On Tuesday, J Street joined with a broad coalition of Jewish organizations to oppose the detention and possible expulsion of American student Lara Alqasem by telling the Israeli government to #LetHerStay.
Today, we have some good news to report. Lara Alqasem has won her appeal and will be allowed to study human rights at Hebrew University.
By making calls to Israeli diplomatic missions, tweeting to diplomats and showing your support online and in the streets, YOU stood up for Israel’s democracy and helped to protect the education of a future human rights advocate in the region.
Does J-Street think that Israel's Supreme Court was swayed by a bunch of left-wing American Jews?
Perhaps J-Street doesn't want to give any credit to Israel's Supreme Court as looking at the case with an unbiased view based on only the facts and the law.
Recently, in a very controversial move, the Israeli Supreme Court gave the Netanyahu government the green light to demolish the Palestinian village of Khan al-Ahmar. The move would displace 180 Palestinians and clear the way for Israel to expand settlements into the contentious E1 Area, thereby forming a block that would separate East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank.
If J-Street would admit that Israel's Supreme Court makes decisions based on the law, including human rights law, then it cannot complain that Israeli policies that are upheld by the court are wrong, as it likes to do.
When Jews are forcibly removed from their homes based on High Court decisions, J-Street applauds and agrees that the homes were built illegally. When Arabs are to be removed from homes that Israel's High Court say were built illegally (with compensation and with new towns built for them!) J-Street complains that it is immoral.
J-Street doesn't care about the law or morality or consistency. It wants to push its far-left agenda under the pretense of caring about "justice."
Justice is the least concern of J-Street.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Last week, while the Jewish community celebrated one of our most sacred holidays with friends and family, the Trump administration was busy continuing its assault on the prospects for Israeli-Palestinian peace.
By announcing that the US will close the Palestinian diplomatic office in Washington, Trump and his team sent yet another clear signal that they are committed to bullying the Palestinians and advancing the agenda of the Israeli far-right -- not to mediating this intractable conflict.
Furthermore, we learned this week the appalling news that the administration has decided to cut funds to coexistence organizations that build people-to-people relationships between Israelis and Palestinians and foster coexistence -- groups like Kids4Peace and the Peres Center for Peace. That’s not just an attack on Palestinians -- it’s an attack on the very concept of peacemaking and reconciliation.
Whatever the wisdom of cutting aid to co-existence programs, J-Street doesn't mention a couple of salient facts that the media also ignores:
* As far as I can tell every single such coexistence program is initiated by Jews. I have yet to see one that was created by Palestinian Arabs, although there are some individuals who do care about real peace, like Bassem Eid. I have never seen J-Street mention this huge disparity, nor have I ever seen J-Street ever say a word of support for human rights activists like Eid.
* There are some coexistence programs, formal and informal, between Jewish "settler" and their neighboring Palestinians. J-Street does not support those programs. Their pretense to be "pro-peace" is a sham.
So spare us your lies that you support real peace and coexistence programs, Jeremy. You're only animating emotion is hate for those you disagree with, not the love that you pretend to support.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Jared Kushner talks a good game about the Trump administration’s deep commitment to achieving peace in the Middle East.
Last week, Kushner again traveled to the Middle East to talk with Prime Minister Netanyahu and with Arab leaders. While there, Kushner gave a rare interview to a prominent Palestinian newspaper. The aim was presumably to convince the Palestinian people to embrace his soon-to-be-released proposal -- but he spent the interview lambasting President Abbas and the Palestinian Authority’s leadership.
The interview exemplified all that’s wrong with this administration’s approach. While offering empty platitudes about the benefits of peace, Kushner refused to endorse the two-state solution or to promise that he is working toward full Palestinian statehood -- continuing President Trump’s disastrous walk-back of 25 years of US and international consensus.
And he failed to acknowledge that the actions of this administration have alienated Palestinian leadership, empowered Israel’s right-wing rejectionists and shattered American credibility as a good-faith mediator.
So the absence of Kushner's saying certain words is what proves to J-Street that the peace plan is worthless?
J-Street, supposedly pro-peace, is pushing for a peace plan that has failed in 2000, 2001, 2008 and 2013. The not-yet-released deal is already, according to reports, gaining support in Jordan, Egypt, and most Gulf countries - more enthusiasm from Arabs than for anything Obama ever said.
