Leftist J Street Dangerous

Open Letter to J-Street after their Attack on Elie Wiesel
By Shmuley Boteach


Jeremy Ben-Ami, the head of J-Street.
Pity Jeremy Ben-Ami, the hapless head of J-Street, the we-condemn-Israel-constantly-because-of-how-much-we-love-it lobby.



In the recent tension between the Obama Administration and the Jewish state over Jews building in Jerusalem, the pro-Israel camp was represented by Elie Wiesel whose full-pages ads in major American newspapers criticized President Obama’s ban on Jews living anywhere in the holy city. The letter, as with everything Wiesel writes, was haunting, stirring, and deeply personal. “For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. It is mentioned more than six hundred times in Scripture and not a single time in the Koran. Its presence in Jewish history is overwhelming. There is no more moving prayer in Jewish history than the one expressing our yearning to return to Jerusalem… The first song I heard was my mother’s lullaby about and for Jerusalem.”



The letter, by one of America’s most celebrated citizens, caused such angst in the White House that President Obama changed his schedule to invite the Nobel Peace laureate to a private kosher lunch in order not to appear out of sync with the Jewish prophet. Like Lyndon Johnson who panicked when he lost Walter Cronkite over Vietnam, Obama understood that losing Wiesel over his Middle East policy spelled almost certain doom.



But while the President behaved courteously, Ben-Ami did precisely the opposite. Not content with Judaism’s greatest living personality having the last word, the J-Street head quickly went into action and responded to Wiesel with full page ads of a bizarre editorial by Yossi Sarid, the former Meretz politician, utterly unknown to the American public whom Ben-Ami is seeking to influence. The man who Oprah travelled to Auschwitz with and chose his book Night as a main selection of her book club and whose novels are studied in the world’s leading Universities was dismissed by Sarid as being a writer ignorant of current events. “You know much about the heavenly Jerusalem but less so about its counterpart here on earth.”



Sarid was only getting started. Next he accused Wiesel of being naïve and easily misled. ‘Someone has deceived you, my dear friend.’ Sarid’s friendship would intensify two paragraphs later when he accused the man revered around the world as humanity’s most eloquent voice for the oppressed as a religious fanatic ‘imbuing our current conflict with messianic hues.’ Finally, not content with his dismissal of Wiesel as ignorant, naïve, and fanatical, he could help himself but conclude that Wiesel is not only confused but intentionally sought to mislead and misinform others. ‘It is unfortunate that a man of your standing must confuse fundamental issues and confound the reader.’



How unfortunate that Ben-Ami and Sarid were not able to forewarn the gullible American president not to invite the ignorant holocaust survivor to lunch and to instead send Air Force One to pick up the encyclopedic, peace-loving, temperate Sarid instead!



Which brings me back to Jeremy Ben-Ami, whom I would now like to address directly.



“Jeremy, my dear Jewish brother. Since the launch of J-Street not long ago you have tried hard, like any effective CEO, to make a name for your organization and capture headlines. The method you have used, however, appears to involve a cavalcade of insults and attacks. And while this has worked in the short term, knowing just a little bit about PR myself, I am fairly certain that it will backfire in the long run.



“Last September I wrote a column commenting on your quotations in a New York Times Magazine feature where you insulted all staunch American Jewish supporters of Israel as paranoids who believe that the world is filled with murderous anti-Semites. Surely that kind of character assassination is not only unnecessary but, I would argue, indicative of significant insecurity about your message. Not that I blame you. I realize that you have the most difficult job of any Jewish organizational head in the world, namely, running an organization that purports to be pro-Israel but invariably finds itself in the company of Israel’s worst enemies and critics.



“But even so I never believed that someone as media-savvy as you would make the mistake of spending your valuable money on full pages ads attacking Elie Wiesel. That, my brother, is pure suicide.



“I twice hosted Prof. Wiesel at Oxford University for public lectures where more than 2000 non-Jewish students hung on his every word. I took him to lecture to the Mormon Church in Utah where thousands more felt awed to simply stand in the same room as him, and just a few months ago I hosted him in New York City on a panel with my friends Dr. Mehmet Oz and Mayor Cory Booker of Newark at a seminar on values where you could hear a pin drop from the more than one thousand people who stood in line to hear him. In each of these forums people from all walks of life came to bask in the light of the man regarded as the most courageous living voice for victims of hatred and genocide. He is regarded by most as a living saint, and his books, especially Night, are among the most influential literature of modern times. You might as well take out full pages ads savaging Nelson Mandela, Mother Theresa, and the Dalai Lama.



“I suggest that whoever is your PR consultant, my friend, be fired immediately and that you recalibrate your message to simply criticize Israel, which J-Street has done with considerable success, rather than attack the voice of the six million which has, predictably, brought an avalanche of condemnation of protest both in print and all over the internet.



“And Jeremy, my dear brother, please be advised that while my advice is free, Wiesel’s words are priceless.”





Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, founder of This World: The Values Network, is publishing, this week, his new book ‘Renewal: A Guide to the Values-Filled Life.’(Basic Books). His website is www.shmuley.com

