This is a guest post by Rebecca Hornstein. Rebecca is from Minneapolis and grew up at Temple Israel. She is a Junior majoring in Religious Studies at Macalester College.
I returned from J Street‘s “Giving Voice to Our Values” conference last year with a greater sense of optimism about my role in creating a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This sense of hope stood in stark contrast to the pessimism I had felt about a peaceful end to the conflict after spending a year in Jerusalem between high school and college.
During my time in Israel, I heard stories of lives lived in the conflict from countless diverse perspectives and returned home with many unresolved questions. I also brought back a profound and continuing sense of ambivalence about my relationship to a place with which I have a strong connection, yet have also seen violate my deepest values first hand.
When I returned to the Twin Cities to begin my freshman year at Macalester College that following fall, I found that all of the nuance and complexity I had encountered during my time in Israel/Palestine was not reflected in the simplistic and polarized conversation about the conflict taking place on campus and in my community. I also saw my dream of a peaceful resolution to the conflict slip further and further away as violence in the region continued without a political solution. My feelings of hopelessness caused me to disengage from both conversation and action.
Participating in the J Street conference last year was my catalyst for re-engaging.
As I listened to Israeli, American, and Palestinian activists taking risks and putting everything on the line for the peaceful solution we all so desperately need, I was forced to look inward and ask myself “What’s my excuse for not taking action?”
The time I spent with other students from around the country in conversations around the Israeli/Palestinian conflicts on their campuses was incredibly meaningful. Suddenly I was surrounded by hundreds of other students wrestling with the same questions with which I had been wrestling. The people I met and the stories I heard that weekend reminded me that with unity and hard work we have the ability to help create a peaceful Israel that reflects the Jewish values of equality and justice we were raised never to compromise.
Finding Optimism and Engagement at J Street's Policy Conference
This year I will attend the 2012 J Street conference, “Making History,” joined by 12 other Macalester students determined to work for a productive dialogue around, and ultimately a solution to, the conflict. If you are unable to join us for this historic conference (March 24-27), be sure to follow live conference coverage along at conference.jstreet.org.
I appreciate the writer’s youthful enthusiasm, but I sense that like other young people eager for change, she is more caught up in the excitement of joining a movement without knowing exactly where it is she/they are going.
I hope Rebecca will research the origins of this organization which is only a few years old… often new is not better… & explore why J Street has generated so much controversy among our own… whom are, demographically, very left leaning.
In February 2011 there was an event held at Macalester College’s student center that drew several hundred people. It was a panel program to “talk” about Israel- that is, how to bring about “justice” through the BDS movement, the return of millions of descendants of Palestinian refugees, and more. In other words, how to end the State of Israel as a Jewish homeland. Several volunteers from the Jewish Community Relations Council and a few others came to the event to observe what would take place. While Macalester was not a sponsor of this program, it was quite shocking that a college that ostensibly prides itself on the diversity would allow its space to be used for such a one-sided presentation. The panel included Jews from Jewish Voices for Peace, a Holocaust survivor, several Palestinians, and even a Native American. Is this what passes for diversity these days on campus? Diversity of background but not of ideology? So Rebecca, if by going with 12 other students to the J-Street convention you can bring a more fair and nuanced message about Israel to your campus, that will be a very good outcome. Good luck.
Charlie: You’re not doing anyone any favors by condescending young Israel advocates. You insult every J Street supporter when you suggest that we don’t know the organization’s principles and direction. How ironic that you mention controversy–J Street itself is not a source of controversy, rather it is the lies and smears about J Street from certain groups in the Jewish community that are indeed so controversial.
Sally: J Street U is already bringing a more balanced, nuanced conversation to Macalester. In November J Street U partnered with the Shalaam Coalition to bring Israel-Palestine Week to campus, a dramatic improvement on the Israel conversation from the February 2011 event you mentioned.
