Governor of New York tries to Blacklist BDS Supporting Companies

[Darth Yan]

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2016/06/ ... cuomo-bds/

Yeah, fuck you Cuomo. If anything, this proves that people who criticize Israel are entirely right. How ANYONE who supports Israel can get behind this is beyond me.

[Grumman]

If anything, this proves that people who criticize Israel are entirely right.

No, it does not. Even if the BDS movement wasn't a bunch of shitbags demanding that Israel open their borders to a community in which a majority of the population is openly in favour of exterminating religious minorities for that reason alone, only an idiot would conclude "The New York government refuses to do business with BDS, therefore Israel is evil."

[Dominus Atheos]

It's really hard to discuss BDS without violating the Israel vs Palestine, but I just want to discuss one thing that virtually no one knows about:

There exists a federal "Office of Antiboycott Compliance (OAC) with the stated mission of:

The Bureau is charged with administering and enforcing the Antiboycott Laws under the Export Administration Act. Those laws discourage, and in some circumstances, prohibit U.S. companies from furthering or supporting the boycott of Israel sponsored by the Arab League, and certain other countries, including complying with certain requests for information designed to verify compliance with the boycott. Compliance with such requests may be prohibited by the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and may be reportable to the Bureau.

You can say that it's not like Israel single-handedly created such things, but at least for me, their very existence lowers my opinion of Israel.

[Darth Yan]

Except that the palestinians WERE open to peace for the most part in the nineties. Israel blatantly screwed them over repeatedly, and the right wing has gotten even nastier. Israel's coming by and large to agree with Netenyahu to the point where I'm honestly convinced the right wing would cheerfully round the palestinians up and put them in gas chambers if they could get away with it. Israel has blatantly tried to starve the Gazans into submission and has even banned shit like paper, pencils, potato chips, chocolate. Anyone who thinks THOSE are somehow a threat is silly and Israel itself admitted that they deliberately kept the palestinians on the edge of starvation. So no, BDS is entirely in the right; Israel needs to have pressure on it; they wield tremendous power yet they still feel like they're poor little victims.

And if anything it's not just "refusing to do business" it's "if you do business you'll be penalized." Blatant violation of freedom of speech.

[Omega18]

You can say that it's not like Israel single-handedly created such things, but at least for me, their very existence lowers my opinion of Israel.

That kind of ignores the fact the Arab League boycott of Israel was implemented in 1945 (with it being directed at the official state after 1948) so it had nothing originally to do with the occupied territories. (And the effectiveness of the boycott actually started getting measurably weaker around 1980 and afterwards when if anything the occupied territory issue became more relevant, with this only possibly measurably changing very recently with different organizations in some cases implementing their own versions of Israeli boycotts.) The fact it was very much primarily a boycott implemented by nation states for a very long time (even today Arab states basically remain the most significant component of it) certainly has allot to do with while the federal office in question exists.

[Dominus Atheos]

The Office of Antiboycott Compliance was established in the seventies. And I don't care when my government started suppressing speech and free affiliation on behalf of a foreign nation, I care that it ever happened.

[Dominus Atheos]

Edit: If I found out that the US ever fined anyone for criticizing Napoleon, it would lower my opinion of Napoleon.

[Omega18]

The Office of Antiboycott Compliance was established in the seventies. And I don't care when my government started suppressing speech and free affiliation on behalf of a foreign nation, I care that it ever happened.

Again, when the office was started it was to a great extent about countering a foreign threat to certain speech and free affiliation because it was Arab nation states who were the key supporters of the boycott.

Nation states were attempting (and had succeeded to a certain degree) to force companies and organizations to boycott Israel regardless of the personal preferences of the owners of the companies or organizations. (For instance Coca Cola was banned from being sold in Arab states until 1991 after they started a bottling plant in Israel and selling their product there in 1968, so there was basically a form of economic coercion design to force behavior out of companies.) Obviously companies actually based in the Arab states were essentially prohibited from doing business with Israel period.

