Volume 91, December 13, 2009

The Commitee for Truth and Justice

Seeking Justice Through Truth

Jews are often their own worst enemies and the most recent manifestation of this is a newly formed Washington anti-Israel lobby group called J Street. Wisconsites have a direct connection with J Street as our own Dan Kohl works for J Street.

CTJ

J Street: An Anti-Israel Group

Noah Pollak - 01.02.2009 - 9:49 AM

Commentary Magazine

Rabbi Eric Yoffie is president of the Union for Reform Judaism, and is a very liberal fellow. Yet even for him, J Street’s campaign to undermine and discredit Israeli self-defense has gone too far. Taking J Street out to the woodshed over its statements on Gaza, Yoffie says that the group

could find no moral difference between the actions of Hamas and other Palestinian militants, who have launched more than 5,000 rockets and mortar shells at Israeli civilians in the past three years, and the long-delayed response of Israel, which finally lost patience and responded to the pleas of its battered citizens in the south. “Neither Israelis nor Palestinians have a monopoly on right or wrong,” it said, and it suggested that there was no reason and no way to judge between them: “While there is nothing ‘right’ in raining rockets on Israeli families or dispatching suicide bombers, there is nothing ‘right’ in punishing a million and a half already-suffering Gazans for the actions of the extremists among them.”

These words are deeply distressing because they are morally deficient, profoundly out of touch with Jewish sentiment and also appallingly naïve. A cease-fire instituted by Hamas would be welcome, and Israel would be quick to respond. A cease-fire imposed on Israel would allow Hamas to escape the consequences of its actions yet again and would lead in short order to the renewal of its campaign of terror. Hamas, it should be noted, is not a government; it is a terrorist gang. And as long as the thugs of Hamas can act with impunity, no Israeli government of the right or the left will agree to a two-state solution or any other kind of peace. Doves take note: To be a dove of influence, you must be a realist, firm in your principles but shorn of all illusions.

J Street’s appalling missive concludes: “This is our moment to show that there is real political support for shedding a narrow us-versus-them approach to the Middle East.” What if you shed an us-versus-them approach to Hamas, but Hamas doesn’t shed its us-versus-them approach to you?

J Street in the past has been unrealistic, silly, and dishonest. But its treatment of the Gaza crisis is simply contemptible. Are there any limits to the group’s capacity for self-delusion about the nature of Hamas? May we now conclude that J Street is incapable of recognizing when it is staring genocidal fanatics in the face?

It is time that thinking people started calling J Street what it actually is — an anti-Israel group.

Return to the Article

October 15, 2009

Blowing J Street's Cover

By Leo Rennert

J Street, a recently formed Jewish lobby that describes itself as "pro-peace" and "pro-Israel,'' finally has shown its true colors in an escalating row with Israel's Embassy in Washington and with its ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren.

Before Barack Obama entered the White House, J Street took strong issue with Israel's counter-terrorism offensive against Hamas in Gaza last winter, demanding an immediate cease fire before Israeli forces could stem an eight-year barrage of thousands of rockets aimed by Palestinian terrorist at civilian targets in southern Israel.

Then, after January 20, J Street trumpeted its all-out support for the president's ill-advised pressure on Israel to institute a complete construction freeze in Jewish neighborhoods in the eastern part of Jerusalem and in Jewish settlements in the West Bank. In taking this position, J Street not only broke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but also with the policies of his predecessor, Ehud Olmert. Both already had put in place a complete halt to new settlements in the West Bank and a ban on expanding their boundaries. But each insisted that Jews could live anywhere in Jerusalem, Israel's unified capital, and noted that many Arabs also have moved into Jewish neighborhoods.

These and other J street positions prompted an Israeli Embassy spokesman to express "concerns over certain policies (of J Street) that could impair Israel's interests."

It was the mildest possible reproach, but it prompted J Street's executive director, Jeremy Ben-Ami, to fire off a blistering reply in an open letter to Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren. Here are the salient passages of that letter:

"We too have our own serious concerns over the policies of the present Israeli government and its impact not just on Israel's interests but on our interests as Americans and as American Jews. As Jews who care about Israel, we fear that, on Israel's present path, we will see our shared dream of a Jewish, democratic home in the state of Israel slip through our fingers.

"As Americans, we worry about the impact of Israeli policies on vital U.S. interests in the Middle East and around the world.

"Finally, as American Jews, we worry that the health and vitality of our community will be deeply affected by what happens in the region, how the world perceives Israel and by how our community here at home deals with increasingly complex conversations around Israel."

