Posted on 10/20/2017 6:56:07 PM PDT by Wyrd bið ful aræd
Applicants for Hurricane Harvey relief grants for the storm-battered city of Dickinson are asked as part of the terms of the agreement to not boycott Israel, a move the ACLU has called unconstitutional.
The city began accepting applications Oct. 11 for grants to rebuild homes or businesses damaged in the storm that made landfall Aug. 25. The grant money was donated to the Dickinson Harvey Relief Fund.
...
In January 2016, Gov. Greg Abbott met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem and said that he wanted legislators to work to approve such a ban. When he signed the bill into law in May he said that "any anti-Israel policy is an anti-Texas policy."
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com ...
So people recovering from a flood/hurricane are fighting for their right to be a Jew hater as they rebuild?
Title should be: To obtain Private Harvey relief funds, Applicant has to agree not to boycott Israel.
Private Contract, but in fact almost unenforceable.
It does not seem inappropriate to me to have a clause from a private donation, to the effect, that you will not use these funds against me.
Can you theoretically be denied a building permit, an LTC, a license plate, under the same statute? It seems to me that this particular case illustrates that the law meant to prevent agencies from doing business with entities that boycott Israel is being applied in such a way that wasn't necessarily intended.
Interesting if the State put that in.
Seems kinda bizarre, and quite difficult to enforce.
Only seems enforceable against organizations that take a direct anti-Israeli stand.
Authored by State Rep. Phil King, a Republican from Weatherford, the bill prohibits the state of Texas from conducting business with companies involved in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel, the governor’s office said.
OK. This is a clause inserted into contracts with the state. If you enter into a contract with the state, you agree not to boycott Israel.
.
If there is no stated remedy, what would be the enforcement?
.
Good, let them see what it is like to be forced to approve of something they personally may not support, just like Christians offering services are forced to do with the LBGT mafia & their supporters. Fight fire with fire I say. No difference here.
True. The only difference is that amongst the SJWs and other progressives at the moment, Jews are ten times the boogeyman that Christians are.
Anti-semites need your money.
no progressives are just less scared of the Jewish population because it is smaller. the only reason they don’t go after Christians as hard is that those identifying as Christians are a lot larger and more dangerous if mobilized.
Not sure I can agree with you, as I think they see them as equal & united. Both the Jews & the Christians have been subjected to this hatred in the past. However, the Jews have experienced it in recent history, so perhaps it hits a much more sensitive nerve. I have seen this slow march to reject & condemn Christianity rearing its ugly head for decades now. At least since the late 80's early 90's. Sometime around the first intifada that started in 1987 thru 1993. Because they mistakenly believed it was just rock throwing children against a brutal Israeli military, because they were not being told the entire truth. This is one of the reasons we also see so much support for Islam, even as they threaten us with our very lives. Systematic brainwashing propagated by the press from around the globe, who did what their employers demanded or found their career ruined.
Thanks W.
Ironically enough the alt-right, as unsavory and antithetical to traditional conservatism as aspects of it frequently are, is a direct result of the left being “the man” for most or all of the conscience memory of Generation Zers, who are rebelling in their turn by swinging right in their own way.
If you'd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
I do think this is a federal issue. Presuming the relief funds are local, it's questionable whether foreign affairs fall under their prevue. I suppose the courts will have to decide.
Alternately, since BDS is clearly a foreign boycott, like the Arab states boycott of Israel, the federal government clearly can ban citizens from participating. Should the federal government wish to do so. Then cities, and many states wouldn't have to attempt to usurp their power.
Then again, maybe it's not usurping. I remember when margarine was illegal in Wisconsin
Give people relief. It’s not the time to tie strings to basic human kindness.
Two Hitler youths took refuge in a bank during the Beer Hall Putsch, as it was falling apart. The Jewish banker sheltered them, because they reminded him of his dead son. After the Putsch failed and they went their way, they left the Nazi Party and never had anything more to do with it (Konrad Heiden, Der Fuhrer, published 1948 in English, don’t remember which chapter and page).
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.