More than 70% of U.S. legislators skipping Netanyahu’s speech endorsed by J Street
-
(JNS.org) More than 70 percent of the federal legislators who have announced their intent to skip Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s March 3 speech to a joint session of Congress about the Iranian nuclear threat are endorsed by the left-wing lobby J Street.
J Street has endorsed 18 of 24 House of Representatives members and two of four U.S. senators who are skipping Netanyahu’s speech, according to the lobby’s announcements of endorsements for elections in 2010, 2012, and2014.
- (JNS.org) More than 70 percent of the federal legislators who have announced their intent to skip Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s March 3 speech to a joint session of Congress about the Iranian nuclear threat are endorsed by the left-wing lobby J Street.
J Street has endorsed 18 of 24 House of Representatives members and two of four U.S. senators who are skipping Netanyahu’s speech, according to the lobby’s announcements of endorsements for elections in 2010, 2012, and2014.
J Street Shows Its True Colors - Conf of Presidents Vindicated
Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street's founder and director, speaking at the group's 2012 confab
Just last year we seemed to think the tables were turned on the Jewish opponents to the security of Israel when the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish organizations voted to refuse admission of J Street to their ranks. At that time, there were some dissidents among major members of that group, notably the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA), National Council of Jewish Women and the ADL, who were supportive of including that far Left organization within the mainstream of the Jewish community. Those rumblings within and from without have now appeared as serious cracks to the foundation of pro-Israel support. It's time for us to come to grips with the structure that supports the future not only of the Jewish state but of world Jewry as well.
The lead up to and response to last week's talk to a joint session of congress by Israel's Prime Minister, Netanyahu has indicated that the bonds of support for the Jewish state are not as secure as we thought they were. Voices from within our own community were raised in opposition to the talk. The ADL, still under the control of Abe Foxman, suggested that the speech be canceled.
And while we're on the subject of the ADL, their selection of Jonathan Greenblatt to be their new leader sounds warning bells for that group's future as the protector of Jewish interests. Jonathan was a special assistant to President Obama and is a protege of the notorious George Soros. We can now bet the farm that the ADL will become another Jewish social welfare group and its concern for Jewish interests will be put on the shelf to collect ponderous layers of that paralyzing liberal dust. But of course, their policies will still be funded by Jewish contributions.
Now, let's talk about another major group, AIPAC, for a moment. That organization has been the umbilical cord contact between Israel and the American elected leadership for ages. Their job is to support Israel's government and to lobby our congress and president in matters all focusing in on the interests of the Jewish state. That vital link must never fall victim to our domestic politics.
Yet AIPAC, which held its yearly conclave just before Bibi's speech, had to gulp down the rebuke from Obama who, together with Joe Biden refused to attend the conference and instead sent a relative nobody to represent them. And that was their National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, a fierce opponent of Israel's domestic and foreign policies when she was the U.S. delegate to the UN. What message of Jewish strength and support for the security of Israel would AIPAC have sent not only to our administration but to the rest of the world were they to have refused to accept pinch hitter Rice because of her overt hostility to Israel?
It would have indicated that Jewish interests were not subordinate to politics. That we Jews have pride. That we Jews will not tolerate a Jew hater to address our leadership. But that's just what they did not do! They caved to the president's wishes which were to defame and denigrate Netanyahu and weaken Jewish support for his nation. One has no doubt of an NAACP response to an overtly anti black president sending in a representative speaker to challenge, let's say voters' rights or welfare handouts. They would have taken a stance supportive of their interests. And rightfully so. Too bad our leaders have no such self respect.
And speaking of the black community, many leaders of the Black Congressional Caucus (BCC) chose to stay home for Netanyahu's speech. In fact, more than half of their delegation joined together to do so. They felt Bibi "dissed" their black president by coming to this country to oppose Obama's policies regarding Iran. Is this a sign that Israel will no longer have support from them? Is this the, "What have you done for me lately?" syndrome? With all the Jewish financial and moral support for their causes over the past 60 years, the racists among the blacks have now openly declared their hostility to Israel. Schwerner and Goodman; rest in peace. Another hard lesson for Jews to swallow.