No Arab state would accept a peace plan where the Palestinians don't end up with a state of some type. Yet they are willing to be more flexible in search of peace than J-Street.
Think about that for a minute.
If J-Street was really pro-peace, it would act cautiously. It might express misgivings but it would wait for the details for a true regional peace plan to be released. Instead, it is lobbying against a plan it doesn't know anything about.
That is not pro-peace!
Luckily, J-Street has an ally: Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah movement is now making posters that neatly complement J-Street's fact-free attack on Jared Kushner:
J-Street's position is aligned with Fatah's, and Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt are more interested in a peace plan than J-Street.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Those who watched The West Wing may remember that my character, Will Bailey, played a minor role in brokering Israeli-Palestinian peace.
The West Wing, alas, is a fictional universe. Here in the real one, our president — unlike Jed Bartlet — is not a Nobel Prize-winning scholar with an unfailing moral compass and an exceptional command of statecraft — or even someone who, you know, reads books.
Nor has our president helped achieve the dream of Israeli-Palestinian peace.
But, like Will Bailey, I am working toward that goal. I’m supporting J Street — and I hope that you will too...
Elder of Ziyon brought this out into the open on Twitter:
Disappointed to see @JoshMalina supporting @jstreetdotorg.
J-Street doesn't just "support two states" as it claims, it is against Israeli democracy and it tries to divide US Jews. Read @AlanDersh, a liberal who understands J-Street's dangerous lies. pic.twitter.com/QmFMJaSgCL
A number of people then joined in, responding to Malina.
So did I:
@joshmalina On the question of @jstreet:
From the beginning, J Street was less than honest about the involvement of George Soros (not known for his enthusiasm for the State of Israel) as far as his initial funding of J Street.https://t.co/ttUfnTFcaE
But that was not my question. The question I asked was whether J Street had come out recently in defense of Israel during the riots. Contrary to the narrative the media readily propagates, not all those involved are in fact peaceful, unarmed protesters. Instead, many are rioting and attempting -- and in some cases succeeding -- in infiltrating into Israel.
It would be nice to have help pointing that out on social media.
J Street's two-paragraph condemnation of "incendiary' comments by Abbas is irrelevant to the point.
I responded
Fair enough, but you do see the irony if @jstreetdotorg condemns "incendiary" remarks but fails to condemn the "incendiary" kites.
I believe they tweeted - and I RT-ed - about terror kites. I am trying to confirm that for you. They are tools of terror and should be called out as such. I have certainly tweeted about them.
From the beginning, J Street has attacked Trump, accusing him of racism and white supremacism, blaming him for an alleged increase in Antisemitism in the US and of causing instability both in the US and in the Middle East.
While there are reports of a small number of Palestinians attempting to breach the fence or otherwise attack Israeli soldiers, the vast majority of those who have gathered appear to be exercising their legitimate and important right to engage in nonviolent protest.
Good to know that the people at J Street read The New York Times.
But other than attempting to impose their view of a peace plan on Israel, do the members of J Street in the US actually see themselves as standing up for and defending Israel from the libels and slanders that come at it from all quarters?
J Street does not call itself "The Home for Pro-Israel, Pro-Peace Americans" -- it calls itself "The Political Home for Pro-Israel, Pro-Peace Americans," which is why nothing they say about Abbas, Hamas and the enemies of Israel ever come remotely close to J Street's ongoing over-the-top attacks on President Trump, David Friedman and Netanyahu.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Yahya Cholil Staquf, General Secretary of the world's largest Muslim organization, the Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) Supreme Council, led a team of people to Israel to discuss common issues and peace.
This included meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the President Reuven Rivlin, and visits to the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
During the visit, the Indonesian delegation also participated in meetings in Jerusalem with Jewish and Muslim religious leaders and activists in order to "bring the views of the three heavenly religions closer together."
The Palestinian Foreign Ministry said in a statement that "the participation of the delegation contradicts the positions of the Indonesian government and the Indonesian people, who has always expressed its position rejecting the occupation and its policies."
Hamas said, "We appreciate Indonesia, its people, its religious leaders and its historical stands in support of our people's rights and struggles for freedom and independence. We condemn this disgraceful act. "
Fatah spokesman Osama al-Qawasmi said in a statement that the delegation's actions were "a crime against Jerusalem, the Palestinian people and Muslims in the world...The participation of Yahya Taqouf in this conference in occupied Jerusalem is a betrayal of religion, the Aqsa Mosque, the Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nations." He called on the Indonesian government and people to "hold accountable those who sold themselves to the devil and wanted to be a tool in the hands of the Zionists and Israel."