This is precisely why J Street U is so important. Until recently the loudest voices on college campuses have been the extreme left and the extreme right, drowning out the moderate middle. J Street U creates space for the moderate majority to have constructive conversations, to look at the difficult issues facing Israel, and to do it respectfully and productively. When people like Charlie try to marginalize J Street U, they’re doing the entire Jewish community a terrible disservice. Whether you support the two-state solution or not, we all benefit from the more moderate, open, and respectful Israel conversation that J Street U fosters.
Great piece, Rebecca! I am excited to count myself among the 12 Mac students headed to the J Street conference next week.
The comments from Charlie and Sally perfectly illustrate the need for a J Street U group at Macalester. On one hand, we recognize the need for Israel to continue existing as the Jewish democratic homeland. On the other hand, Macalester plays host to lots of anti-Israel activity – more than is usual at other colleges and universities – such as Israel Apartheid Week (which occurred just last week) and the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network event that Sally mentioned.
So while J Street indeed is of the more left leaning pro-Israel organizations (at least in comparison to AIPAC), it is plainly and simply the best possible Israel advocacy we can be doing at Macalester.
For those who would like to gain insight into the climate at Macalester regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I hope you’ll find the following Mac Weekly articles useful.
Shalaam Coalition discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
http://www.themacweekly.com/news/shalaam-coalition-discussing-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict-1.2693676
Shalaam Coalition to Students: Note on History
http://www.themacweekly.com/opinion/shalaam-coalition-to-students-note-on-history-1.2721452
Staff Editorial: Israel-Palestine Week
http://www.themacweekly.com/opinion/staff-editorial-israeli-palestinian-week-1.2694057
On Israeli Apartheid Week: Let us not shy away from controversy
http://www.themacweekly.com/opinion/on-israeli-apartheid-week-let-us-not-shy-away-from-controversy-1.2804706
On Israel Apartheid Week: Gray Matters
http://www.themacweekly.com/opinion/on-israeli-apartheid-week-gray-matters-1.2814807
My point, above, was that Rebecca did not provide anything substantive as to why she was jumping on the J Street bandwagon other than the social excitement of belonging to a new activist movement of like minded people who believe they are the ones who can change the status quo…
unfortunately, in this process, J Street has alienated much of the Jewish community… & we’re not the enemy… Above J Streeters label their own views “moderate”… and the rest of us conservative, old school, when we are the most left leaning demographic in America (80-90% of us vote DFL)… bandying about such labels only confuses the issue… & generates further divisiveness.
And what “lies and smears”? I didn’t mention any… J Street is controversial by virtue of the positions it takes… even bringing into question what it means to be “pro-Israel”… can you still call yourself “pro-Israel” when you oppose Israel’s positions? And even lobby against Israel’s position?
As for “lies and smears”, I checked out Noah’s posted links… interesting… but disturbing that Macalester just recently hosted “Israel Apartheid Week”. Calling Israel an “apartheid” state btw IS a lie being used to smear Israel. More disturbing is that J Streeters don’t speak directly to this issue… and it seems from those articles, some even seem to embrace this bit of Israel demonizing street theater… perhaps as some enlightened teachable moment? I’m very offended by such a gross gross misrepresentation of Israel being allowed, even applauded, on a supposedly open-minded campus such as Macalester, so open-minded you even allow lies to be told. J Streeters talk about understanding the “nuances” and “gray areas” of this complex issue… yet fail to see that this now annual week of Israel bashing is not a nuanced gray zone, it is in your face, in black and white wrong… and I think you should invite someone in the know, like Michael Oren or Shimon Peres even, to speak directly to this particular issue. This charade of Palestinian propaganda parading as academia has gone on way far too long.
Charlie, neither are we the enemy. You alienate yourself by taking such a defensive stance on Israel. Surely you can’t believe that Michael Oren and Shimon Peres are the only ones “in the know.” Are you really saying that they together represent the entirety of Israeli society? Are you really saying that Palestinian civilians are less in the know? That Amos Oz is less in the know? That Tzipi Livni is somehow less in the know?