One doesn't have to read between the lines to get the purport of J Steet's message. It's nothing less than an attempt to revive the old canard that Israel stands athwart U.S. interests in the Middle East and beyond.

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.

Never mind also that Netanyahu's stance with regard to the Palestinians is widely embraced across Israel's entire political spectrum -- from Labor on the left to Likud on the right.

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.

This close cooperation is rooted in consistently strong support of Israel by America's electorate. In August, a Gallup poll showed sympathy for Israel at 58 percent, while sympathy for the Palestinians was in the single digits at 8 percent. In the same month, a Rasmussen poll found that 70 percent of Americans view Israel as a reliable ally (not the liability painted by Ben-Ami). No other country in the Middle East got that high a number.

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. Ben-Ami can conjure up such a Halloween scenario only because he is far less interested in Israel's security than in "how the world perceives Israel."

Finally, take a look at Ben-Ami's doomsday scenario for Israel. On its present path, he warns, the "dream of a Jewish democratic home in the state of Israel" will be gone. The fact, of course, is that 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.

Also telling is Ben-Ami's refusal to describe Israel as a Jewish state. In his words, he envisages it instead as a "Jewish, democratic home in the state of Israel."

J Street's agenda thus 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.

How far left is J Street? President Obama has no trouble describing Israel as Jewish state. J Street does.

That's J Street's real meaning of "pro-Israel" when you strip away its phony label. Jewish sovereignty sticks in its craw.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/blowing_j_streets_cover.html at December 12, 2009 - 07:56:20 PM EST

FROM WND'S JERUSALEM BUREAU
WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Israel blasts lobby group touted by U.S.

Warns organization 'fooling around with the lives of 7 million people'

Posted: December 12, 2009
1:20 am Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

J Street member and former Knesset Speaker Avrum Burg

JERUSALEM – The Israeli government blasted a lobby group the Obama administration regularly meets with and promotes, charging the group is "fooling around with the lives of 7 million people."

Israel's ambassador to the U.N., Michael Oren, called J Street "a unique problem in that it not only opposes one policy of one Israeli government, it opposes all policies of all Israeli governments. It's significantly out of the mainstream."

"This is not a matter of settlements here [or] there," said Oren, speaking to a synagogue convention, according to the Jewish newspaper The Forward.

Oren continued: "We understand that there are differences of opinion. But when it comes to the survival of the Jewish state, there should be no differences of opinion. You are fooling around with the lives of 7 million people. This is no joke."

J Street is a lobby group mostly led by left-leaning Israelis that receives funds from Arab and Muslim Americans.

The group brands itself as pro-Israel. It states on its website it seeks to "promote meaningful American leadership to end the Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts peacefully and diplomatically."

J Street, however, also supports talks with Hamas, a terrorist group whose charter seeks the destruction of Israel. The group opposes sanctions against Iran and is harshly critical of Israeli offensive anti-terror military actions.

Oren and other Israeli government members refused to attend J Street's annual dinner last month, headlined by James L. Jones, U.S. national security adviser.

J Street members have held a number of high-level meetings with the Obama administration.

A senior Palestinian Authority official recently told WND the Obama administration upholds J Street as an important voice regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The Powerline blog previously documented how far-leftist Israelis are influential in the J Street leadership, including former Knesset Speaker Avrum Burg, who generated controversy when he stated, "To define the state of Israel as a Jewish state is the key to its end."

Another key J Street member, Mideast expert Henry Siegman, has compared Israel to apartheid South Africa.

Jewish left wins, Jews and Israel lose

Posted: September 30, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

For decades, most of the organized left has fought against Republicans and conservatives more than against the world's greatest evils. During the Cold War, starting in the late 1960s, one heard little if anything from the left about the evils of communism or of communist societies such as the Soviet Union or communist China. But one heard a great deal about the evils of American anti-communists; Ronald Reagan was vilified much more than Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev.

But last week, a new line seems to have been crossed. The organized Jewish left – i.e., left-wing Jewish organizations that claim to be committed to the welfare of Jews – made it clear that even in the fight against the greatest enemy of the Jewish people, the Jewish left prefers to fight what it considers an even greater enemy – conservatives and Republicans.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of the Islamic Republic of Iran, who has repeatedly called for the annihilation of Israel and who denies the Holocaust, came to speak at the United Nations. The day before he was scheduled to speak, Jewish organizations across the religious and political spectrum had organized a "Stop Iran" rally at the Dag Hammarskjold Plaza across from the U.N. They had invited Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and then invited Republican vice presidential nominee Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

The intent was to maximize publicity for the anti-Iran cause, the most important Jewish concern (and arguably the most important world concern) today. With Clinton and Palin present, the world press would cover the anti-Iran rally, and the Jewish community could show the world and America that this was one cause that knew no politics – the most prominent female Democrat and the most prominent female Republican would both lend their names and prestige to this rally.

