a complex conflict one that's been going on for decades so i know the u.s. acts as mediator yet again between israel and palestine to go sheesh and over the border ever end with an agreement. but it's not only foes that are having trouble seeing eye to eye when it comes to the border friends are disagreeing too so is obama and netanyahu gather at the white house we'll explore how deep the relationship really runs between israel and the u.s. . the more ignoring the law when it isn't convenient. that is not who we are. but is it who we are today that was senator obama talking but is president obama's

these days sixteen in libya a deadline for ending the conflict is he breaking the law. and it's the end of the world as we know it at least some people seem to think so we'll show you how they're preparing for doomsday which is tomorrow may twenty first. good evening it's friday may twentieth i'm lauren lyster coming to you from here in washington d.c. and you are watching our t.v. now we have seen u.s. and israeli leaders give speeches and press conferences over the last few days everyone wants peace but no one wants to pay it's a reality that echoes in the chambers of the conflict between israel and palestine and what that payment will be and how to collect remains central to the debate what is the role of the u.s.

and why decade after decade does little progress seem to be made archies christine for south takes a look inside the many sides of this complex conflict. it is a scene only to so milieu in this region as to israel's border that leads. to. here it was the may fifteenth protest marking what palestinians called not for catastrophe the creation of the state of israel on this date in one thousand nine hundred because for israel it was a matter of security according to downhaul a co-director of the zionist organization of america i don't know what any country would do when people gather on your border and come across in violation of the law . but for palestinians it is the continuation of a seemingly endless spite for an independent palestinian state a fight in which us leaders try time and time again to play a chief negotiator from president carter to reagan to george h.w.

bush to president clinton george w. bush and now the obama administration said we believe the borders of israel and palestine should be based on the nine hundred sixty seven lines with mutually agreed swaps. so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states an unusually blunt endorsement of an end to israeli occupation of arab land by u.s. president the idea was immediately rejected by five minister benjamin netanyahu israel argues peace cannot come at the cost of its security and continued palestinian rocket attacks but there is one thing both sides actually agree on when it comes to the u.s. role as mediator it approaches a fact is all wrong american policy is built on this conceptions a wrong view of the causes of the conflict and a prescription that doesn't stand up to even the most casual scrutiny of the

question is not right i don't we have a solution at this point but why on earth should we expect to have a solution with with this system as it is their use of money you are with the jerusalem project says talk is cheap in the us says it's in gage's in the process of a two state solution but is funding and supporting behavior by israel that simultaneously working against. somebody bribing somebody to change their behavior doesn't work when you boil them rotten a recent example in november the us offered several billion dollars in military assistance to israel if it put off the construction of jewish settlements for three months regardless award obama's fears or how he sees it and he sees it better than bush but what he does is can say the costs of peace are high high cost of broad and at home pro israel many accounting for between one quarter and one third of all donations to the major political parties

a concern for many including former u.s. congresswoman cynthia mckinney they want the executive branch they want the legislative branch pro israel campaign contributors totaled nearly twelve million dollars in two thousand and ten far higher than other. major donors making increasing the pressure on israel a politically daunting prospect especially if elections eighteen months away we will see this is a lot of movement but with the need to show support for the arab spring and a reconciliation between the two college students and factions u.s. leaders may be feeling the pressure to make a push yet again christine for zero r.t. . and whether you see them as high points or low point in u.s. israeli relations we wanted to take a look back at some of them looking back to nine hundred forty eight israel declared independence on may fourteenth now the united states announced a fact of recognition only minutes after the announcement but with independence for

israel the arabs called the nakba or the catastrophe now in one nine hundred sixty seven you may remember that as the six day war between israel and neighboring arab states now also though the u.s. was neutral the u.s. did see an attack on one of its naval ships the u.s.s. liberty by an israeli air force fighter jet now despite killing thirty four crew members and a conclusion the attack was a mistake a case of confused identity some survivors and u.s. diplomats continue to dispute official findings they allege it was not a mistake and this remains the only maritime incident in u.s. history where u.s. military forces were killed and it was never investigated by congress and camp david was the site of agreements and breakdowns in one nine hundred seventy eight after secret negotiations the accords were signed by egypt and israel and witnessed by u.s. president jimmy carter it led to the one nine hundred seventy nine egypt israel peace treaty and in two thousand two thousand excuse me the middle east peace summit where bill clinton you see there was president met with israel and

palestinian authority leaders they attempted to negotiate a settlement in the israeli palestinian conflict and it failed. now for more on the policies and relationships in the middle east earlier i spoke with chad freeman he is the former ambassador to saudi arabia and here is part of our conversations. were involved one way or another because of course we subsidize israel heavily with tax dollars. with weapons. to conduct its occupation of these territories so even if we don't try to mediate we are there and we're. i think the cost of the conflict has become so. generating instability terrorism. for for us as well as the region. it's become the key to our whole policy.

