Washington — Left-wing advocates of a two-state solution and a greater U.S. role in the peace process are joining forces in support of what they hope will be a groundbreaking conference this October in Washington.
The conference, set for Oct. 25-28, is being dubbed as J Street’s first national convention, but 11 other groups have signed on as “participating organizations,” including Ameinu, Americans for Peace Now, the Israel Policy Forum, the New Israel Fund and Brit Tzedek v’Shalom.
The plan is for these other organizations to help promote and recruit for the event, in addition to having input on the program and helping to “shape the conference,” said J Street chief of staff Rachel Lerner.
The push for greater cooperation comes as many organizations on the Jewish left are reveling in what they view as a major shift in Washington, with the White House and members of Congress endorsing some of the policy prescriptions that they’ve been backing for years.
In particular, several of the organizations involved in the upcoming conference have been offering strong public support for the Obama administration’s push for an Israeli settlement freeze. Two of the groups – J Street and Americans for Peace Now – found themselves on the list of 14 organizations invited to Monday’s meeting in the White House with the president.
Some lawmakers and congressional staffers say that the increased profile of liberal groups is starting to have an impact on Capitol Hill. One staffer said that while there have always been members of Congress who have been on the left side of the pro-Israel spectrum, now those lawmakers have “a safe place” to remain “pro-Israel” while openly discussing more sensitive issues like the humanitarian crises in Gaza and the failure to establish a Palestinian state.
J Street’s executive director, Jeremy Ben-Ami, said that one of the goals of the conference was to show people in Washington that it “isn’t just 10 people gathering in a basement” who support these views. Similarly, he added, the conference will give the participants a chance to “look and see each other and feel less like lone voices in the wilderness.”
Anti-Defamation League national director Abraham Foxman said he had no problem with the Jewish left getting together to advocate its position, noting that “we are a diverse community.” But he criticized J Street’s attempts to downgrade other Jewish organizations while claiming to truly represent the opinion of the Jewish community.
“Advocate your position, but not at somebody else’s expense,” he said, citing specifically a recent op-ed by a J Street staffer that said Foxman and other mainstream leaders were doing “damage” to efforts to keep young Jews involved in the community with their criticism of Obama’s Middle East policies.
“I wouldn’t delegitimize them,” he said. “They’re trying to delegitimize us.”
Left-wing critics of Israeli policy have frequently sought to portray J Street and its allies as an emerging, dovish alternative to AIPAC and other establishment Jewish organizations that oppose U.S. pressure on Israel. But no one is suggesting that the J Street conference will come close to matching the nearly 10,000 people – including hundreds of members of Congress, administration officials and foreign dignitaries – who have attended the banquet at AIPAC’s annual policy conference in recent years.
Ben-Ami said it would be wrong to portray the J Street conference as a left-wing version of the AIPAC policy conference. Instead, he said, he sees the event as a pro-Israel version of the “Take Back America” conferences during the Bush era, which brought together liberal activists on a variety of issues in Washington every year.
Hopefully, Ben-Ami added, the conference would serve as a big step in building what he calls a movement backing strong U.S. efforts to bring peace in the Middle East.
Organizers said that participating groups will be organizing sessions focusing on their specialties. For instance, Americans for Peace Now will be organizing a session on settlements, Brit Tzedek will be putting together programs on grass-roots organizing and on working with rabbis, and the New Israel Fund will do a panel on democracy and civil rights issues in Israel.
The conference is the largest manifestation of what Americans for Peace Now spokesman Ori Nir called the “growing synergy and common cause” between groups on the Jewish left. Such groups have long worked together in informal coalitions to push legislation and congressional letters on Capitol Hill. But Nir said that J Street’s filling of the “political niche” – an area he said had been neglected by the left in the past – adds another dimension to the movement.
One major dovish group that has not signed on as an official backer of the conference is the Union for Reform Judaism, whose president, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, initially was supportive of J Street’s creation, but later slammed the group for its quick criticism of Israel’s military operation in Gaza.
Yoffie will be speaking at the conference, and says he still sees the cooperation of liberal organizations as a “positive development.”
“Let’s have a broad and generous definition of what constitutes pro-Israel,” he said.
One veteran Jewish political observer assigned some importance to the growing alliance, but cautioned against making too much of it.
“All throughout the political community, like-minded groups get together,” the observer said. Now the “Jewish left is doing it, too.”
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.
Copyright © 2013, Forward Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
When Hank Greenberg Met Jackie Robinson
Reconsider Decision on Rabbis and Intermarriage
Ultra-Orthodox Men Ditch All-Black Attire as Fashion Trumps Tradition
Is Steven Hawking’s Decision To Boycott an Israeli Conference Boon to BDS?