Despite what you think none of us Israel advocates at Macalester condone Israel Apartheid Week or anything that calls for the destruction of Israel…if you knew anything about our experience you would not call for the silencing of our peers in the Palestinian solidarity group, not only because they too have a say in the outcome of whatever happens, but also because using apartheid as a descriptive term for Israel is NOT black and white, and it is appalling that you think so. Please stop thinking that anything in this world is black and white. We truly would agree on more than you might think, the difference is as you yourself described: “old school.” Try something new and listen to what people in J Street are saying, not what people are saying about J Street. I don’t think what I think because J Street tells me to. J Street just has the sense to listen..unlike you.
J Street members actually do condone Israel Apartheid Week by 1) attending events
http://www.themacweekly.com/opinion/on-israeli-apartheid-week-let-us-not-shy-away-from-controversy-1.2804706#.T2OLlcX2aVE
and 2) by not speaking out as to why many of us find it offensive to compare the situation in Israel to the abhorrent racist system of apartheid that previously existed in South Africa. Yes, I s’pose I am very defensive when someone uses such a demeaning, horrid and untrue comparison…. so, I believe J Street actually does play into the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic activities on campus.
And I was merely fantasizing about hosting Michael Oren or Shimon Peres … whom you immediately rejected?!?… but what better mind to speak to the issue than the “George Washington” of Israel. Just this week, Shimon Peres said that without a fantasy, you cannot do fantastic things.
Or how about Elie Wiesel? Like Mr. Peres, also a Noble recipient. So, yes I would say, Amos Oz & Tzipi livni are “less in the know”.
Unfortunately we seldom have the privilege of hearing from such distinguished teachers due to security concerns… & the fact that in the past such learning occasions have been marred by Israel’s detractors who use it as an opportunity to stage anti-Israel protests…
so here’s a fantasy… what if you… J Street were to host such notable teachers… people of knowledge from within our Jewish community who reflect a Jewish pov that transcends the polarization of politics.
We can start with the use of language, of words… I once had the opportunity to hear Mr. Wiesel speak and on this issue too… about why comparisons of Jews/Israelis to Nazis or to South African Apartheid is offensive… & not a good idea. If anything it diminishes what occurred in S. Africa under apartheid & comparisons to the Shoah diminishes the horror of the Nazis, & in so doing, dishonors the memory of the victims.
So… I challenge you to learn from the most sage in our community 😀 Just a fantasy.
Evan,
I have to admit to a distinct sense of concern from your characterization of the Israel-Palestine Week at Macalester in November as a “dramatic improvement.”
At the panel discussion, which was a major centerpiece of this event, among 4 featured panelists:
1 was from Jordan, and called for the one state solution
1 was a signatory to the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
1 claimed that Zionism is not helpful to the resolution of the Middle East conflict, and expressed a belief in the one state solution
And I suppose the fourth merely referred to the missiles from Gaza as “small”
If this is what passes for diversity of opinion, and is truly a “dramatic improvement” to the discourse at Macalester, I am indeed deeply troubled by what Macalester must have looked like before.
But I am by no means comfortable with the “new and improved” Macalester, either – regardless of who sponsors these conferences. And I am rather disappointed that J Street would consider this sort of thing a “win” too.
The old school says we have to speak with one voice only. The old pro-Israel playbook cracks down on dissent by calling us self-loathing (if we are Jews) or anti-Semitic (if we are not). The old guard accepts as collateral damage the masses of American Jews and other supporters of Israel who exit our own sacred community because of the widespread persistence of these attacks. We simply cannot accept this, as Jews or as Americans.
Millennia of persecution and anti-Semitism have instilled in us a defensive posture, and the State of Israel is our greatest bulwark against potential attacks on our people. This defensive stance is essential to our own survival, but the hysterical mistrust and vilification of our own people who dare to challenge the wisdom of certain Israeli policies only weakens us.
