Silencing critics not way to Middle East peace.

[Tom Joad]

From the San Francisco Chronicle .

Last Sunday in San Francisco, the Anti-Defamation League sponsored "Finding Our Voice," a conference designed to help Jews recognize and confront the "new anti-Semitism." For me, it was ironic. Ten days before, my own voice was silenced by fellow Jews.

I was to give a talk about our Middle East policy to high school students at the Harker School in San Jose. With one day to go, my contact there called to say my appearance had been canceled. He was apologetic and upset. He expected the talk would be intellectually stimulating and intriguing for students. But, he said, "a certain community of parents" complained to the headmaster. He added, without divulging details, that the Jewish Community Relations Council of Silicon Valley had played a role.

I was raised a Zionist. I went to Israel after high school for six months to live on a kibbutz. I met my wife there. We returned four years later thinking we'd spend our lives on a kibbutz, working the land and living the Zionist dream. Why did the council feel the need to silence me?

In fact, this was not our first run-in. I have long advocated equal rights for the Palestinians, as I do for all people. I criticize Israeli policies. I seem to have crossed the council's line of acceptable discourse. Because I am a Jew, it is not so easy to smear me as guilty of this "new anti-Semitism." Instead, hosts like the Harker School, and others, are intimidated, and open dialogue on Israel is censored.

more...
________________________________________________

Whatever the JCRC, et. al., did or did not do here, the attempt to silence critics of Israeli policies, and US support for same, it just doesn't seem to be working anymore, except in isolated incidents. Despite the well-funded machinery of aipac and the adl and the JCRC with support from the Christian rightests... it all seems to falling apart, at least at the grassroots, these groups supporting Israeli militaristic policies (and Bush's militaristic policies) have damn good reason to panic. More and more people are seeing the injustice of what Israeli policy is doing to Palestinians, and more and more people are willing to take a stand to change u.s. policy in the region.

This June, tens of thousands will gather in Washington DC to commemmerate the 40th anniversary of the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and the Syrian Golan Heights. For four long decades this has been supported by the US, our tax dollars poured into creating illegal settlements (explicity illegal under the Geneva Convention), the erection of a wall that runs through the West Bank, the brutal sanctions and destruction of the civilian infrastructure in Gaza, the torture and imprisonment of thousands of Palestinians... all this is becoming well-known, and progressive activists are working together to the Israeli occupation is wrong, just as the US occupation of Iraq is wrong, and we demand a new foreign policy.

Support United for Peace and Justice, Progressive Democrats of America, Code Pink, Jewish Voice for Peace, and many others....(add your organization/union group here)

Organize for peace and justice in the Middle East.
http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=1281">End the Occupation.

[Porcupine]

1. So who wants peace? Not TPTB in Israel.

Israel has a bit of a problem. There are a million and a half people they need to get rid of without actually lining them up and killing them. They have no intention of allowing the palestinians control of the West Bank and Gaza equal to Israel's national rights.

Could you imagine a palestinian state with jet fighters, artillary and nuclear weapons? Neither can the israelis. But if there is peace they might have to return control of the occupied territories to the palestinian people. With full sovereignity granted to those people Israel has a viability problem.

Only with the cover of war can Israel continue the genocide in the West Bank and Gaza. Only with the cover of war can Israel slowly squeeze out the rights of israeli arabs and continue their apartheid system.

A real peace would mean an equitable sharing of resources and control of the disputed territories. A real peace deals with the source of the conflict which is the grab of land by Israel and the oppression of israeli arabs and palestenians.

They just can't have that.

[breakaleg]

2. If voices of moderate Jews are silenced, what chance do the rest of us have?

[Tom Joad]

3. Like i said, they are not doing a good job of silencing folks these days.

kinda like the proverbial finger in the dike. That used to work when it was just Noam Chomsky & Edward Said and a handful of others. But now its former presidents, mainstream Peace groups, and all sorts of progressive groups. So they will do their best, but it just won't work anymore. A flood of truth will overwhelm those who wish to protect the status quo.

What's that gurgling sound?