The question is: what do supposedly "pro-peace" organizations have to say? Will they support a leader of 50 million Muslims meeting Jewish and Israeli leaders as a way to bring peace and understanding, or will they accept that the PLO and Fatah and Hamas have veto power over anything any Muslim does, even when those Muslims represent tens of millions of people?
The answer is that J-Street will remain silent, because their positions are exactly those of the Palestinian Authority and they will never admit that a meeting with the supposedly evil Netanyahu government can ever be good thing. SJP and other BDS organizations will be against the visit because it violates their prime directive of no dealing with the Zionist entity.
Ironically, Arab nations' silence means their tacit support for the meeting, given their knee-jerk support for anything Palestinians demanded in the past.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
J Street seems to have a habit of hurting Israel in the pursuit of its own agenda.
J Street Support for BDS
An article came out Monday in The Washington Free Beacon detailing how J Street Chapters Aiding BDS Campaigns on Campuses. While it is true that the deputy director of J Street U, Catie Stewart, claims that the organization does not support neither "Apartheid Week" nor BDS campaigns on college campuses, there are indications that J Street hedges on their position and do not necessarily oppose BDS per se:
o In response to a BDS referendum at the University of Minnesota in March, a pro-Israel coalition launched a campaign in opposition. J Street U released a statement opposing the referendum not because it was anti-Israel, but because "this resolution and others like it only serve to empower the Israeli far-right" and that you cannot "effectively oppose BDS without also actively opposing the occupation that fuels it." The BDS referendum passed at UMN in March.
o When a BDS resolution was proposed at Columbia University/Barnard, J Street U posted a statement, since revised, stating that it "opposes the International BDS Movement." But then it went on to decry "the conflation of anti-occupation with anti-Israel," accusing anti-BDS campaigns as being "government funded attacks" targeting "anti-occupation groups, like the New Israel Fund, B'tselem, and Breaking the Silence" while pretending to deal with "the handful of hardline anti-Israel activists." The Barnard BDS resolution passed.
o When a BDS resolution was brought up at George Washington University in April, the J Street U there did not oppose BDS per se, instead again used the familiar theme that "BDS legislation provides Israel's far-right government with the talking points they use to justify their fear-mongering tactics" and insisted that "one can be pro-BDS and not anti-Semitic." The BDS resolution at GW passed.
This disregard for Israeli seems to be part of a pattern.
Last month, I wrote about Judging J-Street By The Candidates They Support, that J Street consistently supports Democratic candidates over Republican ones -- as if they were the only ones who supported Israel. This was true in 2010 through 2016.
I just found a list from 2008 in a J Street report
Unfortunately, within a few years of J Street’s establishment, I came to the realization that I had been deliberately misled and in a one instance lied to by the senior leadership of the organization. I refuse to work with any group that conducts itself in this manner.
The names of Reps. John Salazar (CO-03) and Ed Towns (NY-10) have been scrubbed from the list of congressmen serving on the host committee for J Street's inaugural conference. That brings to ten the number of congressmen, Republicans and Democrats, senators and representatives, who have bailed on J Street after learning that, contrary to their promotional materials, they are not a pro-Israel group...
o Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) o Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) o Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) o Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS) o Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE) o Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR) o Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) o Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-IA) o Rep. John Salazar (D-CO) o Rep. Ed Towns (D-NY)
Since then, J Street has had the last laugh, gaining in legitimacy. But the fact remains that it has done so by openly declaring itself the "blocking back" for Obama and aligning itself with policies and groups that do not act in Israel's best interest, and by limiting itself to supporting only Democrats.
As a side note, in the same October 2009 interview with Jeffrey Goldberg for Atlantic Magazine where Ben-Ami claimed not to support the Goldstone Report, he also referred to "Jewish Voice for Peace and other groups that are consistently upset with us for backing Howard Berman's [Iran] sanctions plan." [emphasis added]
Earlier, in May of that year, J Street came out with a press release, praising Berman for supporting Obama's plan to pursue a diplomatic solution with Iran: "As Chairman Berman stated, the Administration should be given reasonable time to pursue serious and tough diplomacy with Iran." Seeing that J Street was already aligning themselves with NIAC, one has to wonder just how tough J Street thought that diplomacy should be.
