officials in the mossad, idf. if you were on capitol hill today, you might have run into some of them meeting with members of congress. and orthodox and pluralist thinkers. ..

>> the best of the political world in washington, d.c., but i hope also the best of the jewish people. so thank you very much for having me here this evening and for that wonderful introduction. there are many people in the room as well that i would like to just say thank you to. there are a few people here who read the book in its early stages, who participated in fact checking and research and other work on it. there's number of staff at j street, rather than running through everybody by name i just want to acknowledge that i have some friends and room and some people who mean a lot to me. i will acknowledge that upon along a little fan club just to skew the audience a bit. if you're thinking of asking the tough question or saying something not so nice, just remember that my wife and my

young children are here as well. and i'm very proud of them. as i sit in the introduction of the book, the work that idea in the work that we do at j street is as much for the future generations as it is for our own security and hopes and dreams in our generation today. and so i'm very, very pleased that they are here with me today. as david said, i'm the president and founder of j street, which is the pro-israel pro-peace lobby, a new organization that started about three years ago to fill a vacuum in the american jewish political scene. and over the course of those three years i have been asked a lot why did you start this organization, what motivated you personally, what are you trying to achieve, what problems are you trying to solve and what are the solutions that you are

offering. and in the 21st century you might have expected me to try to tweak the answers in 140 characters or less but i'm old-fashioned and i decide to write a book about it, and the goal of the book, and what i'd like to do in a few minutes tonight in laying it out is to answer some of those questions. first of all, to put the story of j street and the movement we are trying to build of pro-israel pro-peace american jews into a personal and a historical context. the second is to lay out some new thinking i hope and perhaps challenging thinking on three central challenges that face those of us who care about israel and the jewish community, namely how can we ensure israel survive on the lines that david outlined. how can we ensure that for the long run.

second, how can we change what i consider to be and layout in the book unhealthy political dynamics that surround israel in american politics today. and third, how can we deal with an american jewish community that has not been willing to have as open-minded discourse on israel as it fits our people and complexity of the topic. so i try to address all three of those in the book and let out some ideas. but most important is i hope this book delivers a call to action because it isn't enough to write and to think about these issues. we have to act. we want to answer these questions. we will have to come together as a community and try to affect the future again for the benefit not only of ourselves but for future generations. those are the three goals of the book. let me delve into those for a couple of minutes and then we will opened up for what i hope will be a lively conversation. i'm the personal side of his --

on the personal side of this, the layout in the book, i come by my interest in israel and commitment to it very, very honestly, which is that my family is deeply rooted in the land of israel. my great grandparents were in the very first year of the very first, moving from russia to israel in 1882. they helped to found a small settlement at the time when the word settlement was a good word, which today is a thriving industrial city of 300,000 people and is actually a suburb of another city that my grandparents were founders of which is tel aviv. and my family, my grandparents were among the 60 families who 102 years ago stood on the seashore of tel aviv and drew seashells out of a hat in order to choose their lots in the

original garden suburb, the first jewish garden suburb before the chevy chase and long island. there was tel aviv. i was so proud this summer to go back and take my kids to that very spot and show them what was that their grandparents have been part of its history and to take them to the monument in the center of tel aviv and show them their grandparents name. and so my father was born in tel aviv. use one of the first boys born in tel aviv. and he grew up a good socialist going to socialist youth groups talking about the creation of a more perfect jewish community that would lead to the creation of a jewish state in the land of visual. and in the book i talk about his personal conversion as a young man in the wake of the 1929 riot which many of our family members there were affected and, obviously, as you know many

people were killed, and his study abroad and is coming into contact with sort of right of center political thinking, he shifted radically from that youth movement upbringing to become a follower of zen and the hard right of political zionism. he joined, notice him as a church organization to others as freedom fighting movement. and he is one of the people who bought and armed a ship called -- which wil was ultimately blop off the shore of tel aviv. and a small world coincidence, one of the generals who was escorting around washington these last two days, many of you know the name, so he read the first 70 pages of the book tonight ago. i gave it to them on his first night in town and he read andy came and told i could realize where this connection but i was on the beach and shooting at your father 63 years ago this

past week. [laughter] so some of this is history, some of it is still living memory. anyhow, he goes by way of saying that the first part of the book is his personal story, and telling how it is that i came to be rooted in a love of israel, a concern for israel. and then how i came to my own set of political views, that as much as my father sort of shifted from the left to the right, i shifted away overtime from the view that my father held of these issues. and particularly, i wanted to spend time in israel to explore these things personally. i spent three years living there. i learned the language. i study. i ended up opening a business and contemplated after working in the white house four years here, and was nearly killed in a

