Criticize the Israeli Government, Or Criticize Individuals Who Put Israel First Ahead of the U.S., You’re Breaking The Law. Goes Into Effect July 1 — by J

Never thought I'd see it from a Southern State, but thanks to a Representative in their State Legislature, those citizens of that state are having their 1st Amendment Rights squashed (even though the legislation claims not), if they dare criticize the Israeli Government or the actions of those who put Israel first ahead of the U.S., they are breaking their State law.   Those who dare question Israel or question those who put Israel 1st ahead of the U.S.,  are labeled legally as a law breaker thanks to that particular state legislator. 

What state?  South Carolina.  Who is the state lawmaker attacking the 1st Amendment?  State Representative Alan Clemmons.

South carolina Rep alan clemmons

Clemmons initial bill was stalled in the state senate last year, so he attached his bill to the state budget bill of each chamber.  South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster supported Clemmons' proposal, and urged the state senate to pass it.  Keep in mind that Clemmon's bill only lasts for a year, and how far it goes beyond that depends on the outcry by the citizens of South Carolina who were blindsided and muffled by their state legislator and governor.

Rep. Clemmons' legislation 

It appears that Representative Clemmons was rewarded like a little puppy getting a rawhide treat, Clemmons was one of those invited to the dedication of the new U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem party last week.  

Let's examine those particulars that were injected in South Carolina's budget bill, thanks to Rep. Clemmons: 

  • a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities;
  • calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews; making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as a collective; accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, the state of Israel, or even for acts committed by non-Jews;
  • accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust;
  • accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interest of their own nations;
  • using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism to characterize Israel or Israelis;
  • drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis;
  • blaming Israel for all inter-religious or political tensions;
  • applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation;
  • multilateral organizations focusing on Israel only for peace or human rights investigations;
  • denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist, provided, however, that criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.
  • (C) South Carolina public colleges and universities shall take into consideration the definition of Previousanti-Semitism for purposes of determining whether the alleged practice was motivated by anti-Semitic intent when reviewing, investigating, or deciding whether there has been a violation of a college or university policy prohibiting discriminatory practices on the basis of religion.

    (D) Nothing in this proviso may be construed to diminish or infringe upon any right protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States or Section 2, Article I of the South Carolina Constitution, 1895.

    How cannot such a piece of legislation I have to ask Rep. Clemmons not infringe on the 1st Amendment rights of his states' citizens?  To dare to criticize the Nazi policies of the State Israel, is considered illegal by his bill.  Doesn't such infringe on the 1st Amendment of both the U.S. and South Carolina?

So to the 64 dollar conundrum, which other U.S. States will follow South Carolina's actions? 

The bar is now open for drinks and discussion. 


This entry was posted in government, Israel. Bookmark the permalink.