Read this about J street and cry

1)The ZOA has the same opinion that Caroline Glick has.
http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2009/09/18/1007990/zoa-shock-and-dismay-that-j-street-apn-oppose-iran-sanctions

The Zionist Organization of America is expressing "shock and dismay" that J Street, Americans for Peace Now and Brit Tzedek v'Shalom have "taken a position to the left of leading Israeli leftists" on Iran by opposing further sanctions at this time.

2)http://www.jewishreview.org/opinion/Opposing-sanctions-on-Iran-shortsighted

J Street, a year-old left-wing Jewish lobbying group that describes itself as "pro-Israel and pro-peace," views sanctions-such as the bipartisan Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act recently introduced in Congress-as counterproductive. In an April e-mail sent to its supporters, J Street declared: "On Iran, the president is promoting tough, direct diplomacy.but the chances of [his] success won't be helped by Congress imposing tight timelines or a new round of sanctions."

J Street puts forward three arguments for its position: sanctions haven't worked; sanctions will undercut President Obama's diplomatic overtures to Iran; sanctions should be imposed only as a last resort if diplomacy fails.

J Street does claim to support additional multilateral sanctions if at some point diplomacy fails to lead to moderation on the part of the mullahs. What that point might be is anyone's guess. Indeed, J Street's unwillingness to advocate for a specific timeline for diplomacy to yield positive results is troubling, especially in light of the International Atomic Energy Agency report in February revealing that Iran may have enough enriched uranium to make a bomb.

Not that J Street's hedging should surprise us. Notably, J Street also claims to support Israel's right to defend its citizens from terrorism. Yet, less than a day after Israel launched Operation Cast Lead inside Gaza in late December, J Street issued a statement calling for an immediate ceasefire and brashly asserting that "only diplomacy and negotiations can end the rockets and terror."

http://www.jewishreview.org/opinion/Opposing-sanctions-on-Iran-shortsighted



Read the JSt statement on sanctions.

http://www.jstreet.org/blog/?p=638

The imposition of unilateral sanctions, without UN approval or the support of allies, should be, as the Chairman himself says, a last resort.

As we have said before, J Street does not oppose the imposition of sanctions per se. We prefer, as do Chairman Berman and President Obama, attempting to achieve the desired result through diplomatic engagement and multilateral action.



More important is that J St wants a freeze on all jewish settlements. If you agree, then support J St. If you want Israel to stop all building in Judea, Samaria, and Jerusalem, then, by all means, support J St.

http://jstreet.org/campaigns/a-freeze-means-freeze

As Caroline Glick points out in her important article:

J Street asserts that Israel must freeze all Jewish construction beyond the 1949 armistice lines; that Israel should withdraw to the 1949 armistice lines, including in Jerusalem and expel all Jews now living beyond the 1949 armistice lines; that the absence of peace is due to the absence of a Palestinian state; that Israel used excessive force in Operation Cast Lead and the Goldstone Report is legitimate. J Street also opposes both sanctions on Iran and military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.

If you believe all of this, then by all means, support JSt.