suicide bombing in jerusalem. in all of these events together, really helped me to do a rethinking of my personal philosophy when it comes to israel. and to recognize that security doesn't come from strength and might alone. security has to come through political process as well as strength and security. this isn't an either or proposition, and israel itself will be much more secure when it has both a peace agreement with its neighbors and a qualitative military edge. neither one of those alone in my view will be sufficient. so beyond the personal story, i then take the book into the issues facing us today, and around which we created j.c. as i said in opening, there's three central challenges that i hope the book puts into some context and lays down some challenging ideas.

the first is relates to the future of the state of israel itself. the president of the united states am a barack obama laid out a speech in may which he said the path that israel is on today is unsustainable. israel cannot be both homeland of the jewish people and a democracy if it hangs onto all the land between the jordan and the mediterranean. have to make a choice between those three things, between the land, its democratic character, it's jewish nature. the president is right, and the recognition that the sons and daughters of many of the hardline politicians of israel have come to realize, a member of the party, people have spoken very movingly about the future that israel is headed towards, a leader of the opposition. the need for a two-state

solution to the jewish palestinian conflict, the need for two homelands, for two peoples living side by side in peace and security that is not a dream, not an aspiration. it's an absolute existential necessity to those of us who care about the future of the state of israel. in this israel does not give up the land. it will either end up sacrificing its democratic character which i think we're beginning to see little by little by little with some of the loss or passing and some of the movements that are emerging, or it will become a one state nation in which the jews and the palestinians live together as equal citizens. and overtime the jews as a minority will no longer be in control of their own destiny in their own country because the palestinians will one way or another have a homeland. that homeland will either be the entirety of the land of israel or it will be a separate state with a border and defense and a

wall and security arrangements and a demilitarization, and they will let next-door to to israel in peace and security. and so that's the first challenge that i think the book lays out and as many of you who were involved and j street and with a very strong position on and we be saved a second piece which is we need the united states to help solve this conflict. i've often likened the conflict between the israelis and the palestinians to a bad marriage headed toward a divorce. you can't expect the two sides to be put at a table, the door closed and left in there, and ask to solve this on their own. it's simply not going to happen. they've been trying it for 20 years, and the two sides left to their own devices in my opinion will never reach a resolution. they need outside help. they need a mediator. they need an arbitrator. they need the united states to

play the role of an outside broker and facilitator of this deal. and that will never happen if the political space in this country is not created to allow the united states to play that role. so that's the second challenge, how do we create the political space in this country that allows politicians and policymakers to pursue a course that leads to the two-state solution that's in the best interest of those of us who care about the state of israel. because for too long the politicians and policymakers in this town have heard only one voice from the jewish community. and as i sit in the bucket represents the loudest 8% of our community. i'm not meaning to the only 8% of those in the community hold right of center more -- a much larger percentage of the net the people who engage in israel advocacy as the centerpiece of the political life, as the centerpiece of their political and advocacy activity, they are

well to the right of the mainstream of the american jewish community. we see this in poll after poll after poll. and again i lay out the data in the book. we just issued a poll last thursday on an american jewish opinion. american jews support the president. they support a two-state solution. they are opposed to the supplements. they want an active american role in helping to resolve the conflict. these are all things that you wouldn't believe and you wouldn't think are true. if you listen to the pundits enemy and the voices that purport to speak for all of us in the american jewish community. so it is time as a say in the book to rewrite the rules of american politics when it comes to israel, and to give the rest of us a voice in this conversation in the political dynamics. so that's the second challenge. the third challenge is in the american jewish community itself because it's not just in the political sphere that this dynamic happens, that a small group of people locks up the debate and tries to speak for

everybody else. it's in the american jewish community and to establish organize community as well. no one in this room would disagree with the notion that you put two jews in rome and you get three opinions. if you put i don't how many are in this room but you get hundreds of opinions. we are a people who are known for argumentation and debate and discussion and disagreement, and it's a beautiful thing. it is what the basis of her culture and our tradition and are learning comes from. yet somehow this people so filled with ideas and opinions and energy is supposed to have only one opinion when it comes to israel which is such a divisive and difficult question to grapple with in the first place? but no, we are told that within the american jewish community that to disagree with the policies of the government, of the state of israel, somehow outside the pro-israel 10. and that needs to change because that is not only bad for the communities, it's going to turn off a whole new generation of

