‘US Jews are tired of Israel and have no interest in racist settlers’

Haaretz has a piece saying that Israel can’t afford to reject J Street. There were quite a few comments hostile to J Street, but I found this one interesting from an Israeli in the US:

Title: Clueless Israelis

Name: Shoded Yam

City: Los Angeles State: CA

If the hysteric spasms of fear from the above commenters are any indication, I would say Israeli`s are beginning to gain an understanding of the portent of J-Street and the current nature of their relationship with American Jews. Contrary to such self serving assertions as; "…that probably includes a majority of ethnic Jews, but a very small minority of affiliated Jews…." The reality is quite the bucket of cold water. J-Street is not a "Pro-Israel" lobby per se. It is a Pro-Secular-American-Jewish lobby that actually represents the majority opinion amongst American Jewry. As such, its main goal is to affect change in Israel in such a way as to finally allow American Jews go home, go to bed, and finally be Americans, without the hyphen. They`re tired of you. They have no interest in "Greater Israel", settlements, or kool-aide drinking, racist, settlers. They`re tired of Israelis who compete with them for jobs in the US and elsewhere. Your hubris and arrogance is your folly.

This one was more typical, from a settler in the West Bank:

Title: Boycotting Traitors Makes a Lot of Sense

Name: Ruvy

City: Gush Shilo

Boycotting the Soros supported, Arab supported useful idiots of the anti-Israel and self hating Jews in America makes an awful lot of sense. We do not need to associate ourselves or our nation with trash, especially Jew-hating and self-hating trash from America.

About Bruce Wolman

Bruce Wolman is a citizen journalist who has lived in Norway and the Washington area.
Posted in Israel Lobby, Israel/Palestine, US Politics

{ 25 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Citizen says:

    My, my, those two letters certainly do indicate the great divide as between Jews/Israelis.
    So, who would an informed average gentile American side with, assuming that’s not oxymoronic?

    • Mooser says:

      Citizen, as far as I can tell (you can be assured it is not a subject I relish discussion of) most Gentiles think that Israel is the center of the Jewish religion, and functions as a sort of Jewish Vatican. Now you said “informed Gentiles” of which I’m sure there’s tons of, but I don’t know any.
      When Gentiles first ask if I’m Jewish, they usually hasten to assure me of their support and love for Israel and hatred for “Arabs”. It’s sickening, but that’s the way it goes. When I try to inform them of the facts they feel sorry for me because they see me as not availing myself of an advantageous lie!! (He must be nuts if those “Arabs” mean more to him than his “own people”).

      • potsherd says:

        Given that BYahoo informs us that Israel is the center of the Jewish religion and he is the leader of all the world’s Jews, why should they not think so?

  2. potsherd says:

    The rubber band stretches.

  3. Mooser says:

    Now we’re getting somewhere!

    “…that probably includes a majority of ethnic Jews, but a very small minority of affiliated Jews….”
    ROTFL!!! Yeah, Witty, you just stick with those Christian Zionists and Theosophists, and Christian Sado-Dominionists, you don’t need American Jews no-way! You can count on those guys, we would just let you down.

    • MRW says:

      That’s the ticket, Mooser: Christian Sado-Dominionists. I’m going to use that from now on.

      As for Wolman’s post, let’s all buy Shoded Yam a drink!…(how very gentile of me.) The Gush Shilo post is just a taste of some of the emails I get from that neck of the woods.

      • Bruce says:

        Somebody with the name Nemesis has other plans for Shoded Yam:

        If Shoded Yam is an example of the `portent of J-Street`, then not just the Israeli ambassador, but no Jew in the world should even talk to them.

        I remember the J-streeters in the middle ages, they usually wore the white robe of dominican inquisitors…

      • RE: “let’s all buy Shoded Yam a drink!…(how very gentile of me.)” – MRW
        MY COMMENT: Channeling someone in the Weiss household?(lol)

  4. pabelmont says:

    I perceive J-Street as not sufficiently different from AIPAC to warrant all this hoo-hah. See here. It appears that J-Street is either actually different from AIPAC or at least manages to project that impression.

    Being unsure, I’d ask the following questions. I wish to encourage policy discussion, not name-calling.