Obama advanced policies and positions that empowered the radicals at the expense of the moderates.
Obama’s hostility towards Israel, his repeated intimations that Israel is a colonialist outpost while the Palestinians are the indigenous people of the land of Israel were part and parcel of his across-the-board effort to enable the radical Left to take over the party. Obama’s efforts laid the groundwork for socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders’ surprisingly strong challenge to Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton in the party’s presidential primaries. It also set the stage for the rise of radical leaders like Congressman Keith Ellison and Sen. Elizabeth Warren in the post-Obama Democratic party.
The left wing of the Democratic Party is clearly gaining influence, and J Street is part of that.
But to the degree that it has backed Obama, and continues to support how he framed the Middle East, J Street undermines Israel.
J Street's refusal to condemn BDS, except as a tool in the hands of the "right-wing"; its association with the likes of Soros and NIAC in supporting the Iran Deal; J Street's backing only for Democrats; its support for the clearly one-sided Goldstone Report and most recently J Street's support of the narrative of the "GreatMarch of Return -- these positions do nothing to support Israel.
There are many ways to support Israel, and no one says you cannot criticize it -- but the actions J Street takes demonize Israel and affect Israeli security.
In 2009, William Daroff, the Washington director of the Jewish Federations of North America told JTA that J Street was developing "better PR tactics", such as condemning Iran's Ahmadinejad for denying the Holocaust -- but:
these were easy calls. J Street, he said, has not yet defended Israel when it is unpopular to do so.
Don't hold your breath.
At the time, Daroff wondered aloud, "when and if the Obama administration shifts direction, would J Street still be relevant?”
J Street has proven that it is capable of staying relevant.
Just not relevant to the survival of Israel
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Our No. 1 agenda item is to do whatever we can in Congress to act as the president’s blocking back.
Back then, there was also no secret about what kind of candidates J Street was going to support -- all you had to do was check their website.
oIn 2010, J Street endorsed 61 candidates - all Democrats oIn 2012, J Street endorsed 41 candidates - all Democrats oIn 2014, J Street endorsed 71 candidates - all Democrats oIn 2016, J Street endorsed 73 candidates - all Democrats
That's 246 candidates J Street has endorsed during that time, and all of them Democrats.
So much for the importance of bi-partisan support for Israel.
Instead, when J Street claims it is "The Political Home for Pro-Israel, Pro-Peace Americans" -- it should admit that only Democrats need apply!
That page no longer exists.
Instead, these days there is a separate site, J Street Pac, which lists J Street Pac candidates. It lists the candidates according to name, state and office -- but unlike the obsolete page on the J Street site, this page does not list the party of the candidate.
So what kind of candidates is J Street going to support?
Since J Street claims to be pro-Israel, one would naturally suppose that J Street will make a point of supporting only those candidates whose pro-Israel bona fides are impeccable.
But then again, J Street's pro-Israel bona fides are themselves far from impeccable.
True, J Street claims to support Israel, that it is "pro-Israel, pro-peace".
o In 2009, Ben Ami claimed J Street "refuses to embrace" the Goldstone Report, which criticized Israel on its conduct during Operation Cast Lead (December 27, 2008 - January 18, 2009). But when a resolution was sponsored in Congress condemning the report, Goldstone circulated a document to defend it. The source of the report traced to Mort Halperin of the J Street advisory council. In 2011, Goldstone himself repudiated his own report.
So if this is the kind of organization J Street is, we can expect that the candidates it supports reflect J Street's own anti-Israel animus.
Here is a recent example that proves the point.
On April 25, a letter signed by 3 Congressmen was sent to Ron Dermer, Israeli ambassador to the US to oversee the use of US tax dollars for humanitarian aid in Gaza:
Among the points the letter claims:
o There is a decade-old blockade of Gaza - not mentioning that the blockade was instituted as a response to the bloody Hamas coup that led to the increased threat of rockets and terror attacks. Also not mentioned is the millions of tons of food and supplies provided by Israel, a fact that challenges the claim that there is a "blockade"
o The threat to the water and electricity is mentioned generally, as if Israel is to blame for shortages, with no mention that the government is run by a terrorist organization, which should be held responsible for its actions -- but is not.
o Aid through UNRWA is referred to as having a security function, despite the numerous examples of the anti-Israel bias of UNRWA, as documented by Elder of Ziyon
o Israel denied their request in June 2016 to enter Gaza, a request they claim was without justification. It would be convenient for Israel to give a reason and justification for refusing the request, but the fact remains it is Israel's border and it has the right to refuse.
o The letter suggests that in refusing the request, Israel does not want them to see the worsening conditions in Gaza -- again implying that Israel is responsible for them.