Claims Conference Blames Dead Official for Fraud Snafu
You've successfully signed up!
Frank-It's really time for you to go. To suggest that only Arutz 7ers are authentic Israel supporters is just plain stupidity if not insanity. Give it a rest. My late cousin, who used to sell hair tonic on late night cable TV infomercials, had more credibility than you and your friend Alan.
Frank,
Are you one of those Zionists who lives in Israel or are you one of those Zionists who lives in the U.S.?
J Street better known as Judenrat Strasse, courtesy of the funding of its chief benefactor, the Nazi Collaborator and blatant self-hating George Soros, is NEITHER JEWISH NOR PRO-ISRAEL.
It is however, pro-Hamas, the proof of course in its notorious equating Israel with Hamas during the recent Gaza operation. Not once have the Kapos like Ben-Ami loudly demanded Palestinian disarmament or even the immediate release of Gilad Shalit. Or denounced the savage use of innocent horses as bomb carriers by the Palestinians.
But hey, if a Jew builds a room or a playground they'll be right with the moral coward in saying no sireee.
Only Fascists, Neo-Nazis, Self-Haters and JINOs who'd applaud the non-existence of an Israel are those who support Judenrat Strasse. Jews say NO to Nazi-funded, Hamas-supporting Lox and Bagel hypocrites who never practice what they preach themselves.
Normie,
Are you one of these Neo-Nazis who reside on Occupied Native American Land, or are you just a blabbering self-hating dhimmi who resides on Occupied Native American land and refuses to practice what he preaches?
Better get him, that little boyfriend of his, Balkas, Czarkazem (lol), Markie Koch, and the other Jew-haters those pacifiers and maybe a few diapers might come in handy for them as well.
LOL.
Even Ehud Olmert, he of the mass prisoner releases, he of the accepting corpses for babykillers, he of the forced removal of Jews from Amona, he who made every effort and offer to Abbas, INCLUDING Jewish land, even the Leftist arrogant coward Olmert has blasted his fellow Leftist arrogant coward Obama on the "Natural Growth" issue.
Yes, this same Olmert who after Gush Katif was evacuated allowed Sderot and much of Southern Israel to endure THREE FULL YEARS of rocket bombardments from those "peace lovers" in Gaza.
www.jpost.com
OLMERT BLASTING OBAMA...
Read it, and weep, Leftards. It should be required reading too, for the Nazi-paid dolts at Judenrat Strasse aka J Street and their fellow self-haters.
Maybe they too want mustard on their Hebrew Nationals with a glass of milk.
OOPS. Without this, no one will know what the Israel-haters were responding to:
This is just the latest, in a long history of attempts, by the anti-Israel "Jewish" Forward, to try to legitimize the extremist fringe far-left Israel-haters. Its latest ruse is to pretend that they are "advocates of a two state solution" (something Israel's governments have been attempting to reach with "palestinians" who have no interest in doing so), and "a greater U.S. role" (defined as Obama attacking Israel), in the "peace process" (defined as attacking Israel with "palestinians" rejecting any real peace).
Now, with Obama's support, the loony Israel-hating extremist leftist fringe groups are organizing to hold an attack-Israel rally.
Non-Jew-hating Jews need to know just who these anti-Semites are. So what is this "J Street"? It is a new group initially funded by George Soros, who had achieved notoriety for demonizing successive Israeli governments irrespective of their political leanings. During the Gaza offensive, J Street condemned the action against Hamas as "disproportionate." Refusing to "pick a side" and identify "who was right and who was wrong," it applied moral equivalency to both parties proclaiming that "we recognize that neither Israelis nor Palestinians have a monopoly on right and wrong... 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 amongst them."
J Street also opposes Israel's efforts to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Despite the fact that Israelis of all political opinions are united on this issue, J Street members were e-mailed and urged to actively lobby against a bipartisan congressional resolution calling for tougher sanctions to be applied against Iran. It blames Israel for Iran building nuclear weapons, and it opposes any military action to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
J Street has been involved in resurrecting the bogus anti-Semitic charge of "dual loyalties," warning Jews that by continued "blind" support of Israel, they risked alienating the American public and would be condemned for displaying greater loyalty toward Israel than the US. It was almost hysterical in its condemnation of Jews who exercised their rights to protest against the proposed appointment of the fiercely anti-Israel Charles Freeman to head the National Security Agency.
(The Forward has fraudulently described J Street as a "peace group" and a "dovish pro-Israel lobby." A far-left extremist organization, whose purpose is to aggressively lobby against Israel, is with mind-boggling chutzpah described as "pro-Israel".)