position in the middle east and we really don't have any choice we've got to do. so with president obama coming out saying what he did. doesn't matter what he says because as you mentioned money talks the united states has given more aid to israel than any other foreign country since one thousand nine hundred five i think it's three billion dollars a year is the annual average that seems to say the united states will support israel and does no matter what's said publicly is that the case well that's been a problem because israel suffers from a moral hazard it doesn't have to weigh the consequences for itself in the long term when it makes a decision in the present in the short term so it has made a whole series of decisions including putting all these settlements into what is left of palestinian territory. and thereby making it almost physically impossible to have a two state solution the alternative to

a two state solution is some sort of apartheid that is second class citizenship in israel proper for its population and no rights whatsoever for palestinians under occupation. that's not acceptable to anybody it is seems acceptable to some people that are complicit in the united states and also that see it very differently and israel and i kind of want to point to that you know you say them going hazard and you mentioned some of these consequences but you know on the flip side you see the israeli prime minister saying no way you know obama the united states leaders are not living in reality they don't understand our reality israel needs to be able to defend itself and it can't with what they're calling for they don't see it as a moral hazard where you say well actually what he said was there isn't what he called. which is the occupied territories the settlements in there would be indefensible but of course they're a defensible they were illegal from the beginning nobody in the world outside

israel accepts them. so that's really the whole issue so basically what he's saying is what the likud party charter says which is that the palestinians cannot have an independent state they can have something if they want to call it a state even resembles an indian reservation they can do that but this is not a new position for mr netanyahu i would say it's all the also not a new position for american presidents to talk about. sixty seven borders really the whole the whole talking point of this is that this is the first president to it publicly said that that's absolutely wrong george w. bush said this in two thousand and five. nixon said it. in seventy three. resolution two forty two which the united states voted for the united nations so it is nothing new at all so it's not news it's news only

because there's been a kind of. conspiracy of silence on the issue we went from saying that the settlement process settlements are illegal and saying that they were an obstacle to peace. saying that they were something that had to be negotiated but legally. you know that was all happening last year around this time and it was also when the apac conference was going on the pro israel lobby the powerful pro israel lobby is going on again now and i remember back then people that were at the delegates were at that conference saying they expected an apology over the public statements of the u.s. on settlements by secretary of state hillary clinton who spoke and they were all saying you know obama may be a one term president do you think that what's going on now politically for obama has put him in a dubious position well i think it's probably complicated his relationship with some important donors in the american jewish community. but i don't think it can be

relaxed i think just the complication the more amazing thing to me is that here is a foreign prime minister coming to the united states. going to speak to the congress deliberately. to undercut the statement that you know the president was going to. organizing meeting in washington against the president united states and that's really rather unusual what i mean organizing a meeting against the president i mean a pack meeting the president speaking at it that's the point isn't it. talk about why it matters it matters a great deal because. of that particular lobbying group in american politics they have the capacity the others are not alone in this to basically stalemate on capitol hill and this of course is part of the problem. israeli

leaders don't feel any obligation to listen to the president whoever he or she may be in the future because they're always confident that they can go. to capitol hill and. congress. that's a big problem because our foreign policy where examples where because we do there are figures that support the power of the proper israel lobby if you look at money you know they spent for example eleven point nine million dollars in two thousand and ten on candidates and when you look at other ideologically driven. groups and i mean they pale in comparison to the low to mid single digit numbers for things like guns rights human rights other foreign policy. you know factions so aside from the money where do we really see signs of that influence i know that you have a personal story that you were very public about at a time when you were being looked at as the to chair the national intelligence for

the administration so i think that this particular. rules largely by fear. is a long record of their financing opponents and elections for people who like. there was a very famous. post. in an election almost. they have defeated the. person illinois earlier. they tried to defeat. john chafee. in rhode island and so the fear always failed then wouldn't that indicate that it's not the power that it was that was the one you know lateral that was the one instance when they generally succeeded and they think the rate of success on issuing candidates or politicians take their life

