Posted on 02/03/2005 10:27:28 PM PST by hope
Israel divestment
This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
Friday, February 4, 2005
Presbyterians to justify Posted: February 4, 2005 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com In an attempt to justify what some have called an anti-Semitic move, the Presbyterian Church USA will hold a three-day conference to explain to denomination leaders why action was taken to divest from companies doing business with Israel.
As WorldNetDaily reported, the denomination's General Assembly voted 431-62 in July to divest from Israel. The PCUSA is believed to be the largest organization or institution to join the divestment campaign against the Jewish state. It was the first Christian denomination to do so.
The move set the stage for the church to divest itself from companies that receive $1 million dollars or more in profits per year from investments in Israel or have invested $1 million dollars or more in Israel. Apartheid South Africa is the only other nation the denomination has similarly sanctioned.
Scheduled for Feb. 10-12 in Louisville, Ky., home to the denomination's administrative offices, the meeting is meant to let synods and presbyteries "know what we did and why we did it," Marthame Sanders, missionary-in-residence at the PCUSA offices said in a statement.
The meeting is expected to draw 200 participants representing every synod and presbytery in the nation.
The church's statement characterized last summer's move as part of a "process of 'phased selective divestment' in companies supporting the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and in corporations profiting from either Israeli or Palestinian violence."
Said the denomination: "The action is also directed at engaging corporations or financial institutions who benefit from the ongoing creation and expansion of Israeli settlements on the West Bank."
The statement confirmed that Jewish leaders were especially upset with the General Assembly's action.
"Presbyteries and synods have been getting asked a lot of questions about this," stated Sanders, saying the middle governing bodies needed and wanted information about what the assembly did "to be equipped to have a debate" on the subject.
Included on the meeting's agenda is a discussion of Presbyterian theology, "particularly related to Christian Zionism," the statement said.
Subsequent to the church's July action, a petition drive began to protest the move.
The petition says the church's resolution is "anti-Semitic because NO OTHER nation is being singled for divestment, not even those whose violations of human rights are truly egregious."
"Only the moral blindness of Jew-hatred could lead the church to compare Israel's multi-racial democracy to apartheid South Africa," the petition says. "Only anti-Semitism could lead the church to condemn democratic Israel, while not voting divestment from Saudi Arabia, where women have virtually no rights and non-Muslims are not even permitted to enter the country without special permission, from Sudan, where race-based genocide is occurring even as we speak, from Iran, where Bahai are murdered for their faith, or from the many other countries where human rights are violated as a matter of routine."
During the same time period this month, a PCUSA seminary in Austin, Texas, is hosting an event entitled, "To Loose the Chains of Injustice: American Churches and the Palestinians." The denomination is one of the participating churches in the Feb. 11-12 meeting.
"The focus of this conference is on the work of the churches for a just peace in Israel-Palestine," states a flyer advertising the confab.
A group of Presbyterian elders and ministers are circulating a petition among the PCUSA membership to call the General Assembly back into special session to rescind the Israel Divestment Resolution.
Related stories:
Presbyterian: Muslims easier to deal with than Jews
Are mainline churches anti-Semitic?
Episcopal Church next to shun Israel?
Petition condemns church for 'hatred' of Israel
Presbyterians to divest from Israel
|
Then don't. That's not the same as pressuring American companies not invest their money as they see fit. This comes very close to cooperation with the Arab boycot.
I am an Elder in the Presbyterian Church and can not be more fed up with the way denomination that was once critised as too conservative has been hijacked by these people.
I'm currently reading the History of Scotland by Magnussen. Tens of thousands of people died to establish Presbyterianism; perhaps the leaders of our church should give it read.
![]() |
The Arab BoycottBy Mitchell BardThe Arab boycott was formally declared by the newly formed Arab League Council on December 2, 1945: "Jewish products and manufactured goods shall be considered undesirable to the Arab countries." All Arab "institutions, organizations, merchants, commission agents and individuals" were called upon "to refuse to deal in, distribute, or consume Zionist products or manufactured goods." As is evident in this declaration, the terms "Jewish" and "Zionist" were used synonymously by the Arabs. Thus, even before the establishment of Israel, the Arab states had declared an economic boycott against the Jews of Palestine. The boycott, as it evolved after 1948, is divided into three components. The primary boycott prohibits direct trade between Israel and the Arab nations. The secondary boycott is directed at companies that do business with Israel. The tertiary boycott involves the blacklisting of firms that trade with other companies that do business with Israel.
Once on the list, it is sometimes difficult to get off, since the company or some Arab sponsor must initiate the request. A firm might be required to supply proof that it no longer has any business with Israel and/or might be asked to make investments in Arab countries equal to those made earlier in Israel. Bribery is another means of becoming "de-listed." The objective of the boycott has been to isolate Israel from its neighbors and the international community, as well as to deny it trade that might be used to augment its military and economic strength. It has undoubtedly enhanced Israel's isolation and separated the Jewish State from its most natural markets, but the boycott failed to undermine Israel's economy to the degree intended. America Fights The BoycottIn 1977, Congress prohibited U.S. companies from cooperating with the Arab boycott. When President Carter signed the law, he said the "issue goes to the very heart of free trade among nations" and that it was designed to "end the divisive effects on American life of foreign boycotts aimed at Jewish members of our society." The Arab League threatened to take a decisive stand against the new law, which was regarded as part of "a campaign of hysterical laws and bills . . . which Israel and world Zionism are trying not only to enforce on the U.S.; but also in some countries of Western Europe." Contrary to claims that the bill would lead to a drastic reduction in American trade with the Arab world, imports and exports increased substantially. Broader diplomatic and cultural relations also improved. Nevertheless, certain U.S. companies were blacklisted for their relations with Israel. In addition, few other nations adopted anti-boycott laws and, instead, complied with the boycott. For example, the Military Aircraft Division of British Aerospace sent a purchase order to an American supplier in connection with the British agreement to sell Saudi Arabia Tornado aircraft and other weapons in the late 1980's. It guaranteed none of the items "are made in Israel directly or indirectly either in whole or in part and such items are not reshipped from Israel for Israeli account or by proxy for or on behalf of or with any persons or organizations resident in Israel. The supplier moreover warrants not to dispatch any of the items on any Israeli carrier." Israel's capacity to reach its full economic potential was hindered for decades by the actions of Great Britain, Japan and other countries that cooperated with the boycott. The Boycott Begins To CrackOn September 30, 1994, the six Gulf Cooperation Council states announced they would no longer support the secondary boycott barring trade with companies doing business with Israel. At a meeting in Taba, Egypt, February 7-8, 1995, Egyptian, American, Jordanian and Palestinian trade leaders signed a joint document the Taba Declaration-supporting "all efforts to end the boycott of Israel." Since the signing of peace agreements between Israel and the PLO and Jordan, the boycott has gradually crumbled. The Arab League was forced to cancel several boycott meetings called by the Syrian hosts because of opposition from countries like Kuwait, Morocco and Tunisia. The primary boycott prohibiting direct relations between Arab countries and Israel has slowly cracked as nations like Qatar, Oman and Morocco have begun to negotiate deals with Israel. Furthermore, few countries outside the Middle East continue to comply with the boycott. Japan, for example, has exponentially increased its trade with Israel since the peace process began. Still, the boycott remains technically in force and several countries, most notably, Saudi Arabia, continue its enforcement. UpdateRepresentatives from 19 Arab countries met in Syria in late April 2004 for the 72nd conference of the Arab League’s Bureau for Boycotting Israel to discuss tightening the Arab boycott against Israel. Mohammed al-Ajami, who heads the Syrian regional office of the Central Boycott Office, said the meeting was aimed at implementing Arab summit resolutions that approved reviving the Arab boycott of Israel. He said it was “a direct and practical response to the policy of the criminal escalation adopted by Israel.” Mauritania, Egypt and Jordan, which have diplomatic ties with Israel, stayed away from the meeting. Syria subsequently banned a Greek, a Danish and two Maltese ships from its ports because they'd made stops in Israeli ports, and has placed nine Israeli companies on a black list. And Libya, which had pledged to provide entry visas to all qualified participants, announced that it would not allow any Israelis to participate in the World Chess Championships scheduled for Tripoli in June 2004. |
During the mid-1970's the United States adopted two laws that seek to counteract the participation of U.S. citizens in other nation's economic boycotts or embargoes. These "antiboycott" laws are the 1977 amendments to the Export Administration Act (EAA) and the Ribicoff Amendment to the 1976 Tax Reform Act (TRA), [which is found in Section 999 of the Internal Revenue Code].
The antiboycott laws were adopted to require U.S. firms to refuse to participate in foreign boycotts that the United States does not sanction. They have the effect of preventing U.S. firms from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which run counter to U.S. policy.
The Arab League boycott of Israel is the principal foreign economic boycott that U.S. companies must be concerned with today. The antiboycott laws, however, apply to all boycotts that are unsanctioned by the United States.
The antiboycott provisions of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) apply to all "U.S. persons," defined to include individuals and companies located in the United States and their foreign affiliates. These persons are subject to the law when their activities relate to the sale, purchase, or transfer of goods or services between the United States and a foreign country. This covers U.S. exports and imports, financing, forwarding and shipping, and certain other transactions that may take place wholly offshore.
Generally, the Tax Reform Act applies to all U.S. taxpayers (and their related companies). The TRA's reporting requirements apply to taxpayers' "operations" in, with, or related to boycotting countries or their nationals. Its penalties apply to those taxpayers with DISC (Domestic International Sales Corporation), FSC (Foreign Sales Corporation), foreign subsidiary deferral, and/or foreign tax credit benefits.
