Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumObama signs anti-BDS bill into law
President approves provisions making rejection of Israel boycott a key objective in trade talks with EU
US President Barack Obama at Georgetown University in Washington, DC, May 12, 2015 (AFP/Nicholas Kamm)
WASHINGTON After a grueling legislative battle, US President Barack Obama signed into law a controversial trade measure that also contains landmark legislation combating the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement in Europe.
The broader legislation faced an uphill battle after Obamas usual allies Democrats in the House of Representative bucked his authority and voted against key provisions out of concern that liberalization of trade could impact American jobs.
But on Monday, Obama signed into law the so-called fast track authorization that will allow US trade negotiators to work out a long-awaited deal with Asian states known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The Trade Promotion Authority legislation also contained the anti-BDS provisions, which make rejection of the phenomenon a top priority for US negotiators as they work on a more distant free trade agreement with the European Union.
These guidelines, sponsors hope, will discourage European governments from participating in BDS activities by leveraging the incentive of free trade with the US.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/obama-signs-anti-bds-bill-into-law/
King_David
(14,851 posts)These are Democratic Party values despite what half the posters in this group may tell you.
stuffmatters
(2,574 posts)WTF America. Thanks Wall Street Dems like my own Scott Peters, and supposedly "progressive" Senators like Ron Wyden, Maria Cantwell, Patty Murray who manipulated fast track through. Just deplorable.
King_David
(14,851 posts)Maybe another party or candidate should be found to reflect your views?
Myself I'm happy with our party view on this.
stuffmatters
(2,574 posts)Were you one of those America Love It Or Leave It voices during Vietnam?
King_David
(14,851 posts)Wasn't born...
cprise
(8,445 posts)That's a much better question here.
branford
(4,462 posts)The Democratic Party, nationally and at the state level, officially and strongly opposes BDS, and support for it is generally considered an unpopular, fringe position in the USA, notwithstanding the complaints of a vocal few here and elsewhere.
In fact, I don't believe a single senator or any Democratic in a remotely leadership position supports BDS.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)They are contemptuous of what most people want or need. They get their lobbyist dollars, then they suck up to the special interests that bought and paid for them.
They're doing their jobs and representing their constituents who poll after poll after poll show very strong support for Israel (despite their current leadership) across party lines. This was a unanimous vote. You are delusional to think most people agree with your position.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Here's the latest for you to peruse - February of last year (which shows steady support going back decades). Here's the truth:
PRINCETON, N.J. -- Even as relations between the leaders of Israel and the United States reportedly deteriorate over disagreement about how to handle Iran's nuclear program, Israel has retained its broadly favorable image in the U.S. over the past year. Seventy percent of Americans now view that country favorably, and 62% say they sympathize more with the Israelis than the Palestinians in the Mideast conflict. By contrast, 17% currently view the Palestinian Authority favorably, and 16% sympathize more with the Palestinians.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/181652/seven-americans-continue-view-israel-favorably.aspx
That's what happens when people DON'T ignore the fact the Palestinians in Gaza voted in a terrorist organizations or others that think violence is an answer. When it comes to Americans and Israel, you're barking up the wrong tree. Try Europe.
shira
(30,109 posts)As Chris Hitchens stated:
Response to shira (Reply #7)
6chars This message was self-deleted by its author.
cprise
(8,445 posts)And your quote is a non-sequitur.
But it makes a perfect condensation of the arguments against BDS.
shira
(30,109 posts)That quote in its context goes to show that BDS (organized anti-semitism) is a very dangerous totalitarian style movement, not only bad for Jews but for everyone else as well. Historically, what has started off as bad for Jews has also been bad for everyone else.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)racist and anti-Christian.
It's a bullshit lame meme used to deflect from the fact that it is indefensible for a government to use military might to confiscate private property and give it to others. It is government sanctioned thievery.
People see right through this cheap charade.
shira
(30,109 posts)http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/05/obama-interview-iran-isis-israel/393782/
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)The Trade Facilitation Act makes any distinction between the settlements in the West Bank and Israel impossible.
