AP Fact Check: Could Gingrich and Bachmann’s Promise to Move U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem Be Empty?
- Posted on December 8, 2011 at 11:50pm by
Tiffany Gabbay
- Print »
- Email »
(The Blaze/AP) — In remarks to the Republican Jewish Coalition, GOP presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Michelle Bachmann made nearly identical promises to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem if they are elected.
The two candidates were appealing Wednesday to a crowd that wanted to hear pledges of unwavering U.S. support for Israel, and in a climate where evangelical primary voters – among the strongest supporters of Israel – hold unusual sway. But the promises Gingrich and Bachmann made have a long history of not being kept.
GINGRICH: “So in a Gingrich administration, the opening day, there will be an executive order about two hours after the inaugural address; we will send the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, as of that day.”
BACHMANN: “My administration will fully recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s undivided capital, and we will be the first administration … to finally implement a law passed by Congress requiring State to move their department of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem … On the day of my inauguration … I will announce that our embassy will move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.”
THE FACTS: A promise to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem has become a standard part of pro-Israel political rhetoric. Similar pledges were made during their campaigns by Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. But no administration has ever acted on such a promise once in office.
President Barack Obama, as Clinton and Bush before him, maintains that Jerusalem’s status is a matter for negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians. Although candidate Obama never directly promised to move the embassy, it was a tricky subject: Obama drew criticism for saying that Jerusalem would remain the capital of Israel and would remain undivided.
If the United States were to move its embassy in the absence of a peace deal, the act would be a symbolically explosive step. It would be seen as a prejudgment of those negotiations and spark anger throughout the Arab world. It also would destroy any appearance that the U.S. can be a credible and neutral mediator in peace talks.
A 1995 U.S. law recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and ordered the U.S. embassy to move to Jerusalem from a neutral site in nearby Tel Aviv. Using their presidential power, Clinton, Bush and Obama have routinely suspended the relocation of the embassy while saying the U.S. is still committed to doing it.
The U.S. already has a robust consulate in west Jerusalem that functions as a mini-embassy. It is that office that handles dealings with the Palestinians and handles visas and other business for Israelis.
Jerusalem is an ancient city with historic religious sites sacred to Muslims, Christians and Jews. Its modern history is tortured: The United Nations proposed international jurisdiction for Jerusalem when it wrote the mandate for a Jewish state in 1947, but the plan fell apart the next year when the 1948 war divided the city between Israeli and Jordanian control. Israel captured the Old City in the 1967 war, reuniting the city under its disputed jurisdiction.
Israel claims all of the city as its capital and maintains the seat of government there. The Palestinians claim east Jerusalem as the capital of a future state.
The AP article might make a good point regarding the diplomatic implications of such an embassy move, however it does not include additional historical context regarding Jerusalem.
We should point out that claims of Jerusalem being one of Islam’s “holiest sites” did not surface before the 1930′s. Some historians credit the late Grand Mufti Haj Amin al Husseini with creating this narrative. The objective, of course, was a logistical move intended to drive the Jews from, and weaken their historic claim to Judaism’s most holy of sites — and further, to justify Muslim claim to the land.
It is perhaps also worth noting that Judaic artifacts, which date to the First Jewish Temple period — the eighth to sixth centuries B.C. — were found during archeological excavations:
“This is the first time we have shards from the Temple Mount with a [uniform] date,” Haifa University’s Reich told National Geographic News.
The find “most certainly” indicates the presence of people in the temple during the late eighth century and seventh century B.C., he said.
“From an archaeological standpoint, this is the first time this has happened,” Reich said.
“You can say that this was written in the Bible—but the Bible is a text and texts can be played around with. This is physical evidence.”
In addition, artifacts of the Second Temple have also been found in Jerusalem:
A sword in a scabbard that belonged to a Roman soldier and an engraving of the Temple’s menorah on a stone object were discovered in recent days during excavation work in the 2,000-year-old drainage channel discovered between the City of David and the Jerusalem Archeological Garden near the Western Wall. [...]
The channel served as a hiding place for residents of Jerusalem from the Romans during the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E.
The Temple Mount is of course now covered by Islam’s Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque. Many believe the mosque and shrine’s unique location are intended to prevent Israel-lead archaeological excavations from taking place, while also serving as a cover for Muslim-lead excavations conducted directly beneath — excavations whose said purpose is to unearth and dispose ofJudaic artifacts that would prove Judaism’s long-standing historic, religious, and cultural link to Jerusalem.