There exists a robust, dynamic policy conversation at every level of Israeli society regarding the Palestinians. I respect those who feel that it is not our place as Americans to engage in such debates, but I will remind them to in turn respect those of us working to foster an intelligent, honest, open discussion. This is the mission of J Street, and it is precisely the vision that J Street U strives for at Macalester.
Charlie and JYM miss the point completely when they call on J Street U to act as a PR firm for Israel. By creating space for a better Israel conversation, J Street U reinvigorates the American tradition of robust Jewish political leadership. This excerpt perfectly illustrates the value that J Street U brings to a volatile campus environment:
“We understand it is SUPER’s intention to represent the views of Palestinians, but we feel that using the word apartheid comes from a place of hate. The word may have a broader meaning, but it is most commonly associated with the former apartheid regime in South Africa. In apartheid South Africa, social services like education, health care and even beaches were segregated between Blacks and Whites, and Black citizens were provided inferior services. The situation in Israel is not the same. Arab citizens of Israel can vote, serve in the government, and go to the same schools as Jewish Israelis. Currently, there is an Arab Israeli on Israel’s supreme court and over ten Arab members of Knesset (the Israeli parliament). Indeed, there are forms of segregation and separation in Israel-Palestine, particularly in the West Bank, but a comparison between Israel and apartheid South Africa is inaccurate and misleading. To equate the practices of apartheid South Africa with Israel, even unconsciously, is undermining the existence of Israel, a country that we, as Zionist Jews, love. Using such strong language could potentially alienate people and stifle dialogue. We cannot and should not take this word as a mere descriptive term.”
The full op-ed can be read at http://www.themacweekly.com/opinion/on-israeli-apartheid-week-gray-matters-1.2814807
“Old school” says if you ask two Jews a question, you will get at least three opinions. We are a big tent. But perhaps not big enough to encompass those who choose to pitch their tents with those throwing stones at ours…
I’d also like to point out Evan, that those of us who do not share your opinion did not say anything about you or J Streeters being “self loathing” or “anti-Semitic”… it is you who interjected that into this discussion. What I hear is youthful angst at the Jewish “establishment”… J Streeters seem to spend more energy on protesting the established Jewish community from which they feel so alianted vs confronting expressions of blatant hate of your own people by pro-Arab groups that J Streeters seem to coddle & make excuses for.
I did read the op-ed Evan refers to above. It is good that the issue of Apartheid week is at least being openly discussed… nonetheless, very first paragraph states: “We, as Macalester students who try to see everything through an inquisitive and critical lens, also see the need to condemn the Israeli government for many of their current policies.” My problem? This article was published as Palestinians in Gaza were bombarding Israeli civilians with more than 200 rockets, missiles and mortars… following Israel’s targeted assasination of 2 “terrorists” planning an attack. Only Israel is “condemned” in this article…??? I have a real problem with that type of one-sidedness…
That article also states, & Evan requotes, that “The word (apartheid) may have a broader meaning, but it is most commonly associated with the former apartheid regime in South Africa.” Ethnologically, “Apartheid is the Afrikaans translation of segregation (referring to) the segregation law that was established in South Africa by the British in 1910.” No… there is no “broader meaning”.
Previously Israel’s detractors tried to broaden other terms… e.g. the use of the word anti-Semitism to encompass the Arab people as well as Jews altho “the term anti-Semitism was coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm Marr to designate the anti-Jewish campaigns underway in central Europe at that time”. Fortunately Israel’s detractors have stopped arguing that point. And hopefully they now will also lay to rest use of the term “apartheid” in reference to Israel.
And I’m not calling on J Streeters to be a PR firm for Israel. But J Streeters often act counter to Israel’s stated position & then have the audacity to label themselves as “pro-Israel”… perhaps in the land of Doublespeak. So we need to redefine what is means to be “pro-Israel”.
