J Street director talks ‘urgency’ at Berkeley JCC

Since as is now common knowledge, J Street staff including Jeremy Ben-Ami personally, lied and lied repeatedly about their having been funded and founded by vitriolically anti-Israel billionaire speculator George Soros, why should we believe them now?

“We lied then but we’re telling the truth now” is not a very convincing denial.

J Street fails the test of whether someone is a friend of Israel or is only pretending to be.  The rule is that who pays the piper calls the tune.  And that tune is being called by long-time enemy of Israel George Soros.

Ben-Ami’s defense of the shamelessly biased Goldstone Report and of Goldstone is exactly of a piece with his lying about Soros. 

J Street’s actual position seems to be “We are pro-Israel except in every actual case”.

Ben-Ami criticized Israel’s demand that the PA recognize Israel as a Jewish state.  Yet he seems to have no problem with recognizing Palestine as a Palestinian state.  A Palestinian state which may have no Jews on its soil.  Why is that?

Ben-Ami was lying when he said he and J Street were not in effect hired by Soros.  And it sure seems like he is lying when he claims that he is somehow pro-Israel though anti-Israel in every particular instance.

Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice….

Anyone who believes J Street now is being publicly made a fool of by proven liars.

I listened to Jeremy Ben Ami and despite the very eloquent presentation there are still questions about J Street that haven’t been answered.

First of all, after learning that J Street is a Zionist, pro-Israeli organization that endorses the two-state solution and supports Israel’s right for self defense, I am not sure where is the difference between J Street’s and AIPAC’s positions and why do we need an additional Jewish organization.
The only difference is - as explained by Mr. Ben-Ami - that contrary to AIPAC, J Street is not automatically supporting the positions of the Israeli government, but has its own points of view which may diverge from the official Israeli stand. The problem is that neither Mr. Ben-Ami, nor J Street’s web site are very explicit as to what these specific positions are.
The second concern relates to the tactics of J Street. These are to influence the Israeli position by way of encouraging US politicians in Congress and in the Administration to pressure Israel to adopt unspecified policies that are deemed by J Street to be in the interest of the US and of Israel. I believe it will be more appropriate if J Street spelled out what their position is and would try to influence Israel’s position acting in the Israeli arena, either alone, or in concert with Israeli organizations that have the same political views.

Get a load of that photo of Ben-Ami in the article. It has this satanic quality to it wouldn’t you say? Great shot Dan you know what they say about how a picture says a thousand words.

Here are a few observations of Jeremy Ben-Ami’s talk at Berkeley’s JCC: J Street’s slogan is “Pro Peace, Pro Israel.” But the “Pro Israel” pronouncement should be called into question as about 80% of Ben-Ami’s speech was sharply critical of the Jewish state. On the other hand, Ben-Ami said little that painted the policies of Palestinians in a pejorative light.

The event was so tightly orchestrated by J Street that it resembled a colloquium conducted by the Soviet Politburo. Local J Street Director Gordon Gladstone ordered me not to hand out a fact sheet critical of J Street’s activities within the lecture hall. And a J Street moderator who addressed audience questions to Ben-Ami made certain that no truly critical questions were forwarded the speaker’s way. 

Among questions not considered: why Ben-Ami and other J Street leaders have been compulsively dishonest over the course of two years concerning contributions by the Israel-loathing George Soros. And why J Street facilitated meetings between the notorious Judge Goldstone and US Congressmen.

Finally, Ben-Ami rationalized that in the Internet world, it was necessary for J Street to make decisions from the top down. So those who join local chapters might understand that any democratic input they may wish to make will be largely lacking in the formulation of J Street’s policies.

Dan
I’ve been following your comments ever since the down fall of the print version of the Berk. Daily Planet. Please contact me:
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Jstreet claims to represent the vocal majority of american Jewry on its stance on Israel.
Lets be clear, Jstreet is not Pro-Israel.  Each and everytime there is a chance to castrate or condemn Israel, they issue a press release. Each time Israel sends out AID or wins some intl recognition for excellence… silence. (AIPAC does)

The Reason is clear,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIIH1deOoWQ

Soros was just the tip of the iceberg as its funders and many of its supporters are Vehemently ANTI-israel and/or have foreign interest in ensuring US support for israel wains.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Uo8EWiMheY

Join the thousands who have proclaimed JStreet does no represent them
http://www.facebook.com/stopjstreet

As reporter Dan Pine noted, Jeremy Ben-Ami began his talk reciting a litany of his family’s ties to Israel. What is he trying to prove, given his manifest antipathy to the Jewish State?

Just because one’s blood predecessors have connective tissue to Israel doesn’t necessarily mean that said individual cares a whit about Israel’s well-being.

After all, Noam Chomsky’s father was a noted Zionist, Barbara Lubin’s family were ardent supporters of Israel, and Norman Finklestein’s parents were Holocaust survivors.

Ben-Ami, a strident critic without substance of Israel, may spout about all the familial connections to the Jewish State that he wants but it’s crystalline from him and those notorious others that their kin’s connections to Israel are much ado about nada and, in Ben-Ami’s case, means less than zero…

Becky O’Malley, the anti-Semite and Israel hater supreme who formerly published the Berkeley Daily Planet and now has an on line blog of the same name, wrote in it:
“The odious Dan Spitzer attacked J-Street at Berkeley JCC. Why are we not surprised?”

Hence we must reasonably deduce that for Becky (OK, she’s not the sharpest nail in the shed), J-Street must be dedicated to the same hatred of the Jewish State that she, her husband, and former writer Richard Brenneman regularly demonstrated when she put out her propaganda rag posing as a community paper…

You can’t make this stuff up! About half of J Street’s money comes from a mysterious woman from Hong Kong. She may be involved in the gambling biz: The group’s 990 forms … show their largest contribution, of $811,697 coming from one Consolacion Ediscul of “Happy Valley” Hong Kong. Ediscul, whose name is Filipino, has no presence on Google or Nexis aside from this contribution, no one had previously heard of her.

Apparently she is “an associate” of a J Street board member, Bill Benter. “Happy Valley” is the site of a major racetrack, and Benter is regarded as “the most successful sports bettor in the world.” Weird to say the least, that a group would get half its budget from a foreigner doing a favor to a business associate.

All those racing ponies…. think Saudi princes and it becomes a bit clearer. J Street repeatedly has misrepresented its source of funding. Isn’t it about time that J Street stopped being treated as a legitimate “pro-Israel” group?

Calilefty, there is indeed a good deal of money donated to J Street by rich Persians, Arabs, and their American associates. The Jerusalem Post just came out of an expose of this and I’ll provide more details tomorrow on line when the next issue of J Weekly is posted…

“What is he trying to prove, given his manifest antipathy to the Jewish State?”

In a decade or two, Israel, West Bank, and Gaza will have a non-Jewish majority.  It will be impossible to have a democratic Jewish state in Israel, unless we agree to a two-state solution before that time - one majority Jewish state and one majority Muslim state.

This is so obvious that I can only conclude that Dan Spitzer’s real goal is to destroy Israel as a democratic Jewish state.

Of course, this conclusion assumes that Spitzer is 1) rational and 2) able to think about the consequences of the policies he advocates.

When Ben-Ami says ““The most urgent threat to Israel is failure to solve the conflict,” he is absolutely right.  Anyone who does not realize that fact is working against the survival of Israel.