[oberliner]

4. Why was the talk cancelled?

Omitted from the excerpt:

Editor's note: Diane Fisher, executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Silicon Valley, says that although she left a message for the school principal, she never actually spoke to him, and any suggestion that the council was responsible for the cancellation of Beinin's appearance at the school is inaccurate and an "unlikely inflation of JCRC's influence."

<end of omitted paragraph>

How was his "voice silenced by fellow Jews"? Because his talk to a group of high school students got cancelled for unexplained reasons?

He's got an editorial published in the San Francisco Chronicle.

[Tom Joad]

5. Right -- his voice was not silenced. Neither is Jimmy Carter's.

Neither is the Jewish Voice for Peace. Neither are the many hundreds who speak against Israeli human rights abuses each day, like B'tselem or Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch.

Despite the efforts of many extremist organizations who would hope oterwise, these voices for peace and justice are being heard. Eventually politicians will have to listen to the demand of the people for a fair and decent policy in the Middle East.

Edit: i would even add, despite the best efforts of groups like the ADL and aipac, lovely John Bolton is out of a job. They seem to be losing their mojo, that's for sure.

[newyorican]

6. right....

The talk was not canceled due to pressure from influential lobby groups...

Solo Avitals film was not canceled due to pressure from influential lobby groups...

The play about Rachel Corrie was not turned down due to pressure from lobby groups...


All of these lobby groups are just well-dressed peanuckle players, that's all.

[Tom Joad]

7. Yeah, i never quite get the idea of aipac trying to say they really have little influence

must be the only group that does everything it can to say "we're useless... give us a donation"

then again, in reality, they do brag to their donors that they get things done. Like when aipac bragged about what it accomplished in the Israeli war against the people of Lebanon.
http://www.stopaipac.org/aipaclebanon.htm

[oberliner]

9. AIPAC has absolutely zero to do with this

Come on, be fair.

Lots and lots and lots of people do not agree with the idea of replacing Israel with a bi-national non-Jewish state.

If a speaker who espoused that position was coming to speak to the high school of the son or daughter of one such person, I would think that person would call the head of schools and complain.

I promise you there are many Jewish people who do not even know what the hell AIPAC is who would do just that.

[breakaleg]

10. What he said was this:

"In fact, this was not our first run-in. I have long advocated equal rights for the Palestinians, as I do for all people. I criticize Israeli policies."

Does this mean he wants a bi-national non-Jewish state?

[oberliner]

12. Apologies

You're right. It doesn't mean that. I apologize.

Still, the people who do not want him to speak are not members of a lobby they are parents who don't agree with his positions.

[breakaleg]

13. No worries.

[oberliner]

8. When do Jewish parents become a lobby group?

The talk was not canceled due to "pressure from influential lobby groups".

What lobby groups would those be? Complaints from a "certain community of parents"? That's the lobby group?

How about this version of what happened:

The Harker School in San Jose recently canceled a talk by a Palestinian supporter after a few students and parents complained that a different lecturer already aired that viewpoint in the fall.

Here is the statement from The Harker School spokesperson:

The purpose of Harker’s Distinguished Speaker Series is to present our upper school students with topics from leading experts to inform and stimulate debate. We addressed the same viewpoint as Beinin’s earlier this year, and realized, albeit belatedly, that two speakers from the same viewpoint - out of only 4 to 5 speakers all year - didn’t represent the balance and variety we’re seeking in the speaker series.

[newyorican]

15. Not sure what you saying here...

I state that the discussion wasn't stopped due to influential lobby groups.

*reads the post again*

Yup, thats what I said.

I placed all of those statements together to bring attention to the apparent coincidence of a "group of parents" acting in the same exact manner as some, more well-known lobby groups. Amazing, isn't it. Hive-minds wish they could have such conformity.

[oberliner]

20. were you not being sarcastic?

The subject line of your post was "right..."

Perhaps I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

[Tom Joad]

11. See this website... Muzzlewatch.org

http://www.muzzlewatch.org/

The Jan 18th entry is about Joel Beinen.

[calzone]

14. The article is just the tip of the iceberg

From the article, the author goes on to reveal more:
"In 2005, Marin's Rodef Sholom synagogue caved to the council and revoked my invitation, unless my talk could be accompanied by a rebuttal. Roy Mash, a board member, resigned in protest. He asked in his resignation letter whether "given Judaism's long and deep tradition of concern for justice and ethics, a Jewish venue is (not) precisely the setting most appropriate for a speaker like Dr. Beinin?"

