As Jimmy Carter and Archbishop Tutu, two Nobel Laureates and two of our greatest humanitarians (who have both been called anti-Semites) urge warring parties to talk to each other while in Darfur at this very moment, it’s a good time to revisit this 2005 quote from Daniel Okrent, then public editor of the New York Times:

During my research, representatives of If Americans Knew expressed the belief that unless the paper assigned equal numbers of Muslim and Jewish reporters to cover the conflict, Jewish reporters should be kept off the beat.

I find this profoundly offensive, but not nearly as repellent as a calumny that has popped up in my e-mail with lamentable frequency - the charge that The Times is anti-Semitic. Even if you stipulate that The Times’s reporters and editors favor the Palestinian cause (something I am not remotely prepared to do), this is an astonishing debasement. If reporting that is sympathetic to Palestinians, or antipathetic to Israelis, is anti-Semitism, what is real anti-Semitism? What word do you have left for conscious discrimination, or open hatred, or acts of intentional, ethnically motivated violence?

The Times may be - is - imperfect. It is not anti-Semitic. Calling it that defames the accuser far more than it does the accused.

Amen to that.

Meanwhile, someone just sent us this letter that seems to vindicate what we at Jewish Voice for Peace have been saying all along. This was not a case of Jewish groups threatening a boycott or demanding Tutu’s ouster. It was an act of self-censorship, intended to demonstrate support for Jews. In the end, it was the worst thing St Thomas could do, feeding the fire of anti-Semitism, because it promotes the idea that “the Jews demanded” the cancellation of Tutu’s talk. Of course, the fact that right-wing Jewish groups and leaders, claiming they speak for all of us, do often demand such forms of censorship ( as we document regularly here) also creates an atmosphere of intimidation for everyone. Did fear and intimidation play a role? We may never know.

Father Dennis Dease, president of the University of St. Thomas, has asked that the letter below be sent to St. Thomas students, faculty and staff:

Dear members of the St. Thomas community,

I am writing to you today to explain the University of St. Thomas’ decision not to co-sponsor an April 2008 PeaceJam conference for high school students.

Last spring, a representative of our Justice and Peace Studies program advised my office of an opportunity to invite Archbishop Desmond Tutu to speak at St. Thomas during the PeaceJam conference. I discussed the matter with my staff and decided not to take advantage of this opportunity.

Later, I learned that Youthrive, an Upper Midwest affiliate of Denver-based PeaceJam International, had invited Tutu to speak at St. Thomas without my knowledge or that of other senior administrators.

(Metropolitan State University has agreed to host the conference, which will be held April 11-13, with Archbishop Tutu as the featured speaker.)

St. Thomas receives hundreds of proposals to sponsor speakers and events, and we often decline for a variety of reasons. Why was this the case for the Archbishop Tutu opportunity?

We became aware of concerns about some of Archbishop Tutu’s widely publicized statements that have been hurtful to members of the Jewish community. I spoke with Jews for whom I have great respect. What stung these individuals was not that Archbishop Tutu criticized Israel but how he did so, and the moral equivalencies that they felt he drew between Israel’s policies and those of Nazi Germany, and between Zionism and racism.

I was under no pressure from any pro-Israeli groups or individuals, nor did I receive any requests from them, to refrain from inviting Archbishop Tutu to speak.

I am not in a position to evaluate what to a Jew feels anti-Semitic and what does not. I can, however, take seriously the judgments of those whom I trust by not putting St. Thomas in a position that would add to that hurt.

Questions also have been raised about why Dr. Thomas Rochon, executive vice president and chief academic officer, removed Dr. Cris Toffolo as director of our interdisciplinary Justice and Peace Studies program. This is a personnel matter. I will say only that she was not removed because of any private or public disagreement with my decision not to invite Archbishop Tutu to St. Thomas. She continues to teach in the program and remains a tenured associate professor of political science.

I also wish to address concerns about threats to academic freedom at St. Thomas. I strongly defend the principle and practice of academic freedom at the university. This incident did not involve our curriculum or St. Thomas classroom activities. Instead, it involved the use of our facilities and name in connection with an external group.

I want to thank members of the St. Thomas community for sharing their concerns with me. This has been a difficult issue, and I know many people do not agree with the decision. As always, I welcome your comments.

Sincerely,

Father Dennis Dease
President

Get Muzzlewatch delivered fresh daily