Non-violent, Global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement Subjected to Zionist Disinformation-Campaign | Green Left Weekly

I am very impressed by the clear and plain logic of this article written by Samah Sabawi:

[Australia] Recently, Federal MP Andrew Robb on ABC radio attacked the Greens accusing them of being anti-Semitic. Does Robb believe that all Jews are Israelis?

Does he believe that Israel represents all Jews? Does he hold all Jews world wide collectively responsible for the actions of the state of Israel?

Is he telling us that Jews have a political monolithic view and follow one agenda? The idea of lumping all Jews in the world into one category is inherently a racist idea that must be seen for what it is.
The call to boycott Israel did not come about because Israel has a Jewish population but because the state of Israel practises discrimination and apartheid policies. When Palestinian civil society initiated the calls for BDS, it could not care less if the state was Jewish, Muslim or Hindu.
Unfortunately, our right-wing press is telling our politicians that BDS is part of a campaign to delegitimise Israel, a state they say is based on the foundation of liberal democracy.

But you cannot have a state that has two sets of laws — one for Jews and one for non-Jews — and call that a liberal democracy. They claim that BDS demonises Jews, but this is incorrect.

Boycotts in South Africa were never put in place to demonise white people but to bring about change to a racist regime. BDS aims to delegitimise Israeli policies of discrimination and oppression and not, as some have claimed, to destroy Israel. The boycotts against South Africa did not destroy that country; they only dismantled its system of apartheid.

The Israeli government recognises the power of the BDS movement. It sees it as a threat to its current policies of discrimination and apartheid. As a result, it is cracking down on internal dissent and is in the process of making it illegal for Israeli citizens to support BDS.

This is not how democracies work. This is hardly the blueprint on which Australia should model itself.

Boycott Israel campaign challenges apartheid | Green Left Weekly.

Beautifully stated that.

The young Jews in America are waking up to this too. They do not want to be duped fascist-minions for the racist Zionist Project. More power to them. They can research the real roots of Zionism. It's not what they've been misled to believe.

It started out as literally what the Zionists would call anti-Semitic. It started out as a racist ideology of a very confused man, Theodor Herzl. See his diary. It's very revealing about Zionism's roots.

The Zionists have built up Herzl and attempted to cover up his real thinking and his plan and theirs. Watch them attempt to twist his beliefs into something other than what they were. When that doesn't work, and it won't, watch them begin to distance themselves from him and to pretend that he was never "really" their leader and founder. That won't work either. Nothing they do will work. They've already lost. They lost before they started. Zionism was bankrupt from birth. You might say, it was stillborn — the spirit of death incarnate in the Zionists. Repent, Zionists! Repent, Richard Goldstone — Zionist liar, war-criminals and land-thieves excuser!


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.