Victory Against BDS: Airbnb Includes Rentals in Judea, Samaria


by Nitsana Darshan-Leitner

Airbnb has agreed to completely retract its policy of delisting Jewish homes in Judea and Samaria, the Tel Aviv-based Shurat HaDin-Israel Law Center announced on Tuesday.

Over the past few weeks, Shurat Hadin has been negotiating a settlement agreement with the online hospitality giant to rescind its discriminatory policy redlining Jewish-owned properties in the Judea and Samaria region. That policy, announced in November 2018, had banned Jewish property owners in Judea and Samaria from listing properties on Airbnb, while allowing Muslim and Christian property owners to list properties in the same area.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Airbnb has agreed to repeal the discriminatory policy, thereby resolving the discrimination lawsuit.

The plaintiffs, a group of 12 Jewish American families, had filed a civil rights lawsuit against Airbnb in the United States Federal District Court for the District of Delaware. The lawsuit was brought in Delaware because Airbnb is incorporated in Delaware.

The plaintiffs alleged that the policy of the San Francisco-based internet hospitality company discriminated against them based upon their religion.

When Airbnb publicly announced its redlining policy barring rentals of Jewish-owned properties in November, it stated it would no longer agree to list these homes due to claims that such properties are located in Palestinian-owned territories illegally occupied by Israeli settlers. The plaintiff homeowners, however, dispute that contention and contend that all the properties are legal.

Further, the plaintiffs asserted that Airbnb had succumbed to pressure from the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to delegitimize the Jewish state and challenges its right to exist.

The lawsuit was filed under the Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, a federal statute which safeguards against discrimination in the housing sales and rental markets.

While the properties were located in Judea and Samaria, the plaintiffs alleged that the discrimination was being committed by Airbnb, which is located in the United States and is bound to follow federal policies of non-discrimination wherever it operates in the world. The plaintiffs asked that the court enjoin Airbnb from discriminatory practices against Jewish homeowners and sought compensation for any lost rental income from Airbnb.

Under the settlement agreement, Airbnb has agreed to adopt a neutral policy towards all properties in the region, allowing all homeowners to list their houses for rental on its web platform regardless of their religion, race or national origin.

A Powerful Defeat for BDS

“The rescinding of Airbnb’s discriminatory policy is, thus, a powerful defeat for the anti-Israel boycott movement. BDS is an anti-Semitic campaign which purports to care about human rights but whose real goal is to completely replace the Jewish State with a Palestinian one,” Shurat HaDin stated.

“Other international companies need to learn the lessons from Airbnb’s mistake and understand that boycotting Israel and discriminating against Jews are unlawful acts which will ultimately result in dire legal consequences, public condemnations, and embarrassment. No outside party can decide for Israel what its legitimate borders will be or where Jews will be permitted to live.

SOURCE  






Evangelical Support for Trump Is Pragmatism, Not Blind Worship

The president isn't an exemplary man, but he fights for Christians' religious liberty

In the final weeks prior to the 2016 elections, Democrats and their mainstream media mouthpieces were giddy at the predicted landslide election by Democrat Hillary Clinton over Republican Donald Trump.

Yet a constant source of irritation for them was their inability to figure out the unshakeable support Trump garnered from the unlikeliest place — Evangelical voters.

On paper, Trump should have been anathema to Christian Evangelicals. He’s a man whose moral failings are both extensive and widely publicized: multiple divorces, an adulterous affair with a porn star, and a payoff to a Playboy model to keep another affair quiet — and both affairs happened after his third wife had just birthed their son. Moreover, he’s crude, brash, and once said he doesn’t ask for God’s forgiveness. “I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right,” he said in 2015. “I don’t bring God into that picture.” That’s a lot of things, but it’s not Christianity.

And yet Trump’s Evangelical support has not wavered. Folks who are baffled by this have a fundamental misunderstanding of how Evangelicals (and Trump supporters generally) actually view him.

Democrat 2020 presidential candidate Mayor Pete Buttigieg insists, “God doesn’t have a political party,” and he’s made other statements claiming his homosexuality and pro-abortion stance are compatible with his Christian faith. The Reverend Franklin Graham responded in a series of tweets stating, in part, “Mayor Buttigieg says he’s a gay Christian. As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman — not two men, not two women.” Reverend Graham is exactly right.

But in response to Graham’s tweets, National Review columnist and Never Trumper David French accused Graham of selling out his Christian faith for political expediency as an early and steadfast Trump supporter.

Said French, “The proper Evangelical position toward any president is not hard to articulate, though it is exceedingly difficult to hold to, especially in polarized times when one party seems set on limiting religious liberty and zealously defending abortion: We should pray for presidents, critique them when they’re wrong, praise them when they’re right, and never, ever impose partisan double standards.”