While the Forward seeks to legitimate and whitewash J Street by describing it as within the, "left wing of the organized Jewish community", its extremist anti-Israel advocacy is directly in opposition to the mainstream Jewish community. To tolerate such a group within the framework of the Jewish community provides it with an aura of respectability to which it is not entitled. And when a "Jewish" publication attempts to support this virulently anti-Israel organization, its propaganda should be recognized for what it is, and condemned. When a president allies himself with it, alarm bells should be ringing.
we have no proof that either pals or US/Isr have failed to establish a pal'ns state which the article speaks of as "failed to establish a pal'n state". for certain, it is not pal'ns who failed; US/Isr probably never wanted a pal'n state and don't want it now. In short, failure was not only planned but is planned once again, and again... tnx
as a person with at least 000001% of shemitic and, ergo, hebraic genes i am entitled to say the following: even tho US is mighty, it cldn't have to date allowed a 'jewish' state. it can be seen that russia, china, india, pak'n wld never welcome a state for many ethnicities, while denying states for own homogeneous pops such as pashtuns, chechens, baluchis, ighur, punjabis, et al.
in fact all of asia and afrika also do not want a 'jewish' state and for at least two reasons: most of them are composed of two or more peoples and of course they cannot ever approbate colonialism. and even migty US, or rather, its plutos, tremble in fear of what might happen to their business if US wld OK a state for some hundred ethnicities and with one of the worst cults ever invented by any set of clazy priests. tnx
it is interesting to note that any blood wld do to defend israel. 'Zionists' [euros with cultishness] needed cannon fodder; thus ethiopean, moroccan, tunisian, egyptian, yemeni, iraqi, and syrian blood wld be ok to defend 'zionistic' theft of land but not OK to have their share in econo-military-political life of the country or of the diaspora'jews'.
on the other hand, i presume, none of ethiopeans or most of shemitic 'jews' wld have been allowed into israel, if 'zionist' wld have had their state.
this way the 'purity' [of ashn'c blood] of 'jewishness' is ?forever made impure. this is just on eof the punishments that god had to date visited upon ashk'm. More is to yet come!
Balkas, (aka fascist nutcase)
you're wanted back at your padded cell.
PISS OFF.
alan, that was beautifully said. In fact i am so nutty even psychiatrists [most of them zionistic] fear me or won't listen or talk to me. but i got from you more than i get from most shrinks. oh my devil, alan, if you only knew real me, you'd be tossing and turning in your bed all night; so, i better not tell you what i do. I want you to sleep well. Still, i hope you won't be upset- watch it now! here it comes: i have a devil of my own that tells me everything i need to know. He also protects me better that any god cld or wld. Actually even gods fear me! How is it that the devil of mine knows so much? Well, gods don't get along at all; they don't talk to each other; thus they are lonely, so they sepak with the devil and the devil blabs what they say to me. tnx for your comment.
Alan,
If you're such a dedicated Zionist, why aren't you living in Israel?
Norman, if you are such a Palestinian loyalist why aren't you on the front lines attacking Jews.
I assume that those invectives are from Alan posting under a false name.
Ignore the insults. Alan has no answer.
He's a Zionist, but doesn't act upon his convictions by moving to Israel.
Instead, he takes extreme positions, and attacks anyone who takes a reasonable position.
His argument is, "I'm more pro-Israel than you, because I'm willing to kill Palestinians for Israel."
A Freudian would say that he's compensating for his guilt by attacking others.
can it get any udder than this: three 'gods' living in eterne peace and their respective three flocks locked up in eterne warfare, intolerance, anger, angst, fear, hatred, etc? this is utterly/udderly eerie situation.
damn u moshe, jesus, and mohammed. Damn much of mosheism, jesusism, and mohammedanism. here we have three shemitic men and three shemitic hells! And, yet, according the three clazed people, heaven awaits all the pious people! so why don't u people commit a mass suicide and go to heaven.tnx
Simply put, peace is a non-starter for American Jews thirsting for the revenge for the Holocaust they never had the balls to act on and for whom an Israel at war is and has been the entre to corridors of power and influence, and have placed them at the the top of the american political ziggurat. I suggest, that there is a concerted effort by an American Jewish propaganda machine, (Abe Foxman, AIPAC, The ZOA, et al) that is hell bent on depicting the State of Israel as one settler-loving, palestinian-hating, monolith. Given whats in the balance, this is understandable. An Israel that is at peace with it’s neighbors, an Israel that has reconciled itself to the reality of a two-state solution, an Israel that is committed to social justice for all of its citizens, an Israel not torn apart by social dysfunction, is simply not in the interests of certain American Jews, from both the right and the left. Without an Israel on a perpetual war-footing, without an Israel as a supplicant client state, without an Israel that is willing to subordinate its own interests to that of the United States, without the perception that it is necessary for American Jews to intercede with the American government on Israel’s behalf, American Jews become a political non-entity (much as they were prior to June 1967), with all the attendant loss of power and influence that would entail. In short, American Jewish support has nothing to do with Israel’s welfare, it has to do with its own. If you accept the premise that American Jewish concern for Israel is about self-interest rather than any sense of altruism, it can at least be said that J-Streets actions are less about this traditional meddling in the politics and cultyure of Israel and more about extricating American and American Jewish intrests from Isareali society and a formulation of a balanced approach that will be beneficial to Isarel and America rather than the usual song and dance designed to grow penises for Franky and Alan.
