The party was founded back in 1996 as Massachusetts affiliate of the Green Party of the United States. In 1998 Green-Rainbow candidate Stephen Elliot received 12% of the vote for the State Senate, and in 2000 the party achieved official political status when the national Green presidential candidates, Ralph Nader and Winona Duke, got 6% of the Massachusetts vote.

It lost that status in 2004 when the Green-Rainbow ticket didn’t make the 3% threshold in the Massachusetts elections. But it regained it in 2006 when the party came back stronger than ever.

The Green-Rainbows base their ideology on the Ten Key Values of the North American Green movement, essentially a set of hoary peace-and-love shibboleths that haven’t changed since the late 1960s: “Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect their lives; no one should be subject to the will of another…. We must maintain an ecological balance. . . . We must consciously confront…racism and class oppression, sexism and heterosexism, ageism and disability. . . . We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity. . . .”

It’s not for me to tell people in Massachusetts how to vote on issues like gay marriage or the environment. But when you look at the Green-Rainbows’ Party Statements on foreign policy issues, you wonder if they forgot about the Ten Key Values when they were writing them.

The statement on the “US Occupation of Iraq” is very far-out—“We call for all members of the Bush administration and all top military officers to be tried for war crimes”; “We call on the US government to stop their imperialist project of military and economic domination of the world”; “We support US soldiers who wish to resist any illegal service including service in the illegal occupation of Iraq”—but perhaps on the Left fringe of the U.S. political spectrum.

But then you come to the “Green-Rainbow Party Statement on U.S. Imperialism and Sudan”:

We reject the racist mischaracterization of the situation in Darfur as genocide being perpetrated by Arabs. The US military and economic intervention over the last decade, which has worked to impoverish and destabilize Sudan, has largely caused the humanitarian crisis of civil war and famine in the Darfur region.

We oppose any military intervention in Sudan by the US, the UN, or imposed by any other foreign power. . . .

We recall the unprovoked criminal attack that destroyed the al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, launched by the Clinton administration in 1998, and call for the US government to pay reparations for this brutal transgression…. In 1967 Martin Luther King noted that the United States is the “greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.” Given that this fact about the USA has remained true, we condemn the US government declaring Sudan a “terrorist” nation. The US should normalize relations with Sudan.

We strongly condemn the practice of both the George Bush and John Kerry Presidential campaigns for distorting the human tragedy in Darfur for use towards domestic political ends and as a pretext for action to gain control over Sudanese oil that is currently being developed by China and other non-Western countries.

This account can charitably be called demented and is based on the notion that dark-skinned people cannot possibly harm other dark-skinned people and that non-Western people are incapable of evil. But if the Green-Rainbows engage in genocide denial in the case of Sudan, where the Arab Janjaweed militia is estimated to have killed 100,000 black Sudanese civilians over the past three years, at least they don’t actively call for the murders.

Not surprisingly, it’s in their “Statement on Palestine” that the Green-Rainbows shed even that inhibition:

The Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts calls for the end of all American military and economic aid to Israel. Additionally, the Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts supports the following means to bring pressure to bear on Israel: Divestment initiatives that seek to withdraw institutional investments from Israel state bonds and corporations that do business with Israel; academic boycotts of Israeli academics and academic institutions….

The Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts rejects all apartheid-based governmental systems and calls for a secular, democratic governing entity for all people in the geographic region of historic Palestine (today referred to by some people as Israel, the West Bank and Gaza)….

The Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts recognizes the right of Palestinians to self-defense as well as nonviolent resistance to Israeli occupation and the Israeli project of forced displacement of the indigenous Palestinian population which has been ongoing since 1948. The right to resist occupation is guaranteed to all peoples of the world by international law.

So there you have it—a call for the dissolution of a country, Israel alone among all the countries of the world; and a clear endorsement—“recognizes the right of Palestinians to self-defense as well as nonviolent resistance. . .”—of any and all Palestinian violence against Israeli civilians. The endorsement is not even conditional on Israel leaving the West Bank, but, if at all, on its disappearance as a political entity. The statement sets no limits on the dimensions of the “resistance” and in no way indicates, for instance, that setting off a bomb in a crowded restaurant would be going too far.

It’s hard for me to believe that 18% or 16% of Massachusetts voters take that position. Be careful whom you vote for. A peace-and-love, citizen-empowerment, eco-friendly veneer can hide twisted attitudes of hatred toward America, Israel, the West, and Caucasian people. A party like the Green-Rainbows of Massachusetts has no place in America and should get no votes at all.

Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.