On the surface, French is right. But his comments reflect that fundamental misunderstanding of the support for President Trump by Evangelicals and the broader Republican base.

No Evangelical or conservative Republican has or would argue that we should praise Trump for his moral failings, or argue that these sinful acts are “no big deal.” Just the opposite.

But what Evangelicals and rank-and-file conservatives see in Trump is not an ideological purist, or a faith leader; they don’t look to him as a moral icon, or a political philosopher. They look to him as a happy, indefatigable warrior defending the Christian faith and conservative values, as counterintuitive as that might seem.

Mitt Romney was arguably the most personally moral, scandal-free Republican candidate in decades. George W. Bush was a born-again Christian. But both were gentlemanly fighters, adhering to the Marquis of Queensbury rules while their progressive Democrat opponents slashed and gutted them in a political knife fight. Bush saw his presidency weakened because he refused to really fight back against accusations of racism, bigotry, and lack of compassion. Romney was taken down by a brazenly dishonest Barack Obama long before he even had a chance to step foot in the Oval Office.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, is a fighter. He is a street brawler who matches blow for blow, and then some. He responds to every attack. He epitomizes the Sean Connery line in “The Untouchables” about how to take down Chicago gangster Al Capone: “He pulls a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue!”

The Christian faith and conservative values have been under relentless assault for years, and the choirboys that Republicans keep running for office don’t seem up to the task of defending them, offering platitudes and lip service as the lives of Christians are destroyed under attacks from the Rainbow Mafia and left-wing judges.

But Trump is up to the task. As our Brian Mark Weber noted last year, “For decades, Republicans at all levels of government gave campaign lip service to the hopes of Christians around the country only to turn their backs on those same voters once in office. Why, then, continue to elect these well-meaning but mild-mannered choirboys? Instead, why not throw in behind a serial philanderer who’s delivering the strongest pro-life message in our history and seating a conservative Supreme Court that will defend religious liberty for the next generation?”

Donald Trump may not be the best person to articulate Christian doctrine, but he has fought valiantly to defend religious freedom and Judeo-Christian values in the public square. His administration, much to the dismay of anti-Christian leftists, is stocked with faithful Christians, from Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo down to junior aides. He has been the most actively pro-life president in decades and arguably the most pro-Israel president ever. He has put two solid conservative, pro-life justices on the Supreme Court, partially defunded Planned Parenthood, and ended IRS harassment of churches.

No, Christians are not hypocrites for supporting Trump over the horrible Hillary Clinton. Nor are they the dimwitted lemmings the press paints them out to be. In fact, their support of Trump has turned out to be far more politically astute than anyone could have suspected. While there is only one Savior, which is Jesus Christ, in Donald Trump they see their political David, slaying their anti-Christian Goliaths.

And so long as Trump continues to fight for them, their support for him will remain unshakeable.

SOURCE  





Post office ordered to stop mistreatment of National Guard Vet

A letter carrier from Auburn, Maine, last week won a legal victory when the U.S. Postal Service was forced to reinstate him in a job after he was absent for 14 years while deployed in the “Global War on Terrorism.”

John Patrie, who was called up by the Maine National Guard soon after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorists attacks, served almost continuously in U.S. military campaigns that included combat in Afghanistan and Iraq, before his honorable discharge in December 2015, the OSC reported in an April 25 release.  During those years, Patrie regularly provided copies of his orders to his Postal Service managers, maintained his job benefits and expressed a desire to return to mail carrying, the special counsel said.

But the Postal Service informed him in January 2016 that it would not reinstate him because he had “abandoned” his civilian post. His attorneys saw that as a violation of the 1994 Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, which is enforced for federal employees by OSC.

At first, Patrie filed a complaint with the Labor Department, whose investigation concluded that USPS violated the veterans protection law, for which Patrie had met the criteria. But after USPS again refused to reinstate him, the department referred his case to OSC, which took it to the Merit Systems Protection Board.  That board’s judges held an evidentiary hearing and ruled for Patrie.

“Patrie did everything he could under the law, and he had no idea how long he would be away,” OSC attorney Patrick Boulay told Government Executive. The veteran even kept his locker and union membership. “The whole idea of USERRA is to maintain the employment as an 'unburned bridge.' It is the service member’s choice whether to cross that bridge, but the Postal Service decided at the last moment to burn the bridge.”

The Postal Service, Boulay added, has been applying its own standards in such cases similarly for years, and is the only agency that doesn’t follow the exceptions to the law’s five-year limit on employment eligibility.