Posted on May 10, 2010


J Street Dangerous to Israel’s survival 17 reasons
1. Wants to turn over Jerusalem to International authority in latest full page ad
2. Israeli and American Left have had seventeen years to try out their "confidence building measures" (read concession after concession) via their highly touted "Peace Process." The results? Thousands of corpses - both Jewish and Arab - an ascendant Islamic radicalism and Iran about to produce (apparently with Obama's acquiescence) nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them. It's as if Neville Chamberlain had been left in charge of British foreign policy throughout World War II.
3. Alan M. Dershowitzm J Street Can No Longer Claim to be Pro-Israel
J Street has gone over to the dark side. It claims to be "a pro-Israel, pro peace lobby." It has now become neither. Its Executive Director, Jeremy Ben-Ami, has joined the off key chorus of those who falsely claim that Israel, by refusing to make peace with the Palestinians, is placing the lives of American soldiers at risk. . In the letter to The New York Times on April 21, 2010, Jeremy Ben-Ami, speaking on behalf of J Street, included the following paragraph:"An analysis of the Obama administration’s calculus on Middle East policy should reflect that many in the Jewish community recognize that resolving the conflict is not only necessary to secure Israel’s future, but also critical to regional stability and American strategic interests." Although Ben-Ami doesn't explicitly make a direct connection between Israeli actions and American casualties, his use of the phrase "critical to…American strategic interests," is a well-known code, especially these days, for the argument that there is a connection between Israeli actions and American casualties. In lending support to that dangerous and false argument, J Street has disqualified itself from being considered "pro-Israel." ..Now that it has crossed the line into legitimating the most dangerous and false argument ever made against Israel's security, it must stop calling itself pro-Israel. Some of its college affiliate groups have already done that.
4. J Street aims to distance US from Israel and undermine US support for Israel
“As Americans, we worry about the impact of Israeli policies on vital U.S. interests in the Middle East and around the world” “J Street Calls for Stronger American Engagement to Stop Provocative Actions in Jerusalem . ...J Street urges the U.S. government to forcefully oppose provocative, unilateral actions …J Street condemns .....We urge the United States and American political leaders to seek an end to actions “
5. J Street's agenda is to turn Israel into a state in which Jews might find a home -- leaving plenty of room for a "right of return" for Palestinian refugees and a bi-national state that dare not identify itself as Jewish.
6. The Israeli ambassador to the United States blasted J Street, saying the organization was "fooling around with the lives of 7 million people." Among the policies Oren pointed to as problematic were J Street 's criticism of Israel 's attack on Gaza last winter, its refusal to reject the Goldstone report
7. J Street Refused to accept Israel ’s right of self-defense in Gaza
In regard to the recent Gaza conflict, it is J Street ’s address of Israel ’s side that truly casts some doubt on its “pro-Israel” stance. J Street ’s website features a section titled “ J Street ’s Response to the Gaza Crisis” (note, the word, crisis). The organization lists a number of statements and articles condemning Israel ’s military response to the rocket attacks, calling it “disproportional,” “counterproductive” and “deepening the cycle of violence.” No such criticism exists for Hamas’ rocket warfare and even more disturbing is the website’s lack of information about the destructive impact of the Gaza rockets on Israeli civilians. Of course, J Street also refrains from mentioning that Hamas’ charter calls for the complete destruction of Israel .
8. J Street has deep ties to enemies of Israel.
a. Iranian ties J Street conspiring with an organization run by an Iranian national -- an organization that Congress has asked AG Holder to investigate for violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and lobbying disclosure laws -- to kill that legislation? Parsi was invited to speak at J Street 's conference. Mohsen Makhmalbaf, the unofficial spokesman for Iran 's Green Movement. "I think Trita Parsi does not belong to the Green Movement. I feel his lobbying has secretly been more for the Islamic Republic," Makhmalbaf said. It seems J Street isn't just redefining "pro-Israel" -- they're redefining "pro-Iran" as well.. Others According to the US Federal Election Commission, donors to J Street ’s political action committee hail from forums aligned against Israel . J Street’s donors are affiliated with the National Iranian American Council, “Stop the Occupation”, AMIDEAST, the US State Department and the Arab American Institute -establishments not exactly known for pro-Israel views. Among the many private Jewish and Christian donors to J Street , there are also a number of Islamic and pro-Iranian activists, as well as Palestinian and Arab American businesspeople. One such example is Zahi Khouri, a major Palestinian businessman with a Coke franchise in the West Bank . Khouri actually decried Israel ’s attempts towards economic peace with the Palestinians in an article he wrote in the New York Times on September 9. One member of the J Street Philly Host Committee “compared Israel's treatment of Gaza with the genocide in Sudan . "Another Host Committee member is involved with ICAHD, a radical group which interferes with Israeli efforts to stop terrorism and which advocates "Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel .”
9. J Street is Raising money for Congress people who blast Israel “from the Arabist New Day”: J Street Raises $15,000 for Donna Edwards in 240 Minutes | TPMCafe By Issandr El Amrani New Day: J Street Raises $15,000 for Donna Edwards in 240 Minutes | TPMCafe Donna Edwards, another African-American representative who did not endorse Israel's Gaza brutalities, now defended by J Street.
10. Two months after accepting an endorsement from J Street's political action committee, a local Democratic congressional candidate is disassociating himself from the upstart lobbying group. Doug Pike -- a former editorial writer for The Philadelphia Inquirer who is now seeking to unseat U.S. Rep. Jim Gerlach (R-District 6) -- asked J Street officials this week to remove him from its list of 41 endorsed candidates, and said he's planning to return some $6,000 donated via the group. Pike explained that when he first sought J Street's endorsement back in September, he had underestimated his policy differences with the group.
11. Rep. Jan Schakowsky has been totally silent. But J Street, the far-left organization she helped found and build, has gleefully celebrated the crisis, calling on supporters to sign a petition supporting the administration's stance against Israel. As Rep. Schakowsky told J Street at its Chicago opening last month: "I've been a supporter of J Street since its inception." She is also the #3 money recipient from J Street PAC this cycle.
12. they explicitly said in the NYT that they would have Obama’s back.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/03/15/j-street-backs-obama-in-row-with-israel/
13. Want 67 borders J Street went further in its statement Monday, calling on the Obama administration essentially to impose the terms for new negotiations with the Palestinians on Netanyahu. The lobbying group said the U.S. must make Israel’s 1967 borders as the base-line for the creation of a new Palestinian state, factoring in the potential for land-swaps between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators.“We urge the United States to take this opportunity to suggest parameters to the parties for resuming negotiations,” J Street said in its statement.
14. Backed Obama in tirade vs Israel. J Street said Monday that its criticism was warranted. “The Obama administration’s reaction to the treatment of the Vice President last week and to the timing and substance of the Israeli government’s announcement was both understandable and appropriate,” it said. Other leading Jewish American organizations, such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Anti-Defamation League, have squarely backed Netanyahu in the squabble. J Street, meanwhile, says it will continue its campaign to back the administration.
Jeremy Ben-Ami, the organization’s executive director, said in an interview Monday that J Street had already gathered 20,000 signatures from its members and delivered a petition of support to the White House. The lobbying group also said that it was intensifying its dialogue with key U.S. lawmakers about their need to back the White House’s stance on Arab-Israeli peace talks.
15. The Jerusalem Post reports:The American "pro-Israel, pro-peace" lobby group J Street made "untrue assertions" about an alleged boycott of the congressional delegation it recently brought to Israel, and about Israel allegedly apologizing to the group for the slight, a senior Foreign Ministry official told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.
"[Deputy Foreign Minister Danny] Ayalon did not prevent the delegation from meeting with senior Israeli officials," as claimed by J Street last week, said Barukh Binah, Foreign Ministry deputy director-general and head of its North America Division.
16. Author: Solomon J Street Teams up With Leftist Christian Group to Cause Israel Diplomatic Trouble. J Street, in cooperation with anti-Israel Churches for Middle East Peace (CMEP), is hosting a delegation of Congressmen from the US to Israel. Who is this CMEP that the "pro-Israel" J Street is running with? NGO Monitor has a good rundown:Analysis: Churches for Middle East Peace and the BDS Movement Churches for Middle East Peace (CMEP), which is J-Street's partner in sponsoring the visit of a US Congressional delegation to Israel, is a US-based political advocacy organization. Like many other such NGOs, CMEP's rhetoric and its activities are not always consistent, and some of its constituent groups are centrally involved in the political war against Israel. CMEP's website also features the "KAIROS Palestine Document", which was written by a group of Palestinian Christians, including Ateek. KAIROS Palestine calls for action designed to create "a system of economic sanctions and boycott [and divestment] to be applied against Israel," echoing Sabeel's efforts. CMEP also quotes Bishop Mark Hanson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, referring to the document as "a word of hope in a time of pessimism that could lead to despair."The fact that J Street would partner with a group like CMEP is simply and straightforwardly another nail in the coffin of J Street's pro-Israel bona fides. How out to lunch do you have to be to partner with this group and give them credibility before a group of Congressmen? Here, BTW, is a search on "CMEP" at CAMERA's site. Lots of material there.