The 3 Congressmen who signed the letter -- Pocan, Kildee and Johnson -- are supported by J Street. What else do we know about them?
[Pocan] chose to facilitate a pro-BDS smear campaign using taxpayer dollars without even showing his face at the event...As millions of Jews and non-Jews alike celebrate the 50th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem, Congressman Pocan and his J-Street lackeys are spending their time working to undermine the state of Israel.
There has been a steady [stream], almost like termites can get into a residence and eat before you know that you’ve been eaten up and you fall in on yourself, there has been settlement activity that has marched forward with impunity and at an ever increasing rate to the point where it has become alarming.
When you compare the statements and actions of J Street with those of Senators Mark Pocan, Hank Johnson and Daniel Kildee they do seem to be a good fit -- they all undermine Israel.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Compare that to this speech by Hawaii senator Brian Schatz, where the applause for pro-Israel positions like supporting Israel's right to exist and maintaining Israel's military edge were muted or nonexistent, but supporting the Iran deal and demanding that the US take in Syrian refugees were greeted rapturously.
Altogether, the representative of a terror organization received far more adulation than a Jewish senator who supports Israel's right to exist.
(You might argue that Schatz didn't pause enough after saying his pro-Israel positions so the audience couldn't applaud as much. Perhaps, but I would argue that he knew his audience - he is a professional politician and knows how to elicit applause with a pause, and he didn't want to risk an awkward silence.)
Schatz also made a pro-J-Street argument, claiming falsely that the Zionist crowd is unwilling to engage in debate and that this is undemocratic. No, we are happy to engage in debate - of all J-Street was doing was asking for debate there would be no shortage of people willing to argue for Israel against it. But J-Street is actively trying to undermine Israel's democracy while pro-Israel organizations support it. That's the issue.
Which he knows is true, because AIPAC always supported the Israeli government, left or right. It is J-Street that is manifestly undemocratic.
J-Street isn't a pro-Israel organization. It is simply a leftist group that is trying to split the American Jewish community to oppose Israeli policies.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Based on the picture used to illustrate the rest of the ad, J Street is making a not too subtle point:
The J Street ad even makes the point of listing all the people who support a two-state solution:
o US presidents from both parties o Veteran US foreign policy leaders o The majority of the Israeli security establishment o 80 percent of Jewish Americans o The Arab League o Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who last month laid out a new proposal for two-state negotiations
That leaves out just 2 groups: the Israelis and Arabs themselves.
Reaching a two-state solution is vital to securing Israel’s future as a democratic homeland for the Jewish people and to advancing overall peace and stability in the region. That’s why it’s long been supported by the majority of Israelis and Palestinians... [emphasis added]
But that is not accurate. According to a poll taken in November of last year into the beginning of December, under 50% of Palestinians, Israeli Jews support the two-state solution - that's 47% of Palestinians and 46% of Israeli Jews, according to the poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research and the Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research. In a similar poll conducted earlier in June 2017, 52% of Palestinians and 47% of Israeli Jews supported a two-state solution.
To put it simply, the people who are going to have to live with this "solution" are not really in favor of it.
On the other hand, what about the people who are in favor of it? The presidents and policy leaders have successfully proven themselves far from infallible. The Jewish Americans may find the idea of a two-state solution emotionally satisfying, but that is no argument - especially since they need not worry about the consequences. The Arab League? Who knows if their motivation is because they believe the plan will work. As for the Israeli security establishment, their recommendation cannot be rejected out of hand but requires explanation: are they arguing abstractly on the basis of peace being the best kind of security, or do they anticipate specific conditions being fulfilled for that peace to be effective and lasting?
And that brings us to Abbas.
Looking at the record of the man J Street insists is the only man who is pushing for peace, it is clear that J Streets omission of Abbas's spotty record in peace negotiations slants the story.