 “We are very pleased to have won this victory not just for Mr. Patrie but for service members everywhere,” said Special Counsel Henry Kerner. “Our country must honor its commitments to those who serve in uniform and defend our freedoms.”

SOURCE  





Justice for Justine at last

The Minneapolis cops are good at coverups but this crime was so heinous that they had to let it go to trial

Why did the Somali cop fire?  His explanations are nonsense but I think I know why.  She was greatly admirable in her blonde beauty -- something he could never be.  So he fired in a jealous rage.  The constant Leftist shrieking about white privilege has now had a fatal outcome

The fiancé of Justine Ruszczyk Damond has spoken out against former police officer Mohamed Noor after the cop was found guilty of third-degree murder.

Don Damond told reporters on Tuesday that Justine's death exemplified a 'complete disregard for the sanctity of life.'

The Australian-American woman, 40, was gunned down outside her Minneapolis home after she called 911 to report a possible sexual assault behind her house in 2017. 

'Nearly two years ago my fiance, Justine Damond Ruszczyk, was shot dead in her pyjamas outside our home without warning as she walked up to a police car which she had summoned,' Mr Damond said.

'Ironically, the Minneapolis Police Department emblem on the squad door reads: "To protect with courage and to serve with compassion".

'Where were these values that night? That night there was a tragic lapse of care and complete disregard for the sanctity of life. The evidence in this case clearly showed an egregious failure of the Minneapolis Police Department.'    

Noor was charged with second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter in the 2017 death of Damond, a dual citizen of the U.S. and Australia.

A jury of ten men and two women reached a verdict on Tuesday after three weeks of testimony. The jurors were sequestered and deliberated for 11 hours.

Noor, 33, was found guilty of third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter, and was acquitted on the highest charge, second-degree murder.    

Third-degree murder is also known as 'depraved-heart murder,' meaning the act was committed without intent to effect death, but caused by acting dangerously and without regard for human life.

Second-degree murder means the murder was intentional but was not premeditated.

Noor was acquitted on the second-degree murder charge. Second-degree manslaughter occurs when a person causes death through negligence.

He was immediately led out of the courtroom in handcuffs. He is scheduled to be sentenced on June 7 and could face up to 25 years in prison. The former cop showed no reaction, but his wife cried as the jury's verdict was read at his trial.

During a press conference, Damond's father, John Ruszczyk, described the process as a 'painful journey' but said he was 'satisfied with the outcome'. 

Noor's attorney asked that he be released on bond pending sentencing, but prosecutors opposed that on the grounds of the seriousness of the case.

The Hennepin County Sheriff's Office said it had concerns about Noor's safety if he was free.

The verdict is believed to mark the first time a Minnesota police officer is convicted on a murder charge for shooting someone while on-duty.

Damond, 40, was shot on July 15, 2017, shortly after she called 911 to report a possible sexual assault behind her home.

Noor fired at Damond from the passenger seat of the police cruiser he was in with his partner, Matthew Harrity, when she emerged from her home.

The victim, a yoga instructor, had approached the cruiser after calling 911 twice to report a possible rape in the dark alley behind her home. No such assault was ever found to have occurred.

In court, prosecutor Amy Sweasy said Noor violated Minneapolis police training policies - and endangered the life of his partner and a teenage cyclist also present.

She dismissed speculation that Damond contributed to her own death.

'He pulled (the gun). He pointed, he aimed, and he killed her,' Ms. Sweasy said. 'This is no accident. This is intentional murder,' she said.   

Noor had testified that he believed there was an imminent threat after he saw a cyclist stop near the police cruiser, heard a loud bang and saw Harrity's 'reaction to the person on the driver's side raising her right arm.'

Noor added that when he reached from the cruiser's passenger seat and shot Damond through the driver's side window, it was because he thought his partner 'would have been killed.'

He said that after Damond approached the cruiser, his partner screamed, 'Oh, Jesus!' and began fumbling to unholster his gun.

Then, Noor said he saw a blonde woman wearing a pink T-shirt raising her right arm at the driver's window, identified her as a threat and fired.

The prosecutor, however, suggested that the officers should not have been surprised by a woman walking to their car, given that the 911 caller reporting the possible sexual assault was a woman. 

Ms Damond, a dual US-Australian citizen was to due be married to her fiancée a month after her life was cut short.

Her death sparked anger and disbelief in the U.S. and Australia, cost the city's police chief her job and contributed to the mayor's electoral defeat a few months later.

Neither officer had their body cameras running when Ms Damond was shot, something Officer Harrity blamed on what he called a vague policy that didn't require it.

SOURCE  

*************************

Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  Email me (John Ray) here. 

***************************