bolder and more pro-Palestinian Barack Hussein Obama gets, the bolder J Street becomes in its relentless pursuit to undo the Jewish State. The latest comes from Yossi Sarid, J Street spokesman, who says of Israel's sovereignty in Jerusalem:

"Barack Obama appears well aware of his obligations to try to resolve the world's ills, particularly ours here. Why then undercut him and tie his hands? On the contrary, let's allow him to use his clout to save us from ourselves, to help both bruised and battered nations and free them from their prison. Then he can push both sides to divide the city into two capitals -- to give Jewish areas to the Jews and Arab areas to the Arabs - and assign the Holy Basin to an agreed on international authority."

Notice the messianic qualities attributed to Obama by the staunchly secular - and - now properly marginalized Israeli Left. And of course, numero uno on the list of "the world's ills" is the effrontery of Jewish sovereignty in its own capital, Jerusalem. Apparently, J Street wants to move the hands of the clock back to the glorious days of Count Folke Bernadotte, who, in 1947, wanted to "internationalize" - some say he would have awarded the city to the Jordanians - Jerusalem. Imagine The Western Wall in the hands of the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade. There is no doubt that the Palestinians would reciprocate the magnanimity shown by Moshe Dayan and Levi Eshkol when they handed over the keys to the Temple Mount to the Islamic Waqf in 1967. My guess is that the Arabs would finish the demolition the Romans left incomplete in less than an hour. And, of course the concessions won't end there. Who needs the Golan, the Galilee and the Negev? If left to J Street's blueprint, all that would remain of Israel would be an upscale, small suburb of Tel Aviv so that the Ben Ami family could establish a pied a terre while visiting Hamas headquarters.

In an ad placed in several Jewish American newspapers, J Street spokesperson, Yossi Sarid (the chief architect of the failure of the near 100% giveaway that preceded the 2000 initifada), adopts a nauseatingly condescending tone towards Mr. Wiesel, whose letter served as a reminder of the centrality of Jerusalem to the Jewish people:

"Someone has deceived you, my dear friend...", Sarid sarcastically intones. He then goes on to essentially accuse Wiesel of treason by "tying the President's hands" by his suggestion that The Temple Mount remain under Israeli sovereignty. Sarid then spells out J Street's absurd plan to "internationalize" the area. What the Palestinian Arabs and 6 Arab armies could not achieve through their aggression of 1948, J Street would now give them through capitulation. Jennifer Rubin of Commentary has more here. The most ominous Obama pronouncement on the horizon is the "imposed solution" scenario. More of that later.

Let's see if we can understand the landscape: Yossi Sarid and the now (hopefully permanently marginalized) Israeli and American Left have had seventeen years to try out their "confidence building measures" (read concession after concession) via their highly touted "Peace Process." The results? Thousands of corpses - both Jewish and Arab - an ascendant Islamic radicalism and Iran about to produce (apparently with Obama's acquiescence) nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them. It's as if Neville Chamberlain had been left in charge of British foreign policy throughout World War II.

When will American Jews wake up to this lunacy? Most of the American Christian communities have figured it out.

J Street and the rapidly emigrating madmen of the Israeli Left have all the answers. Let's pray that they depart Israel soon and that Harvard, UCLA and Oxford grant them tenure as soon as possible.


