Skip to comments.Congressmembers Urge U.S. Action Against Divestment Campaign
Posted on 09/29/2004 5:26:47 AM PDT by SJackson
ZOA: Congressmembers Urge U.S. Action Against Divestment Campaign
September 28, 2004
Contact: (212) 481-1500
Attn: NEWS EDITOR
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO COMMERCE DEPT: ANTI-ISRAEL DIVESTMENT CAMPAIGNS VIOLATE U.S. ANTI-BOYCOTT LAWS
NEW YORK- A bipartisan group of thirteen Members of Congress has sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Commerce, urging the shutdown of anti-Israel divestment campaigns, because they violate U.S. laws regarding the Arab boycott of Israel.
The letter was initiated by the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA). It was led by U.S. Representatives Jim Saxton (R-NJ) and Rob Andrews (D-NJ), and also signed by Representatives Joseph Crowley (D-NY), Pete Sessions (R-TX), Dennis Cardoza (D-CA), Michael McNulty (D-NY), Peter King (R-NY), Madeleine Bordallo (D-GU), Martin Frost (D-TX), Philip Crane (R-IL), Shelley Berkley (D-NV), Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY), Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO).
The letter, which was sent to the Commerce Department's Office of Anti-boycott Compliance, noted that by urging Americans to divest their holdings in companies doing business with Israel, the divestment organizers are illegally "furnishing information about U.S. companies that have business relationships in or with Israel, and specifically advocate that these companies be boycotted." Such actions are "expressly prohibited by the anti-boycott provisions of the Export Administration Act, which were enacted in response to congressional concerns about the Arab boycott of Israel."
The Congressional letter noted that divestment supporters are actively promoting the boycott of Israel on the internet and have launched divestment campaigns on more than thirty college campuses, including the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
The divestment campaign "poses serious economic consequences for our country," the letter pointed out, noting that according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the Arab boycott of Israel is a "substantive impediment" to U.S. trade and investment. "The financial future of U.S. companies and the status of our country's international trade ... are at stake."
The Congressmembers urged the Office of Anti-boycott Compliance to "investigate the national boycott campaign against Israel, shut down the illegal divestment campaigns, and impose the appropriate penalties."
The letter added that the issue is "urgent" because a national student divestment conference is scheduled to be held at Duke University on October 15, 2004.
Susan B. Tuchman, director of the ZOA's Center for Law and Justice, which has been active on this issue, said: "These thirteen Members of Congress are to be commended for their forthright and principled stand against the divestment proponents, who are violating U.S. law by illegally promoting economic warfare against America's ally, Israel."
What divestment campaign?????
Let's start with the Presbiterian and Anglican churches.
The various Church sponsored campaigns, Anglican, Presbyterian and I believe a third. Though the article doesn't mention it, I suspect one of the legal problems arises from the fact that the Arab world has had a formal boycott which it's illegal for an American to comply with.
Sorry. Most of the time, I support the Zionist side of an argument, but you can't inhibit free speech. The Presbyterian and Anglican church leaderships, while they have proven themselves over and over again including in this instance to be minions of Satan, are well within their rights to withdraw their holdings from corporations whose policies they dislike, and well within their rights to explain to their church members why they are doing so. If this puts them at odds with an anti-boycotting law, then the anti-boycotting law is laughably unconstitutional.
Change the law before you break it. Second of all, first explain to people why and ask them if they are OK with it before withdrawing somebody else's money, not vice versa.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.