. very intimidating. so we don't really have much of a debate about issues connected with israel. there was a former apec. so you can pick your car. and. that was ambassador charles freeman the former ambassador to saudi arabia now it is day sixteen in the u.s. intervention in libya the military intervention is the deadline to get out or get approval from congress by law yet no loud noise for anyone to of course the law very few calls from congress seem to falling on deaf ears so what does this mean for the rule of law and the rules of u.s. engagement in war take a look. fifty eight. fifty nine. sixty eight i said at the outset that this was going to be a matter of days and weeks. days to turn two months and in libya the battle rages

on in washington time has run out. in this rhetoric is running up against a real growth block thing here you don't think their power thanks is a war powers are the war powers act a resolution that says sixty days marks the deadline for an american president pull u.s. forces from hostilities or get congress's approval for a formal declaration of war yet neither appear to be happening and according to the president publicly time seems to be the enemy only for someone else now time is working against gadhafi. he does not have control over his comfort but it's unclear who or what has control over this one the law or the will of the president the president did not seek a declaration of war begin with. nor really has there been much discussion of the

war powers act nor does it seem there will be when pressed by the majority of congress not with leaders of the senate foreign relations committee saying there are no plans for action and top lawmakers like john mccain saying quote he's never recognized the constitutionality of the war powers act nor has any president which is only sort of true according to legal and political experts every president has expressed some concerns about its constitutionality but interestingly not a single president has questioned the sixty day rule hathaway's says if obama does this would set a new precedent for combat by a president who campaigned on ending u.s. wars and abiding by constitutional law. still when it comes to war powers there's enough blame to go around absolutely congress doesn't take it seriously and kristen seven taken it seriously and us media don't take it seriously meanwhile u.s.

drones fly over libya dropping bombs and the last governing this type of mission seem to have flown out the window to it makes a joke of the whole idea of having laws that you can still go out and give beautiful speeches as the president seems to do and talk about peace and justice in principles. as the clock strike days sixteen in the libyan intervention and the billions of reported three quarters of a billion dollars in the u.s. is third war with no congressional oversight or end in sight time is working against rhetoric and the rule of law in theory in reality in the nation's capital though no alarm appears to be going on or in leicester arcane washington d.c. . and for more on this libya deadline earlier i spoke with ivan eland senior fellow the independent institute and here is what he had to say. yes it's illegal and unconstitutional and it's not the first president to have done it but it's clearly

a move in the direction of more executive power and more. executive you're so patient in the. congressional war making power which is clearly in our in the united states the constitution the founders spent a lot of time on this that the original convention is probably the most important issue they've addressed and it's very important to the republic and they want to make sure that executive branch. because they had an experience that experience of the kings of europe taking their countries to war and all the costs falling on the . average person in blood and treasure so they put the requirements in the most important requirement of the constitution is declaring war and we don't do that anymore and so yes so why doesn't anyone care is my question i mean congress you have a few members you have six republican senators that sent a letter to obama saying you're breaking the law we have a few other outspoken members of congress but you have really no push from

congressional leadership to enforce this well this has been occurring since one nine hundred fifty when harry truman was the first president to run a large under cleared war and so people have sort of gotten used to it that's one problem the second problem is if your congress man or woman you know you don't want to be tagged with responsibility for the success or failure there's this there's that about abdicating responsibility yes why do you think that what's what's your evidence that that well because people they want to take credit if it goes well the praise the president or if it goes well badly they can criticize him but if you have a vote on a declaration of war anything sort of authorization for that they have to go on record as either opposing it or supporting it and therefore you know they get blamed by their constituents one way or the other so just let the president take responsibility and will you know will be the kid that sir is on the side and say he

did a great job or he didn't do a good job and you know the constitution of course has always been important that is what this country was founded upon but it's seen this renewed resurgence where you always say lawmakers quoting from that you see the tea party worshipping it i mean there is a renewed obsession with the constitution so is it this. kind of sign that that matters less than politics well i think you do see some of the tea party like ron paul and rand paul worrying about this but more tea parties should get involved in this because there are more involved in taxes and stuff but this is a much more important issue for the republican we've. on way outside you tend towards the you know executive rule and that's not a good thing for a republic and a couple things on that you know you mentioned that other presidents have had not followed the war powers resolution but from what i understand the only president that broke the sixty day rule was bill clinton during kosovo but even then he still went to congress for funding so he did at least go to congress is this

a new precedent if it is i mean the precedent that harry truman's the war powers was an act was in fourth and it came after vietnam when they discussed it with lyndon johnson and nixon so yes clinton did that's exactly what happened but i think obama is in new territory since he's not going to get funding special funding approved like bill clinton did so he's well he's gone farther than the clinton and of course george bush for all his failings he did get congressional authorization for afghanistan and iraq and he was the champion of executive power but obama has really gone further in this case than bush ever went a couple things on that why is he getting a free pass they don't feel like we're seeing that much about it or criticism and what does this say about a president that campaigned on a not getting involved militarily when you were attacked and then u.s. wars and stalling the law i mean he had a sound bite that we played at the beginning of the show where he said that we will