April 21, 2010 5:06 PM
by Alan M. Dershowitz
J Street Can No Longer Claim to be Pro-Israel

J Street has gone over to the dark side. It claims to be "a pro-Israel, pro peace lobby." It has now become neither. Its Executive Director, Jeremy Ben-Ami, has joined the off key chorus of those who falsely claim that Israel, by refusing to make peace with the Palestinians, is placing the lives of American soldiers at risk.

This claim was first attributed to Vice President Joe Biden and to General David Petraeus. It was quickly denied by them but continued to have a life of its own in the anti-Israel media. It was picked up by Steven Walt and John Mearsheimer, Pat Buchanan and others on the hard right and hard left who share a common disdain for the Jewish state. It is the most dangerous argument ever put forward by Israel bashers. It is also totally false.

It is dangerous for two reasons. First, it seeks to reduce support for Israel among Americans who, quite understandably and correctly, care deeply about American soldiers being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Israel has always understood this and that's why it is one of the few American allies who has never asked the United States to put its troops in harm's way in defense of Israeli citizens. If Americans were to believe the falsehood that Israel were to blame for American deaths caused by Islamic extremists in Iraq and Afghanistan, support for the Jewish state would suffer considerably.

It is also dangerous because its implication is that Israel must cease to exist: the basic complaint that Muslim extremists have against Israel is not what the Jewish state does, but what it is: a secular, non-Muslim, democracy that promotes equal rights for women, gays, Christians and others. Regardless of what Israel does or doesn't do, its very existence will be anathema to Muslim extremists. So if Israel's actions were in fact a cause of American deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan--which they are not--then the only logical solution would be Israel's disappearance. This might be acceptable to the Walts, Mearsheimers and Buchanans of the world, but it is surely not acceptable to Israel or anyone who claims to be pro-Israel.

Finally, the argument is totally false as a matter of fact. At the same time that Israel was seeking to make peace in 2000-2001 by creating a Palestinian state on the West Bank and in Gaza with a capital in East Jerusalem, Al Qaeda was planning the 9/11 attack. So Israel's "good" actions did nothing to make America safe from Islamic terrorism. On the other hand, when Israel took tough action against Gaza last year in Operation Cast Lead, Israel's "bad" actions did not increase American casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, there is absolutely no relationship between Israel's actions and the extent of American casualties. It is a totally phony argument based on equal parts of surmise and bigotry.

Yet this dangerous and false argument, which is being hotly debated within the Obama Administration, has now received the imprimatur of J Street. In the letter to The New York Times on April 21, 2010, Jeremy Ben-Ami, speaking on behalf of J Street, included the following paragraph:

"An analysis of the Obama administration’s calculus on Middle East policy should reflect that many in the Jewish community recognize that resolving the conflict is not only necessary to secure Israel’s future, but also critical to regional stability and American strategic interests." Although Ben-Ami doesn't explicitly make a direct connection between Israeli actions and American casualties, his use of the phrase "critical to…American strategic interests,"

is a well-known code, especially these days, for the argument that there is a connection between Israeli actions and American casualties. In lending support to that dangerous and false argument, J Street has disqualified itself from being considered "pro-Israel." The argument is also anything but "pro peace," since it will actually encourage Islamic extremists to target American interests in the hope that American casualties will be blamed on Israel. It will also encourage the Palestinian leadership to harden its position, in the expectation that lack of progress toward peace will result in Israel being blamed for American casualties.

Truth in advertising requires that at the very least J Street stop proclaiming itself as pro-Israel. As long as it was limiting its lobbying activities to ending the settlements, dividing Jerusalem and pressing for negotiations, it could plausibly claim the mantle of pro-Israel, despite the reality that many of its members, supporters, speakers and invited guests are virulently anti-Israel. But now that it has crossed the line into legitimating the most dangerous and false argument ever made against Israel's security, it must stop calling itself pro-Israel. Some of its college affiliate groups have already done that. They now describe themselves as pro peace because they don't want to burden themselves with the pro Israel label. J Street should follow their lead and end its false advertising. Or else it should abandon its anti-Israel claim that Israel is damaging American strategic interests.


URSDAY, APRIL 8, 2010

J Street's grave dangers
Thursday, January 28, 2010
5 main dangers of J Street

5 Main Dangers of J Street taken from various sites
1. J Street aims to distance US from Israel and undermine US support for Israel
a. Their own statements demonstrate it: “As Americans, we worry about the impact of Israeli policies on vital U.S. interests in the Middle East and around the world”
b. Ben-Ami is so intent on driving a sharp wedge between Israeli and U.S. interests that he totally ignores multi-layered security ties that bind Washington and Jerusalem -- from missile defense to intelligence sharing to thwarting terrorist threats from Hezb'allah and Hamas.
c. Not content to peddle a fictional incompatibility between U.S. and Israeli interests, Ben-Ami then goes on to depict Israel as a threat to "the health and vitality" of the U.S. Jewish community. This is nothing but another attempt to revive baseless fears that, if Israel exercises its right to self-defense, American Jews will be at risk. .
d. J Street is a very non-pacific front organization for Arab designs on Israel . It has issued a call for "forceful" opposition to Israel . Here's their language “J Street Calls for Stronger American Engagement to Stop Provocative Actions in Jerusalem . ...J Street urges the U.S. government to forcefully oppose provocative, unilateral actions …J Street condemns .....We urge the United States and American political leaders to seek an end to actions “



