Flotilla Investigation Ignores Israeli Evidence Tampering

To members of The European Campaign to End the Siege on Gaza

Beesan Bessan

January 24 at 11:46pm

The conclusion of the Turkel Commission that Israel acted within international law and in self-defence during a deadly raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla of aid ships last May ignores substantial proof that Israel fabricated or tampered with evidence, charges the European Campaign to End the Siege on Gaza (ECESG).

A study sponsored in October by the International Bureau of Humanitarian NGOs (IBH) and the Friends of Charities Association (FOCA) found "multiple instances of Israeli officials creating false evidence to implement and bolster the government's version of events. The Israel government also went to great lengths to prevent survivors from discussing the attack or proving their version of the event" by confiscating their film, computers, etc.

"It seems clear that the Turkel Commission relied primarily on evidence supplied by Israel," said Mazn Kahel, director of the ECESG. "Yet, the FOCA report documented numerous instances of falsification, including manufactured imagery. All traceable efforts to obscure the details of the attack originated from within Israel and its champions. How can the commission's conclusions be anything but highly suspect?"

The ECESG insists that only an independent commission – not one led by a retired Israeli Supereme Court judge – that examines all evidence, including the testimonies of the flotilla passengers, can conduct a proper investigation of the Israel Defense Force attack May 31 on six ships in international waters. Nine people on board the Mavi Marmara flotilla ship were killed, and many others injured.

The ECESG will participate in a second large flotilla due to set sail for Gaza in the spring. "Israel's actions in the past and its threats regarding the future won't deter us," said Mr. Kahel. "We will not stop until Israel's siege of Gaza ends and the 1.5 million people regain their freedom."

The European Campaign to End the Siege on Gaza (ECESG) is an umbrella group of 34 European human rights and humanitarian organisations that have come together to collectively pressure the international community and Israel to end the siege on Gaza's civilian population.

Donate


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.