However, the moment Clinton learned that the organizers had invited Palin, she withdrew. For Clinton, giving the other most-popular woman politician in America publicity was unacceptable – even among New York Jews, one of the steadfast liberal and Democratic groups in America. The near collapse of the Stop Iran rally was of less consequence to Clinton than denying Palin a public platform.

Not many were surprised by Clinton's action. What was alarming was the realization that for much of the Jewish left – not leftists who happen to be Jews and for whom the welfare of the Jewish people is not particularly significant, but left-wing Jews who claim to care deeply about Jewish survival – fighting Palin is of greater importance than fighting Ahmadinejad.

Left-wing Jews and Jewish organizations put intense pressure on the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations to cancel the invitation to Palin. And the pressure worked.

As the liberal editorial page of New York's major Jewish newspaper, The Jewish Week, put it:

"But somehow, a big-tent cause like Iran as a terrorist power seeking nuclear arms has become so politicized within our community that Monday's rally was more about the non-presence of Gov. Sarah Palin than about the very real presence at the U.N. of a Holocaust denier whose goal is to destroy our way of life."

Yet, in a rare move, publishing an entire speech that was never given, Haaretz, Israel's equivalent to the New York Times in its prestige and in its liberal politics, published the speech that Palin would have given. In Israel, liberal and even many left-wing Jews know that Iran is a greater threat to Israel than American conservatives.

The Palin speech was so good it should be read by every American concerned with Israel's survival. And it was so nonpartisan that it praised Clinton for being at the rally. To say that Palin – who has the American, Alaskan and Israeli flags in her Juneau office – is a better friend of the Jews and Israel than much of the American Jewish left sounds odd only to Jewish leftists.

But the Jewish left acts as if it fears and hates her more than it fears and hates Ahmadinejad. That is why within days of her nomination Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla., announced that "John McCain's decision to select a vice presidential running mate that endorsed Pat Buchanan for president in 2000 is a direct affront to all Jewish Americans. Pat Buchanan is a Nazi sympathizer with a uniquely atrocious record on Israel. … It is frightening that John McCain would select someone one heartbeat away from the presidency who supported a man who embodies vitriolic anti-Israel sentiments."

Wexler's statement was false: Palin supported Steve Forbes, not Buchanan. And associating Palin with Nazi or anti-Israel sympathies is morally loathsome, not to mention weakens the struggle against real anti-Semites.

For left-wing Jewish organizations and their supporters – as opposed to many rank and file liberal Jews – the real fight is against Republicans and especially Christian conservatives (as a community, the Jews' best friends) more than against a nuclear Iran.

After the cancellation of Palin, a left-wing Jewish organization that was influential in opposing Palin's appearance, an organization called J Street, on whose Board of Advisers sits the executive director of MoveOn.org, headlined on its website: "We Won!"

That is indeed the case. The Jewish left did win. Which is why the Jews and Israel lost.

Showdown on J Street

Posted By Lenny Ben-David On October 20, 2009 @ 12:07 am In Homeland Security, Iran, Israel, Middle East, US News, World News | 39 Comments

J Street’s director, Jeremy Ben-Ami, published an open letter ^[1] to Israel’s Ambassador Michael Oren in the Jerusalem Post this week insisting that he appear at the J Street Conference at the end of the month. Hopefully, Ambassador Oren will continue to deny the supposed “pro-Israel” organization the legitimacy of his presence.

J Street’s goals and policies were revealed when Stephen Walt, co-author of the venomous The Israel Lobby, recently proclaimed ^[2], “This is a key moment in the debate. It will be important whether Obama gets enough cover from J Street and the Israel Policy Forum so Obama can say, ‘AIPAC is not representative of the American Jewish community.’”

It’s time to call out Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street’s director, to answer the following questions:

1: You served as Fenton Communications’ senior vice president until you established J Street, launched in 2008. In early 2009, Fenton signed contracts with a Qatari foundation to lead an 18-month long anti-Israel campaign in the United States with a special focus on campuses. The actual text of the contract ^[3] called for: “An international public opinion awareness campaign that advocates for the accountability of those who participated in attacks against schools in Gaza.”

Did you sever your ties with Fenton when you began J Street? Do you retain any role or holdings in Fenton today? Did you play any role in introducing Fenton to the Qatari agents or play any role in facilitating the contract? Were you aware of the negotiations or the contract signed on March 12, 2009?