2. J Street policy effect would be the end of Israel.
a. If Israel were to deviate from its current path and shape its security according to J Street and world opinion, Israel definitely would be a goner.
b. J Street's agenda is to turn Israel into a state in which Jews might find a home -- leaving plenty of room for a "right of return" for Palestinian refugees and a bi-national state that dare not identify itself as Jewish.
c. How far left is J Street? President Obama has no trouble describing Israel as Jewish state. J Street does.
d. The Israeli ambassador to the United States blasted J Street, saying the organization was "fooling around with the lives of 7 million people." Among the policies Oren pointed to as problematic were J Street 's criticism of Israel 's attack on Gaza last winter, its refusal to reject the Goldstone report
e. J Street Refused to accept Israel ’s right of self-defense in Gaza
In regard to the recent Gaza conflict, it is J Street ’s address of Israel ’s side that truly casts some doubt on its “pro-Israel” stance. J Street ’s website features a section titled “ J Street ’s Response to the Gaza Crisis” (note, the word, crisis). The organization lists a number of statements and articles condemning Israel ’s military response to the rocket attacks, calling it “disproportional,” “counterproductive” and “deepening the cycle of violence.” No such criticism exists for Hamas’ rocket warfare and even more disturbing is the website’s lack of information about the destructive impact of the Gaza rockets on Israeli civilians. It appears that for J Street , the issue of the Gaza conflict is not even about Gaza but Israel ’s military response to Palestinian rocket terrorism. Not once does J Street point out that Palestinians who commit terror acts against Israel adhere to a radical Islamic ideology that teaches them to do so, nor that key players, like Iran and Syria , are heavily involved in supporting the terror war against Israel . Of course, J Street also refrains from mentioning that Hamas’ charter calls for the complete destruction of Israel .



3. J Street interferes in sovereign democratic government of Israel. What moral right do they have to interfere? As the far-left voice of J Street, Ben-Ami takes dead aim at Netanyahu's government, even though its diplomatic and security agenda does not differ materially from that of the previous centrist-led Kadima government of Ehud Olmert.


4. J Street has deep ties to enemies of Israel.
a. Iranian ties J Street conspiring with an organization run by an Iranian national -- an organization that Congress has asked AG Holder to investigate for violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and lobbying disclosure laws -- to kill that legislation? Parsi was invited to speak at J Street 's conference. Mohsen Makhmalbaf, the unofficial spokesman for Iran 's Green Movement. "I think Trita Parsi does not belong to the Green Movement. I feel his lobbying has secretly been more for the Islamic Republic," Makhmalbaf said. It seems J Street isn't just redefining "pro-Israel" -- they're redefining "pro-Iran" as well.
b. Others According to the US Federal Election Commission, donors to J Street ’s political action committee hail from forums aligned against Israel . J Street’s donors are affiliated with the National Iranian American Council, “Stop the Occupation”, AMIDEAST, the US State Department and the Arab American Institute -establishments not exactly known for pro-Israel views. Among the many private Jewish and Christian donors to J Street , there are also a number of Islamic and pro-Iranian activists, as well as Palestinian and Arab American businesspeople. One such example is Zahi Khouri, a major Palestinian businessman with a Coke franchise in the West Bank . Khouri actually decried Israel ’s attempts towards economic peace with the Palestinians in an article he wrote in the New York Times on September 9.
c. One member of the J Street Philly Host Committee “compared Israel's treatment of Gaza with the genocide in Sudan .

d. "Another Host Committee member is involved with ICAHD, a radical group which interferes with Israeli efforts to stop terrorism and which advocates "Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel .”
e. J Street is Raising money for Congress people who blast Israel “from the Arabist New Day”: J Street Raises $15,000 for Donna Edwards in 240 Minutes | TPMCafe By Issandr El Amrani New Day: J Street Raises $15,000 for Donna Edwards in 240 Minutes | TPMCafe Donna Edwards, another African-American representative who did not endorse Israel's Gaza brutalities, now defended by J Street.

5. J Street Influences Obama to ruin negotiations with Israel and the Palestinians
a. :Obama took the great advice of “progressive” geniuses like Rashid Khalidi and J Street. J Street , when not bad-mouthing AIPAC behind closed doors, spent much of the year openly bragging about their White House influence. According to Time, here are the results. Nothing pushed Israel and the Palestinians further away from negotiations than Obama doing what J Street suggested: making harsh demands on Israel, insisting on a total freeze on ‘natural growth,’ treating even Jerusalem as if it was a hilltop settlement, demanding that Israel give in on just about everything prior to negotiations. (Why even negotiate? Obama made all his dictates – exactly as J Street advised — in lieu of Israel and the Palestinians actually negotiating these things themselves.) Obama once pretended to be an “honest broker” only to expose himself as a Jimmy Carter-type advocate for the bad guys. And he did it in record time. Good job, J Street . Maybe that’s what “J” stands for: Jimmy
b. This is the reality- Obama brought J-Street into the center of the Israeli Palestinian issue, appointing their people to his Administration, and allowing J-Street a place at the table. Put simply, Obama is the face of J-Street. And J-Street is not pro-Israel
POSTED BY TRUTH SEEKER AT 8:09 PM 0 COMMENTS
THURSDAY, MARCH 25, 2010

these Chicago area Rabbis for J Street
Host Committee:

Rabbi Sam Gordon, Rabbi Debra Newman-Kamin, Rabbi Andrea London, Rabbi Aaron Petuchowski

cordially invite you to

a reception and meeting for Chicago-area rabbis with Jeremy Ben-Ami, Executive Director of J Street.
POSTED BY TRUTH SEEKER AT 12:21 PM 0 COMMENTS
J Street endorsed candidate rejects endorsement
In Turnabout, Politician Says 'No' to J Street

March 25, 2010 - Bryan Schwartzman, Staff Writer

http://www.jewishexponent.com/images/publications/mar252010/pike.jpg

Doug Pike

Two months after accepting an endorsement from J Street's political action committee, a local Democratic congressional candidate is disassociating himself from the upstart lobbying group.