has anyone noticed that shoded yam means pirate in Hebrew?
"...My hormones got me through the Marines. Where were you shoddy boy? On the beaches of tel aviv?"
Yeah I know. "Don't ask, don't tell" eh? Don't worry. You're secret is safe with me.
Not that its relevant, but since you insist on a pissing contest, I served in Zahal from 1985-1988. Nachal Brigade, 50th Battalion(Gidud Chamishim) served Lebanon 1986-87, served in the Occupied Territories 1987-88. Discharged 1988 with the rank of Samal.
You know what I notice, GI Joe? The guys who talk the most about their service shouldn't have bothered in the first place.
since euros with moshe's 'laws' cld never fool all of the goyim at any time, they decided they can always delude selves. And so the self-delusion still goes on.
the numerous peoples with the mosheic cult had suffered three shoahs but 'celebrate' [is that right?] only one; the most recent one. meanwhile, slaughter of gypsies and slavs is not mentioned by 'zionists' with 0000000001% of shemitic blood because romas and slavs have 01% of shemitic genes. and zionists are mighty envious and hateful of slavs and romas. tnx
bozh, shoded, Aaron, Rusaka, Martell, sound like they are the same poster with the same obsessions.
The International Crisis Group, an investigative think tank connected to billionaire George Soros, has issued a report on the current influence of the religious Zionist movement and ways in which its opposition to further Israeli retreats can be overcome. Soros, who was a major contributor to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign and who is vehemently opposed to the “Israel lobby” in the United States, is a member of the Crisis Group's executive committee.
After conducting extensive research in Israel, including dozens of interviews with Jewish leaders, senior and junior officials, rabbis, military men, residents of Judea and Samaria and many others, the group’s analysts concluded that the government needs to “rein in” the “settlerment enterprise” and stop showing “lenience toward anti-Palestinian violence or hateful incitement, especially with a religious content.”
However, they also note that Israel’s religious right has “deep roots,” and that “even its most militant expression cannot be dealt with exclusively through confrontation.”
Advocating what some may see as a divide-and-rule approach to the religious Zionists, the report’s authors believe that the religious right’s opposition to further Israeli pullouts can be minimized if an agreement reached between Israel and Arabs marks exactly where the border between Israel and the PA will pass, thus making it clear which communities can keep on growing and which are on the chopping block.
The report also warns of a drift by ultra-orthodox Jews towards nationalistic positions, and recommends that the United States and other “foreign actors” attempt to woo ultra-Orthodox parties like Shas and United Torah Judaism by involving them in the diplomatic process. The report also warns of a drift by ultra-orthodox Jews towards nationalistic positions.
Early compensation The group suggests that “an early evacuation compensation package for Jews in Judea and Samaria could help persuade some settlers to leave voluntarily, narrowing the problem to a smaller group,” whereas “for those who value their attachment to the land over their attachment to the state, efforts could be made to examine how and under what conditions they might live under Palestinian rule and the extent to which Palestinians might accept them.”
The report also suggests that “unlike what happened with the Gaza disengagement, the government could start early planning for settler relocation by building alternative homes inside Israel proper.”
It claimed that "the 2005 disengagement from Gaza went remarkably smoothly" but made no reference to police forces' separating babies from their mothers and did not offer any comment on the government's failure to fully carry out promises to help the expulsion victims re-establish their homes and find work.
Serious snoopers While the report does not list its authors by name, it is known that one of them is Crisis Group senior analyst Nicolas Pelham, a former veteran BBC correspondent and an expert on Arab affairs, who has been conducting extensive research in Israel in recent years.
Nicolas Pelham (Crisis Group)
The group prides itself on being “the leading independent, non-partisan source of analysis and advice to governments and inter-governmental bodies worldwide on the prevention and resolution of violent conflicts.”
