US Churches Take Stand Against Israeli Occupation (Muslim's support PCUSA's treason)

Al Jazeerah ^ | Nov 21, 2004 | Barbara Ferguson

[telder1]

Josh Reubner, grassroots advocacy coordinator for the US Campaigns and the Israeli Occupation (www.endtheoccupation.org), a diverse nationwide coalition of 175 organizations that work to end US support for Israeli occupation in the territories, applauds the church’s decision. “For the Commerce Department to threaten organizations that are considering divesting from companies that profit from human rights violations, and to call this a violation of US an anti-boycott law is ridiculous,” said Reubner.

“It’s the Commerce Department that is breaking US law by licensing caterpillar bulldozers to be sold to the Israeli Army in full knowledge that Israel is using these bulldozers in contravention of the US Arms Expert Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act.”

Reubner said there is “tremendous” pressure being put on the Presbyterian Church to reverse its decision. “But I’m hopeful that the church will stick with its clear, moral decision and not relent under pressure from extremists.”

[telder1]

OBL endorses Kerry. Al Jahzeerah endorses the PCUSA --but doesn't call it the PCUSA but merely 'the Presbyterian Church'. Note the 'The Israeli Land-Grab Apartheid Wall ' picture and link on the same page...

[Presby Conservative]

The Presbyterian Church USA gets lambasted in the regular press all the time. So any press that praises them is well received by the leadership---it is but a trivial matter to them that the praise comes from radical islamic interests.

[telder1]

I'm not understanding why they haven't been prosecuted if it was indeed Hez'bollah they met with, even--especially --that they went overseas to do it. Hez'bollah is Hez'bollah. I would find it stretching credulity that they met with 'the political, non-violent' wing of Hez'bollah. Being a non-profit in no way protects it from consequences of doing treason. (Can anybody declare themselves to be non-profit and then do treason with immunity simply because they are a legal non-profit?)That possibility of prosecution may be why they fired the two...--not because they were actually trying to distance themselves from the action as immoral and sin. Note in the article the "Presbyterian" spokesperson is quoted to have said that the divestment is a grassroots effort by the members. If that is true, the people can't hide behind "that's just some commitee up in the denomination gone wild." and pretend there is no blood on their hands.