Doug Pike -- a former editorial writer for The Philadelphia Inquirer who is now seeking to unseat U.S. Rep. Jim Gerlach (R-District 6) -- asked J Street officials this week to remove him from its list of 41 endorsed candidates, and said he's planning to return some $6,000 donated via the group.

Pike explained that when he first sought J Street's endorsement back in September, he had underestimated his policy differences with the group.

For instance, Pike said, he was "troubled" by J Street's recent stance that Israel halt construction in eastern Jerusalem. J Street has largely sided with the U.S. government in its latest diplomatic flare-up with the Jewish state over plans to build new housing in an eastern Jerusalem neighborhood.

"Belatedly, I got a clearer sense of the important points where J Street looks at things differently than I look at things," Pike said in an interview. "Also, people simply assumed when they heard that I was endorsed by J street that I agreed with them on everything. The endorsement was an impediment to my being able to explain my convictions about Israel's security."

The announcement comes as Pike is locked in a heated primary battle against Manan Trivedi, a physician and Iraq-war veteran from Berks County who has recently gained momentum, and been endorsed by the Democratic committees in both Chester and Montgomery counties.

The race has high stakes, as Gerlach's seat has long been a high priority target for Democrats, and party insiders are saying that Trivedi stands a better chance of getting the job done.

It's unclear what impact, if any, Pike's reversal will have on the outcome of the May 18 primary or his ability to attract Jewish support. But with Pike now seeing the endorsement as more of a liability than a help, the reversal raises questions about the influence of J Street and its ability to raise cash and support candidates who favor its more proactive approach to the Israeli/ Palestinian conflict.

It's just the latest twist on an ongoing debate about whether J Street, which has expanded its grass-roots efforts to the Philadelphia area, should be considered a mainstream Jewish organization, under the pro-Israel tent.

For its part, J Street took a swipe at Pike in response to the news. "We wish Doug Pike well, but are pleased to see him return the funds provided to his campaign, as it is our purpose only to support politicians with the courage of their convictions," J Street founder Jeremy Ben-Ami said in a statement.

"We are as little interested in providing support for someone who would walk away from what they believe under pressure as they may be in having our support," added Ben-Ami, who declined requests for an interview.

Agrees With Prime Minister

Pike, who traveled to Israel in November -- in part to visit a cousin who decades ago converted to Judaism and made aliyah -- said his positions have been clear from the start.

"The United States should encourage a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, but ultimately, this must come from negotiations between the two sides," Pike wrote in a column addressing his decision. "I agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu: Negotiations should begin as soon as possible without preconditions."

The son of Otis Pike, a former New York congressman, Pike plans to return $6,375 -- $1,000 was a direct contribution from J Street's PAC, and the rest was donated by 10 individuals via the PAC.

Right now, he has significantly more money than his opponent. As of Dec. 31, Pike had $1.1 million in his war chest, compared to Trivedi's $123,381. But if Pike does beat his rival -- and the race is considered close -- he'll need more to wage a credible assault on Gerlach.

The GOP lawmaker is a vocal opponent of most of President Barack Obama's domestic agenda, most recently voting against health care reform.

But according to one pro-Israel fundraiser who did not wish to be named, a number of potential contributors walked away from Pike after the J Street endorsement became known, and after Gerlach -- considered a strong Israel backer -- decided not to run for governor.

More publicly, last week State. Rep. Josh Shapiro (D-District 153) rescinded his endorsement of Pike, citing concerns about Pike's approach to Israel, according to www.pa2010.com.

Marcel Groen, chairman of the Montgomery County Democratic committee, which has thrown its weight behind Trivedi, said that Pike's reversal should have little impact on the primary since relatively few voters are so heavily invested in the question of whether J Street is a legitimate political voice for American Jewry.

Richard Schiffrin, a Democratic fundraiser backing Pike, stated that the candidate's positions on Israel were well within the mainstream.

Trivedi -- who is expecting to attend his first Passover seder next week at the home of supporter David Dormont -- declined to comment directly on Pike's endorsements. Trivedi said that, as an Indian-American, he can relate to Jews with relatives in Israel who live under the constant threat of terrorism. He has expressed interest in visiting there after the primary.

Gerlach's campaign had no hesitation about responding to the J Street incident.

"Pike's campaign for Congress is like the old Seinfeld sitcom; it's a campaign about nothing," said Gerlach spokesman Mark Campbell. "Pike's problem is that he staked out flaming liberal positions on the far left, and someone has finally told him he can't win by being a flaming liberal."

For his part, Pike rejected the assertion that he's changed his position: "I intend to better communicate my commitment to Israel as a candidate, and to demonstrate it by my words and deeds as a member of the next Congress."
POSTED BY TRUTH SEEKER AT 12:15 PM 0 COMMENTS
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 17, 2010

J Street on Obma's hurting Israel
Rep. Jan Schakowsky: Take a stand against the administration's attacks on Israel

This morning on the Don Wade & Roma show on WLS AM, Rep. Jan Schakowsky claimed that the Obama administration's attacks would not hurt the U.S.-Israel relationship. She the attacks were "not going to harm the long-term or even the short-term relationship between the United States and Israel," and she compared the argument to a marital dispute.

It is a completely inappropriate analogy, and one belied by the statement by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren that "Israel's ties with the United States are in their worst crisis since 1975" and that this was "a crisis of historic proportions." Rep. Schakowsky is failing in her duty to speak truth to power on behalf of the residents of her district, who overwhelmingly support a strong U.S.-Israel alliance.

It is time for Israel's friends in the United States to stand up and be counted. I call on Rep. Jan Schakowsky to join me in condemning the Obama administration's ongoing attack on Israel, America's most steadfast ally. I urge her to denounce the dangerous posture of J Street, the far-left organization that she helped found in Chicago last month and which is backing the administration's hostile approach against the Jewish State.