    [1A] If J-Street claims that its policy positions are not merely a rehash of those of AIPAC, then ask those who perceive a difference to explain its PRESENT differences from AIPAC.

    [1B] Are these PRESENT differences supposed to be “enough” to satisfy the political longings of progressive Jews and other Jews who, while loving Israel, do not love Israel’s policies and practices? (Recall the October conference, not much reflected in J-Street official activity.)

    [2] Assuming that, today, J-Street is merely a rehash of AIPAC:

    [2A] Does J-Street really mean SOMEDAY to be really progressive? (Who does it need permission from?) (and if not now, then when?) (didn’t the membership at the October conference sufficiently suggest a shift away from AIPAC policies to another direction TODAY?)

    [2B1] Otherwise — and J-Street intends now and forever to be merely repackaged AIPAC — does J-Street mean to fool and subvert Progressive Jews?

    [2B2] or, again Otherwise, does J-Street merely mean to fool non-Jews (but not to fool the progressive Jews, who, presumably really like the positions of AIPAC)?

    [3A] Do many progressive Jews believe that the illegality of the presence of the settlers in occupied territories and the clear anti-human rights consequences of their presence for Palestinians justify demanding the removal of all 500,000 settlers?
    [3B] If so, and J-Street does not make that demand, where does this disparity come from?
    [3C] If not, then I’ve sadly misjudged the meaning of ‘progressive Jews’.

    • Mooser says:

      Since “progressive” is one of the most meaningless MEANINGLESS words in our US political lexicon, that wouldn’t be hard to do.
      “Progressive” is a word that makes my gluteus maximus start aching, right away. Yes, there was once a Progressive Party in the US, but as far as I can tell, the present use of the word “progressive” has nothing to do with it.

      It’s a meaningless word, which means nothing, and from which no conclusions can be drawn except this “progressivism” is for people who want all the rewards of liberalism or even socialism with none of the commitments or sacrifices, and above all, without having to call themselves those two things.

      • MRW says:

        Well, Mooser, now we agree on two things: Springsteen and Progressives.

      • syvanen says:

        I disagree completely. Progressive is a perfectly good label, as generalizations go, as accurate as liberal, conservative, libertarian and so forth. I stopped using the term liberal to describe my political orientation during the Vietnam War. This is a war that was started and promoted by liberals. It is liberals that brought us humanitarian war. Thomas Friedman is a liberal. Neoliberalism brought us NAFTA, financial deregulation and aggressive war against Serbia. Somehow I just find it a little icky sharing a label with them. If I lived in Europe, the label of social democrat (i.e. former socialists that reject excessive centralized planning of the economy) would be appropriate but then in Europe parties that are called liberal are generally right wing parties.

    • Avi says:

      J Street lost me with the Goldstone report.

    • jimby says:

      @ pablemont, What is so amazing is the level of venom over practically nothing. As you point out, there isn’t much difference between AIPAC and J Street. It’s only indicative of the hysteria running through the veins of the “true believers”.

  5. radii says:

    ‘US Jews are tired of Israel and have no interest in racist settlers’

    ah, if only … I do recall untold billions of dollars of private money regularly sent from U.S. jews to israel, and a good chunk of that going to the settlers

    • Bruce says:

      Untold billions of private money is quite an exaggeration.

      Granted millions can still manage to do a great deal of damage, it’s the Big Bucks from Uncle Sam along with all the economic perks that get us into the billions to Israel category.

      Still the leverage involved is an impressive feat probably never achieved by any lobby outside of our own defense and finanical firms.

  6. Avi says:

    Name: Shoded Yam

    Shoded Yam is Hebrew for Pirate. Funny guy. Arrrrrr

  7. Bruce says:

    A JStreet organizer on campus named Max asked the following:

    Title: Who decides who is a Jew?
    Name: Max
    City: Portland State: OR

    I am a JStreet organizer at my college, and I am deeply concerned about the reaction this article has engendered. I am a secular Jew, but I take my Jewish identity very seriously. I support and defend the existence of a Jewish homeland, while also demanding that my government do more to advance the cause of peace. I have serious concerns with the direction of Israeli policy, but none so radical would make me out of place on the Israeli left.