young people who cannot think that way. and i say in the book that i think there are a number of generational explanations for why we act the way we do as a community. i think that over time those who are older than me remember world war ii, they remember personally or their parents experienced in the holocaust. they remember the creation of a state of israel and the wars that were fought for israel's existence. those that are older than me. those younger than me have no personal recollection of those events. for them the reality of today is intifada's, occupation, and israel no longer as the david but a as a life. and there is a vast generational difference in perception and experience that has evolved and i think the american jewish community doesn't come to embrace that, and to understand and to provide space for a broader conversation that may at

times be difficult, but in the end i think will be very beneficial to the community. i think it is sowing the seeds of its own institutional to my stick and i lay that out as the third challenge in the book. but really in the end i didn't write this book to top a personal story. i didn't write this book simply to lay out challenges and outline problems. i laid out this book to sound the alarm, to sound the alarm and to inspire action. i am so deeply afraid that the path of the israel is on today is a path that we will ultimately to tragedy. as i say in a subtype of the book, i think we are fighting for the survival of the jewish nation today. and that if we do not within the next figures come within the next decade find some way to reach a two-state solution what is still possible i think it will slip out of our fingers and we will rue the day that we did not stand up and scream and

holler at the top of our lungs and say something must be done. so ultimately this book i hope is a call to action to, first, the israeli government and to the israeli people, as your cousins, as your friends, that the people of donated money, have lobbied on your behalf, who have spoken out on behalf of israel for our entire last 60 years here, we are telling you the truth. the time has come to change the status quo before it's too late, and it's time for the israeli people. we cannot do anything from here, but we can speak out, we can tell the truth. secondly, as jewish americans we can acknowledge these complexities, we can do more than simply give lip service to peace, give lip service to a two-state solution. we should be holding emergency meetings in our community not to discuss whether or not criticism of israel should be acceptable. no, we should be holding the emergency meeting to discuss the substance of the criticism here

we are debating the size of the pro-israel 10th and the tent is burning down around us. and it is time for our committed to wake up and to address the threat, otherwise will regret it the way that my father's generation regretted not acting in advance of world war ii to save european jewry. third, the american government. the final call to action. the american policy establishment knows what needs to be done to resolve this conflict. almost every in this room, if i gave you 60 seconds you could write down the outline of the two-state solution in line with what president clinton has laid out, what president bush is laid out, what president obama's later, what every single secretary state police, the former national security advisers of both parties get together all the time and write joint bipartisan's op-ed which is a rare thing in this town today. we all know and what needs to be

done, with the american government is very good at giving speeches, very good at laying out a vision, not quite as good a stepping forward and taking action. the time now is for action. we need a president of united states, we need a congress to step forward to engage with the quartet to lay out some parameters to say to the parties, you must come to the table now. these are the parameters and we expect you here before the september vote. so it's a time for action. it is time for working together to of bird refuge we don't want to regret. i'll use this opportunity since there are many of you in the room to entities in the back of the original director, and gregory was waiting. and original legal director indicated over. either one of them would be happy to talk to you about our campaign going on right now which is called the two state summer campaign, to try to let our elected officials know that we do support the president's vision for two states. based on the 67 lines of swaps. this is a time for us to step

forward and mobilize and act. that's why hope for this book that you won't read it as a lament, as a catalog of ills, as a list of all the problems we face. but no, it's a vision of hope, a call to action, and hopefully a guidepost for us as we move forward in an effort to save the future of the state of visual. so thank you very much for coming. i look forward to the discussion. [applause] >> thank you so much. we will open it up for questions. before we do that, jeremy has given us a very full and comprehensive speech. or talk, presentation. i just want to take a minute to thank our camera people from c-span who just add so much to civil and civilizing discourse in this country. so thank you for being here. and if you're comfortable, feel free to say your name. >> i joined americans for peace

now. i joined j street as soon as i heard about. i think it's a wonderful idea. do you think that barack obama should push a little harder, that he shouldn't have backed down on settlements so quickly? i mean, yes tools at his disposal, as george h. to be bush did, threaten to withhold money, or would that just push all of the israelis into the trenches? and make them more recalcitrant than ever? >> i would separate at the two parts of the question. i think the president could push harder. i think that he could be working with the quartet instead of trying to soften the language of the parameters that the quartet just laid out, to try to make them line up with his speech. and as i said before, make a clear demand to both parties them both israelis and palestinians. they need to come to the table with him and with the quartet to solve this according to the following parameters. i don't think it works to

