Latest Group Of Hollywood Celebrities In Israel

A new group of Hollywood celebs are visiting the Holy Land, as guests of America’s Voices In Israel.

Star of The CW’s popular teen drama “90210? AnnaLynne McCord and her boyfriend, former “Prison Break” star Dominic Purcell are currently visiting Israel, it was reported today. The visit is yet another planned Hollywood delegation to the holy land, similar to the one from last fall that was part of a numerous celebrity trips.

The group also includes “ER” and “8 Mile” actor Mekhi Phifer, “One Tree Hill”‘s Paul Johansson and “House” star Omar Epps, who just last year visited Israel joined by his fellow cast members on the 2011 delegation, as he reminded his followers on twitter. Back then he had a fun time at the Dead sea. Also on hand is former “21 Jump Street” actress and tv show host Holly Robinson Peete, who already tweeted her excitement.

The trip’s organizer is America’s Voices in Israel a pioneering program focused on bolstering Israel’s image in the US by bringing traditional media & radio personalities to broadcast live from Israel. Their past celebrity trip included “Grey’s Anatomy” actors Kevin McKidd & Sarah Drew, TV and film star Miguel Ferrer and big screen heart-throb Kellan Lutz, who just happens to be AnnaLynne McCord’s ex boyfriend.

The group is scheduled to tour Israel for the remainder of the week, visiting Masada, the holy graves of Northern Israel, the Dead Sea and of course Jerusalem.

Meanwhile, here’s AnnaLynne McCord speaking a few years ago about Israel.

Welcome celebs, and enjoy your stay.

Update: Holly’s impressed.

11 thoughts on “Latest Group Of Hollywood Celebrities In Israel”

  1. On the other hand, Jamie-Lynn Sigler, Meadow Soprano herself, toured Israel on a Birthright trip shortly after my nephew went on the tour.

    1. Jim from Iowa

      Have you read about the problem that Birthright has had with participation of non-Jews in the program? Some participants lie about their heritage to get a free trip to Israel paid by the Israeli taxpayers. You’d think this would be easy to prevent. This could be done by requiring sponsorship by reputable Jewish organizations of all applicants.

      1. I have not read about that problem. However, to the best of my knowledge, the Birthright program is funded by a private group of businessmen, including Sheldon Adelson and Michael Steinhart, and Israelis benefit when participants spend their own money on entertainment, souvenirs, etc.

  2. Jim from Iowa

    Any effort to effectively put Israel in a good light before the American public should be encouraged. It is particularly important in making the case for Israel to
    Americans, to avoid presenting it in a partisan political framework.

  3. The trouble with Israel trying so hard to entice (instead of force) a better outside opinion of it is that it isn’t lost on those who hate Israel.

    There has been an abnormal number of formal visitors—diplomats of all kinds of rank, including ambassadors—who have seen it fit to offer some very preachy sermons to Israel on their visits. Mainly on the subject of the Ahk-You-Pay-Shun, of course, but also on Israel’s societal affairs. It’s puzzling, on the face of it: Common sense would, I think, dictate that a visitor is not to wag a moralistic finger at his hosts. It should apply to every state, but as we can see, it doesn’t apply to Israel.

    Obviously those diplomats think they have nothing to lose with treating this one special case of a host state that way. Problem is, they don’t only think so, they’re right about it. An Israel that spares no effort in pleading to be loved by the world (“Please, please love us! Pretty please with sugar on top!”) cannot fail to impress upon its guests a feeling that they are doing it a favor by gracing it with their mere presence. Or, as one critic of Zionism on CiFWatch, posing as someone who has the best interests of the Jewish people at heart, put it: “You need all the friends you can get.” A warning unto the beggars of the world’s love not to get too choosy.

    In order for this, um, exceptional situation to change, two changes on Israel’s policymaking level need to occur: 1) To stop viewing the outside world’s opinion as the be-all and end-all. This is not to say it must be disregarded completely—hence, the second change: 2) To stop courting a favorable opinion and start taking it instead. We know where opinion is primarily shaped: In the media outlets, which are by majority under the ownership of Israel’s anti-Zionist enemies. That’s a good thing, because being Israel’s enemies means the Jewish State has legal cause to coerce them to cease and desist their unfavorable portrayal and switch the bias to other direction.

    Israel’s predicament will be over a little after it plays as much hardball as its enemies. As in the physical battlefield, so in the war of ideas. Who is an a war must do as in a war!

    1. Jim from Iowa

      I don’t think you’ve completely grasped the concept of “soft sell,” ziontruth. I fear that if an organization like “Rock the Vote” hired you, instead of increasing turnout for the youth vote, you’d have young people organized to throw rocks at polling places.

      p.s. C-SPAN is an invaluable source of unexpected information. While watching the debate between Congressman Barnery Frank and the Weekly Standard’s William Kristol sponsored by the American Jewish Council, Barney Frank revealed that he is related by marriage to one of The Three Stooges, Shemp Howard. There’s a joke in there somewhere, but I’ll leave it to others to find it.

      1. “I don’t think you’ve completely grasped the concept of ‘soft sell,’ ziontruth.”

        I don’t think you’ve grasped the message of my post. It’s that both soft sell and hard sell approaches don’t fit the bill as cures for Israel’s deficit of favorable outside opinion. Neither a war-as-business (soft sell) approach nor a business-as-war (hard sell) one are appropriate here. The decline in outside opinion on Israel is nearly entirely due to anti-Zionists being the owners of most global media outlets. Israel is not up against a recession or slump in demand, but a blockade.

        For the record, my comment wasn’t meant as a criticism of the America’s Voices in Israel initiative. Far from it, I can only praise any effort done within current constraints. My criticism is aimed, as it most often happens to be, at the government of the Jewish State for preserving those constraints. The Jewish State has the legal right to act against the anti-Zionists in ways that individuals cannot, yet it foolishly abdicates the use of this right, and with it, the duty of protecting the nation residing in it.

        1. Let me finish your thought for you. “… by preventing access to those news organizations that chronically lie or refuse to tell the whole truth. The Arabs do that all the time.”

          1. Operatively, Israel is to be the only source those news agencies get their info from. Although this is not a situation to be relished—like most people, I’d prefer the media outlets did their job responsibly—there is no choice in a media environment that sports an Arab name after every Israel-related article.

            The solutions I propose are not ones I would espouse in a normal world, but as Israel is confronted with the abnormal situation of the worldwide media waging war on it, the prospect of the Jewish State strong-arming those media outlets does not overly prick my conscience. They have brought it on themselves by their misconduct.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top