In 2008, then-Prime Minister Olmert made an offer to Abbas. Years later, in 2015, Abbas admitted he was the one who rejected Olmert's peace plan, an agreement that would have given him nearly all of the land the Palestinian Arabs wanted, an almost total withdrawal from the West Bank, a land link to Gaza, with the Old City in East Jerusalem under international control. Abbas rejected the offer, claiming he was not given an opportunity to study the map that described Israel's offer. Olmert's version is a little different. He says he showed the map to Abbas, who wanted to take it with him. Olmert agreed - on the condition that they both sign the map since Olmert considered this as the final offer and not a basis for future negotiations. Abbas demurred and instead said he would return the next day with experts. Olmert never saw Abbas again.
In late 2009, Netanyahu agreed to Obama's request for a 10-month moratorium on building settlements in order to facilitate peace talks. Abbas waited and did nothing until the last month, at which point he demanded an extension of the freeze. When Netanyahu refused, Abbas walked out.
Abbas did nothing to support the negotiations, instead failing to condemn a terrorist attack and announcing a unity government with Hamas terrorists.
Now, on February 25, J Street came out with the strangely named post "The Palestinian Peace Plan" -- strangely named because there is no description of the plan. Instead, part of J Street's argument for the plan is an admission of just how bad a peace partner Abbas actually is:
Let’s be clear: We have no illusions that Mahmoud Abbas is the ideal partner. His rhetoric is at times incendiary, and his frequent refusal to acknowledge the Jewish people’s historic connection to Israel or Jerusalem is troubling. His hold on leadership is tenuous and his critics are legion.
Yet we know there will never be a Zionist sitting on the Palestinian side of the negotiating table — and there doesn’t need to be to reach a lasting agreement that will make Israel safer.
As Yitzhak Rabin said, “You don’t make peace with friends. You make it with very unsavory enemies.” [emphasis added]
While admitting the problems of Abbas as a peace partner, J Street leaves out:
o Abbas's hold on leadership is more than tenuous - his term as president ended in 2009 o He has a history of pocketing concessions and then leaving negotiations o He incites hatred against Israel, paying stipends to terrorists and naming stadiums after them o Palestinians don't support the two-state solution
This is not an issue of being "unsavory"; the Palestinian government does not support the idea of peace, or even Jewish right to a state, to its own people. That is not unsavory, it is dishonest.
While J Street is quick to credit Abbas with suddenly coming forward with a peace initiative for the first time, it is worth noting that he was happy to sit back and wait during the Obama adminstration and never actively pushed for peace until the Trump administration, which put an end to coddling the Palestinian Arabs.
J Street appears happy to ignore the anti-Israel actions of Abbas and other members of the government.
This is the same J Street that once bragged, “Our No. 1 agenda item is to do whatever we can in Congress to act as the president’s blocking back.”
Apparently they are blocking for Abbas now.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
J-Street placed a full page ad in the New York Times saying that Abbas has accepted a two state solution - but Netanyahu and Trump have not:
Here is a photo of Mahmoud Abbas from last Thursday - after he supposedly accepted a two-state solution at the Security Council - as he attended a Fatah Revolutionay Council meeting.
Note the logo on the folder he is holding. It is the Fatah logo, of the political party he heads. And it does not show a two-state solution. In fact, it urges a violent armed takeover of all of Israel.
There has never been any move to change the Fatah logo to indicate acceptance of Israel's existence, by Abbas or any of this people.
But J-Street knows that the head of the group whose logo boasts three weapons taking over the Jewish state is the peaceful party. .
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
In a new mailing from J-Street, Jeremy Ben Ami waxes poetic over Mahmoud Abbas' "peace plan" of giving up nothing and demanding everything be handed to him on a silver platter:
Last week, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas made an important speech to the UN Security Council.
Abbas laid out explicit support for the two-state solution and put forward a serious proposal for how to get there.
Of course, if Ben Ami had been paying attention, Abbas was not showing the slightest willingness to make any hard decisions for peace - as he and his predecessor have adamantly refused to do so for over twenty years.
But then Ben-Ami goes into complete fantasyland:
So it’s stunning when you realize that, today, of the three, the Palestinians are the only party willing to publicly endorse the goal of two states for two peoples.
This is a breathtaking lie.
Never has Abbas recognized Israel as a Jewish state, and he never will. He certainly didn't do so in his speech. Without that, there are no "two states for two peoples."
This has been what Israel has insisted upon since Camp David. The very expression "two states for two peoples" is Israeli. Israel has never stopped endorsing it. The phrase is mentioned numerous times on Israel's Foreign Ministry website, today.
