The government watchdog group Judicial Watch is suing the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the State Department for records of anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) groups lobbying the Obama administration to circumvent trade laws put in place to protect the Jewish State.
One of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits was filed Thursday with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in response to the DHS refusing to respond to two of Judicial Watch’s requests that were made on June 20 – one to the DHS and the other to its U.S. Customs and Border Protection Bureau (CBP) branch.
Obama entertaining anti-Semitism?
In the Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security lawsuit, all email communications between former President Barack Obama’s DHS or CBP and any of the following anti-Israel groups are being sought: Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, Al-Awda, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Friends of Sabeel-North America, If Americans Knew, the International Solidarity Movement, Jewish Voice for Peace, the Muslim American Society, Students for Justice in Palestine, or the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation (the BDS Groups).
A similar demand for records is being made in the Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State lawsuit.
Even though Obama signed pro-Israel legislation and frequently insisted that he supported Israel as a longstanding American ally, his words and actions have provided evidence of his consistent pro-Palestinian political stance.
“In February 2016, President Obama signed the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 into law, which forces U.S. trade partners to cut ties to the BDS movement and protects Israel territories, but Obama’s announcement [of the law showed that he was open to anti-Israeli interests],” Judicial Watch recounted.
The former commander-in-chief’s ensuing proclamation about the Act was anything but supportive of Israel.
“Certain provisions of this Act – by conflating Israel and ‘Israeli-controlled territories’ – are contrary to longstanding bipartisan United States policy, including with regard to the treatment of settlements,” Obama declared in a White House statement at the time. “Moreover, consistent with longstanding constitutional practice, my Administration will interpret and implement the provisions in the Act that purport to direct the Executive to seek to negotiate and enter into particular international agreements (section 414(a)(1)) or to take certain positions in international negotiations with respect to international agreements with foreign countries not qualifying for trade authorities procedures (sections 108(b), 414(a)(2), 415, and 909(c)) in a manner that does not interfere with my constitutional authority to conduct diplomacy.”
Once the legislation left Obama’s desk, his administration was quick at work to revert back to its anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian dealings.
“Shortly after Obama signed the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, the Customs and Border Protection Bureau restated the West Bank Country of Origin Marking Requirement rules requiring labeling of goods from the West Bank,” the government watchdog revealed.
After Obama signed the so-called anti-BDS bill, it was reported in February 2016 that the rules were merely restated by the president to appease several complaints made by Israel advocates demanding that the White House adhere to policy guidelines that demarcate products made in Israel from those produced in the Palestinian-occupied West Bank. It was indicated that Obama was intentionally trying to blur the lines to benefit the Palestinians.
“Using language that has appeared previously in signing statements to indicate a president will not implement parts of bills that do not comport with U.S. foreign policy, the statement added that ‘consistent with longstanding constitutional practice,’ Obama would continue to negotiate with other countries ‘in a manner that does not interfere with my constitutional authority to conduct diplomacy,’” The Jerusalem Post reported at the time.
The Israeli daily was quick to point out the deceptive nature of Obama’s actions.
“Obama’s statement is … salvo in an intensifying battle over whether the United States should differentiate between economic activity in West Bank settlements and Israel proper,” the Post’s Ron Kampeas explained. “Proponents of eliminating the distinction say there is little difference between Israel and the West Bank when it comes to countering BDS, while others contend that lumping in settlements undercuts the wider effort to counter the boycott movement.”
Obama’s Democratic predecessor in the White House was the one who wanted to differentiate between to two – in order to not to fuel the interests of the jihadist-supporting side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“The West Bank country-of-origin marking requirements is said to stem from ‘longstanding bipartisan U.S. policy’ toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” Judicial Watch informed. “First put in place in 1995 under the Clinton administration, the rule is to preserve the distinction between the goods produced in State of Israel and the goods produced in the territories it controls over the Green Line.”
It was noted that with the BDS movement being founded in part by the Islamic terrorist-sponsoring Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), Obama’s willingness to entertain the interests of group supporting its cause compromised the economic and national security of both the U.S. and Israel.
“The BDS movement was started by the PLO and other anti-Israel groups to encourage an economic and cultural boycott of Israel,” the conservative group added. “It has gained the support of radical Leftwing groups here in the United States – especially on college campuses.”
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the former president out on his covert pro-Palestinian dealings.
“President Obama advanced the agenda of anti-Israel radicals in subverting U.S. law that rejects the malicious anti-Israel boycott movement,” Fitton asserted. “And it is no surprise the Deep State ignores our FOIA requests that could expose the Obama-BDS connections. It is well past time for the Trump administration to stop this obstruction and follow the FOIA law.”
More conflicts of Israeli interest
The United Nation’s anti-Semitic policies were recently reported by Israel’s YNet, which disclosed that the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHRC), Prince Zeid bin Ra'ad Zeid al-Hussein, declared a database of blacklisted businesses would be published before the end of the year to expose companies across the globe that conducted business with Israelis in Samaria, Judea and “east” Jerusalem.
Al-Hussein was given the go-ahead by the pro-Palestinian U.N. to potentially hurt the pro-Israeli businesses based in the U.S.
“Al-Hussein forwarded a draft of the list to international businesses, which includes several U.S. companies – among them Caterpillar, TripAdvisor, and Priceline,” CBN News reported. “The UNHRC voted in favor of the database despite Israeli objections.”
Danny Danon, Israel’s ambassador to the U.N., condemned the U.N.’s support of the blacklist being published.
"[Going along with efforts to publish the blacklist is] an expression of modern anti-Semitism reminiscent of dark periods in history," Dannon insisted, according to CBN News.
The U.S.’s ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley also called out those behind the effort behind the blacklist database.
"[This] an attempt to provide an international stamp of approval to the anti-Semitic BDS movement," Haley proclaimed, CBN News reported. "It must be rejected."
Setting himself apart from Obama’s persistent unwillingness for eight years to support Israel in America’s foreign policy, Trump is demanding that the U.N. conceal the list, which is designed to hurt Israeli and American businesses.
“The Trump administration is pressuring the U.N. not to release the list [and] meant to strengthen the BDS movement overall,” CBN News’ Tzippe Barrow noted from the Christian news agency’s Jerusalem Bureau.
Furthermore, before his last month in office, Obama refused to stand by the Jewish State and reject the U.N.’s anti-Israel resolution condemning America’s longstanding ally in the Middle East – and only democracy in the region.
“In December 2016, the Palestinian Authority (PA) called on the U.S. to support a resolution condemning Israeli ‘settlements’ and urging companies not to do business with Israelis living in Judea and Samaria,” Barrow informed. “Proponents of the BDS movement also support boycotting Israeli academia, international sports competitions and cultural events.”