No, because that business would inevitably be providing material support for Al 
Qaeda, and that would be a violation US law, whereas the DPW subsidiary would 
be operating only in US ports and under US guidelines- meaning no boycott of 
Israel. It is different than the Al Qaeda example because the act of sending 
profits back to DPW does not violate US law, whereas Jihad Ice Cream would be 
violating the law by sending funds back to Bin Laden, et. al. 

>So if Al Queda sets up a separate subsidiary, staffed by Americans, that 
>operates only the US business and complies with all the relevant laws, none 
>of this would be a problem.
>Jihad ice cream anyone? All legal.
>
>> Even assuming that's all true, if DPW creates a separate subsidiary, 
>> staffed by Americans, that operates only the US ports and complies with 
>> all of the relevant laws, none of this would be a problem.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:198363
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to