The group’s analysts have left few stones unturned in their quest to understand the history, ideology and personal makeup of the religious-Zionist movement. Judging by the quotes that appear in their report, they have received some form of cooperation from dozens of interviewees, including an unnamed former head of the Shin Bet; Rabbi Dov Lior of Kiryat Arba; Religious Affairs Minister Yaakov Margi; Motti Karpel, Editor of Nekuda; former MK Benny Elon; Yesha Council head Danny Dayan; Yitzhak Pindrus, who is described as an “ultra-orthodox deputy mayor of Jerusalem and close adviser to Rabbi El-Yashiv [sic]”; an “ultra-orthodox chief administrator” at “Tel Tzion settlement”; an “ultra-orthodox settler and reserve soldier” at “Adam settlement”; a “Lubavitch Torah college lecturer” at “Immanuel settlement”; a “Torah college teacher” at Mea Shearim; a municipal official at Modiin Illit; Edah Haredis representatives at Mea Shearim; a Torah college teacher at Nachliel; residents of Amona, Migron and Maskiyot and numerous others.
According to the secretary of a religious seed group in central Israel, a researcher for the group went so far as to disguise himself as a religious Jew in order to enter a seed group’s synagogue in Ramle.
The Palestinian people must have their state from the river to the sea. 62 years of Israeli occupation of Palestine must end. The Jewish settlement of Tel Aviv and every other settlement must be dismantled.
We welcome President Obama’s groundbreaking speech in Cairo on June 4th.
We applaud his statement that the bonds between America and Israel are "unbreakable."
We praise his principled condemnation of the Holocaust denial that is all too common in Arab and Muslim societies.
We fully embrace his commitment to peace – peace among Israel, its Palestinian neighbors, and the larger Arab world.
And we share his vision of a region where "children grow up without fear."
At the same time, I wouldn’t be honest if I didn’t tell this audience that we have some specific areas of concern. This is a caring critique from a friend, and we hope that these issues can quickly be put behind us.
Let me cite three.
First, in his Cairo speech, the President implied that the Holocaust was the primary reason for Israel’s creation. That is unfortunate – and factually incorrect.
Israel was born out of an ancient vision unique in the annals of history. In the words of its Declaration of Independence, Israel "was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped. Here they first attained statehood, created cultural values of national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book of Books."
This was understood by President Harry Truman, who defied the advice of his State Department to recognize the re-establishment of Israel in 1948.
His favorite Psalm, according to presidential historian Michael Beschloss, was Number 137: "By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion."
Why is this important now? Because the Arab world has long challenged Israel’s legitimacy by arguing that it is a Western implant in the Middle East, created to appease the conscience of a Europe with Jewish blood on its hands.
President Clinton encountered this view when his valiant efforts to make peace were rebuffed, as Yasser Arafat outrageously denied the historical Jewish connection to Jerusalem.
Indeed, more than any other issue, this gets to the root of the conflict. The United States must take every opportunity to reinforce Israel’s rightful place in the region.
Second, the President juxtaposed the Palestinian condition with that of black Americans and other suffering people "from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia."
Whatever its intent, this seemed to create a regrettable equivalence.
I would not for a minute deny that Palestinians have suffered. I have visited the West Bank and Gaza and know that the lives of many Palestinians have not been easy.
Yet I also know that the Palestinian condition is, above all, self-inflicted. That is to say that the Palestinian people have been ill-served by their own leaders.
Where are the Martin Luther King and John Lewis, the Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa, and the Mahatma Gandhi of the Palestinian people – individuals of visionary greatness and deep commitment to non-violence?
According to a senior British official, Palestinians are the world’s largest per capita recipients of foreign aid. Yet corruption and mismanagement have siphoned off too much from the intended recipients.
To suggest that Palestinians are the modern-day version of those who endured inescapable oppression is to give them, and especially their leaders, a free pass. Those leaders should be held accountable for failing to move Palestinian society from victimization to responsibility.
On this front, there are glimmers of hope today in the West Bank, but there remains a long road yet to be traveled. Meanwhile, of course, Gaza is in the iron grip of Hamas, which continues its implacable hostility toward Israel, and, indeed, toward the Palestinian Authority.
And third, the President, in his speech in Cairo, made a specific demand for action by only one country. He said, "It is time for these settlements to stop." Like the Secretary of State, the President made clear that he was referring to all settlements, everywhere.
The President has said that friendship entails honesty, and that he is being honest with a friend.
Yes, but among all the countries of the region, it was unusual to see our President single out only Israel – our "stalwart democratic ally," in the words of Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) – with such sharp focus.