Organizations claiming to represent American Jews engage in a systematic campaign of defamation, censorship and hate-mongering to silence criticism of Israeli policies. They hollow the ethical core out of the Jewish tradition, acting instead as if the highest purpose of being Jewish is to defend Israel, right or wrong."

In the article, the Jewish Community Council minimizes their role, even though it's confirmed by the school official. They say "we don't have that kind of influence", yet they're calling around to head off someone who wants to practice free speech and give a side of the situation that rarely enjoys the light of day. They obviously go to the trouble of pressuring public and private venues to keep information from being disseminated. This is not only unAmerican and dishonest IMO, it is extremely harmful to Israel and it's survival. Nothing short of violence harms Israel more than this kind of virtual book-burning.
---------------------------------------------------------------

NEW YORK -- "Two major American Jewish organizations helped block a prominent New York University historian from speaking at the Polish consulate here last week, saying the academic was too critical of Israel and American Jewry.

The historian, Tony Judt, is Jewish and directs New York University's Remarque Institute, which promotes the study of Europe. Judt was scheduled to talk Oct. 4 to a nonprofit organization that rents space from the consulate. Judt's subject was the Israel lobby in the United States, and he planned to argue that this lobby has often stifled honest debate.


An hour before Judt was to arrive, the Polish Consul General Krzysztof Kasprzyk canceled the talk. He said the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee had called and he quickly concluded Judt was too controversial."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/08/AR2006100800817.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Another corroboration of the Judt incident, along with other ambushes:

"New York University historian Tony Judt sought to claim new ammunition this week for his charge that pro-Israel groups use their influence to stifle debate about their activities.

Less than three hours before he was due to give a talk about the Israel lobby at the Polish Consulate Tuesday night, Poland’s consul general abruptly canceled the event after being contacted by Jewish and non-Jewish organizations.

Pro-Israel advocates also claimed their lobbying of Yale University donors succeeded in preventing Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Middle Eastern studies professor, from receiving a tenured appointment at Yale earlier this year. University officials denied they played a role.

Also this year, acclaimed British architect Richard Rogers was threatened with the loss of billions of dollars in commissioned design work from New York City until he renounced ties to an architects’ group strongly critical of Israel. The group was threatening to call for an economic boycott of Israel to protest its occupation of the West Bank.

Yet another flap involved the cancellation of an award-winning play in New York about Rachel Corrie, a young college graduate from Washington State who went to Gaza with a solidarity group to protest the occupation. Corrie was run over and killed there by an Israeli bulldozer demolishing a Palestinian home.

The play, scheduled to open last spring at the New York Theatre Workshop, was canceled, with the Workshop’s artistic director citing pressure from unnamed Jewish leaders. The play is set to reopen at the Minetta Lane Theatre this month."

http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13081

Here's another list of Jewish orgs that are loyal to the tradition of fairness and justice, and who understand the harm that blind obedience and unrelenting, unreasoning support of Israeli govt policies does to Israel.

http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/

http://www.peacelobby.org/

http://www.eccmei.net/~eccmei/j/orgs.html

http://www.junity.org/

http://www.nimn.org/

http://www.Jewsagainsttheoccupation.org

www.peacenow.org.il/English.asp

[Tom Joad]

16. JCRC is a very political organization. Supported war against Lebanon. opposed ceasefire.

It organized a rally to support the relentless bombing campaign.

In san francisco, JCRC shares office space with aipac.

Most Jews in the US oppose the very militaristic policies espoused by such organizations, yet they pretend to speak for the entire Jewish community.

Like Falwell pretends to speak for Christians. yeah, right.

[calzone]

17. The analogy in Christianity is apt

Alot of supposed Christians in this country are anything but (Biblical literalists, creationists, tv evangelists, etc.). It tends to eclipse the good work of true Christians like the ones that protest our militarism and help the poor.

