Beinin writes about Harker incident in SF Chronicle
Posted on February 5 2007 by Cecilie Surasky under ADL , American Jewish Committee , Educational Institutions , Joel Beinin.Stanford Middle East history professor Joel Beinin tells his own story in this op-ed about silencing, concluding that smear campaigns and shutting out dissenting voices are the tactics of people who can’t win based on the facts.
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.
Get Muzzlewatch delivered fresh daily
Print This Post
February 5th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
[…] I contacted Joel to ask him what happened and he advised me he was writing an Op Ed piece about the incident. Now, Cecilie informs me via Muzzlewatch it’s been published in the San Francisco Chronicle, Silencing critics not way to Middle East peace: 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. […]
February 6th, 2007 at 1:59 am
It’s interesting. The article claims that “Joel Beinin co-edited “The Struggle for Sovereignty: Palestine and Israel, 1993-2005.” What they don’t say is that noone ever got to read that book — because, by publicly declaring that they disagreed with the book, using the vehicle of the media to voice said criticism yet, certain unnamed figures totally MUZZLED THE BOOK. That’s right, they said unflattering things about it, which leads inexorably to the stifling of open debate. (Only properly-phrased discussion which is congrulatory rather than critical and does not emanate from undevious individuals is, of course, immune to stiflization, muzzlification, and other intended consequences of incorrect speech.)
February 9th, 2007 at 8:44 am
Serge, you illustrate one problem with having a blog like Muzzlewatch: paranoia.
There are books and speakers that get little attention simply because they deserve little attention. This is not “muzzling”.
Notice that you did not consider this possibility in your note.
Further, notice how very little this possibility is considered by the commentators on this blog. That is, perhaps you are NOT being “muzzled” at all. You are simply drawing a LACK of reaction because your opinions don’t resonate with the experience of most people.
Also, I am unable to find on this blog any discussion at all of the exaggerations, misuse of terminology, and uneven application of human rights standards that are rampant among certain leftist groups when it comes to Israel.
Moderator, are you willing to have some actual dialogue on this blog? Some actual exchange of views that might lead to insight?
Or are you going to “muzzle” any opinion that you don’t agree with?
February 10th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
The Harker School wanted a discussion of the Arab-Isareli conflict. To that end, they brought in an anti-Israel Arab to speak. To balance the discussion, they wanted to bring a Jewish voice to the table. Unfortunately, according to my source, a person with “malicious intent” suggested the Jewish voice be Joel Beinin. The organizers of the event did not know that Beinin, despite being Jewish, is notoriously anti-Israel.
The organizers may have not have known, but they found out. The school’s parents also found out and protested loudly over this obvious mistake. Realizing that the planning committee has erred, the principal cancelled Beinin’s invitation. By the time the Silicon Valley JCRC called the principal, the principal had already made his decision.
This was another classic case of the anti-Israel forces trying to put on what they call a “balanced” presentation – that is “balanced” between an anti-Israel Arab and an anti-Israel Jew. When the duplicity was discovered, Beinin was rightly booted from the panel.
February 12th, 2007 at 9:45 am
From today’s Chronicle (Feb 12, 2007):
“Rabbi responds
Editor — As Senior Rabbi of Congregation Rodef Sholom, I wish to set the record straight regarding Professor Joel Beinin’s Feb. 4 article.
Congregation Rodef Sholom is a Reform Jewish synagogue whose mission includes support for the State of Israel as the Jewish national home. We encourage vigorous debate and education on the wide variety of Zionist perspectives regarding Israel, her history, culture and politics.
To that end, I offered Beinin the opportunity to present his views as part of a larger panel. Beinin refused our invitation. There was no pressure exerted on me by any outside organization. I made this decision based on the expressed mission of our synagogue.
Congregation Rodef Sholom remains steadfast in its commitment to a rigorous educational approach, an embrace of diverse views, and a love and support for the State of Israel.
Rabbi STACY FRIEDMAN
Congregation Rodef Sholom
San Rafael”
March 1st, 2007 at 12:28 am
Very nice site! Good work.
March 12th, 2007 at 5:15 am
mmm.. nice design, I must say..
March 16th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
i’am really impressed!!