We need to have a common language, agreed upon terms, for productive dialogue to occur.
J Street is a lobby with a specific political mission, but we also acknowledge that real progress towards a two state solution will not come unless the conversation in our own community is reinvigorated. J Street is the future of pro-Israel precisely because we embrace this reality. Like you, we champion Israel as the Jewish, democratic homeland. But that doesn’t stop us from engaging in difficult discussions about the wisdom of certain policies. (Contrary to your assumption, we question policies of unbridled settlement expansion, not those of self-defense.)
The old school doesn’t ask us to think critically of American policy towards Israel, or internal Israeli policy for that matter. This self-censored mentality has only weakened the pro-Israel lobby, allowing for a fraction of extremist Jews to own this debate. I do not hold you personally responsible for the slanders mentioned above. But you need to understand that claiming J Street is outside the Jewish communal tent is false and slanderous as well.
For example, it is laughable for you to assert that J Street spends more energy “protesting the established Jewish community.” On the contrary, J Street is leading the Jewish community on this issue of critical importance. This February J Street collaborated with the JCRC to bring Yoel Hasson, a rising star in Israeli politics, to Minneapolis. This event followed another major community conversation convened by the JCRC specifically to focus on the two-state solution. We are role models for the established Jewish community, lobbying for peace and opening up the conversation.
J Streeters are pro-Israel because we are fighting to preserve a future for Israel as the Jewish democratic homeland. We are pro-Israel because we don’t just oppose BDS, we actually bother to sit down with those who support it and respectfully explain why they are wrong. Millions of American Jews have been victims of the old pro-Israel playbook, and J Street is the future of pro-Israel because it empowers each of us to write a new page in the book on Israel advocacy.
Check out futureofproisrael.com/responses
That J Street is trying, as you are, Evan, to build bridges is good. But I think it’s a little audacious to presume the rest of us “old schoolers” haven’t been engaged in same… for many decades. Contrary to your sweeping generalization, the greater Jewish community has thought “critically of American policy towards Israel, or internal Israeli policy for that matter”… You just weren’t around when those conversations took place.
Each generation stands on the shoulders of those who’ve gone before.
I also think it misleading to claim the community has allowed “a fraction of ‘extremist’ Jews to own this debate”… Extremist!!??? Netanyahu himself invited Abbas to sit down together with him while they were both in D.C… in the same building!! to talk peace. Is Netanyhu an “extremist”? I think one needs to be careful with the use/misuse of language.
Again, I think it’s a disservice to label the greater Jewish community as “conservative”… led by “extremists”…
as I’ve stated previously… the larger Jewish community is very “left” leaning… & we have been at the forefront of human rights, marching for civil rights, women’s rights, immigrant rights, freedom for those who are unfree & fighting for environmental protections…. yadayadayada … I think you very harshly judge your own community.
And yes, J Street’s still in the tent… on the map & on my radar due to many missteps made in the few years since its inception. I’m always hopeful when a new voice for Israel joins the chorus… but when that voice is used to sing the Palestinian song… & shout everyone else down as wrong… e.g. supporting the Goldstone report… lobbying Congress against Israel’s position… we have to argue with our own when there’s a real enemy bombing the snot out of southern Israel right now. Why aren’t J Streeters out on campus protesting that?! Or is that a shade of gray too?… “nuanced” as J Streeters like to say … All in all, when J Streeters join the voices of Israel’s bashers criticizing our Jewish community… they do a lot more harm than good to our/their own Jewish community… & that’s a real concern.
I can’t help but wonder why Charlie continues to portray J Street and myself as something quite different from the reality. He is not deliberately misrepresenting us–My guess is that he is both woefully misinformed and genuinely skeptical of a recent development with a lot of momentum. Here are a few examples of his confusion:
When I cite an extremist minority, Charlie perceives it as labeling the greater community as politically conservative, a naive claim which we all know to be false.
