails relating to our hypothesis that U.S. aid to the State of Israel is repugnant to the General Welfare clause of the Constitution. As with the first round of responses, there is more agreement than disagreement. Because we are interested in the truth and care about people whose feelings we may have hurt or whose treasured shibboleths we may have undermined, we endeavor herein to once again objectively, intelligently and rationally respond to our critics. However, there is a danger. With each new article, round of emails and responses to those emails, our readers may lose sight of the fundamental Constitutional question before us. This is especially true as we respond more and more to critics whose criticisms are based on biblical doctrine and philosophy, esoteric or otherwise. Our hypothesis is as follows: If anyone can show that the hostilities being directed toward the United States and the War on Terror has nothing to do with our funding of Israel’s occupation and oppression of the Palestinian people, we beg them to do so. In the meantime, we are not to close our eyes to violations of the General Welfare clause of the Constitution because we have a personal/political relationship with a particular association, and see only other violations, say, violations of the tax clauses.
Please remember, as you read this article, our hypothesis is what is important here, and our hypothesis is not the result of any ill-will toward Israel, Jews, AIPAC or apostate Evangelical Christian groups. Our hypothesis is aimed squarely at the United States Government in defense of the Constitution and individual Rights, no more or less.
1) U.S. tax money is being used to oppress and destroy the Palestinian society;
2) in response, the Palestinians and their sympathizers are attacking the United States;
3) in reply, the United States has instituted a domestic War on Terror;
4) the War on Terror has given rise to a growing Police State in the U.S.;
5), the Police State has resulted in an across the board erosion of individual Freedoms, Rights and Liberties; and 6), therefore, U.S. financial aid to Israel is violative of the General Welfare Clause of the Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 1).
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: robin (#0)
Jefferson would've disagreed.
"a motley rabble of saucy boys, Negroes, and mulattos, Irish teagues and outlandish jack tars...shouting and hazing and threatening life...whistling, screaming, and rending an Indian yell... throwing every species of rubbish they could pick up in the street."
I've read everything Jefferson has ever written, including his personal journals. I don't recall his ever discussing Israel, and I'm not sure anything he said or wrote would allow you to make such a statement. US Aid is repugnant to the general welfare clause, but since the executive and the congress get to do the interpreting, and they are whores for AIPAC, it's a moot point.
1) U.S. tax money is being used
to oppress and destroy the Palestinian society; 2) in response, the
Palestinians and their sympathizers are attacking the United States; 3) in
reply, the United States has instituted a domestic War on Terror; 4) the War
on Terror has given rise to a growing Police State in the U.S.; 5), the
Police State has resulted in an across the board erosion of individual Freedoms,
Rights and Liberties; and
6), therefore, U.S. financial aid to Israel is violative of the General Welfare
Clause of the Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 1). Nothing to disagree with here.
"The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes nor between parties either — but right through the human heart." — Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
I object to (6), and I think Jefferson would, were he alive. (6) is consistent with supporting "whatsoever they shall think or pretend will be for the general welfare" which Jefferson rejected. (6) grants that US aid to Israel would be o.k. constitutionally, provided it forwards or is believed to forward the general welfare. The constitution prospectively prescribes a set of processes, powers of state, and their general ends. Whether the use of a power is constitutional does not depend on the result of that use. Congress has the power to declare war; if the United States loses a declared war, the war is not therefore post facto unconstitutional. A war is unconstitutional if unconstitutionally entered. However, a war may be entered under false pretenses. If declared by congress in honesty, the war remains constitutional, but those who maneuvered entry are guilty of treason. I certainly agree US aid to Israel is greatly destructive of the general welfare, but the "general welfare clause" is just that -- general -- and followed by a list of particulars. US financial aid to Israel is not unconstitutional because it is bad for the US. US aid is unconstitutional, period.
"a motley rabble of saucy boys, Negroes, and mulattos, Irish teagues and outlandish jack tars...shouting and hazing and threatening life...whistling, screaming, and rending an Indian yell... throwing every species of rubbish they could pick up in the street."
I don't think arguing over how Jefferson would respond today is particularly useful, so we'll agree to disagree on that point. In his lifetime, he opposed the excesses of the Federalists, so he clearly did not favor the kind of government they represented, which is exactly what the Republicans represented between 1952-1954, and more recently. If he were here today, he'd be at some black titty bar, in the champagne room, banging black chicks two at a time.
I guess that means I wouldn't be reading any of his posts on Stormfront? lol
Law Enforcement Against ProhibitionWe have received a second round of emails relating to our hypothesis that U.S. aid to the State of Israel is repugnant to the General Welfare clause of the Constitution.
#2. To: Tauzero (#1)
Jefferson would've disagreed.
#3. To: Tauzero (#1)
Our hypothesis is as follows:
#4. To: robin, Paul Revere (#3)
Nothing to disagree with here.
#5. To: Tauzero (#4)
#6. To: Paul Revere (#5)
If he were here today, he'd be at some black titty bar, in the champagne room, banging black chicks two at a time
In a CorporoFascist capitalist society, there is no money in peace, freedom, or a healthy population, and therefore, no incentive to achieve these.
- - IndieTX
"Peace? There's no money in peace! What we need is a war!"
--Three Stooges
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest