US leaders want to punish people who boycott Israel with 20 years in prison – StepFeed

“The billwould punishbusinessesand individuals based solely on their point of view. Such a penalty is in direct violation of the First Amendment,” the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said in an official statement, strongly opposing the legislation.

Proponents of the law argue that it helps fight discrimination and antisemitism toward Jews. But as those who boycott Israel reiterate over and over, they do not stand against Jews. In fact, many prominent Jewish individuals and organizations have thrown their support behind the BDS movement, becoming some of the staunchest critics of the Israeli state and Zionism.

“The ACLU has long supported laws prohibiting discrimination, but this bill cannot fairly be characterized as an anti-discrimination measure, as some would argue,” the ACLU said.

While the bill has garnered significant bipartisan support from Republicans and Democrats, it was crafted with the help of the immensely powerful Israeli lobby group, American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

The staunchly right-wing Zionist organization is widely perceived to be one of the most powerful lobby groups in the U.S., with politicians seeing their careers rise and fall based on the organization’s approval.

See the original post here:

US leaders want to punish people who boycott Israel with 20 years in prison – StepFeed

Related Post

July 23, 2017   Posted in: Israeli Lobby |

Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."