Significantly even as your link describes, the office is about preventing companies from specifically complying with the Arab League boycott or those of some other nation state, presumably primarily gain commercial a advantage from being able to sell in Arab markets from compliance. (Notably the organization didn't prevent Pepsi from almost certainly defacto complying with the boycott and not selling its products in Israel until 1992 so it was able to still sell its product in various Arab states participating in the boycott.) The office was certainly not created to prevent some organization from deciding to boycott Israel for reasons which had nothing to do with the Arab League or related states which really was not particularly a concern in the US at the time.

[Dominus Atheos]

The Office of Antiboycott Compliance was established in the seventies. And I don't care when my government started suppressing speech and free affiliation on behalf of a foreign nation, I care that it ever happened.

Again, when the office was started it was to a great extent about countering a foreign threat to certain speech and free affiliation because it was Arab nation states who were the key supporters of the boycott.

Nation states were attempting (and had succeeded to a certain degree) to force companies and organizations to boycott Israel regardless of the personal preferences of the owners of the companies or organizations. (For instance Coca Cola was banned from being sold in Arab states until 1991 after they started a bottling plant in Israel and selling their product there in 1968, so there was basically a form of economic coercion design to force behavior out of companies.) Obviously companies actually based in the Arab states were essentially prohibited from doing business with Israel period.

Significantly even as your link describes, the office is about preventing companies from specifically complying with the Arab League boycott or those of some other nation state, presumably primarily gain commercial a advantage from being able to sell in Arab markets from compliance. (Notably the organization didn't prevent Pepsi from almost certainly defacto complying with the boycott and not selling its products in Israel until 1992 so it was able to still sell its product in various Arab states participating in the boycott.) The office was certainly not created to prevent some organization from deciding to boycott Israel for reasons which had nothing to do with the Arab League or related states which really was not particularly a concern in the US at the time.

It would be nice if it actually said that, but it doesn't:

What do the Laws Prohibit?

Conduct that may be penalized under the TRA and/or prohibited under the EAR includes:

Agreements to refuse or actual refusal to do business with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
Agreements to discriminate or actual discrimination against other persons based on race, religion, sex, national origin or nationality.
Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about business relationships with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about the race, religion, sex, or national origin of another person.

Implementing letters of credit containing prohibited boycott terms or conditions.

The TRA does not "prohibit" conduct, but denies tax benefits ("penalizes") for certain types of boycott-related agreements.

Again, it would be nice it is said "Agreements with an Arab League member to refuse or actual refusal to do business with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies." But it doesn't.

[mr friendly guy]

In theory BDS should be only just an attempt to boycott Israeli companies in the disputed/occupied territories (depending on your POV) and they have had some individual success with Israeli companies. In theory BDS should be using this as an attempt to force Israel to the negotiating table and the argument could be made that a democracy will respond better to this type of pressure than a dictatorship, so targeting democratic Israel is more effective than targeting its rivals.

Unfortunately when they don't actually state what the outcome of negotiations they want, ie the don't comment on whether they want a 2 state or 1 state solution, which allows people who actually want Israel gone to join the group, which needless to say is unproductive for negotiations. Because you know, why would Israel negotiate if the option is for its destruction as opposed to peace and giving up some land. I mean when they use phrases like "from the river to the sea its Palestine," that sounds like a nice chant, until you look on a map and from the river to the sea, its kind of all of Israel. Once again, why they hell would Israel negotiate when the option is their destruction (as opposed to 2 state solutions). So firstly from a pragmatic point of view, its a problem.

One might be able to overlook this part as an oversight or a tactic to not get too mired in details, however

In practice, BDS has in his group some of the most loathsome anti-semitic twats you will see, and I am not just talking about the fringe elements.

David Pakman has segments on BDS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNiH52w5o6g

For a longer piece here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw3Qc9s8u3Y

I could overlook the lack of commenting on a two state solution as a impractical measure which is easily fixed, but when they start going off into anti semitic rants I just lose any sympathy for the group, if not their goals for peace in the ME.

[Tribble]

I'd like to get a moderator's opinion on whether this thread breaks the "Israel v Palestine" ban before commenting because IMO it already seems to be spiraling in that direction. There are some posts IMO that already cross that line, though there are others which are trying very hard to avoid it. Ruling?

[NecronLord]

I'm keeping an eye on this thread; keep your tempers in check folks.

