‘J STREET’ – Barack Hussein Obama’s favorite Jewish anti-Israel group


J Street seems to pop up in all the right places lately, buoyed and immunized by indulgent, adoring anduncritical journalists. The upstart lobby was invited to join other Jewish organizations in a July meeting with US President Barack Obama; a month later it attended a meeting with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

The New York Times magazine published the latest paean to J Street, portraying it as brash and brave, representative of 92 percent of American Jewry (Totally untrue)Frankly, the Times article is missing so many components and questions about the “pro-Israel” organization that it cannot be viewed as anything other than J Street puffery.

For instance, the writer, James Traub, devotes considerable effort to show how J Street is in touch with American Jewish opinion on issues such as Israeli settlements and American engagement in the peace process. J Street commissioned “an extensive poll of Jewish opinion on Middle East issues,” Traub wrote.

But Traub failed to report the recent and shocking exposé, written in Commentary by Noah Pollak, that J Street’s poll was conducted by J Street’s own former vice president, Jim Gerstein. “J Street not only commissions polls,” Pollak wrote, “it writes the questions, conducts them, analyzes the results and then carries out promotional campaigns with the findings. If you were wondering how it was possible that J Street could repeatedly produce ‘polling data’ that almost perfectly complements the group’s political agenda, now we have one important clue.”

THE TIMES‘S Traub failed to report on the identity of J Street’s broader leadership and decision-makers. Who are the organization’s funders? Traub reports on the 50-member finance committee, the existence of which was revealed in a Jerusalem Post article last month. The Post revealed names of some of the members: “The finance committee with a $10,000 contribution threshold,” the Post wrote, “includes Lebanese-American businessman Richard Abdoo, a current board member of Amideast and a former board member of the Arab American Institute (AAI), and Genevieve Lynch, who is also a member of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) board.

J Street’s Web site presents its distinguished 170-member “advisory council,” a display case of wealthy progressive Jews and former US diplomats to the Middle East, including several who became foreign agents working the halls of Washington for Arab countries.

Traub should have asked what role George Soros plays in the organization.

J Street billionaire, George Soros, was a Nazi Collaborator


George Soros’ obsession with making Judea and Samaria Judenrein has its roots in his experience as a Nazi collaborator in Hungary. This is not a baseless accusation, but is admitted to by Soros himself, as seen in the following excerpt from Front Page Magazine.

While it might be understandable that Soros did what was necessary to survive, it is not understandable that he shows no remorse for his actions. Worse, he and his present-day J Street collaborators intend to redefine Jewish identity, removing the central importance of Eretz HaQodesh and reducing Judaism to nothing but another culture with no more value than any other culture.

[NB: Soros, like Obama, Rahm Emmanuel, Rev. Jerimiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, David Duke, and Shimon Peres thinks that Israel is a regime that needs to be opposed rather than accepted.] LINK

J Street’s disturbing alliance with the Iranian lobbying group, the National Iranian American Council, is also ignored by the Times‘s tribute. J Street and NIAC directors coauthored a Huffington Post article earlier this year arguing against new sanctions on Iran.

One fact the Times magazine seems to get right: “J Street shares the Obama administration’s agenda.” But the Times should have gone on to ask the nature of J Street’s relationship with senior officials in the Obama administration. ” At the height of Israel’s Gaza operation in December 2008, J Street’s evenhanded statement on the fighting was very similar to that of David Axelrod, Obama’s senior adviser, who, speaking on NBC’s Meet the Press, avoided endorsing Israel’s military action. JERUSALEM POST


What does it mean when one represents oneself as “pro-peace,” and how do we measure whether something really is?  And what does it mean to represent oneself as “pro-Israel?”  In order to qualify, one would at least have to support the existence of that state, and to disassociate with and defend against those who want to expunge it.  On its website, in its literature, in the glossy mailings sent to government officials, universities, synagogues and individuals, J Street garbs itself as “pro-peace” and “pro-Israel.”  But let’s peek underneath the costume to see whether J Street really is what it claims to be.

For years Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly threatened to wipe Israel off the map, denied the Holocaust as a trick to justify the establishment of Israel, and has predicted the end of Israel and of the United States.  President Barack Obama recently revealed that Iran has been lying for years about a secret underground nuclear plant.  Iran is closer to its goal of nuclear weapons than officials previously thought.  Obviously any entity so publicly and enduringly committed to death, destruction and deception is a major obstacle to global peace.  Surely any pro-peace organization would support every possible means of ensuring that this country, nominally headed by a highly volatile dictator (whose strings are pulled by fanatical  mullahs waiting for the 12th Imam to come up out of a well on Judgment Day), would be prevented from completing its race towards nuclear weapons.

But even after Obama revealed Iran’s secret nuclear plant, J Street’s position remains unequivocal: it is “strongly opposed to any consideration at this time” of “further sanctions” against Iran, and it is of course categorically opposed to “the use of military force by Israel or the United States to attack Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.”  As the peace window is closing, J Street opposes swift, decisive action to prevent it from slamming shut.

Now let’s look at whether J Street’s positions concerning Israel are calculated to ensure a real and lasting peace between Israel and its enemy neighbors.

The raison d’etre of the terrorist group Hamas is the annihilation of Israel. In January, 2009, Israel deployed a military response intended to eliminate the continuation of years of violent attacks by Gazans against Israeli civilians.  Surely the cessation of attacks on its people is a necessary part of ensuring a country’s existence. J Street claims that “it recognizes the unquestioned right of Israel to take action to answer acts of terror and violence.”   But it came out strongly against Israel’s efforts at self-defense. Better, apparently, so far as J Street was concerned to let the rockets continue to fall, as they have for years, on Israeli towns.

In its hegemonic insistence on the immediate creation of a Palestinian state, J Street is President Obama’s self-described “blocking back” determined to impose a two-state solution on the Israelis and the Palestinians in the shortest possible timeframe.



The participants resist the creation of two states for different reasons — the Palestinian leadership, both Hamas and Fatah, will only be satisfied with one state: a Palestinian one — and no Jewish one, as they have acknowledged repeatedly, in public and in private, in Arabic and in English, and to continue its armed “resistance” in order to achieve that goal. The Israelis will not agree to a Palestinian State until they are assured it will recognize Israel as a legitimate Jewish State, and they insist on continuing to protect themselves from the Arabs’ armed “resistance,” which is itself another costume, beneath which is  the use of weapons to attack all Israelis, including unarmed civilians.

Those are the reasons there has been no breakthrough in the “peace process,” not because Israel’s allies have applied insufficient pressure on Israel.  This imperialist view ignores the vital essence of each participant.  And J Street is pushing an approach that will guarantee a violent, bloody and long-term conflagration.  Again, the contrary of working towards a lasting peace.

So why does J Street keep claiming it is pro-peace and pro-Israel?  And, more importantly, what does that mean for people, especially politicians, who lend their names to such an organization precisely because being pro-peace and pro-Israel is being sold as the current miracle elixir?

Perhaps we need to turn to Jeremy Ben-Ami, the executive director of J Street, for an explanation.  He publicly stated: We’re trying to redefine what it means to be pro-Israel.”  He neglected to tell us that J Street is also redefining what it means to be pro-peace. Let’s take Ben-Ami at his word.  But let’s make sure everyone buying the J Street snake oil understands what they’re drinking. AMERICAN THINKER

Thanks to SULTAN KNISH for  J Street photos