Sometimes, Palestinians and apologists for their double talk like Jeremy Ben Ami will claim that Palestinians do accept two states for two people - but when they say that they mean the "Israeli" people, not the Jewish. people. That is almost certainly what Ben Ami meant - and he is knowingly deceiving his readers who do not realize the depth of his hate for Israel as a Jewish state.
But actual people who care about actual peace know that he is throwing dust in their eyes with this lie.
J-Street does not say that Jews have the right to self determination, but "Israelis." Which makes no sense, since there was no "Israeli" people before 1948 - so whose self-determination was realized with the rebirth of the state of Israel?
There is no daylight between the official Palestinian position stated to the world and J-Street. It is not pro-Israel in any sense.
And people who believe that all peoples have the right to self determination but not Jews, which seems to be J-Street's position, are antisemitic.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The American Council for Judaism was a small but vocal anti-Zionist group whose main purpose in the 1940s and 1950s was to convince Americans that not all Jews supported Israel. It used its supposed Jewish bona-fides as a means to split the Jewish community and to show others, especially American Christians, that since the Jews were not all pro-Israel, then the non-Jews should be reluctant to support Israel.
Later, the ACJ dropped its most toxic opposition to Israel's existence, but remained (and remains) politically opposed to Zionism and Jewish nationalism by pretending to be far more representative of American Jews than it really is.
J-Street is today's American Council for Judaism.
While Americans are overwhelmingly pro-Israel, J-Street wants to make it look like plenty of Jews are against Israel to disrupt support for Israel and enhance support for Arab terrorist sympathizers who want to destroy Israel - but who, like J-Street, talk out of both sides of their mouths.
J-Street reached its political apex during the Obama administration, as they were invited to meet the President on many occasions and were used as a means to put political cover on Obama's anti-Israel bias.
In the current White House, J-Street is trying to find a way to remain relevant. And that has been to attack anything Trump does.
The clear affinity between Mike Pence in his current trip to Israel and ordinary Israelis has shown that J-Street's claim to be "pro-Israel" is hollow.
In a mailing that J-Street leader Jeremy Ben Ami sent out yesterday, the group has now adopted the exact same methodology as the anti-Zionist websites like Electronic Intifada - to associate people they don't like with each other.
Ben Ami writes:
The common threads running through the actions and rhetoric of the far-right here and there -- of Trump, Pence and Netanyahu -- are clear:
- Extreme partisanship that puts right-wing ideology ahead of national interests and democratic values; - Contempt and disrespect for immigrants and people of color; - Disdain for diplomacy, negotiation and compromise.
Netanyahu has contempt for people of color? He is the one Israeli leader who has done more for the people of Africa than any other, and African nations respect him more than most world leaders! He set up a ministerial committee to battle racism in Israel.
Netanyahu has "disdain" for negotiation and compromise? He is the one who accepted a US framework (by Obama!) for peace - a framework that goes against Bibi's opposition to basing a solution on the 1967 lines! - which was rejected by Abbas.
And after watching Bibi's amazing political maneuvers that has brought Israel closer to Arab states, India, China and many other countries, the idea that he puts narrow ideology over Israel's national interests is laughable. Netanyahu has positioned Israel better politically than any other Israel leader.
J-Street has decided that the best way to show how much it hates Israel is to associate it with Trump. Since many Americans hate Trump, J-Street wants them to hate Israel's leaders just as much. Saying that Bibi (and, by implication, Israel's government and Israel itself) is racist and illiberal is simply slander. Which is all that J-Street has as it scrambles to raise money in an era where it is irrelevant as a factor in changing US policy towards Israel.
Jeremy Ben Ami is the one who puts ideology over Israel's best interests, and truth is the obvious casualty.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Is there any more proof needed that J-Street cannot be taken seriously?
Israel's "peace partner" Mahmoud Abbas gives an hour-long rant that denies any connection between Israel and Judaism, that says that Jews chose to stay in Europe during the Holocaust rather than emigrate to Israel, that Ben Gurion was a bigot who hated Jews from Arab lands but ended up making secret agreements to have them persecuted in Arab countries so they would flee to Israel, hints that TWA chose to fly Jews from Yemen to Israel against their will because it is owned by Jews, and other hateful and antisemitic garbage.
