The blatantly illegal American government’s “aid” to Israel might come to an end sooner than expected after the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy’s (IRmep) filed a new urgent application on November 28.
The motion aims to block all payments pending the outcome of an earlier and ongoing lawsuit over the matter.
According to the motion, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the temporary injunction is necessary because the “plaintiff is likely to prevail on the merits” of the case, and it is therefore in the public interest that the subject of the suit—“aid” to Israel—be halted pending the court’s final decision.
According to the lawsuit, filed in August and amended in November 2016, U.S. aid to Israel is illegal because it violates longstanding amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
The Symington and Glenn amendments ban or subject to mandatory waivers U.S. foreign aid to countries with nuclear weapons programs that have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
As Israel has nuclear weapons and refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, U.S. foreign aid to the Jewish ethnostate is clearly illegal in terms of the U.S. government’s own laws.
Although this legal situation has been obvious for decades, the power of the Jewish lobby in Washington D.C. has been able to suppress all legal challenges until now.
The original IRmep case is legally watertight, but the controlled media has ignored the ongoing court case as it fundamentally challenges the Jewish lobby’s control over the U.S. government—and anybody who even dares mention that aspect of Jewish Supremacy is labelled an “anti-Semite.”
The new motion points out that since the presidency of Richard Nixon, “nuclear ambiguity” has been the de facto law of the land in a foreign policy decision made by executive decision, rather than a specific law.
In other words, the new motion says, all U.S. presidents since Nixon onward have simply overridden the Symington and Glenn amendments through “executive decision” foreign policy rulings.
But, the motion continues, the U.S. Constitution’s “Take Care Clause,” (U.S. CONST. art. II, § 3, cl. 5) specifically forbids such executive lawmaking and the “Presidents unilateralism is procedurally and substantively unlawful.”
Furthermore, the motion says, without a preliminary injunction halting the aid, the government will “continue to refuse to properly respond to Plaintiff’s sunshine law requests for benign information, particularly under the Freedom of Information Act.”
IRmep has noted that various government agencies are under executive orders not to cooperate with any media or Freedom of Information requests regarding the exact details of “aid” to Israel, and “if this conduct is allowed to continue, it will be more difficult to obtain a claw back of illegal aid once the Defendants divvy aid up between military contractors in the United States and Israel after a December omnibus bill mandates funding.”
The original suit filed in September noted that that the Obama administration committed to providing $3.8 billion per year to Israel over ten years. This secret “memorandum of understanding” replaces an expiring MOU signed by the Bush administration.
The lawsuit also demanded that a gag order passed by the Obama administration in 2012 prohibiting federal employees and contractors from discussing or releasing government information about Israel’s clandestine nuclear weapons program be overturned.
The decision to enjoin is up to D.C. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is handling a number of related plaintiff cases.
A statement issued by IRmep pointed out that it had won release of a Department of Defense report detailing Israel’s nuclear weapons infrastructure and quest for the hydrogen bomb in a 2014 lawsuit, and in a separate lawsuit, IRmep’s plaintiff won release of files indicating that the CIA withheld information from an FBI investigation into the unlawful diversion of U.S. weapons-grade uranium to Israel.
The IRmep statement also noted that their original lawsuit aims to “claw back” $234 billion in foreign aid unlawfully delivered to Israel since the laws preventing it went into effect.
“A public opinion poll cited in the lawsuit indicates most Americans would rather spend such funds on caring for veterans, education or paying down the national debt,” the IRmep statement said, concluding with the remark that an “economic analysis reveals that Israel foreign aid generates far fewer U.S. jobs (7,000) than would spending on U.S. infrastructure (30,000).”