Hamas 'will win Palestinian polls'
By Adam Makary
Brought up under Israeli occupation, Zahar was assimilated into a culture of resistance where self-defence came first.

In April 2003, his 25-year-old son Khaled was killed when Israeli forces destroyed their family home in Gaza.

His other son, Hussam, was killed in January this year by an Israeli air strike that also took the life of his son-in-law.

'Criminal' Zionism

Zahar told an audience at the Doha Debates, the public forum for dialogue and freedom of speech in Qatar: "You don't know what it's like to look into your son's chest and see that it's empty."

His sense of loss is not simply that of a father's grief but also results from a strong feeling of dispossession triggered by "al-Nakba" - The Catastrophe - the 1948 creation of Israel and its expulsion of thousands of Palestinians from their homeland.

Zahar said: "I don't resent the Jews or the Jewish faith.

"One must differentiate between Judaism and Zionism, and Zionists - they are the criminals."
Zahar explained 11,550 Palestinians are in prison and that one quarter of the Palestinian people have been imprisoned at some point in their lifetime.

Israel demands the halting of rocket attacks on Israeli towns and the release of Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier captured in Gaza during a cross border raid in June 2006.

Israeli 'games'

Zahar said: "Israel promised to release 1,000 prisoners.

"In the first go, 450 Palestinians would be released and then we would give back Gilad Shalit," he said.

"But in the end, we know the Israelis are only playing games with us.

"Ceasefire for ceasefire, agreement after agreement, and in the meantime, they talk about releasing prisoners in one month – [then] no, two months. Then two years pass. So? Where are the prisoners?"
Zahar is infuriated by Israel and the west's version of Palestinian history and speaks in a tone that demands the script be revised.

For Zahar, the history of the Palestinians should not be defined by the Israeli conquest, but by the continued Palestinian struggle to achieve their rights.

"Over the years, all that has changed in the meaning of the word Nakba is that we are nearer to achieving our goal after 60 years of struggle.

"We failed, but our grandsons will not."


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)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.