Last week, the Obama administration attacked Israel for announcing that it would be building new apartments in a Jewish neighborhood in East Jerusalem-an area that the White House had agreed would not be part of the "settlement freeze," and which will be part of Israel in any peace agreement with the Palestinians. Despite apologies from the Israeli government, the administration has continued to attack Israel in the U.S. media.


Members of both parties have criticized the Obama administration for its overreaction, which amounts to incitement against Israel and has created the worst crisis in U.S.-Israel relations in 35 years, according to Israeli ambassador Michael Oren. There was no similar criticism from the administration when Palestinian leaders dedicated a public square in honor of a terrorist the day after Vice-President Joe Biden's visit.


In the wake of criticism from Biden, David Axelrod, Hillary Clinton and others, Hamas has sent violent protestors into the street to denounce Israeli construction in Jerusalem, including the reconstruction of a centuries-old synagogue that was destroyed by Jordan after 1948. The Obama administration has given Palestinian leaders a new precondition for negotiations, without demanding that they live up to their commitments to stop terror.


Rep. Jan Schakowsky has been totally silent. But J Street, the far-left organization she helped found and build, has gleefully celebrated the crisis, calling on supporters to sign a petition supporting the administration's stance against Israel. As Rep. Schakowsky told J Street at its Chicago opening last month: "I've been a supporter of J Street since its inception." She is also the #3 money recipient from J Street PAC this cycle.


The administration and J Street are wrong in their attacks on the Israeli government. Banning Jews from Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem smacks of bigotry and gives Palestinian leaders an excuse to avoid peace talks. The attacks also embolden Israel's enemies at a time when the U.S. and Israel must stand together against Iran. It is time for Rep. Schakowsky to decide: where does she stand-with J Street or with Israel?


I call on Rep. Schakowsky to join me in taking a stand. Speak up for America's 62-year relationship with the only democracy in the Middle East. Stop the rhetoric that is more vitriolic than anything the Obama administration uses against America's enemies. Stop public demands for unilateral Israeli concessions. Start focusing on Iran's nuclear program, instead of joining Iran in attacking the Jewish presence in Jerusalem.


Rep. Schakowsky is the voice for J Street in Chicago and across the nation. She hosted their first gala dinner and was a featured speaker at their first national conference. It is up to her to speak out against J Street's petition drive and against the anti-Israel attacks of the Obama administration. Her silence, as long as it continues, will stand as evidence of her true beliefs about Israel. She must take a stand, before more damage is done.
POSTED BY TRUTH SEEKER AT 3:39 PM 0 COMMENTS
MONDAY, MARCH 15, 2010

J Street aids enemies of Israel
What a shocker-since they explicitly said in the NYT that they would have Obama’s back.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/03/15/j-street-backs-obama-in-row-with-israel/

At least one Jewish-American organization is lining up behind the Obama administration it its intensifying feud with the Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
J Street, the newest Israel-focused lobby in Washington, broke Monday with more established Jewish-American bodies and publicly backed the White House’s sharp criticism of Netanyahu and Israel’s plans to continue building in contested east Jerusalem.
J Street went further in its statement Monday, calling on the Obama administration essentially to impose the terms for new negotiations with the Palestinians on Netanyahu. The lobbying group said the U.S. must make Israel’s 1967 borders as the base-line for the creation of a new Palestinian state, factoring in the potential for land-swaps between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators.
“We urge the United States to take this opportunity to suggest parameters to the parties for resuming negotiations,” J Street said in its statement.
The White House believes Israel’s government sought to humiliate Vice President Joe Biden during his visit to Jerusalem last week by announcing the building of 1,600 new Israeli homes in east Jerusalem. In response, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other U.S. officials publicly upbraided Netanyahu last week and suggested the future of the U.S.-Israeli alliance could be imperiled.
Netanyahu appeared unfazed. “The building of those Jewish neighborhoods did not hurt in any way the Arabs of east Jerusalem and did not come at their expense,” he said on Monday.
J Street said Monday that its criticism was warranted. “The Obama administration’s reaction to the treatment of the Vice President last week and to the timing and substance of the Israeli government’s announcement was both understandable and appropriate,” it said.
Other leading Jewish American organizations, such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Anti-Defamation League, have squarely backed Netanyahu in the squabble.
Late Sunday, Aipac called for the White House to defuse the battle with Netanyahu. “The Administration should make a conscious effort to move away from public demands and unilateral deadlines directed at Israel,” it said in a statement.
More airing of the tensions is expected next week when AIPAC holds its annual policy conference in Washington. Netanyahu, Clinton, and the leader of Israel’s political opposition, former Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, are all scheduled to speak.
J Street, meanwhile, says it will continue its campaign to back the administration.
Jeremy Ben-Ami, the organization’s executive director, said in an interview Monday that J Street had already gathered 20,000 signatures from its members and delivered a petition of support to the White House. The lobbying group also said that it was intensifying its dialogue with key U.S. lawmakers about their need to back the White House’s stance on Arab-Israeli peace talks.
“Our supporters are calling Congress and making it clear to the political establishment that there are two sides to this story,” Ben-Ami said.
POSTED BY TRUTH SEEKER AT 10:14 AM 0 COMMENTS
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2010

J Streeet lies
yalon: J Street lied
The Jerusalem Post reports:

The American "pro-Israel, pro-peace" lobby group J Street made "untrue assertions" about an alleged boycott of the congressional delegation it recently brought to Israel, and about Israel allegedly apologizing to the group for the slight, a senior Foreign Ministry official told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.

"[Deputy Foreign Minister Danny] Ayalon did not prevent the delegation from meeting with senior Israeli officials," as claimed by J Street last week, said Barukh Binah, Foreign Ministry deputy director-general and head of its North America Division.