[pelsar]

18. i find the "crying" rather repulsive...

of that website..

its called freedom of the press, freespeach etc...every group, organization has the right and the duty in fact to get their voice heard within the confines of the law...

as in real life, some will be better at it than others....for those who getting the short end of the stick, they should figure out how to do it better.

they whinning of "they're muzzlling us, etc..is just pathetic

[Violet_Crumble]

19. What's yr problem?

It's interesting to note that you support the right of some to try to stifle the freedom of speech of those you disagree with by labelling those who use their freedom of speech to point out that there are attempts to stifle them as whining and crying and pathetic....

[pelsar]

21. my problem is that i like freedom of speach...

and that also includes peoples attempt to shut others up....its goes both ways.

i may not agree with them, but that is irrelevant, freedom of speach is exactly that...the freedom to shout others down...and the freedom to protest and shout back.

of course there are attempts to "stifle"..we see that here all the time...so?..the idea that there is some great conspiracy to "keep others quiet" is pathetic.

[Violet_Crumble]

22. You like attempts to stifle other people's freedom of speech??

Oh-kay. Personally I disagree with you, and I'm opposed to any tactics involving bullying, intimidation and harrassment. I find it a bit strange that you use the *freedom of speech* excuse to support the actions of some, while not using the same *freedom of speech* argument when it comes to things you don't support. Because whether you agree or not is relevant, otherwise all everyone would be doing is ignoring what everyone else is saying and trotting round going on about *freedom of speech*...

There's no conspiracy, and no-one has claimed that there's one. What is a fact is that there are systematic and blatant attempts made to silence US critics of Israel. I'm a bit confused how you could have read the articles that have been posted in this forum and claim otherwise...

[pelsar]

23. whats bullying?

is someone shouting because they're emotion suddenly "not acceptable"..some people shout. Is having a protest or politicial pressure NOT to have a speaker/movie/play show suddenly "illegal".

i dont think so. I wouldnt want to have "debbie does dallas" playing a theater next to my house, if its shows up we might just protest and pressure the local council not to have it played there. And you can replace debbie does dallas with the play about corrie or zarahs blue eyes or the titanic....its all the same principle. Not every local is interested in every subject.

i'm not sure what a blatant attempt to silence US critic of israel is...has someone been killed, whos been harrassed (isnt that illegal?) I could say the opposite about europe, the israeli narrative is "shut down" ....does that get you equally mad? (somehow i doubt it, making your protests nothing to do about free speach)

if no ones been killed than whats left? political pressure?..so, thats how liberal societies work. I betcha if you went to dearborn michiagan and tried to put on a school play about zionism....you would find yourself "being run out of town"

and i would think that perfectly within their rights given the make up of the local population.

If the palestinian narrative is not being heard as much as the palestinians would like it to be, perhaps that because less americans are interested in it? It could be that americans have less tolerence for societies that arent western or democratic....just a theory.

btw, if recall you were against the cartoonist pubishing their satire on alllah...something on the intl areana, that to me is censorship of the worst kind.

[Violet_Crumble]

24. Huh? Where did I say bullying was illegal?

I didn't. What I said very clearly was that I'm opposed to it and think attempts to excuse it by waving a very selective *freedom of expression* flag are pathetic...

Oh, so you wouldn't think yr opinion of whether you agree with something or not is irrelevent compared to free speech when it comes to a porno movie playing in a cinema next to yr home, but you think it's irrelevent when it comes to the bullying tactics used by some 'supporters' of Israel in the US...

Seriously, have you not read any of the threads in this forum that have been about attempts to bully and smear critics of Israeli policy into silence? I can put together a list of links to those threads if you really haven't read them...

Yr theory about the Palestinian narrative not being heard in the US coz less Americans are interested in it is pretty ridiculous. While generally many Americans tend to be not particularly interested in anything that's not happening in their neck of the woods unless the media force-feeds it to them, when it comes to the Palestinian narrative they're not even given a chance not to be interested as the Palestinian narrative doesn't get heard in the US, unlike in the UK, Australia and other western countries...

Yes, I was opposed to the publication of those cartoons. You already know that and seeing it's you, not me, who's dragging out the *freedom of speech* excuse very selectively, and it's already been explained to you many times now that opposing something being printed is not censorship, do you think you could stick to what's being discussed in the posts yr replying to?