Tom Usher wrote or added | "Israel has rejected a French idea that EU forces would check the cargoes of ships heading for Gaza to ensure they are not carrying goods Israel would consider a security risk. Bernard Kouchner, France's foreign minister, called the response from Jerusalem 'rather negative'."
Why aren't they talking about ending the apartheid regime? The Palestinians have a right to go back home where the Zionists who horned them out are squatting illegally — milking sympathy from WWII. Look at that Palestinian child's face in the accompanying photo. The Zionists did that because the Gazans want their land back that the Zionists have stolen.
Who's the global cop on the beat? The US claims the right to go anywhere and do anything; but it won't stand for the Gazans' land rights, and it won't stand up for even itself, what with the way it lets Israel and the Jewish Lobby (AIPAC, et al.) in America set US foreign policy, as if the US is the Zionist Regime.
Well, I am an American, despite the fact that the US is a lawless rogue stomping all over it's own Constitution and backsliding on its international treaties, and I say that I'm not on the side of the Zionist Project in their brutal, evil, ongoing deeds in Palestine.
No amount of idiotic speeches from so-called leaders saying that there is "no distance" between the US Bill of Rights and what's been going on in the US and Israel is going to change the fact that I speak for America as an American just as much as those bought-off, cowardly, pathetic "leaders" do at this point. I say there is a huge gulf between on the one hand, the ideals and values I was raised with and on the other hand, what Israel has been doing in Palestine and even what the US has done in Iraq and Afghanistan and so many other places.
Now, just try to tell me that I can't stand squarely against the current US foreign policy and administration, and I'll tell you where you're headed — it won't be Heaven — and I'll go right on speaking out.
As for the French, just get out there in the water with your ships and kindly request the Gaza Freedom Flotilla to let you check everything on their way to Gaza. If the Flotilla submits, which they should, and if the Israelis then still insist that those ships go elsewhere where the Israelis will illegally imprison the passengers and where the Israelis will withhold cargo and not return the passengers and crews and owners their personal possessions and the actual ships right then and there, then as a major European power, France, stand up in the world and say, "No" to the Israelis. What do you want, war?
If the Palestinians aren't given full, equal rights with the Zionists and the full and unconditional right of return (with the exception that they should pledge not to take vengeance), then the Zionists must not be supported, period.
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)