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 684 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 647 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 523 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 361 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 314 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 172 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 211 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 146 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Scathing New Ad Capitalizes on Rep. Ryan‘s ’Fading Obama Posters’ Remark 124 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 172 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (63)
geigergag
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:18pmFirst, it is not prejudging negotiations to move the embassy to Jerusalem unless it is pre-judging to allow the arab to live in Hebron, the ancient Jewish City, or anywhere else in Judea and Samaria, where it is the Jews that are the indigenous people. The arabs already have country for the arab now living in Judea and Samaria, it is call Jordan. Second, since many of the arabs living in Israel continue to be in a state of war with the Jews, there is no real negotiation going on. Third, Jerusalem is not holy city for the moslems, that is a myth and the moslems will never get a capitol there anymore than they will get a capitol in Washington DC
Report Post »Ex-Democrat
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:10pm“It would be seen as a prejudgment of those negotiations and spark anger throughout the Arab world.”
…*ahem*…and this would be different from how they normally are because…….?
It makes no sense to attempt to mollify those who hate us and want to kill us because it might make them hate us and want to kill us.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:39amWhile we’re on the Newt subject, even AUSTRALIANS are warning the US against Newt. They made a great website with old photos of Newt and condensed info that’s a quick read, but makes the point well.
http://www.newtexposed.com/
Report Post »cromag11b
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:01amThat whole area needs us to give ti the King Solomon treatment. Nuke it flat and then see who really wants it.
Report Post »Think of how many lives have been wasted over a stupid chunk of ground all because the Jews decided to steal it when they came stumbling out of the desert, then the Christians, then the Muslims also tied their hitch to it. If the 3 tribes of Abraham want it that bad they can fight over a smoking crater.
Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 9:56amI love both ads — I‘d give Romney’s anti-Newt ad an A+ and Ron Paul’s anti-Newt ad and A
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 9:47amIt was downright dishonest of the Republican Jewish Coalition to exclude Ron Paul from those debates. Here’s Dr. Paul talking about that exclusion, his policy regarding Israel etc.
“Israel is our best friend”
Dr. Paul is the only one that doesn’t support aborting jewish babies in the holy land
Did you know that Ron Paul is the candidate most-likely to defeat Obama because of his foreign policy:
Do you know it? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhAGZIv22Us
Report Post »Ghandi was a Republican
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 9:02amIslam spread itself as a predator through fear and intimidation. It stole Israel’s land as they have across the middle east. It is time to cut the head off the Snake and it should die by the sword it lives by. Islam is a culture with no clear God. It has 100 names for a deity? It is nothing but a culture that rules by the sword. they will tell you they are a CULTURE every time they commit their atrocities. So shall it be- the sword!~
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 9:09ami guess israel could put their capitol in any city in israel if they wish. the u.s. has no business telling them anything.
Report Post »kcinco
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 7:04amAren’t there more important topics to address regarding Israel? And why would we spend millions or billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to move an embassy? Let’s just reassure Israel that we are their ally and will support them militarily if need be. Campaign promises are ridiculous and candidates would be wise to stop making them.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:30amTrue. Campaign promises are downright dangerous as Newt is about to learn. Newt said he would ask Bolton to be his secretary of state. Seems promises of a position by a candidate — is against the LAW!
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/12/07/gingrich_promise_breaks_the_law.html
December 07, 2011 – Gingrich Promise Breaks the Law
Report Post »Stoic one
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 11:44amVECHORIK
I followed your link and then went farther… you are misleading with your statement of law breaking. I suggest you go back and read more than the headline.
Report Post »cobblestone
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 5:25amThe important thing to remember is who is not pro-Israel: Ron Paul. Newt talks a lot. If it were to cause him to lose popularity, we know he would retreat. He’s about celebrityhood. We need to look more at the character of these folks than their stated policy positions. Michelle Bachman is sincere, but she doesn’t not have enough support.
Report Post »blue_sky
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 6:56am.
It is important for a conservative not to lie, but to look at the facts
Ron Paul has just been exposed over Israel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcKIsBcEA-8
(must see, cannot argue against hard facts)
Report Post ».
martinez012577
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 8:29am@cobblestone
You sad, mindless, worker drone.
I am voting for Ron Paul even if I have to write his name in.
Report Post »Stoic one
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 11:54amBLUE_SKY thanks for the link… Ron Paul is looking better and better…
Report Post »Capitalizt
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 3:51pmRon Paul is more Pro-Israel than many people realize.
Report Post »http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/paul-israel-support-wead/2011/12/07/id/420247
Shiroi Raion
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 5:18amMichelle would do it. I’m voting for her it the primaries no matter what anyone says. She probably won’t win because (from the looks of the polls) people are letting the media choose for them… again! Either way, I’m voting for honesty, character, and for the candidate with values most similar to my own. She’s the best. No matter who wins the primaries, Obama’s gotta go!