To be sure, the settlements are an issue. We at AJC have said so more than once.
But they are not the underlying cause of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. They should be addressed in the context of negotiations, not treated as a sine qua non for talks, as Palestinian leaders are doing now.
In fact, Palestinians seem to have interpreted – or misinterpreted – President Obama’s stance as a license to sit back while Israel is forced into concessions. As President Abbas said in a revealing interview, "I will wait for Israel to freeze settlements. … Until then, in the West Bank we have a good reality. … The people are living a normal life."
In the end, Israel cannot and will not return to the fragile armistice lines of 1967. This was acknowledged by Presidents Clinton and Bush, and we hope that it will be reaffirmed.
As the late Abba Eban, an Israeli diplomat and peacemaker par excellence, said, "We have openly said that the map will never again be the same as on June 4, 1967. … The June map is for us equivalent to insecurity and danger."
Distinguished Senators, no nation other than Israel has experienced the daily trauma of more than six decades without peace. Today, Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah openly call for its destruction.
No other nation in the Middle East has been a more steadfast friend and democratic partner of the United States.
No other nation, victorious in wars thrust upon it, has demonstrated more willingness to make painful concessions to advance peace.
The UN embraced the idea of two states – one Arab, the other Jewish – as early as 1947. Prime Minister Netanyahu’s call for recognition of Israel as a Jewish state is not new. It was embraced by a majority of UN member states six decades ago.
An agreement, however difficult, remains possible today. Indeed, four consecutive Israeli prime ministers have called for a two-state accord.
Yet their Palestinian counterparts have not reciprocated, even when Prime Minister Olmert made what the Palestinians themselves acknowledged was an unusually far-reaching offer.
As Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) recently said, "I believe negotiations will be successful only with a renewed commitment from the Palestinians to be a true partner in peace."
In that spirit, why has Saeb Erekat, the PA’s principal negotiator, refused to negotiate with the current Israeli government, while holding talks with the Iranian foreign minister instead? Shouldn’t it be the other way around – spurning the Iranians and meeting the Israelis?
It’s no wonder that many Israelis are skeptical about the chances of achieving a solution. They seek reassurance that the United States, their indispensible friend and partner, stands with them in their quest for lasting peace and security.
President Obama has laudably reiterated his deep and abiding friendship for Israel on numerous occasions. Quite frankly, though, the polls show that many Israelis are not convinced.
Perhaps he could soon find an opportunity to pay a visit and speak with Israelis directly. It might do a lot to advance understanding among the Israeli public – and to reaffirm America’s belief, expressed by President Truman, that Israel is "not just another sovereign nation, but … an embodiment of the great ideals of our civilization
Listen folks, you should read the post by "David Harris", above. I do not know if it was actually posted by him, but Harris is the executive director of the American Jewish Committee (AJC), and the post is verbatim from his Blog, which contain his "remarks to a meeting of the Senate Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee, attended by about 20 Democratic Senators, on Capitol Hill on July 22 [2009]."
His remarks are conciliatory and diplomatically phrased, but the message is clear.
AJC was reportedly one of the groups invited to the Obama meeting. The Forward has previously opined that there was no "push-back" by any of those Jewish groups, and suggested that they were, "in full support of his peace efforts, including his demand for a complete freeze of Jewish settlements on the Israeli-occupied West Bank".
The Forward also claimed that, "the meeting yielded a broad understanding that the administration’s decision to take its dispute with Israel to the public sphere will not be challenged by American Jews."
Both of these claims have since, thankfully, been proven wrong.
Read the Harris post above, and also read the following "Mideast Briefing" of July 25, 2009, by the AJC, which (diplomatically) states:
....
"Soon after [the Cairo speech] came the denial of U.S.-Israel understandings about construction within settlement boundaries. These understandings were well publicized at the time they were formulated and were denied by no one. They were a key component of the Sharon government's case for the Gaza withdrawal.
Flat denials of those understandings from the new administration dealt a body blow to the peacemaking process."
AJC News - American Jewish Committee
http://www.ajc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=2818289&content_id={A1DE490B-ADFA-4822-96A1-020EB3EF9197}¬oc=1
....
As Mr. Harris stated, above:
....
"In the end, Israel cannot and will not return to the fragile armistice lines of 1967. This was acknowledged by Presidents Clinton and Bush, and we hope that it will be reaffirmed."
....
Harris also has a Blog that's worth reading: David Harris Blog - American Jewish Committee
Thankfully, we are starting to see the "push-back" from Jewish leaders that the Forward claimed and wished would not materialize.