I lament the monopolization of this debate by extremist Americans, and Charlie reads it as a knock against Israeli PM Netanyahu (Deep US roots but not part of the American Jewish community).
Charlie says that J Street “lobbies Congress against Israel’s position,” which is a vicious lie. I personally led a group of Minnesotans last spring in lobbying Minnesota’s congressional delegation to continue aid to both Israel and the PA, a wise and consistent policy supported by the Israeli government.
Lastly, Charlie repeats again and again that “J Streeters join the voices of Israel’s bashers criticizing our Jewish community.” Listening to those with whom one disagrees is not the same as joining their chorus.
If calling on Israel to end settlement expansion is Charlie’s idea of bashing Israel, he’s sorely mistaken. If Charlie thinks lobbying for continued American aid to the Palestinian Authority is doing harm to the community, he needs to do his research.
Charlie is exactly right in saying that we “just weren’t around when those [critical Israel] conversations took place.” Just because there once was a robust Israel debate doesn’t preclude us from having one now. In fact, we need it now more than ever.
Charlie also hits the nail on the head when he reminds us that “each generation stands on the shoulders of those who’ve gone before.” Thanks to the efforts of traditional pro-Israel advocates, Israel and the US-Israel relationship are stronger today than ever before. Resolving this conflict takes courage, and only a strong and secure Israel has the cover to take the risks necessary to establish a Palestinian state and achieve peace with her neighbors.
Charlie has every right to be skeptical. He is a critical thinker in his own right, and I appreciate that. But I cannot allow him to continue to distort and falsify J Street’s record. If he can’t escape this pattern, Charlie should respectfully stick to his own methods of supporting Israel and stop criticizing ours.
Yep, I’m “skeptical”… but not necessarily “woefully misinformed”… and just to clarify to whom you’re “talkin'”, I’m not a he, but a she, a retired professional, community activist and grandmother of 3. Calling me “misinformed” does not further this conversation.
I do disagree with the portrayal of the larger Jewish community as being closed-minded, led about by a few “extremists” who supposedly dominate the debate. So I have to ask, if not Netanyahu (who, after all, is Israeli not American as you point out) who might these “extremists” in our midst be? And what do you mean by “extremist”?
You refute my claim that J Street “lobbies Congress against Israel’s position” as “a vicious lie”… yet in January 2011, J Street came out against a US veto of an anti-Israel UNSC resolution that was proposed by the Palestinians and Arab states… J Street also opposed sanctions against Iran. And supported the Goldstone report which Goldstone himself has since renounced and just this past week J Street was quick to condemn Israel for killing over a dozen Palestinian “civilians” which, I believe, they later had to retract because almost all the Palestinians killed were “militants/terrorists”.
This is not “distort(ing)” or “falsify(ing)” J Street’s record. This is J Street’s record.
And, excuse me please, but this board invites comments… and this article is critical of the Jewish community… so don’t end the conversation by saying I should be the one to stop “criticizing” your methods of supporting Israel. That’s not bridge building.
I want to apologize, Charlie, for assuming you’re a man. I’m sorry!
I also would like to clarify that the larger Jewish community is in no way “closed-minded.” I am referring only to the sphere of actively pro-Israel Jews. The entire community supports and loves Israel, but only a fraction of us are actively engaged in advocacy and serious policy debates. When I lament the extremist minority, it is within this political pro-Israel sphere.
And by extremist, I refer not to the PM but to his foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman, who openly calls for the execution of Arab MKs and the wholesale evacuation of all Palestinians from greater Israel.
The Emergency Committee for Israel is extremist when it buys a full-page character assassination in the New York Times against important progressive think tanks that it deems to be “anti-Semitic and anti-Israel.”
Extremists subsidize the expansion of illegal settlements with the deliberate intent of reducing the viability of a two state solution. This is not so much a battle between Israel and the Palestinians, it’s a battle between the moderates and the extremists–on both sides. The actions of one extremist strengthen the other, and the same is true as well for those voices of reason in each camp.