Conduct that may be penalized under the TRA and/or prohibited under the EAR includes:
Agreements to refuse or actual refusals 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 actually furnishing information about business relationships with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
Agreements to furnish or the actual furnishing of information about the race, religion, sex, or national origin of another person.
Furnishing information about business relationships with Israel or with blacklisted persons.
Implementing letters of credit containing prohibited boycott terms or conditions.
TRA does not "prohibit" conduct, but denies tax benefits ("penalizes") for certain types of boycott- related agreements.
The EAR requires U.S. persons to report quarterly any requests they have received to take any action to comply with, further, or support an unsanctioned foreign boycott.
The TRA requires taxpayers to report "operations" in, with, or related to a boycotting country or its nationals and requests received to participate in or cooperate with an international boycott. The Treasury Department publishes a quarterly list of "boycotting countries."
EAR reports are filed quarterly on form BXA 621-P, available from the Commerce Department's International Trade Administration and Bureau of Export Administration field offices or from the Office of Antiboycott Compliance in Washington, D.C.
TRA reports are filed with tax returns on IRS Form 5713. This form is available from local IRS offices.
Violations of the antiboycott provisions of the EAR carry the same penalties as those for export control violations. These can include:
Criminal:
"knowing violators": The penalties for each such violation can be a fine of up to $50,000 or five times the value of the exports involved, which ever is greater, may be imposed in addition to imprisonment of up to five years.
"Willful violators": The penalties for each violation -- where the violator has knowledge that the items will be used for the benefit of, or that the destination or intended destination of the items, is any country to which exports are restricted for national security or foreign policy purposes -- for individuals is a fine of up to $250,000, imprisonment for up to ten years, or both. For firms the penalties for each violation can be $1 million or up to five times the value of the exports involved, whichever is greater.
Administrative:
For each violation of the EAR any or all of the following may be imposed:
Revocation of validated export licenses;
The general denial of export privileges;
The exclusion from practice; and/or
The imposition of fines of up to $10,000 per violation, or $100,000 where the violation of national security export controls are involved.
The maximum civil penalty allowed by law during periods where the regulations are continued in effect by an Executive Order pursuant to the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) is $10,000 per violation.
Violations of the TRA involve the denial of all or part of the foreign tax benefits discussed above.
U.S. Department of Commerce
BXA/Office of Antiboycott Compliance, Room 6098
Washington, D.C. 20230
(202) 482-2381
Department of the Treasury
Office of the General Counsel, Room 2004
14th & Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20220
(202) 622-1945
Source: Office of Antiboycott Compliance
![]() |
WARNING: This is a high volume ping list
will these tight ass phonies sell MSFT,INTC etc etc etc??lets see
Funny that you singled out Israel though. Israel is one of the few countries that stands with us and helps us in the WOT.
"Funny that you singled out Israel though. Israel is one of the few countries that stands with us and helps us in the WOT."
Russia and Pakistan are both allies in the war on terror, but there are a lot of things to critique in both countries. There is nothing wrong with being an ally to a country and pointing out policies that are unliked at the same time.
Boycott the simple Bloodtest for MS it was developed in Israel. Avoid devices the restore the use of limbs to stroke victims because they also were developed in Israel. Avoid the new breathing device for asthmatics coming out soon that helps asthmatics breath at night.
Avoid the new vaccine for Samllpox and Anthrax! Also there is a good chance that if someone you know has alzheimers or Parkinsons their drugs were developed in the Zionist State.
Also please stop using computers because Microsoft Israel is deeply involved in Microsoft operating systems. Also the new intel chips are being developed in Israel . Also dont use AIM or ICQ. Israel has the highest amount of high tech companies outside the US.
So if you are going to boycott Israel be sure to do it right because you never know where the Jews are. They can be anywhere!
I know how hard it is to boycott the so called Palestinians because they have developed so much such as????????
What policy of Israel dont you like?
I strongly dislike how Israel is a socialist country.
Don't confuse these anti Christian losers with Presbyterian Christians.
Funny, it seemed to me that the church's policy was to divest from the STATE of Israel, and not the glbal population of Jewish people. Conflating Israel with the Jewish population is intellectually dishonest.
As for singling out Israel, there aren't many organizations or states that hold all other states to a consistent standard. As long as they can point to the policies that they do not agree with, there is nothing wrong with singling out a state for divestment. They have that right, whether you or I or anyone agrees or not.
There are so few of churches of any size left in the PCUSA, this will not even make a ripple in the scheme of things.
Please don't confuse their right to do it with my right to call them anti-Semitic for doing so.
I always confuse the PCUSA with the CPUSA.
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.