threaten to cut off, i don't think those kinds of negative pressures, whether it's boycotts, divestment, sanctions, cutting off a. we at j street have not felt those rituals that make any sense. they undercut the fear and insecurity that israelis need in order to make a deal. but we do think the president could be pushing harder and that's part of our call to action. thank you. >> i have two questions. one, i would just want to say i am a supporter of j street and they do agree with your positions. but i have two questions. one is, why hasn't j street and what, spoken out about the move for the u.n. to approve a palestinian state unilaterally? and what is at j street's position on that? and secondly, i have a number of jewish american friends who say

it is not for us to decide for the israelis what they should do if we want to do that we should go to israel and be a resident there and be an israeli. it is not for america to say what they should or should not do. how would you answer that? >> so, on the u.n., what we're all about at j street is actually resolving the conflict. actually having to states with a border. israelis on one side, palestinians on the other. we will support anything that we think moves in the right direction. the passage of a u.n. resolution that simply says there is a state of palestine, in our view doesn't necessarily move the ball in the right direction. in fact, it may move the ball in the wrong correction. it may result in of the unilateral actions by israel that moves in the wrong direction. it may lead to violence.

it may lead to expectations being raised on the west bank and then dashed by the failure. anything different the next day to happen. we met with salaam, the prime minister of the palestinian authority on the most recent trip to the housing authority and we sat with him and asked him about the human action to quisenberry publicly opposed to this because he said nothing will change on the ground the next day. such a street position right now is there's a window. we've got six to eight weeks before the u.n. meets and votes. the quartet and americans have been meeting with israel's and postings trying to find a formula in order to get going again on a diplomatic initiative, a real service diplomatic initiative, not just talks for talks safe. enough of process. we need peace. to a talking a serious meaningful initiative to happen in the next six to eight weeks that would've for a u.n. vote to such time as it ratifies an

actual agreement between the parties. that's our position on the u.n. that it doesn't in and of itself resolve anything but it doesn't move the ball forward to the resolution pass. >> and i do a follow-up? >> can add your second question first and i will leave it to the moderator. [inaudible] >> the second question i get a lot which is what right do americans have to speak out on these issues. and my answer to this is, obviously the decisions at the end of the day rests with the people who live there. it's a democracy. the israeli people live there. they suffer the burdens. they will have to make these decisions on their own. they are what i call preferred shareholders in this enterprise, that i think we have a stay, too. and we've been partners in building the country, securing it and building the alliance with the united states and raising money, sending our kids their own birthright trips, being asked to make, as to lobby. we are partners. we have the right and avoid in

this discussion, even as the decisions are made over there. and this is an american debate. so it's the right of center in our community has the right to lobby in washington, d.c., to make its user in the american clinical process. and their pressure is going to skew american politics and policies. we have every right as americans to speak out here about american policy to say what we think is the right direction for the united states. we are american citizens participating in the american debate about what american policy should be. >> i think we're taking them from the microphone. there is a line at the microphone. it's for the tv. >> i really appreciate you putting this forward. question, couple of things. what is the resistance, i'm a i keep hearing it's the element that has too much power and hangs on and clinks.

that's one thing. what kind of reaction are you getting from palestinians regarding this? and the right of palestinians to return, in other words, is to give the state, that means it cancels out the palestinians returning? and then finally, your choice, finally, economic development is going to be obsolete crucial to any solution to this thing regardless of whether or not the two states. is there any kind of thinking to set up some kind of a joint economic development plan? i know that's jumping way ahead, you don't even have the state yet, but i think some hope has to be offered that it's not just to on equal states that will never be able to live side-by-side. >> i think a rumor three of the four.

the source of the resistance within the american jewish committee i think is very understandable, which is we are a people that suffered a great deal. we have a legacy of generation after generation having enemies. we've been wiped out in various different places. and i think it's rude in our communal psyche of a very heightened sense of security in fear, and i think that emotional side of us controls the rational side at times. and i think that's totally understandable, and i think we need to address that in this case that you going to be more secure in reaching this agreement. if you're accepted into the international committee of nations. you be less secure if you're a pariah state. you'll be less secure if there's a majority of palestinians living in your geographical area. so i think the resistance is understandable because of the sense of fear, that israel and rooted in history. the palestinian reaction to this has been understandably positive

from those who are reasonable, moderate palestinians who are interested in a two-state solution. and there are many. one of the misconceptions of this debate is there's no partner, nobody to talk to. there is a whole segment, large segment of palestinian society that is the mirror image of a large segment of israeli society and has suffered a great deal, and they have emotions and fears and insecurities. they understand at the end of the day what's best for them and their family and their kids is to reach a peaceful resolution. so there's been tremendous reaction from the moderate wing of the palestinian community. and yes, there has to be economic development. one of america's taking place under salam fayyad on the west bank has been eight or 9% annual economic growth. i visited ramallah many times, i've never seen as i read and developing and trained in economic activity. it's one of the fundamental underpinnings creating a state.