These questions are relevant because it’s important to know if J Street’s refusal to support Israel’s anti-Hamas military campaign was influenced by your ties with Fenton, whose promotional material claims: “We only represent people and projects we believe in.”

Were there discussions with Fenton prior to J Street’s refusal to condemn the Goldstone Report on Gaza, a report that certainly serves the Fenton/Qatari interests? Were there communications with Fenton surrounding J Street’s support for Rep. Donna Edwards who refused to sign a congressional resolution supporting Israeli actions in Gaza?

2: You were recently asked in an interview ^[4] about funds J Street received from Palestinians, Arab-Americans, and Iranian-Americans, to which you answered: “J Street does have some Arab and Muslim donors — about five. These are individuals, not organizations, corporations or foreign countries. Well over 90 percent of our money comes from Jewish Americans and Christians.”

Did you really say J Street has only five Arab and Muslim donors? A partial listing quickly extracted from the U.S. Federal Election Commission shows ^[5] more than 30 contributors, many with ties to Arab-American organizations.

So far, only J Street’s Political Action Committee has disclosed its contributors, as mandated by federal law. But who are the donors to the main J Street organization? Make that list public, and these pesky inquiries will probably go away.

When asked about J Street’s funding by the Jerusalem Post — the newspaper that ran the original exposé — you responded ^[6] “at most 3 percent” of contributors were Muslim or Arab. Now you state that the figure may be closer to 10 percent. One tenth of J Street’s budget of $3 million, or $300,000, is a substantial sum. Why do so many Arabs contribute to an organization that purports to be “pro-Israel?”

3: Do any Israelis support J Street’s agenda? How many? Look at the list of Israeli speakers appearing at J Street’s Conference, all losers in Israel’s political arena: Ami Ayalon, Colette Avital, Amir Peretz, Shlomo Ben-Ami, Yuli Tamir, Amnon Lipkin-Shahak. They have all failed to secure support from the Israeli electorate or even from their own parties, so they take their messages to the U.S. and plead with the U.S. government to pressure Israel’s government, make the Israelis do things that their citizens have already rejected. The tactic is patently anti-democratic.

Two retired senior IDF officers, well-known members of the peace camp, recently went to the U.S. to speak on J Street’s behalf. When they got there they discovered that J Street opposed sanctions against Iran. According to a JTA account, Brig. Gen.(res) Israela Oron called for a “timetable that would be tied to punishing sanctions.”

“The thing that worries me and that worries other Israelis is that [current negotiations are] not limited in time,” Oron said as the faces of her J Street hosts turned anxious, adding ^[7]“I’m not sure I’m expressing the J Street opinion.”

Maj. Gen. (res) Danny Rothschild discovered that he differed ^[8] with J Street’s policies on an immediate freezing of settlements, the halting of settlements’ natural growth, and opposing tough sanctions against Iran.

And then Labor MK Ophir Pines-Paz spoke to a Washington gathering in early October sponsored by J Street’s co-founder, Daniel Levy, today of the New America Foundation. When Pines-Paz was told he was wrong in “assuming that everyone on the left is aligned on Iran’s nuclear capabilities and threat, [and in agreement] with Israel’s assessment,” he exploded. ^[9] “Wake up!” he shouted.

J Street produced a film clip for its site and for YouTube ^[10] showing prominent Israelis who “speak out in support of a two-state solution and J Street.” But do they actually support J Street? View the clip carefully and discover that only three out of 11 Israelis mention J Street at all — former minister Ami Ayalon and Uri Savir. The third is former MK Colette Avital who is a J Street employee in Israel. Not quite the ringing endorsement J Street had in mind.

Even the leaders of Israel’s opposition have refused to appear at the Conference, according to sources in Jerusalem.

4: How extensive is your interlocking directorship? I believe that is the correct characterization of J Street and its allied organizations. J Street’s contributions from the heads of the Arab American Institute and Iranian lobby NIAC have been documented in these pages. They serve on J Street’s Finance Committee which has a minimum requirement of $10,000. As research continues in the files of various federal agencies, we found that the interlocking relations continue into the second tiers as well.

Take for example, the case of Rebecca Abou-Chedid. She appears in the federal elections records as contributing to J Street’s PAC. Her occupation is listed as “consultant” for “USUS LLC.” But until recently, she was also the national political director at the Arab American Institute where she “was responsible for formulating AAI’s positions on foreign policy … and represented the Arab American community with Congress as well as the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and State.” Today, Abou-Chedid is the director of outreach at the New America Foundation’s Middle East Task Force. ^[11]

J Street co-founder and Advisory Council member Daniel Levy serves as co-director of the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation, an institute that benefits from George Soros’ largess and membership on its board.

