Dear Sir:

I was recently surprised, and I must add, embarrassed, to learn that you were one forty-four members of Congress who attended the recent "J-Street" extravaganza. "J-Street" claims to be a pro-Israel, pro-peace lobbying group that represents the interests of the majority of American Jews. In point of fact, it is none of these things.

"J-Street" is not pro-Israel It openly opposes taking any action to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, which is why Iranian lobbyists in the United States support "J-Street." Iran has declared its intention to "wipe Israel off the map;" one leader speculated that even one nuclear bomb would be enough to achieve that goal. But a nuclear Iran isn't just a threat to Israel, it is also a threat to the United States. Iran is known to be considering using nuclear weapons in an electromagnetic pulse attack, which might enable that country to destroy the United States as a functioning society with as few as three or four weapons.

Nor do "J-Street's" policies promote peace. They advocate applying American pressure on Israel to accept the "two-state" solution and the Clinton parameters proposed in 2000. But when President Clinton offered them, Israel accepted them and the Palestinians rejected them, preferring instead to raise the level of violence. How will pressure on Israel change this in any way? "J-Street" doesn't say because establishing a viable peace isn't its objective.

"J-Street" has endorsed the notion of "tough love" for Israel, basically bullying that country to fulfill the demands of Arab leaders in exchange for nothing, thereby raising the likelihood of a major and devastating war. President Obama may already have learned that this approach is counter-productive; by beginning his quest for peace with a demand for a total settlement freeze, he appears to have set back the peace talks by anywhere from two to four years. Let's hope the delay isn't a lot longer.

American Jews haven't been fooled. They overwhelmingly support the "two-state" solution, but according to a recent poll, 94% realize that the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians continues because the Palestinians refuse to accept a viable Jewish state as a neighbor. How can "J-Street" claim to represent the interests of American Jews when at least 94% of them reject "J-Street's" understanding of the conflict?

Lastly, "J-Street" isn't a lobby as is commonly understood. Lobbies represent the interests of constituency groups to governmental entities, the Congress or the Executive Branch. "J-Street" appears to function in exactly the opposite way, to present government policies to the targeted constituency. In doing so, it functions as a front group, enabling the Obama Administration to claim support for its policies that really doesn't exist.

The use of front groups has a long and dangerous history; they are a dependable presence in a dictatorship.

In your capacity as a member of the Judiciary Committee, perhaps you could undertake hearings to determine the extent to which "J-Street" is the creation of the Obama Administration's political personnel and/or financial backers. If it is, then there may be more serious issues the House will need to consider.

Yale Zussman
Weymouth, MA