[White Haven]

Just as a side-note, when I hear 'BDS,' I don't think 'This must be an Israel thing,' I think 'the first three letters of a good time.' Maybe define your terms next time so prospective readers don't have to go digging to find out what you're talking about?

[Flagg]

I don't give a shit about the IvP situation on this issue because the entire sphere of anti-boycott <insert anything here> laws, movements, or anything else stifling boycotts shits all over the first amendment (money being speech, for one) and is anathema to how this country was founded (boycotting English goods). So anyone who wants to put a lid on who you can or cannot boycott can suck my proud red white and blue 21' (around) Flagg pole.

[Elheru Aran]

Just as a side-note, when I hear 'BDS,' I don't think 'This must be an Israel thing,' I think 'the first three letters of a good time.' Maybe define your terms next time so prospective readers don't have to go digging to find out what you're talking about?

They do mention it in the article:

Cuomo declared that the order sends a strong message against the “hateful, intolerant campaign” of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement — a non-violent grassroots movement that first began in 2005 and places economic and political pressure on Israel to acknowledge Palestinian rights and end its illegal occupation of Palestinian territories. But many are concerned that the executive order goes a step too far.

But yes, that was annoying me for a while until I finally read the article in question. Yan should have quoted it in the OP, I thought that was normal procedure here anyway?

[Flagg]

You know who else banned boycotts? The Birmingham Alabama bus companies during the civil rights bus boycotts. So Cuntmo is in good company.

[Darth Yan]

Many Jews are in BDS and I think overall Israel needs to get pressure on it. They've never made real concessions at all, so they need to have their arm twisted

[Elfdart]

I'm old enough to remember the original BDS movement against the Apartheid regime in South Africa. Although quite a few right-wingers would rather avoid the subject all these years later, it's a historical fact that the American Right had a throbbing hard-on for P.W. Botha and his racist state that made the racist terror in Mississippi look like the last ten minutes of a Doris Day movie. From Jesse "the Hutt" Helms to Strom Thurmond to Pat Robertson to Jerry Falwell to Von Reagan himself, they would proselytize about how wonderful South Africa was and how anyone who opposed Apartheid was a communist negro-lover, and probably a homosexual too.

However fond they were of shilling for Pretoria, for voting against sanctions, for voting against the arms embargo (which by the way, Israel ignored -offering Botha & Co. all kinds of weaponry to keep the "kaffirs" in their place, including nuclear weapons) and slandering those who opposed Apartheid; they did not once, as far as anyone has been able to discover, write up blacklists of those who supported BDS.

That's right, even Jesse Helms -a seething white supremacist who referred to the University of North Carolina (UNC) as "the University of Niggrahs and Communists"- had more respect for the 1st amendment rights of those who didn't share his own fanwhore fetish for an American client state.

Some people have no fucking shame. Cuomo has less than that.

[montypython]

I'm old enough to remember the original BDS movement against the Apartheid regime in South Africa. Although quite a few right-wingers would rather avoid the subject all these years later, it's a historical fact that the American Right had a throbbing hard-on for P.W. Botha and his racist state that made the racist terror in Mississippi look like the last ten minutes of a Doris Day movie. From Jesse "the Hutt" Helms to Strom Thurmond to Pat Robertson to Jerry Falwell to Von Reagan himself, they would proselytize about how wonderful South Africa was and how anyone who opposed Apartheid was a communist negro-lover, and probably a homosexual too.

However fond they were of shilling for Pretoria, for voting against sanctions, for voting against the arms embargo (which by the way, Israel ignored -offering Botha & Co. all kinds of weaponry to keep the "kaffirs" in their place, including nuclear weapons) and slandering those who opposed Apartheid; they did not once, as far as anyone has been able to discover, write up blacklists of those who supported BDS.

That's right, even Jesse Helms -a seething white supremacist who referred to the University of North Carolina (UNC) as "the University of Niggrahs and Communists"- had more respect for the 1st amendment rights of those who didn't share his own fanwhore fetish for an American client state.

Some people have no fucking shame. Cuomo has less than that.

I never trusted Cuomo to begin with (far more than Spitzer actually), this just reinforces that.