With respect to J Street’s record, I’ll retract my claim that you’re lying and instead say that you are always entitled to your own opinion. Not all of J Street questioned the wisdom of the spring 2011 US veto, but the majority of us did. That was our opinion. Last fall, when the US faced another UNSC situation, the majority of J Street supported the veto. Again, that was our opinion and not a universally shared one at that.
Jeremy Ben-Ami called for diplomacy with Iran 3 years ago, when the President was saying the same thing. The choice at that time was between talk and more sanctions. J Street preferred the US to talk. Now the choice is between greater sanctions and military action, and predictably J Street is advocating for the same approach as the President.
J Street lobbies for an American policy towards Iran that most effectively prolongs or prevents a war that is neither in Israel’s nor our national interest. You’re welcome to your own opinion, but you can’t credibly claim that such a policy is counter to Israel’s position. It may be counter to the positions of certain Israeli politicians, but the majority of Israeli society strongly opposes war with Iran.
I’m sure we will continue to disagree about which actions, statements and policies are truly in Israel’s best interest. There is a productive and respectful way to do that, and the JCRC has taken great strides locally towards resuscitating the communal Israel conversation. We also have to thank TCJewfolk for providing this amazing digital forum for conversations like this to occur.
If you support the two state solution and care about a robust American discourse, that makes you a J Streeter on paper. You may not agree with every thing J Street does, but no other American group is out there fighting harder or more effectively for peace and preservation than J Street.
If you really do care about J Street’s mission, Charlie, I would strongly encourage you learn more about the organization and get involved yourself. Not only would J Street Minnesota love a community activist and grandmother of three, but once in our tent you can more effectively provide constructive criticism. If you care about the two-state solution, don’t try to beat us–join us!
Hello again… Going back to your previous statement of lamenting “the monopolization of this debate by extremist Americans” I still have to ask who these “extremists” are? … I thought you said we were talking about American Jews who were extreme, not Israelis?…
Anyhow,I think the term “extremist” is misleading. To you, an “extremist” might be a Jew/Israeli who builds her home in the West Bank (or perhaps the American who finances that endeavor)… to me it would be a Palestinian who butchers a sleeping West Bank family in the middle of the night. Are we talking the same thing here?
Btw, the Emergency committee… is NOT a Jewish group. You are attributing to mainstream American Jews that which is NOT ours.
I happen to have a lot of trust in our Jewish community and the many institutions that represent us… So I think it is a little overarching to claim that “no other American group is out there fighting harder or more effectively for peace and preservation than J Street”… who’ve only been on the block a few years… & which essentially came into being to counter AIPAC… so the relationship has been testy from the start and more often than not J Street sounds more like foe than friend… e.g. criticizing AIPAC, which Israel’s detractors have long done… misportraying mainstream Jews as “conservative”, “right-wing”, when in truth, I think we agree that the vast majority of Jews in America (80-90% of our community) are left of political center… and if J Street is left of mainstream Jews, that doesn’t make us mainstream Jews “right wing” or “conservative”??!
What I think J Street’s been effective at is causing dissension among our own vs furthering the cause of peace… starting brushfires while the rest of us are trying to put out a firestorm… e.g. pointing fingers at Jewish “settlers” as the obstacle to peace … rather than shaking a fist at Palestinian violence… the problems in Israel/Palestine existed long before there were any “West Bank settlements”… and continue to exist 7 years after all Jews/Israelis left Gaza… Gaza is now judenrein… yet just this last week or so the Palestinians in Gaza have bombarded Israeli CIVILIANS in southern Israel with more than 300 rockets! So J Street’s focus on the “settler” problem is problematic.
Thanks for the invite, but I disagree with too many of J Street’s positions and tactics and have come to see J Street has part being of the problem rather than the solution.
.