J-Street briefly says that Abbas said some unacceptable things without elaborating - and then tells us why he was driven to such despair:
Sunday’s speech by President Abbas no doubt reflected his own and the Palestinian people’s deep despair at the ever-deepening occupation and the lack of diplomatic progress toward resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That frustration, however, is no excuse for calling into question either the Jewish connection to, or Palestinian recognition of, the state of Israel – or for language and proposals that are justifiably earning widespread condemnation.
This speech – and the undercutting of America’s role as a mediator in this conflict – would not have come about if it were not for President Trump’s inept and disastrous missteps regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By appointing a settlement movement ally as Ambassador to Israel, refusing to endorse the two-state solution and upending longstanding US policy on Jerusalem, the president and his team have taken one step after another to destroy the chances of peaceful resolution of the conflict.
Abbas revealed himself as a blatant antisemite. And not for the first time. His PhD thesis denied the Holocaust, saying that not so many Jews died and that Zionists colluded with Hitler to persecute them. He told the EU Parliament that rabbis encourage Israel to poison Palestinian wells. He said that Jews raise wild boars and dogs just to attack Palestinian farmers.
But to J-Street, Abbas is a moderate peace partner. To them, Abbas' long history of hate and bigotry doesn't exist, and when it is undeniable, they blame...Trump, The Source Of All That Is Evil In This World.
Because they know their audience. And to the J-Street crowd, Trump saying that Jerusalem is Jewish is the ultimate evil, and Abbas saying that Jews preferred to die in gas chambers rather than move to their ancestral homeland is a minor annoyance....that must be blamed on Trump.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
J-Street, led by J-Street U, started a new campaign this week called "Stop Demolitions, Build Peace."
Acting exactly like any anti-Israel organization, J-Street U is "partnering" with six Arab communities in the West Bank to protect them from Israel demolishing illegal structures.
So for example, one of the communities being partnered with is Jabal al-Baba, a village I cannot find listed in the comprehensive Survey of Western Palestine indicating that it is not an ancient village at all. In August, Israel was accused of destroying a kindergarten there - but in reality it was an illegally erected shed that had never been in use.
The slick video that J-Street produced for this effort claims, falsely, that Israel demolishes Arab communities and then builds Jewish settlements on the same areas.
J-Street falsely says in the video, "The Israeli government is engaged in a process of 'creeping annexation' in the West Bank. Central to this trend is the systematic demolition of Palestinian communities in the West Bank to make way for more Israeli settlements."
If you consider Area C to be occupied, then Israel has the obligation under international law to uphold zoning laws on the land, although security concerns trump other considerations - again, under international law. When Israel demolishes a structure that was illegally built, it is following international law, not spurning it. The Palestinian Authority would do the exact same thing.
And Israel isn't destroying any communities unless they were set up illegally - in recent years - to begin with.
J-Street is once again shown to be completely anti-Israel, anti-international law and anti-truth.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
Media Distort Revised Gaza “Famine” Report
-
It’s embarrassing to admit a mistake. But it’s worse to try and hide it.
Sadly, media outlets opted for the latter in their coverage of a revised
report th...
The neglected Jewish history of Qamishli
-
Although the community could not compare to those in Aleppo and Damascus,
some 3,000 Jews at peak lived in the French-built city of Qamishli, in
Kurdista...
High Court Decision
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon, Jew, Jewish, Army, Yeshiva, War, HighCourt,
Israel, IDF,]
Jewish Unity in a Time of War.
* * * *DO YOUR PART.* *SUPPORT DRY BON...
Red-handed: Catching the BBC pushing fake news
-
This time I caught the BBC red-handed. I actually have a growing pile of
BBC ‘gotcha’ articles waiting to be written. The situation is so bad these
days ...
Hamas and the Nazis: Disturbing Parallels
-
Fathom just published a shorter version of the article I post below. At the
time it accepted the piece it dropped some of the specific criticism of
Omer Ba...
Guest Post by Netivotgirl
-
*Some of you may remember the wonderful posts my dear friend aka
"Netivotgirl" had posted in the past about living in Netivot. Here's
something she sent...
An Excess of Democracy
-
The State of Israel is more endangered today than at any time since 1948,
including 1973. She is tied down in Gaza while her enemies wait their turn
in Leb...
Yom Hashoah 5784 – 2024
-
Israel’s Yom Hashoah began at sundown this evening with the annual ceremony
at Yad Vashem with torches lit in memory of the 6 million Jewish victims of
the...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Friday, October 19, 2018
Elder of Ziyon
