PR Newswire - The American Jewish Committee is dismayed by the decision of Costa Rica to establish diplomatic relations with the State of Palestine.
The timing of this decision is both odd and painful, said AJC Executive Director David A. Harris. Odd because there is not yet a Palestinian state. Painful because this action comes less than two years after President Oscar Arias moved his countrys embassy out of Jerusalem, ending Costa Ricas longstanding and courageous example of maintaining its embassy in Israels capital city.
AJC supports efforts to achieve a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, premature recognition of a Palestinian state is not normal diplomatic practice, nor is it helpful to the process.
Given the fact that Costa Rica has been a shining light of democracy in Latin America, this action against another stalwart democracy, Israel, is particularly shocking, said Harris.
AJC has visited San Jose regularly over the years for meetings with government and Jewish community leaders. The main Jewish organization, Centro Zionista de Costa Rica, is an AJC international partner.
RLCC: Oscar Arias of Costa Rica needs no lessons in democracy from the likes of the American Jewish Committee that wrongly terms Israel a "stalwart democracy."
Israel is a racist state, just as was South Africa during its Apartheid era. By highly unethical means, Israel forcefully drove the Palestinian people from their homes and lands so false-Zionists could take over what they so covet. They are still at it with their expanding illegal settlements, denying Palestinians building rights and most of the basic necessities of life, and by, among other things, destroying Palestinian homes. They kill 300 Palestinians for every Israeli killed in the conflict, said Ralph Nader very recently. They're Nazi-like.
Americans need to stop avoiding calling Israeli racism and ethnic bigotry what they are: Racism and ethnic bigotry. If certain Jews don't like it, let them denounce racism and ethnic bigotry and live accordingly. Otherwise, no one should accept any of their propaganda.
Fortunately, more and more Jews are coming to their senses. They are coming forward to speak out against Apartheid Israel. That is smart, not the neocons ideology. It takes away all the supposed justification of those who themselves are ethnically bigoted against Jews.
Yahoo! News: World - Latin America on February 25, 2008, 9:08amfrom
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
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.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)