be ruled by law we will no longer violate the constitutional law that's not who we are as a country but it seems to be who he is as a president if this is an example well he's a constitutional law professor and he made the statement that you shouldn't we should be going to war unless congress approves unless we're attacked the country is a test which is what the constitution said and the work hours act also says so there's no excuse for him doing this and you know it is better and it's just a case of he was in the opposition before when george bush was president conducting wars now he's that he was the anti-war president but now he has one more war than george bush. he continued both of bush's wars and it has now started a third one so there's really no excuse for this at all and just bigger picture when you look at a country that is involved in three wars spends more money on defense than any other country has fourteen trillion dollars in debt with lawmakers unable to come to any consensus on how to tackle that where does this put the country on

a trajectory on i mean does this put us in a place where we can just perpetually be at war because it seems that there's one after another of these laws when it comes to declaring war or getting money for war getting approval for war that are either not enforced disregarded made built so that they don't matter well this is what the founders worried about the u.s. becoming an empire which we have become an empire in the post world war two era and i think we could go the way of the soviet union the way of the roman empire the way the british and french empire. you know after world war two i was ivan eland with a bold prediction senior fellow at the independent institute now in case you haven't heard tomorrow's a big day the end of the world begins may twenty first two thousand and eleven at least for a devout group of christian radio listeners that's what they believe and you may have seen the headlines a lot of people are talking about this today but i would make a bet that you haven't seen them this up close and personal anywhere else artie's camcorder wrote along on family radio's caravan and tells us more about the end of

the world as we know. have you heard the awesome news watch watch watch one the world is ending yes destruction that's all you can see tomorrow. night nine months ago eddie and jessica ramos hit the road to tell people just that so what i did as i shut the business. i got the. fact that i basically the same way and everyone had theirs and you know and my wife agreed that this was the best way. to do what we're supposed to do what the bible this time has to go so one of the people there are three daughters travel with them i homeschooled i want when they were in school for a little bit and then now that it's toys here we decided to per hour. so much as possible also gives us more family time jeff again eddie aren't alone there is just one of four caravans roaming the country preaching the apocalypse they believe the

world of ending may twenty first and that it's their duty to warn the people harold camping the eighty nine year old founder of family radio used a series of biblical calculations to arrive at me twenty first two thousand and eleven basically we have a state in the bible guarantees that the bible guarantees it that we have enough information out to show that this is going to happen although camping did predict the end once before in september one thousand nine hundred four campaigns prediction has since been branded on buses billboards t. shirts this is the greatest and the biggest advertising campaign in the world. there's never been anything like this before since god proved this world. the bible promised that everybody all nations will get this message before may twenty first world and everything in between including gary vollmer s.u.v. which he drives every day to his job at the department of homeland security this is

a vehicle i had wrapped it was about two years ago i actually had the work done on it and it's. pronouncing the lord's work judgment day we actually have a depiction here this is actually a picture of the california plate actually sinking into the ocean as we walk around the vehicle on the hood the hood has a theme on it on this this is a mass burial ground this side of the vehicle here is the opposite depiction of the far side this is actually a depiction of fire and it's talking about how the lord is going to bring down a fire and brimstone upon the earth and the dead destruction it's both both sides of the coin of the ten destruction according to camping the day of destruction will begin with a giant rolling earthquake at the international date line and travel around the world killing millions for that happens all the true believers will be caught up with christ and they want to hear it was going to happen here five months. of sorrow suffering and meanwhile those who know they'll be left behind like these

atheists are already making plans of their own offering to buy on craigslist raptured people's possessions and dogs that for those called up to have been here he says that he's still here tomorrow it means he's been left behind but he isn't worried to us as it says it's awesome news you know it's salvation it's life and to life for some and death and to death for others jessica eighty eight can't say the same they worry that their three daughters won't follow them to having to worry because they're still young small paper that said he was asleep playing with them when the listeners of family radio say it's impossible the world won't end tomorrow but for now we'll have to see which tomorrow brings you in fort artsy washington d.c. . you heard it here by tomorrow we'll know who's going to hell that's an idiot for now though for more on the stories we covered that are to. us a check out our you tube channel you tube dot com slash r t america and please follow me on twitter at lauren lyster and feel free to message me let me know what

you feel about the show any comments you have questions concerns i want to hear from you but that is going to do it for now will have so much more news in just a short amount of time in the meantime got our you tube channel we have some awesome video of nasa catching a comet headed for the sun and take a look at that and till i bring you more news. let's not forget that we are in a park right. i think. the one. we never got there as their very safe get ready because their freedom.