If Mr. Harris was indeed the poster, he should be alerted to the fact that this comment, along with others' pro-Israel comments, are often deleted by the Forward (while far-left virulently anti-Israel anti-Semitic posts are not).
The conspiracy to drive the last of the original inhabitants of the land into homeless despair is gaining force. Already 500,000 illegal aliens are occupying the hilltops overlooking the hapless people living under the point of the gun. How about taking a deep breath and examine what you are really saying--and doing? Palestine is the only land in the world where illegal aliens rule over the righful inhabitants. Think on it. 100 nations and the UN have condemned the occupation. Tell me that they are all anti-Semites or self-haters.
Another not-so-shocking disclosure about virulent anti-Israel "J Street":
......
Aug 14, 2009
MUSLIMS, ARABS AMONG J STREET DONORS
By Hilary Leila Kreiger, Jerusalem Post Correspondent
The J Street political action committee has received tens of thousands of dollars in donations from dozens of Arab and Muslim Americans, as well as from several individuals connected to organizations doing Palestinian and Iranian issues advocacy, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
Additionally, at least two State Department officials connected to Middle East issues have donated to the PAC, which gives money to candidates for US Congress supported by J Street. The organization describes itself as a "pro-Israel, pro-peace" lobby pushing for more American involvement and diplomacy in resolving the Middle East conflict.
Arab and Muslim donors are extremely rare for other organizations that describe themselves as supporters of Israel as J Street does, Jewish leaders at organizations across the political spectrum told The Jerusalem Post. Because most of these other organizations are not PACs, however, US law does not require them to release their donor lists. J Street's non-PAC arm also does not release a complete list of contributors.
J Street executive director Jeremy Ben-Ami estimated the amount of Arab and Muslim donors to be a very small percentage - at most 3 percent - of the organization's thousands of contributors. But he said that such supporters show the broad appeal of J Street's message and its commitment to coexistence.
"I think it is a terrific thing for Israel for us to be able to expand the tent of people who are willing to be considered pro-Israel and willing to support Israel through J Street," he said. "One of the ways that we're trying to redefine what it means to be pro-Israel is that you actually don't need to be anti-Arab or anti-Palestinian to be pro-Israel."
Activists from several other Israel-oriented groups, though, suggested that J Street's donor list reflects on the group's commitment to Israel and approach to the peace process.
"It raises questions as to their banner that they're a pro-Israel organization. Why would people who are not known to be pro-Israel give money to this organization?" asked Lenny Ben-David, a former Israeli diplomat and staffer for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a major Washington lobby but not a PAC that makes contributions to candidates. "Once you introduce a large group and large amount of money from people who are suspect in their pro-Israel credentials, J Street loses some of its credibility in claiming it is pro-Israel and representing the Jewish community."
Ben-Ami described the organization as one that is "primarily but not exclusively Jewish" and said that as the numbers of Arabs and Muslims participating in J Street are low, he would like to welcome more non-Jews into the fold.
The funds that come from these sources indeed constitute a small fraction of the year-and-a-half-old organization's political fundraising, which totaled around $844,000 in 2008 - a key election year - and $111,000 so far in 2009. They comprise several dozen of the PAC's 4,000-5,000 donors.
But some of the contributors play key roles in the organization. The finance committee's 50 members - with a $10,000 contribution threshold - include Lebanese-American businessman Richard Abdoo, a current board member of Amideast and a former board member of the Arab American Institute, and Genevieve Lynch, who is also a member of the National Iranian American Council board. The group has also received several contributions from Nancy Dutton, an attorney who once represented the Saudi Embassy in Washington.
Smaller donors include several leaders of Muslim student groups, Saudi- and Iranian-born Americans, and Palestinian- and Arab-American businessmen who also give to Arab-oriented PACs.
Additionally, Nicole Shampaine, director of the State Department's Office for Egypt and the Levant, gave $1,000 last summer. Lewis Elbinger, who used to serve in Saudi Arabia, gave a combined $150.
A State Department legal adviser said there were no laws or codes prohibiting employees from donating to groups doing advocacy work on the policies they are formulating.
"The State Department ethics rules don't prohibit contributions to lobbying groups," she said.
Shampaine did not respond to a request for comment from the Post and Elbinger could not be reached.
The donations raised the eyebrows of some Jewish organization officials.
"It informs our view of where these individual foreign service officers' heads are in relation to US-Israel policy," said one who spoke on condition of anonymity. "It might not be the smartest move for them to be showing their hand in that way, though I don't think it's illegal or even unethical."
Though Abdoo, Lynch and Dutton also did not respond to queries from the Post, donor Zahi Khouri was reached by telephone during a visit to the West Bank, where he splits his time along with Orlando.