we are opposed to the right of return because that would decimate the concept of a state of the jewish people. there should be one state for the palestinian people and one state for the jewish people. the bottom lines of reaching an end of this conflict is an acknowledgment that all claims have been settled. there will be compensation for those of enron, of lost their property and homes. but if you going to return to a home, it's going to return to home and home in which is the state of palestine living next door to the state of israel. >> has you're getting politics enacted, s. j street or any other progressive organizations that you know of thought about the primary and general election and congressional races and house and the senate, have you thought about which candidates

to back, which not to? the reason i ask is, i'm convinced that you won't get anything from president obama for the next, certainly not until the presidential election, here netanyahu is too smart for obama. he's been willing to humiliate obama as an extension of the settlement, and obama is up for reelection. so -- >> i get the drift of the question. >> thank you. >> the whole purpose of j street is to engage politically. what was lacking in this political discussion prior to the creation of j street was a political action committee, and a lobby that would actually raise money and endorse, raise

money for and endorse candidates who support sensible pro-israel obese position. we created j street back. and the last two cycles we've made into the largest pro-israel pac in the country. and on our website, you can find out more about our pack and find out more about the candidates we endorse. we're going to endorse again in the torrent will cycle through windows i think 61 candidates for the house and senate. last cycle we raise $1.5 million which was about a third of all the money that came into all -- >> i contributed. >> thank you. so, you know, that's what we do. that is how we hope to shift the dynamics over time. this is a steep mountain and it is not an easy lift. so we are making tremendous progress. we have 180,000 members of j street pac. we have a staff of 50 people and it will be through the political change that we create the ability for president like barack obama to stand strong and do the right thing.

>> get down to the district level. thank you. >> absolutely. >> talking about the rare consensus in congress and the government about the issue of the two state plan. and it would seem like a ministry, how come with this consensus that there's no movement? i think if we don't actually expose, still the elephant in the room here, or anytime what's going on in politics here, almost not mentioned at all, talking about the influence, the blocking influence of the jewish lobby and its extension into power the israel embassy has over the conference of the jewish presidents, et cetera. and is our reality, and it exerts a lot of power over the

decision-making in the jewish community, top down. and i don't know, it wasn't mentioned. i know it is a factor. so it should be talked about. >> i -- >> really put a lot of power against any type of change, and it's a reality that if you move any leader, move away from the direction that the embassy besides to get the right line, you are sanctioned. >> i think you are raising -- >> the question is, what is the advocacy, how do you approach the sensitive issue? but it's a real issue, main issue. >> right, it's an elephant and a donkey. [laughter] is bipartisan. look, i addressed it very directly in the book. it's not a ministry. it's not shrouded in any secrecy. the fact that american

politicians depend for their reelection on money is a reason to reality of american politics today. i think all of us would agree that it is and what works us on health care policy. it's what works us on energy policy. the role of money and politics works the policymaking process in this country, and leads to bad results. on this issue it is the fear over what jewish voters and jewish donors think that has american politicians in a bind. because behind closed doors and we are talking off the record, they will say one thing about what they actually believe and what they know, and when they had to go out front and talk to a public audience they will say something else. so what we have to do, what we have to do is change that dynamic. go back to the prior question. until we who are the moderate rational people in the community can raise enough money and show

that we have political power, when the going to change that dynamic. the rulebook of american policy. this is the way the game is played. and until the rules are changed by people like david cohen we are not going to be able to say we don't like the rules. we have to play by those rules and we have to show powerful we are, how many of us there are. where to organize and speak up more effectively than we do. [inaudible] >> let me take, there's a long line. thank you. >> good evening. first of all i would just like to say it's the first time i've heard of your group, and i appreciate what you are doing. i do have a few points that you could consider issues or concerns. i'll just say the. i leave you to you. first of all i have no mission of jerusalem in your discussion. as you i'm sure no during the 1450s when jordan controlled jerusalem that jews were not even allowed their pick your not allowed to go to the wailing wall. jewish historic gravesite for

