The problems in the Middle East stimulated by the film produced by a nonprofit in the US raise for me a number of questions, most which are focused on governance.
Should nonprofits that do harm get to keep their tax exempt status? Does "harm" inlcude attacking the core principles of other groups, especially religious organizations?
Of course the government would have to prove intent: that the Board of the nonprofit in question did indeed authorize actions which would be so incendiary that only harm could result. And would a nonprofit Board really have this kind of conversation -- for the record? And, as a proponent of keeping meeting minutes that pretty much focus on the results or actions, would the dissenting vote count, albeit not a majority, to demonstrate that the whole board was not behind such an action. And, did the members who did not approve resign after the action to demonstrate how opposed to doing harm they really were?
The story that stimulated my thinking about the role or accountability of a nonprofit board on these matters can be found in the LA Times.