Israel Matzav

J Street and the PLO

Elliot Jager points out the striking similarity between J Street's positions and those of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

In fact, one is hard put to discern any policy differences whatsoever between the stated positions of J Street and the Palestinian Authority or the PLO. Both J Street and the PLO oppose any and all Jewish presence beyond the pre-June 1967 borders; like the PLO, moreover, J Street brazenly prodded the Obama administration not to veto the recent UN Security Council resolution branding as illegal any Jewish presence whatsoever over the Green Line—metropolitan Jerusalem included. Both the PLO and J Street (through its partner, the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity Movement) want to abolish the Jewish Agency and the Jewish National Fund. Both oppose Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.

These positions—they are only a representative sample—may help explain why J Street advocates that the U.S. impose a solution in the Middle East. How else, after all, are the demands of the PLO concerning boundaries and the return of all Palestinian refugees to be met? The same positions may also explain why the PLO ambassador in Washington was glad to address J Street's just-concluded conference while Israel's ambassador declined.

J Street has openly relished the role of domestic enabler to the Obama administration in the latter's pursuit of policies whose net effect has been to harden the already intransigent positions of the Palestinian Authority.

Follow the money. The financial connection between J Street and each of Iran and Saudi Arabia has already been proven. Is the PLO or the 'Palestinian Authority' financing J Street? Maybe. We already know that the 'Palestinians' European supporters are financing J Street. Is there any difference between them and the PLO? Aren't they advocating the same positions too? Hmmm.

Labels: J Street, PLO, pro-Israel pro-peace

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 10:21 AM