Heads of other pro-Arab organizations, such as AMIDEAST, and Arab foreign agents are contributors to the PAC. But Mr. Ben-Ami claims that no organizations or foreign governments contribute. They don’t need do; their representatives do.

5: Who drives policy at J Street? It’s difficult to imagine that the unwieldy J-Street 160-member board of advisors directs policy. Some of those members are also foreign agents who worked for Egypt and Saudi Arabia. It also seems unlikely that your big bucks, 50-member Finance Committee provides decision-making guidance. That’s where the heads of the pro-Iranian and Arab-American lobbies sit.

So who directs policy? A hint was provided by a left-wing blogger, Richard Silverstein, who heard the pre-launch spiel in Seattle given by you and “co-founder” Daniel Levy 18 months ago.

“It’s always important with efforts like this to examine the board member names,” Silverman wrote. ^[12] “There are of course leaders of the main American Jewish peace groups. There are rabbis and academics. But most important there are heavy hitter political donors (Alan Solomont), policy wonks (Rob Malley), U.S. ambassadors to Israel (Samuel Lewis), high level political operatives (Eli Pariser of Moveon), Hollywood liberals (Robert Greenwald), business leaders, George Soros’ top aide (Morton Halperin), and even a former Republican senator (Lincoln Chafee) and former Congressman (Tom Downey). … The group founders believe that Barack Obama and his staff “get” J Street’s perspective while they believe a Clinton candidacy might not advance J Street’s mission as aggressively.” [Note, the briefing was given at the height of the Democratic primaries.]

Soros, the National Journal reported, was present ^[12] at J Street’s initial strategy sessions.

Anyone reading Soros’ 2007 manifesto, “On Israel, America and AIPAC ^[13],” will understand that he is the spiritual godfather of J Street, if not its silent sugardaddy.

“I believe that a much-needed self-examination of American policy in the Middle East has started in this country,” Soros proclaimed, “but it can’t make much headway as long as AIPAC retains powerful influence in both the Democratic and Republican parties. Some leaders of the Democratic Party have promised to bring about a change of direction but they cannot deliver on that promise until they are able to resist the dictates of AIPAC. Palestine is a place of critical importance where positive change is still possible. Iraq is largely beyond our control; but if we succeeded in settling the Palestinian problem we would be in a much better position to engage in negotiations with Iran and extricate ourselves from Iraq. The need for a peace settlement in Palestine is greater than ever. Both for the sake of Israel and the United States, it is highly desirable that the Saudi peace initiative should succeed; but AIPAC stands in the way. It continues to oppose dealing with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas.”

So it appears that Soros has created an organization that competes with AIPAC, calls for inclusion of Hamas, and opposes sanctions against Iran. His people sit on J Street’s board, and his other offspring from the New America Foundation and the National Iranian American Council, work in lockstep. It’s a scary scenario that should attract the attention of the best investigative reporters from national news outlets, but the modern day Lotus Eaters have been lulled and ensnared by J Street.

But just because they won’t ask the tough questions doesn’t mean that they don’t have to be answered.

Article printed from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com

URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/showdown-on-j-street/

URLs in this post:

[1] an open letter: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1255450643490&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

[2] proclaimed: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/09/aipac-still-chosen-one

[3] text of the contract: http://www.fara.gov/docs/5945-Exhibit-AB-20090928-4.pdf%20http://www.fara.gov/docs/5945-Exhibit-AB-20090928-3.pdf

[4] an interview: http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/39884/head-of-liberal-jewish-lobby-pushes-back-against-his-critics/

[5] shows: http://jaystreetcontributors.blogspot.com/2009/10/j-streets-exec-jeremy-ben-ami-was.html

[6] you responded: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1249418604334&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

[7] adding : http://jta.org/news/article/2009/09/07/1007638/iran-policy-could-leave-some-jewish-groups-without-israeli-constiuency

[8] discovered that he differed: http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2009/09/16/1007930/j-streets-general-doesnt-always-agree-with-j-street

[9] he exploded.: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/israels-pines-paz-ignores_b_306195.html

[10] YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPBxwTqYPM0

[11] director of outreach at the New America Foundation’s Middle East Task Force.: http://www.trumanproject.org/programs/fellowship/people/rebecca-abou-chedid

[12] Silverman wrote.: http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2008/04/17/j-street-new-israel-peace-lobby-launches/

[13] On Israel, America and AIPAC: http://www.georgesoros.com/articles-essays/entry/on_israel_america_and_aipac