desiccated throughout the area. i don't believe that he has changed. and even with the two state system, to which i'm not opposed, i wonder how come if you're teaching effect of the on the surrounding countries. the second is, your insistence on a political arena, i wonder what that arena is or is will get a fair shake. i surely don't see that in the united nations. so i just wonder what you mean by that. the third point that concern to me was your speak as if you mention, i thought it was a good analogy that at the end of a bad marriage, the two partners alone are not able to kind of see themselves through the settlement, let us say. i think you get the oslo accords that are still standing, just not been acted on, yet many other accords, he of other agreements that been tried. of other countries besides those

that stepped in to mediate on behalf of or in good faith, i would say. it's not as if this is not been done for before. above is a never move forward. in fact, many would argue the palestinian uprising was staged in many senses because the fact that two state agreement was very close to settlement. so i just wonder kind of how you see your way through those particular issues. and i would just like to say in closing, the only thing pakistan, the only thing that is work, billy treaty, the only agreement to all of this was the camp david accords which kept israel and egypt, more or less on their own side of the fence. that's the only, and that did involve money. and to. >> -- thank you. >> jerusalem, i couldn't feel more attached to any city in the world. i lived there for three years. my great grandparents lived there. my parents are buried on the mount of olives which is one of the territories that was on the

other side of the line. so i am deeply concerned about the issue you are raising. the solution for jerusalem has to be though that is the capital of both peoples. the eastern part of the city today, 20 our villages that were annexed in 1968, those villages remain in 2011 arab villages. my family went to look at the overlook from the promenade, and i asked my kids, can you tell which part is there, which part is jewish? you can still tell. it's easy enough to say this part belongs to the jews, this part belongs to the palestinians, and that's the capital of them and this is the capital of us. the holy area which is one square kilometer and that's the toughest nut to crack, the former prime minister put forward a proposal for an internationalization of that area. this was the idea for the first u.n. resolution. i believe it's the only way to

go with the holiest areas where an international committee oversees and administers so that all religions have free and equal access to their holy sites. so i think there is a resolution to it requires a sharing. a city that i love, and say that i think is the holiest place on earth. but so do other people. where is the political arena? i'm talking the political ring of united states and i'm talking about that being opened up, the the discussions can take place we so america's national interest can be pursued so that all sides of an argument can be heard. and so that we don't have resolution passing that are overwhelmingly one side, that don't advance america's interests and passing 400-5 because 300 members of the congress feel intimidated into voting for something they don't really agree with. that doesn't serve our interest. you're right, the solution, i said that in my talk, i could outlined for you in 60 seconds

and i'm assuming that many other people in this room could, what's been missing is the political will. we've never had a constellation we had a palestinian leader and an israeli leader and an american who are all on the same page and read to take it for. there's always been a missing piece picks i think applicable has to come from venus state. i think where the ability to help both the palestinians and israelis to move forward with a may be reluctant at times, and went to work in concert with our allies in the international community as well. >> yesterday i went to hear doves waxman, interesting enough were introducing their new book. and if i could characterize, you know, the main theme of the book, they're basically saying that a two-state solution is necessary, but is not sufficient. and that was also required is an

accommodation within israel and with israeli palestinians, one that recognizes the continued jewish character of israel but at the same time find the means of recognize the dignity of the palestinians as well. and basically i think what they're saying is that the trend in israel is moving at precisely the opposite direction, the right wing is in ascendancy, and that this is a major issue and that until a resolution can be devised, and a two-state solution in and of itself is not going to be sustainable. it's getting much less attention at the international level, for i think fairly clear reasons, but is nevertheless it strikes me as an important issue that and i guess i'm interested in one, whether you agree, and number two, what does this mean

in terms of how we proceed? >> let me say first of all, i am 100% agree, i know the authors will be i appreciate their work. i talk about the internal and external challenges facing israel, as two sides of the coin that is the future of israel. there is no future for israel as a jewish and democratic state that is secure and living in recognized boundaries if it doesn't deal with both sides of the coin. one side of the coin is it has to reach peace with all its neighbors, and it needs borders that are accepted by the neighbors in recognized by the whole the world. that's one part of the puzzle for the future, but the other part for those of us who care deeply about israel is the internal. it is the domestic health, the vibrancy of the democracy, the adherence to jewish values in practice, where jews finally have power. do they keep up what they said