He explained that he donated to the J Street PAC because "I believe that they are sincere about being pro-Israel and they are sincere about being pro-peace. And AIPAC I consider an enemy of Israel rather than a friend of Israel because they're not helping it to achieve peace."
The businessman behind some of the biggest Palestinian investment groups and enterprises said that he wanted to see a home for Israel and a home for Palestinians, along the 1967 border with a shared Jerusalem and symbolic treatment of the refugees, and felt that J Street would help achieve that.
"They are equally hard on the Palestinians as they are on Israel, so they're not pro-Palestinian. They are just pro-peace and pro-Israel. I believe that," he told the Post.
Khouri, who also does outreach in conjunction with a Palestinian media advocacy group, noted that he doesn't give money to other Jewish or Israel-oriented organizations, and officials with such bodies said it was very unusual to receive money from Palestinian or Muslim Americans.
Mainstream groups ranging from the American Jewish Committee to the United Jewish Communities 150-plus federations rarely if ever get such donations; PACs from the National Jewish Democratic Council's to the Republican Jewish Coalition's don't list such contributors among their public filings.
Other progressive Jewish groups also aren't accustomed to such backers.
"APN receives thousands of checks every year from its supporters. The vast majority - as far as we can tell - are American Jews. That is the segment of the US public that we typically target," said APN spokesman Ori Nir, noting that while he does not keep tabs on every check received, he knows that all of the group's major donors are Jewish.
Nir, whose group has similar stances on the peace process and engagement with Iran to J Street, also said that the organization tears up any checks sent with Israel-bashing notes.
In contrast, Ben-Ami said that J Street doesn't screen or reject donations. "We are so clearly pro-Israel, and we are an organization that is grounded in and based in Jewish values and a Jewish desire to support the State of Israel, that if someone wants to choose to do their political giving through us, it's more a question for them: Do they want to be seen to be giving their money through us. If they do it, that's the statement they're making."
Ben-Ami also rejected anything smacking of a religious test of donors for pro-Israel groups.
"It would be a very big mistake for pro-Israel organizations to apply a religious or ethnic litmus test for support for Israel from other Americans. I don't think anybody checked to see whether [Pastor] John Hagee was Jewish before he was invited to keynote the AIPAC conference," he said. "I don't think we should be banning Christians, I don't think we should be banning Muslims, I don't think we should be banning Arabs from finding a way to support Israel, to support its right to exist and to support a program that is designed to secure the future."
Ben-Ami noted that J Street, as with APN and other Jewish groups, doesn't solicit donations from Muslims and Arabs, but he said that in any case, "Our views are not a reflection of our donors. Our donors are supporting our views."
Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League, one of the few mainstream Jewish organizations to recall receiving occasional donations from Arabs or Muslims - though, like most non-profits, it hasn't disclosed its donor list as the law doesn't require it to - said the key issue in his mind about J Street's contributors were whether they were individuals or organizations.
"Individuals have a right to support whoever they want. What would be troubling would be if you find organizations," he said, as it raises the question of, "Why are these Arab or Muslim organizations supporting a Jewish or pro-Israel group?"
Another leader from a mainstream pro-Israel organization said that while his group has never received money from such sources, "There's no moral impediment for reaching into other constituencies. It's not something we have done, but I like to think the cause of Middle East peace is a cause that is not only supported by American Jews but is broadly supported."
At the same time, he suggested that these donors might have chosen to give to J Street because "that constituency supports the kind of a line that maybe naturally gravitates to an advocacy organization that's more critical of Israel."
An official from another Jewish organization who also spoke anonymously had a different explanation for the donations, though. "Arab-American organizations or Palestinian American organizations have minuscule impact in Washington" in comparison to major Jewish ones, he maintained. "That's where the power is. So if you're looking for impact, for bang for your political buck, you'd give to J Street."
Ben-Ami rejected the contention out-of-hand. "I can't see this having become a vehicle in any way for the political expression of Arab-Americans. I think that's ludicrous. I don't see that in the slightest."
He said instead that it was J Street's "approach to being pro-Israel that actually is so attractive to people of other religions, who are trying to find a way to be pro-Israel that breaks the cycle of violence, and breaks the cycle of us-versus-them thinking."
So? What's wrong with being from Abraham's other line? As far as I know, Arab money is just as kosher as the last-ditch apartheid money that evangelical Goyim are pouring into OyePAC.
Abe - You are getting paid back for what you did to demonize Rabbi Kahane and for your silence while Jews were yanked out of their homes in Gush Katif. Make tsuva