…”no nation on earth has the power to dictate where the US places its embassies.”

Ok. But the point remains that Israel's acquisition of East Jerusalem is illegal under international law.

 

Vice President Al Gore stated that the US viewed "united Jerusalem" as the capital of Israel. In 1995, Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act which declared that Jerusalem should remain undivided and that it should be recognized as Israel's capital.

If you prefer international law over US law, perhaps you should move there.

 

International law is intended to facilitate the peaceful existence of people across international boundaries. If you want people to peacefully co-exist, perhaps YOU should support its principles.

 

Yes, it is.
The WB was part of Jordan in 1967; Israel occupied it 1967-1994.
In 1994, Jordan ceded the land to Israel, via treaty.
Thus, Israel did not take it, Jordan gave it away.

East Jerusalem is part of the territory ceded in 1994.

 

East Jerusalem is part of the Jordanian territory ceded to Israel in 1994.

 

Jordan did not cede East Jerusalem to Israel.

 

According to the 1994 peace treaty between Jordan and Israel, Jordan ceded all of the land west of the Jordan river.
Where is every part of Jerusalem, relative to the Jordan river?
Be honest now.

 

Again, JORDAN NEVER GAVE EAST JERUSALEM TO ISRAEL.

 

Really? Where in the treaty is this found?
http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/peacetreaty.html

Fact is, Jordan ceded all the territory west of the Jordan.
This necessarily includes East Jerusalem.
Your refusal to understand this in no way means it is not true.

 

Fact is Jordan did not GIVE East Jerusalem to Israel. Jordan gave up its claims to East Jerusalem. That is different from saying that Jordan GAVE East Jerusalem to Israel.

 

By recognition of the Jordan as the Israeli/Jordan border, the West Bank was ceded to - that is, given to - Israel, in toto.
This includes East Jerusalem.
Unless, of curse, you can find language in the treaty to the contrary.
Which you cannot.

 

You are wrong. The recognition of the boundary is ONLY THAT. It is merely a recognition of a geographic location of a BOUNDARY and nothing more. There is nothing whatsoever in that treaty that says Jordan is giving East Jerusalem to Israel.

 

Not in the slightest.

The 1994 treaty created a national border, agreed to by both sides.
One side of the border: Jordan
The other side: Israel
Which side of the border contains East Jerusalem?

 

France is on the other side of the border. Is France part of Israel too?

 

I understand you don't want to answer the question, because to do so honestly will prove you wrong, but...

The 1994 treaty created a national border, agreed to by both sides.
One side of the border: Jordan
The other side: Israel
Which side of the border contains East Jerusalem?

 

Again, there are so many things "on the other side of the border." You answer this question, does all land on the face of the Earth west of that boundary belong to Israel?

 

And you are fully aware that your question is asked outside the context of the conversation.

The 1994 treaty created a national border, agreed to by both sides.
One side of the border: Jordan
The other side: Israel
Which side of the border contains East Jerusalem?

 

I am fully aware that a boundary is just a boundary, no matter how much you may try to create the fiction that Jordan gave East Jerusalem to Israel. Answer this question, Egypt is on the other side of that boundary. Does Egypt belong to Israel?

 

The 1994 treaty created the national border between Israel and Jordan.
On which side of the border is East Jerusalem?

 

On which side of the border is Egypt? Does Egypt belong to Israel?

 

Its very clear you aren't willing to discuss the issue honestly, because you know to do so proves you wrong.
Thus, I accept your concession of the point.

 

Israel took East Jerusalem from Jordan in 1967. Jordan has since relinquished all rights, claim or title, so your point is moot.

 

There is no concession, just as Jordan NEVER gave East Jerusalem to Israel. The treaty that you put forward specified a boundary and nothing more.

 

My point is that under international law, Israel has illegally annexed East Jerusalem.

 

The national borders created by the 1994 treaty say otherwise.