There are times when, in the course of human events, simple
occurrences take place, the significance of which should be obvious to everyone
yet are not seen by a segment of society. Arguments, counter arguments and
points of view of every kind are advanced by those who care to participate in
the exploration of the differences between the antagonists. But instead of
reaching a consensus, the participants sometimes create a haystack where the
needle of truth that may have existed at the start gets lost for ever.
In a case such as this, the burden falls on the shoulder of
fiction writers to clarify the situation. To do this, they set up a parallel
fictional situation inside of which they recreate the main points of the actual
occurrence after stripping it of the tangents that were added to it by the
participants. One of the techniques they use is the setting of a tribunal in
which they try the case as if in a court of law. The smarter they make the
judge of the tribunal, the more convincing they can make his or her final
judgment. Perhaps the readers are familiar with the character Q in the
television series Star Trek, the Next Generation. He played such a role in a
number of episodes.
I bring this up because we have a case such as this on
Planet Earth, and so I ask: How would Q have decided? You can get a sense of
what the case is about if you read: “Curious IRS Timing,” a Wall Street Journal
editorial that also came under the subtitle: “Did the tax agency also target
groups that support Israel ?”
It was published on May 29, 2013.
After discussing a number of other matters, the editors of
the Journal tackle the subject making up the subtitle. They explain that
organizations doing charity work can apply for a tax exemption status under the
501(c)(3) rule. Then they present the facts of the case as follows: A
pro-Israel group filed for that status, intending to operate purely as an
educational group. To explain the slow pace of approval, the IRS acknowledged
its targeted enforcement especially to groups connected with Israel .
Applications related to Israel
were sent to D.C. to determine whether the organization's activities contradict
the Administration's policies. The group filed suit alleging viewpoint
discrimination.
And so the editors of the Journal ask the question: Why the
special scrutiny for pro-Israel groups? And they answer that tax-exempt groups
were donating to West Bank settlers. That the
American Treasury was helping to sustain the settlements through tax breaks on
donations to support them at a time when the American government was seeking to
end the four-decade Jewish settlement enterprise. And so the editors of the
Journal opine that this is a violation of public trust.
Knowing very little about the subject of Jewish settlements
in Arab West Bank, Q quizzes his computer and gets
a thorough backgrounder on the subject. He learns that the activities of the
settlers are a violation of international law, a point of view that America has
embraced, and has never repudiated. Moreover, America
has warned Israel
repeatedly that the activities of the settlers were a detriment to the peace
process it has tried to broker between the Palestinians and the Israelis for
four decades now.
Given these realities, Q decides that not only the IRS was
correct in making the decisions that it made, but that the editors of the Wall
Street Journal were as sly as foxes shedding crocodile tears by talking about
public trust instead of talking about the criminality that is obvious in
violating the tax laws of America to violate America's adherence to the
international laws it helped formulate, and to which it is adhering.
Q departs the Earth still thinking that the human race is a
hopeless one. And if you want to know my opinion, it's the fault of the Wall
Street Journal and its Jewish editors.