Report Post »momsense
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 5:00amCertainly would put a wrench in the plans of the Palistinian terrorists if they did.
Report Post »whatthehellbook
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 3:19amRon Paul‘s new ads are great and I really think he’s going to win Iowa. I read that the Paul campaign has 20,000 hard commits in Iowa and the total turnout is usually around 100,000. He should get around 30% come January 3rd.
RON PAUL 2012
http://www.whatthehellbook.com/the-book/
Report Post »YepImaConservative
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 5:48amNice commercial. I hear RT (Russian Television) is looking for some new Pro- Ron Paul spots to run.
Did you hear about the the new self-help group for compulsive Ron Paul infomercial posters here on the Blaze? It’s called “On and On Anon.”
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:37amI often watch Russian Television on YouTube.
Report Post »The thing I LIKE is that they watch the US media and INCLUDE WHAT OUR MEDIA OMITTS!
Guess they figure if the media doesn’t want the US citizens to know something, then it’s good to tell. LOL
I don’t care what their votives are — Information is good to know.
jim
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 2:09amAn empty promise coming from a politician? Noooo! But, in this case, I think Michele would do it. Gringrich is a coin toss.
Report Post »Detroit paperboy
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 4:30amYou know. I think Ron Paul is totally freakin nuts, but at this point, im inclined to vote for him, and im not kidding…. We psycho change !!!! Totally psycho change, nothing less…..
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 4:36amThe Article is Meaningless… because there is no relaltionship to… whatever Past Presidents did, or did not do… and what a New President would do!
Report Post »YepImaConservative
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 6:09am>PAPERBOY. Ron Paul will be pummeled with his stances on military policy (Liberal), foreign policy (Liberal) and social issues (Liberal). His views are far out of step with Republican primary voters. That in itself will be enough to kill his chances of winning. Ron Paul is a quasi-Conservative-thrifty-Liberal. The only thing he’s got going for him are his economic stances (for the most part…).
If Paul were a serious candidate at some point, all it would take to destroy him is to show his previous views about drug legalization (and decriminalization) and show quotes from the 1988 nutty Libertarian Party platform, when Paul was its nominee. The TV commercials about “our children” being in danger with a Ron Paul presidency virtually write themselves. I will be donating personally to the anti-Paul “money-bombs” to help create these spots if necessary. Bet on it.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 9:57amRon Paul’s foreign policy WILL WIN THE ELECTIONS — stats say so!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-aF4sQ-1Oc
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:44amI’m not afraid of Dr. Paul discussing his drug policy. I WANT treatments centers instead of jails for non-violent drug offenders. You like to DISTORT, YepImaConservative! The President has no say about legalizing drugs, porn, nor prostitution — It’s a STATE right! Just like Nevada legalized prostitution. That was the end of the world, wasn’t it? How has that affected you?
Report Post »carl_in_ohio
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 1:40amin a time of tense political atmosphere, an unaddressed crushing US debt, American forces withdrawing from the Middle East, a progressive left government with less than 20 percent approval rating — why are we talking about moving an embassy?
for iconic reasons? why are so many people trying to diffuse and redirect our attentions away from the real issues of debt, unemployment, energy, and a need to rebuild our wealth?
the embassy works where it is — why create new issues, problems, bills to pay?
Can we focus on the real issues?
Report Post »1casawizard
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 2:49amvotes, Carl, votes. we have to have the jewish votes to help overcome the idiocy that is in the WH. Bachmann will probably make true to her promise. Jewish voters usually vote dem. The Israelis can help pay for the relocation. You have alot of good Qs. The real issue now is getting the Chicago gangster out of the WH.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:00amThe Jewish vote in inconsequential:
The population of American adherents of Judaism was estimated to be approximately 5,128,000 (1.7%) of the total population in 2007 (301,621,000); including those who identify themselves culturally as Jewish (but not necessarily religiously)
Report Post »HarmonyCorruption
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 1:04amThis has been promised by past Presidents and never gone through, just more of the same. I don‘t see how it’s relevant to either nation’s well being, either.
Report Post »bigsir74
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:59amJust another one of Newt’s stupid sratements. A little off topic ,but you remember three years ago when Rush Limbaugh [because Mccain had the nomination wrapped up] he encouraged Republicans to register Democratic and vote for Hilary Clinton then switch back Republican To create a little, and I quote Rush “chaos”. Well it appears the Democrats are playing the sane game. To get Gingrich as our nomination [the easiest victory for Obama] the liberal Democrats are going to ruin any chance we have of beating Obama and are swaying the poll numbers,and as soon as Newt gets the nomination you will see them switching and registering back as a Democrat and voting Obama.Thanks Rush. Did you hear how upset Rush was today when hearing other republicans making truthful,but negative comments about his Newt. Thank you.