    Do Israelis really want young American Jews like me to feel like we can`t support Israel if we feel compelled to criticize Israeli policy? Would you rather we left behind our idea of our Jewish identity? When you say politically engaged, liberal Jews like me aren`t really Jews or supporters of Israel, you alienate a slice of the population that you should be wooing. JStreets critics should spend more time thinking about why JStreet has so quickly generate such a large following.

    Nemisis has wisdom for Max also

    Max, if you `leave behind your idea of your Jewish identity` you`ll be no less Jewish than you are now.

    Secular left-wingers in Oregon may have been born to Jewish mothers, but they are as lost to the Jewish people as assimilated Jews have always been, whether absorbed into Hellenism, Catholicism or Bolshevism.

    • Avi says:

      but I take my Jewish identity very seriously

      Can someone explain how a person takes his identity seriously, as opposed to not so seriously?

      And what does a Jewish homeland have to do with one’s personal identity, especially if he wasn’t born there and doesn’t live there?

      If he’s insecure to the point he needs to have Israel just so that he can invoke its name whenever he needs a boost, then perhaps a trip to the shrink is in order.

      • Bruce says:


        Max will have to speak for himself, but I read his statement to mean that being Jewish is important to him, and figuring out what it means to be Jewish is something he takes seriously and not just something he leaves to others to determine. I don’t find this such a strange position.

        I would say that Phil himself probably holds a similar viewpoint.

        I on the other hand no longer take being Jewish so seriously. It’s not that important to me. I no longer spend any more of my time trying to figure out what it means for me to be Jewish, or how I should live as a Jew. It ranks fairly low in my concerns.

        If one personally identifies as Jewish, then it is fairly difficult not to have an attitude about Israel, or Israel as the Jewish homeland, especially if you were not born there or live there. One’s attitude towards Israel has become a litmus test for acceptance in large segments of the American Jewish community. It is as if Israel has replaced the religion itself as the unifying factor for Jews. Sounds crazy, no, but that is the way it is.

        Avi, maybe it is the diaspora Jewish communities which need the shrinks, not Max.

  8. I’m Shoded Yam. For some reason, the interface would not recognize my handle. In any case;


    “…As for Wolman’s post, let’s all buy Shoded Yam a drink!…(how very gentile of me.)”

    As long as your being very gentile, I’ll be very jewish and accept your offer. As the stockbroker said to his proctologist; “Here’s looking up your assets” ;-) Thanks, man.


    “…Somebody with the name Nemesis has other plans for Shoded Yam”

    “If Shoded Yam is an example of the `portent of J-Street`, then not just the Israeli ambassador, but no Jew in the world should even talk to them.”

    Not to worry Bruce, thats always their plan with me and it never works, because theyy just can’t seem to help themselves. As a good friend of mine once said; “Dave, you bring the idiot out in everyone” Ahahahahaha :-) “Nemesis”, Please. More like “Nitwit”

    and Avi is correct. I am a pirate, sailing the seas of jewish american discourse, raiding their commerce and burning their outposts. Arrgh Ye Mateys.

  9. RE: “…then perhaps a trip to the shrink is in order.” – Avi
    ME: A trip to the shrink is always in order! It’s akin to pensioners’ trips to the Social Security office. “A shrink a day keeps the electrodes* away.”
    * or “jumper cables” as Lee Atwater famously referred to them
    P.S. Actually, a “shrink a day” (living in a household with one) might be problematic for many people.

  10. otto says:

    There are of course millions of racist settlers in Israel …

  11. pabelmont says:

    (It’s wonderful to examine the website and find out that the COMMENTS are lagging the EMAILs of comments. Hard to reply accurately).

    re JIMBY: “What is so amazing is the level of venom over practically nothing. As you point out, there isn’t much difference between AIPAC and J Street. It’s only indicative of the hysteria running through the veins of the “true believers”.”

    Good point (not mine: I am angry at the small difference!). The venom probably arises from fear that the “lockstep” mechanism is breaking down. “You’re saying I’m not in charge anymore and you call yourselves Jews?!!” All JS had to say was “I love Israel but I don’t love AIPAC” to call down whatever thunderbolts AIPAC still has to throw.