"Ayalon was never part of the delegation's schedule and talk of boycotting meetings with congressman has no basis in fact. On the contrary, the deputy foreign minister is always willing to meet with elected officials from any friendly country, especially the United States of America, and [with] Jewish organizations which represent a range of diverse views from across the political spectrum."

Binah also rejected the "subsequent assertion that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs apologized in hastily arranged meetings," which he said was simply not true.

Author: SolomonJ Street Teams up With Leftist Christian Group to Cause Israel Diplomatic Trouble

J Street, in cooperation with anti-Israel Churches for Middle East Peace (CMEP), is hosting a delegation of Congressmen from the US to Israel. Who is this CMEP that the "pro-Israel" J Street is running with? NGO Monitor has a good rundown:

Analysis: Churches for Middle East Peace and the BDS Movement

Churches for Middle East Peace (CMEP), which is J-Street's partner in sponsoring the visit of a US Congressional delegation to Israel, is a US-based political advocacy organization. Like many other such NGOs, CMEP's rhetoric and its activities are not always consistent, and some of its constituent groups are centrally involved in the political war against Israel.

A number of CMEP partners take an active role in promoting BDS - the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign - as part of the 2001 Durban NGO agenda which calls for the total international isolation of Israel. For example, Friends of Sabeel North America (www.fosna.org) is a fundraising and publicity branch of the Palestinian NGO Sabeel. This organization, headed by Naim Ateek, is a leader of the church divestment campaign, and in his speaking tours around North America, Ateek employs antisemitic themes and imagery in sermons promoting his "Palestinian Liberation Theology." In promoting this agenda, his rhetoric includes references to "the Israeli government crucifixion system".

CMEP's website also features the "KAIROS Palestine Document", which was written by a group of Palestinian Christians, including Ateek. KAIROS Palestine calls for action designed to create "a system of economic sanctions and boycott [and divestment] to be applied against Israel," echoing Sabeel's efforts. CMEP also quotes Bishop Mark Hanson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, referring to the document as "a word of hope in a time of pessimism that could lead to despair."

This adoption of the Palestinian narrative of victimization, perhaps a reflection of the close ties to Sabeel and other Palestinian groups, was also evident in a January 21, 2005 full-page New York Times ad sponsored by CMEP. The text read, in part, "With each news report of Palestinian suffering...popular support in Arab and Muslim countries for terrorism grows and the threat of attacks directed at the United States increases."

A number of CMEP's board members also reflect the goal of demonization, under the façade of promoting peace. For example, Helena Cobban, a fierce anti-Israel ideologue and member Human Rights Watch's Middle East board, sits on CMEP's Leadership Council.

Thus, while much of the media coverage of this delegation has focused on the involvement of J-Street angle, this is only half of the story. CMEP is an equal partner, and deserves equal scrutiny.

The fact that J Street would partner with a group like CMEP is simply and straightforwardly another nail in the coffin of J Street's pro-Israel bona fides. How out to lunch do you have to be to partner with this group and give them credibility before a group of Congressmen? Here, BTW, is a search on "CMEP" at CAMERA's site. Lots of material there.

J Street's handling of the event is already causing trouble, as the Foreign Ministry is refusing to meet the delegation with J Street as an intermediary: US congressman demands explanation for chilly reception in Israel

A visiting U.S. congressman lashed out at Israel's number two diplomat Wednesday, saying he was snubbed by the Foreign Ministry and demanding an official clarification.

Rep. William Delahunt, a Democrat from Massachusetts and a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, is heading a congressional delegation to the region. The trip is hosted by J Street, a liberal Jewish lobbying group that presents itself as an alternative to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee -- one of Washington's most powerful lobbies.

J Street, which supports President Barack Obama's push for a Palestinian state alongside Israel, says it sought a meeting for the U.S. representatives with Israeli diplomats but was turned down.

The Foreign Ministry dismissed the complaint, saying in response that it did not need mediators to set up meetings with U.S. officials.

The snub appeared aimed at J Street. Israel's government has been critical of the group's programs, which are more dovish than those of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's hawkish government.

Speaking to reporters in Tel Aviv, Delahunt said he was surprised and disappointed to read an Israeli newspaper report that he was being boycotted by the Foreign Ministry for his affiliation with J Street and identified Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon as the culprit.

"We were puzzled that the Deputy Foreign Minister has apparently attempted to block our meetings with senior officials in the Prime Minister's office and Foreign Ministry -- questioning either our own support of Israel or that we would even consider traveling to the region with groups thatthe deputy foreign minister has so inaccurately described as 'anti-Israel'," Delahunt said.

"In our opinion this is an inappropriate way to treat elected representatives of Israel's closest ally who are visiting the country."

Delahunt asked the Israeli government "for a clarification of its stance toward this and future delegations."

Ayalon's office said the deputy minister was prepared to meet any elected officials, especially from the U.S. Congress, but he "didn't need mediators."...

...Four other U.S. representatives were traveling with Delahunt -- Democrats Donald Payne of New Jersey, Lois Capps of California, Bob Filner of California and Mary Jo Kilroy of Ohio...

All five of the Congresspeople now assisting J Street in redefining what it means to be "pro-Israel" were signatories to the Ellison/McDermott sponsored letter on the Gaza "siege."

Here's more on J Street's latest self-inflicted wound: J Street blasts Ayalon's 'boycott'.

This is what a pro-Israel group does? Partners with one of the worst of the anti-Israel Christian groups and causes a diplomatic incident with the government? Once again we see that J Street is more about leftist politics than about support for Israel. Leftism is the only thing a group trying to claim it was pro-Israel in any meaningful sense could possibly have in common with CMEP. They partner with CMEP yet denounce John Hagee. They bring Bill Delahunt on a trip to Israel and instigate a row putting Danny Ayalon on the spot, as though he doesn't have enough to worry about.

This is about Jeremy Ben-Ami's ego, fundraising and leftist politics. It has nothing to do with supporting Israel.