Report Post »garbagecanlogic
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:56amSo just exactly why would anyone be worried about an “explosive” response from the arab world? They hate us as it is. Show some b*lls for a change. Don’t act like a dummycrat forever.
The U.S. Out Of The U.N.
Report Post »The U.N. Out Of The U.S.
carl_in_ohio
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 1:43amI can see why your name is “garbage can logic.”
Report Post »its well suited.
Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:48amI like GarbageCanLogic’s — LOGIC
Where do you think the “one world government” comes from? The UN!
Report Post »Read UN Agenda 21 that Bush I AGREED TO and every president (Democrat & Republican) has pushed to the hilt.
circleDwagons
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:52amwhy wasn’t Paul at this meeting? shouldn’t the ambassy be located in the capital of the country?
Report Post »YepImaConservative
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 6:24amBecause Paul wasn’t invited and for good reason. Paul was at his “ambassy” (The Von Mises Inst.) listening (and not saying much) to all things anti-semite by Lew Rockwell… his personal ambassador of good will…
Report Post »martinez012577
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 8:45am@ yep
Your comments are just starting to look really bad.
Here educate yourself son. Click on the links in my other responses to you and then follow up with this one.
Class is in session.
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/12/08/ron-paul-israel-our-best-friend/
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:01amDr. Paul talks about why he wasn’t at the meeting and what he would have said if he were there:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-aF4sQ-1Oc
Report Post »JLGunner
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:13am@Yep. Martinez is going to school you, ha! Since I’ve seen your comments on The Blaze, I’ve actually done the research on Paul and appreciate you riding their tin cans (goes along with tin foil hats) with useful information and humor.
Report Post »riseandshine
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:48amThey’d do whatever the shadow government wants them to do
Report Post »4stmichael
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:48amThe channel served as a hiding place for residents of Jerusalem from the Romans during the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E.
===
B.C.E. ______________________ C.E
Before Common Era __________ Common Era
BC __________________ AD
Before Christ __________Anno Domini [in the Year of our Lord]
The BCE CE crowd has not sufficiently distinguished nor scientifically distinguished the point of departure from “Before Common Era to Common Era. Their commoner-type attempt to define a movement from era to era is muddled and ridiculous. Wiki says BC/AD is interchangeable with the commoner-type and that both are acceptable. Hmmm..
They remain in NEED of the Birth of Christ on this planet to even have a jumping off point for their commoner’s puddle-muddled attempt at an explanation. They can keep their commoner’s mentality.
I’m honored to remain in the Year of Our Lord.
I Stand With Israel!!
Report Post »carl_in_ohio
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 1:46amI stand with Israel too.
But do you several hundred million dollars to spare to relocate an existing embassy?
I know the US is printing money as fast as it can, but some day someone has to pay for all our existing debt.
Why not live in the house we already own, and pay off our bills first — then we can move.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:25amJust Google “images” U.S. embassy and gawk
Report Post »It’s absolutely disgraceful that the U.S. builds a “palace” and calls it an embassy!
Swimming pools, you name it!
johnokee1
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:44amGod will one day reclaim the mount. Islam is destined to be on the trash heap of a long list of failed religions. Why hasn’t it happened yet?, because the fullness of the gentiles has not come in yet. Rom 11:25 We await Christ! In the meantime Islam is God‘s tool to inflict punishment onto a hedonistic culture of western civilization and Satan’s tool to gain power in the ME.
The Antichrist will come out of the revived Roman Empire as per Daniel and Islam occupies 60% of the old Roman Empire. When the church is gone, don’t believe in the Muslim or anyone who brings a said peace to Israel with her enemies, it will be a 3.5 year false peace and then all hell breaks loose. Don’t believe them! Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
Report Post »jzs
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:49amOh come on. You’re seriously asking if Bachmann and Gingrich are making empty promises?
Report Post »Skul
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:34amNow, promise and keep the same.
Report Post »Move the freaking UN, to someplace else.
THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:33amYes, let’s worry about Isreal while our own politicians destroy us at home…
Report Post »bioengineer
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:36amDitto. Who cares where the Embassy is. And Im sure Israelis have no say, like its even our choice.
Report Post »lodgerat
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:20amIn my humble opinion the U.S. Embassy should have been moved to Jerusalem a long time ago.
Report Post »abbygirl1994
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 12:16amI believe Bachmann would Gingrich never! God help us!
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on December 9, 2011 at 10:54amI agree. Bachmann seems honest and Gingrich has been caught in too many lies.
Report Post »