"In a diplomatic race against the clock, Foreign Ministry Tzipi Livni concurrently met with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in order to arrive at an MOU - a memorandum of understanding - to give guarantees of cooperation against arms smuggling.
Some of the clauses in the memorandum, that will bind the incoming US administration as well, include measures against Iran, Hamas's main backer as regards funding and armament."
Hmm.. and I wonder what else binds the incoming administration. WTH! How can they do this?!!!
But technically, a MoU does not have the force of law but only an understanding between the countries that chose to be bound. So Obama can still go against it, I think.
But if not, there must be some principle (if there is a lacunae, can someone who has rights of audience and knows the procedures in the US supreme court have a suit filed and argued to make this latest MoU or parts of it void? Or defend against anyone of Bush's cronies who files a suit to enforce it?)
Rationale - there should be a decision / law (or decision / law) which disallows the passing of laws (or MoUs) to shackle the next administration esp AFTER the elections and there is a president-elect with the people's vote already. Any laws and MoUs etc, ought to take the president elect's views into account.
The fine line for the rationale is the timing - cut off date - not at the date the president-elect takes over officially BUT at the time the new president is elected. Because that is the time when the people have spoken.
USA - where is your democracy? Your people have chosen. You could pass laws and MoUs before the election but after ... Barack Obama is being ethical in his actions - that there is only one president in office at any one time. HOWEVER, the current president is NOT ethical at all! Racing against the clock to pass MoU at the last minute to bind the incoming president??
Unless... Obama is not what he seems to be and the current govt did take his views into account and are using this drama performance to protect him so he can say that his hands are bound and nothing much he can do about it. I seriously doubt it as I think he is a man of integrity but time will reveal his true intentions. We will see if he is decisive and fearless.
/There is a Chinese saying - "when one needs to sh*t urgently, then only look for a toilet". So it's a mad scramble to go and dig a hole in the ground, like Bush is doing now. ... Shall I say my next sentence? Nah.. I'll be kind and leave it to your imaginations.
*****************************************
Don't want no drama,
No, no drama, no, no, no, no drama
Thanks, KBO
From the above link ... hrumph!
"In a diplomatic race against the clock, Foreign Ministry Tzipi Livni concurrently met with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in order to arrive at an MOU - a memorandum of understanding - to give guarantees of cooperation against arms smuggling.
Some of the clauses in the memorandum, that will bind the incoming US administration as well, include measures against Iran, Hamas's main backer as regards funding and armament."
Hmm.. and I wonder what else binds the incoming administration. WTH! How can they do this?!!!
But technically, a MoU does not have the force of law but only an understanding between the countries that chose to be bound. So Obama can still go against it, I think.
But if not, there must be some principle (if there is a lacunae, can someone who has rights of audience and knows the procedures in the US supreme court have a suit filed and argued to make this latest MoU or parts of it void? Or defend against anyone of Bush's cronies who files a suit to enforce it?)
Rationale - there should be a decision / law (or decision / law) which disallows the passing of laws (or MoUs) to shackle the next administration esp AFTER the elections and there is a president-elect with the people's vote already. Any laws and MoUs etc, ought to take the president elect's views into account.
The fine line for the rationale is the timing - cut off date - not at the date the president-elect takes over officially BUT at the time the new president is elected. Because that is the time when the people have spoken.
USA - where is your democracy? Your people have chosen. You could pass laws and MoUs before the election but after ... Barack Obama is being ethical in his actions - that there is only one president in office at any one time. HOWEVER, the current president is NOT ethical at all! Racing against the clock to pass MoU at the last minute to bind the incoming president??
Unless... Obama is not what he seems to be and the current govt did take his views into account and are using this drama performance to protect him so he can say that his hands are bound and nothing much he can do about it. I seriously doubt it as I think he is a man of integrity but time will reveal his true intentions. We will see if he is decisive and fearless.
/There is a Chinese saying - "when one needs to sh*t urgently, then only look for a toilet". So it's a mad scramble to go and dig a hole in the ground, like Bush is doing now. ... Shall I say my next sentence? Nah.. I'll be kind and leave it to your imaginations.
*****************************************
Don't want no drama,
No, no drama, no, no, no, no drama