when we were a minority and we said the minority should be treated well. they should be given equal rights. you shouldn't have systems where you have preferences for those in power. well, we thought there was a good thing when we were in the minority. how about when we are in power? so i couldn't agree more. there's wonderful organizations like the new israel fund that focus on the internal strength of israel. igg streets partnership with the new israel fund as the two sides of that coin. and you need those if we're going to ensure that there's a country therefore our kids and grandkids that we will be proud of. >> good evening. i had a chance to redo your book and i deeply appreciate it. i was wondering if you talk a little bit about teaching a nuanced view on the conflict from disco, from jewish day school, sunday schools. how should teachers in your opinion go about teaching a nuanced view of our remaining sensitive to the development of

their peoples love for israel? >> the good news for all of you is the only other book i've been of this talk and he's already finished reading it. that's a quicker read it is. [laughter] since you going to be one of the teachers on my kids i better come up with a good answer for you, right? i think you have to tell the truth. you know, i think that is one of the things that i found in my own personal development that i resented was never being given the whole story. and the mythology is wonderful, but when you find out it's mythology, the reaction against it is far harsher and more extreme than the difficulties that you encounter if you hear the truth from the beginning. and so i just advocate that would be open and honest. my kids know there is people

called the palestinians, you know, and they were there, too, and they think it's their land and we think it's our land. and everybody has inherited and we will never agree. you don't have to agree on the narrative. you can accept that you each have their own narratives, and there's one land and to people, and just like anything else the kids deal with, they will have to deal with it together and share it. and i think it's a lesson that is very appropriate for kids to start learning from an early age. >> hello. i believe him not as eloquent speaker as you are, but i would like to make my case. second and grown but -- correct me if i'm wrong i had this feeling while you spoke that anytime in spite of your family background, anytime you mentioned israel, it was with some sense of negativity for some reason. i mean, that's my feeling and

you can correct me of that. now, when it comes to the rest of my thoughts i'm not going to start from the fall of the ottoman empire because it will take forever with the middle east, but let's just roll the clock back to 1967. before 1967, nobody heard of the palestinian nation. nobody heard of palestinian land because the west bank was part of jordan. here comes the egyptian president, and he comes to do with the egyptian president and they attack israel in 1967. just happened so that israel is smart enough and powerful to take over and to win the case. not only that, king hussein that was offered by others to join the party and become the liberator of jerusalem, he jumped on that crippled carriage

and actually he lost the west bank. the next thing, king hussein and mixes the west bank. he doesn't want it back. and when prime ministers menachem begin signed a peace treaty with egypt, egypt refused to take that, so if we just go backward, israel was forced on this 1967 war. israel is not the aggressor. it just happened so that they make it, they made it. now, just one less thing. if you go over the bit to the north and to travel there, there are several mountains, i november it will, and the syrians used to fire on israel in the summers, you know, they plow the fields, down in the valley. so when it was taken at the end of this war, then this track actually finished. so i don't see any case to

return anything because, and don't believe for one minute that i'm not for peace in the whole world, but this peace in israel is very sketchy. and the last thing i can say one thing, i've seen children's books from syria after the 67 war, and i saw children's book from egypt, and they all teach the kids how to kill. and i cannot forget one sketch, one graphic. it was the silhouette of the land of israel, which is very recognizable, and a syrian soldier, brave soldier with a rifle stabs the land. that's what they showed in kindergarten books in schools. so, i'm not sure -- >> okay, thank you. several things you phrase. number one on the whole issue of negativity. i don't know how you can sit

here for this time and say that, you know, i don't have -- >> i maybe wrong. >> i urge you to buy the book, read it. you know, i deeply, deeply hope that you'll come out of that, recognizing my love and my all at what's been achieved. [inaudible] >> number one. number one. number two, too often people into discussions about this issue talk about rolling back the clock and looking backwards and arguing over what happened in 67, what happened in 48. and i'll grant you everything you said. so we don't have to argue, i'll stipulate history. to me the question is future. the only thing that we can change, you and i come we could argue for the rest of our days and not change the past. we can change the future. so me to the question is, let's say you accept what you say, which is there was no such thing

as a palestinian, there is nobody's state, it's our land, we want it. so how are you going to take it? how will israel make it? you have a minority of jewish people ruling over land that has a majority of non-jewish people. how is israel going to be a jewish home and a democracy without a palestinian state? i don't want to do you give a lengthy answer now, but my challenge back to you is, i don't want to argue, and this book doesn't argue about the past. this is a moment to decide about the future, because the only thing that we can effect is where we go from here. and i'll stipulate all the facts that you said, even though i disagree with them. in terms of the military threat, as i said i've just been spending the day with seven former generals and diplomatic officials and security officials of the state of israel. you know, the question, what's the threat going forward? the key strategic threats to israel are no longer syrian

