Freedom Rider: Slow Death in Gaza
Wednesday, 04 June 2008

by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley

Each American claim to moral authority becomes a foul excretion in light of U.S. complicity in Israel's barbaric and illegal treatment of the Palestinians. Washington deploys its superpower apparatus to smother dissent against its Middle East policy in Europe and elsewhere, leaving former president Jimmy Carter and Nobel laureate Desmond Tutu as lonely defenders of Palestinian human rights. No change in American policy is on the horizon, as "the rot in America goes beyond this administration, and so does the rot in Israel." The "abomination," as Desmond Tutu describes it, against 1.6 million people in Palestine shows the hypocrisy of American and Israeli pretenses to civilization.
Freedom Rider: Slow Death in Gaza

by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley

"The Europeans seem to be quite satisfied acting as America's puppet states."

How would the civilized world react if 1.6 million people were kept imprisoned, denied access to food, clean water, sanitation facilities and electricity? If those people were also prevented from fleeing their oppression, would Americans and Europeans speak out in protest?

If those aforesaid people lived in Gaza, and were oppressed by Israel, then the civilized world would say and do absolutely nothing. Israel is the Untied States' number one client state, and fear of American power has silenced everyone on earth who has the power to stop this atrocity.

While Tibet and Darfur are the subjects of selective cause celebre condemnation, there are almost no voices raised publicly on behalf of Palestinians, who live in danger of indiscriminate shelling and gunfire, whose homes are destroyed by Israeli tanks, and who are literally denied an exit from their hellish existence. While they suffer, Israel continues to build settlements on what is rightfully Palestinian land.

It is not surprising that Washington takes no action against Israel, but silence from the rest of the world community is the most shocking aspect of this continued violation of human rights. Former president Jimmy Carter and Nobel peace prize laureate Desmond Tutu are alone among world leaders who openly condemn the Israeli government and the complicit silence from other nations.

Gaza's woes began in 2006 when its people voted for a government headed by Hamas, the Palestinian group that Israel and the U.S. didn't like. The United States then demanded a blockade of Gaza and the rest of the so-called Quartet (European Union, Russia, the United Nations) went along. Carter has revealed the ugly truth about this decision."The Quartet's final document had been drafted in Washington in advance, and not a line was changed."

"Former president Jimmy Carter and Nobel peace prize laureate Desmond Tutu are alone among world leaders who openly condemn the Israeli government."

Carter called the blockade that has imprisoned more than 1 million people a "human rights crime." He has called on the other Quartet members to break with the United States and end the blockade and he has tried in vain to encourage the Europeans to oppose American policy. "Why not? They're not our vassals. They occupy an equal position with the U.S." Apparently Carter has given Europeans more credit than they give themselves. They seem to be quite satisfied acting as America's puppet states.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu has joined Carter in calling for international action to end Gaza's suffering. He recently led a United Nations Human Rights Council delegation to Gaza specifically to investigate the 2006 killings of 19 members of a Palestinian family whose homes were destroyed by Israeli rocket fire in the town of Beit Hanoun.

The Israeli government made no pretense of showing Tutu the respect that he receives everywhere else on earth. The government refused to grant him and the other members of his party entry into Israel, and they were forced to enter Gaza through Egypt. Tutu's conclusions about the situation in Gaza were inescapable and obvious. Yet the words may seem odd to American ears, who never hear a discouraging word about their government or Israel's.

"This is not something you want to wish on your worst enemy," said Tutu. He called the situation in Gaza "abominable" and condemned the "silent complicity" of the world community. He called the killings at Beit Hanoun a "massacre" and in a diplomatic understatement said that Israel's explanations of the killings "fell short of accountability."

"Gazans have nothing to look forward to except more suffering."

The situation in Gaza is of course a result of America's support of Israel. In the past that support was at least tacitly criticized by the world community, but now shows signs of being accepted in much the same way that all of America's aggression has become accepted.

America is feared like a bully on the playground and European nations have decided to be quiet and let Bush have his way. Jimmy Carter said they should not be "supine" but they are, and so they acquiesce, living in denial and inertia while running out the clock until January 2009 in hopes of getting a better deal.

They won't. The rot in America goes beyond this administration, and so does the rot in Israel. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert may be forced to resign because he has been caught taking bribes from a rich American. United States foreign policy will not change with a new administration. Only Jimmy Carter and Desmond Tutu will have anything to say about the crime being committed in Gaza, but neither of them are in power, so their words won't matter at all. Gazans have nothing to look forward to except more suffering, more Beit Hanouns and more silence from the rest of the world.

Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.Com. Ms. Kimberley maintains an edifying and frequently updated blog at freedomrider.blogspot.com. More of her work is also available at her Black Agenda Report archive page.


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.