And speaking of the BCC, one of its major members is James Clyburn (D-SC) who was apparently honored for his avoidance of Bibi's talk by recently being invited as the keynote speaker at the annual Broward County Democratic Party's Unity dinner in Florida, at the end of this month. There are at least 200,000 Jewish Democrats in that county indicating that it is of no concern to them that such a congressman with a known hostile voting record against Israel, would be given the podium to amplify his beliefs right to their faces. And the chair of the Broward Democrat Party, Mitch Ceasar, is Jewish. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
We have only a mere twenty months to go before the next major election. Congressional seats and the presidency will be up for grabs. It's our responsibility to see to it that our votes go only to those candidates who support Israel and the security of Jews in this country and around the world. Our record so far has not been good. We have willingly and willfully overlooked the dangers of those for whom we have voted in order to maintain our record of being politically correct. Our fathers had done so only to see the ruins of our European brethrens' lives. We cannot continue on this dangerous path. Let's wake up and to repeat again, support only those who care for the support of Israel and the security of Jews in this country. It's our right and responsibility to do so
JStreet again shows it's traitorous, evil anti israel essence
http://www.vosizneias.com/194264/2015/02/10/933-j-street-petition-against-netanyahus-congress-speech-rallies-20000-signatures-diaspora-jerusalem-post/
J Street: Pro-progressive, not pro-Israel
Contentions
Gaza Fighting Proves J Street’s Irrelevance
Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary
07.30.2014 - 6:35 PM
07.30.2014 - 6:35 PM
Pity poor J Street. As Israelis seek to defend themselves against Hamas rockets and terrorist tunnels, the left-wing lobby finds itself in a tough spot. Its flagging bid for mainstream support has caused it to try and craft a low-key position of support for Israeli self-defense. But that nuanced stance is causing many of J Street’s supporters to abandon the organization for those groups that take sides against Israel.
As the Forward noted today, J Street has tried not to repeat the mistake it made in 2008 when the group publicly opposed Israel’s efforts to suppress Hamas rocket fire during Operation Cast Lead. The position was very much in character with J Street’s ideology that sees Israel as the obstacle to peace rather than the Palestinian refusal to recognize a Jewish state no matter where its borders would be drawn. But the group that at that time harbored an ambition to replace AIPAC as the voice of the pro-Israel community learned its lesson after it was condemned for this outrageous decision by a wide spectrum of American Jews, including many liberal leaders. During subsequent crises J Street has avoided open condemnations of Israeli actions while still failing to play the sort of role in mobilizing support for an embattled Jewish state that other more mainstream groups take as a matter of course.
As Alan Dershowitz wrote in the Jerusalem Post last week, J Street refused to take part in a communal pro-Israel rally organized by the Boston Jewish federation. Nor did J Street chose to co-sponsor a similar rally in New York. He said these actions sounded the “death knell for J Street” as a group that sought to be considered as part of the pro-Israel community. But the irony is that sort of moral cowardice isn’t enough for many, if not most J Street supporters who are uncomfortable with the way the group has sought to neither condemn nor fully support Israel’s campaign in Gaza.
As the Forward reported, even as J Street avoided being seen at pro-Israel rallies, their members are playing a prominent role in organizing protests against the Jewish state. Many have joined #ifnotnow, a new ad hoc group dedicated to opposing Israel’s actions in Gaza.
Even worse for J Street is the trend that was also discussed in a separate Forward articlewhich reported that many of the group’s adherents are leaving it to join the openly anti-Zionist Jewish Voices for Peace. That group, which serves as the Jewish front for BDS—boycott, divest, sanction—campaigns against Israel is profiting from the situation since many on the left prefer its unadulterated venom directed against the Jewish state to J Street’s more equivocal positions.
While no one should be shedding any tears about J Street’s dilemma, their troubles do illustrate a key point about the ongoing battle to defend Israel.
J Street came into existence in part as a cheering section for Obama administration pressure against Israel. But it was also a manifestation of the old left-right debate in Israel and the United States between those who supported “land for peace” as the solution to the conflict with the Palestinians and those who opposed the idea. J Street’s belief that Israel needed to take risks for peace might have made sense in 1992 before Oslo, the second intifada, and three Palestinian refusals of Israeli offers of statehood. But after 20 years during which Israel has traded land not for peace but for terror, J Street’s positions aren’t so much wrong as they are irrelevant. That’s why Israel’s political left that once dominated the country’s politics is now marginalized and rejected by an electorate that backs the Netanyahu government’s actions in Gaza by a 9-1 margin.
The real battle for Israel now isn’t the old one about where its borders should be placed or whether settlements are good or bad but whether there should be a Jewish state or if it has a right to defend itself. In that struggle, J Street’s tepid Zionism doesn’t resonate with the mainstream community and is of little interest to leftists who prefer open-Israel bashers like JVP.
J Street once thought it would become the main address for Jewish activism. But recent events have shown that J Street’s moment has passed. Those who wish to support Israel in its life and death struggle against Hamas terrorists who seek its destruction will always gravitate toward groups that don’t pull their punches when it comes to defending the Jewish state. At the same time, J Street’s base on the left is following celebrity Israel-bashers and abandoning it to join with those who are playing into Hamas’s hands by claiming it is wrong to shoot back at the terrorists. In this environment, organizations that won’t take a clear side in this fight will soon find themselves historical relics of a bygone era that will never return.
No comments:
Post a Comment