riflemen shooting from the top of the golan heights. it's the entirety of the world viewing israel as a pariah state, and take away its international legitimacy. that's one of the biggest strategic threats. long range rockets. you don't need the goal line heights anymore and/or to fire rockets into issue. you just need a launcher out of anywhere in lebanon arson perhaps even iran. so the threats are not the same threats. so you don't need the same solution. that's why the prime minister netanyahu is willing to give back the very golan heights utah by an order of peace because peace with syria and peace within neighbors is a much greater assurance of long-term security than holding on to the land. finally, on the issue of children's books, look, this is a symptom of a disease. the disease is that there is tremendous hatred in this region

and have to acknowledge that. these people are enemies. the only way to begin to resolve that overtime is to reach an agreement and to begin to undo those years of hatred. i don't deny that that existed i believe on the israeli side is also a degree of hatred that exists. both sides have it. they are both victims. they are both thought for three generations, as i think the way to deal with that is to end this conflict and to move forward. so i think you've had speak to i don't want to take from her time. let's just remember one thing, that -- >> not fair, not fair. >> there's people in line and we'll will hear from all of them. we will bring it to an end. >> thank you. diane perlman. i just returned from turkey, at first i was there for the international society, of political psychology. many as raise there. they all ask about j street and they really appreciate j street,

as i do, so thanks for your work. the other thing while i was there i met with people in several think tanks and assembled and talked about israel and reconciliation. israel and turkey have been very strong allies in the past. there's some problems now, a strong desire to reconcile. but turkey is emerging a lot on the region is seen as a mediator, and new foreign policy minister has shifted the paradigm from security to conflict resolution and mediation and their problems in the region. so, it seems to me that turkey could have a role. i mean, they need to reconcile with israel first, and i spoke with many people there about that, but in addition to the u.s., do you envision a role for turkey in mediating and they also have a connection with iran and my build is up with several dimension spent i think the israeli turkey relationship is essential to long-term survival and security in the area.

there's a lot of discussion going on right now between the two governments about how to make that happen. the prime minister of israel seems very interested to do some and his cabinet who seem less interested. we can only hope that does happen. i think as turkey provides a model of how democratic muslim country can become a leader in the neighborhood and they can be a force for good. and i think israel has defined common interest which it has had for decades with turkey, and i think that that is very, very important for the long-term stability of the region. >> high. my name is carol. you mentioned provide space and holding emergency meetings and mobilizing and acting quickly. i've spent a long time in israel as well and they do support your organization 100%. what about the israelis?

i was recently told that only 10% support your organization of fisheries. are you going to be able to change that so that the israelis come to your way of thinking and hopefully we can improve things in israel speak speak with the good news is that only 14% have heard of us so that's not a bad number. [laughter] you know, i think there's a lot going on in israel. it has to come from israel. it's not going to be us organizing over there. it's not going to be j street or other americans trying to israelis do this but it's going to come from the ground up. interestingly i think the change in israel is going to come on a set of issues that may not have anything to do with it. if you're watching the news of israel this past week, very interesting what's happening with the housing protests and the have-nots versus the haves. the greatest disparity between the wealth, rich and poor, used to be the united states. and it's now pass that on on to israel. we continue to export good things to israel.

but that may be where part of the change comes from politically. there's movements like the israeli peace initiative which is former heads of the regime by responding to the and arab initiative. there's the independence hall movement which brought nearly 100 israel prize winners, leading academics and scholars and israel coming together with her own initiative to say it's time for a palestinian state. i think is a bumbling -- bubbling and ferment and it will come from the. we can encourage it as again friends and cousins, because it's the right thing to do for the future. spent i just want to say he sent his best regards to you. >> thank you. >> a short comment and a short question. first of all, listening to you i pretty much agree with everything you have said. however, it appears, it feels what your attitude reminded me

of was obama negotiating with the republicans. [laughter] he's in there with the compromises. the republicans are not going to compromise it with everything. you through the two together and guess what? obama loses his shirt. so, it's wonderful to come with compromise, and the other side isn't interested, you get slaughtered. so i believe that netanyahu is quite willing to negotiate when he sees that the other side is willing to negotiate. i believe that the settlements, that he will be willing to let them go in an instant if he believes that the other side really wants peace, and whether it's a case of some of the other side wants peace and some don't, but pretty much we have a lot of good evidence that the oer