The offending clauses:
Text of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 (H. R. 644, passed on Feb 12, 2016)
Source: GovTrack.us
(b)Statements of policy
(7)supports efforts to prevent investigations or prosecutions by governments or international organizations of United States persons solely on the basis of such persons doing business with Israel, with Israeli entities, or in any territory controlled by Israel.
----
(f)Definitions
In this section:
(1)Boycott of, divestment from, and sanctions against Israel
The term boycott of, divestment from, and sanctions against Israel means actions by states, nonmember states of the United Nations, international organizations, or affiliated agencies of international organizations that are politically motivated and are intended to penalize or otherwise limit commercial relations specifically with Israel or persons doing business in Israel or in any territory controlled by Israel.
I would suggest that the one-staters in this thread try to figure out how making the settlements completely equal to Israel, and for all practical purposes making criticism of the settlements illegal, will keep the Jewish state Jewish...
Read more: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr644/text
shira
(30,109 posts)Little Tich
(6,171 posts)I think the peace negotiations went on too long and resulted in a missed opportunity to implement the two-state solution. The current situation is the one-state solution, and I can't see how that can be changed. I have no desire for the one-state solution, I've just resigned to its inevitability.
This trade act only shows why resistance is futile...
shira
(30,109 posts)Little Tich
(6,171 posts)That includes full right of return for all Jews and Palestinians as well as full access to equal rights for all who live there. Does it mean that I'm against a Jewish state?
I don't know, what do you think?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Don't you mean Israelis and Palestinians?
If not, which category would you put this person in:
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)There are more than just "Jews and Palestinians" involved here.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)their relationship with the Israeli government as a whole has had its ups and downs over the years
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Those are by far the two largest groups of people involved.
It seems like one should either say "Jews and Muslims" or "Israelis and Palestinians" rather than taking one from each.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)My beliefs about the rights of people are not formed by the I/P conflict - I only apply what I believe in general to a specific situation. There's no reason why any person should be denied the right to live in their ancestral homeland, and that of course includes Druze. I just don't really see why Israeli Druze are so important here, as most of them are living in their ancestral homeland already.
In this case, I think that it's wrong to define the right to live in their ancestral homeland as being only for Israelis and Palestinians, or Jews and and Muslims. There are many Jews that are not Israelis, and they should have the right to live in their ancestral homeland too, just like any Palestinian. There are many Muslims whose ancestral homeland isn't Palestine, and I'm not sure why you think they should be included.
Do you think that all Jews and Palestinians should have the right to live in their ancestral homeland or not? I think they all do, no exceptions...
Israeli
(4,161 posts)....why Little Titch before shira oberliner ??????
shira
(30,109 posts)....with Hamas in charge of a fascist totalitarian regime due to a majority of Palestinians electing them.
Do you not realize this, or is it that you just don't care that Jews wouldn't be safe in their homeland if you got your way? And it's not just Jews, but also women, gays, christians, and children who would suffer under such a regime.
This BTW is why Jews cannot be rationally persuaded or bullied into accepting BDS demands. We have human rights too, in particular the right to stay alive and live freely with liberal democratic freedoms.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)Israel, nor a race war.
Very few Israeli Arabs identify with Hamas, and if more Palestinians were given the opportunity to vote in Israeli elections, they would probably vote in a similar way. I personally hope Israel will be the first country in the Middle-East to make the transition into a full democracy like Germany or Sweden.
shira
(30,109 posts)Just as you did by denying the reality of racist, jew-hating Balad MP's who support terror attacks on random Jews.
These MP's also observed a moment of silence for these 'martyrs'.
What on earth makes you think Jews would want to live under Balad or Hamas racists who want to murder them?
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)Last edited Sun Feb 21, 2016, 08:43 AM - Edit history (1)
Chances are that the bi-national state is just around the corner, and will suddenly just happen one day. It doesn't really worry me, simply because all parallels where a country gives equal rights to all groups have always been peaceful. Lincoln freed the slaves and they didn't kill all the whites, same thing in South Africa.
The idea that Hamas and Balad would be the only parties Palestinians would vote for in a situation where the full range of democratic expression is allowed, seems far fetched to me.
BTW, welcome back!
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)an ever growing occupation and yes while there is blood shed as long as the majority of that blood is Palestinian it's oh well
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)and Congress has zero compunction about actively helping accelerate the one-state solution.