ZGram - 4/16/2002 - "American Library Association Becomes Another Israeli Occupied Territory"

[irimland@zundelsite.org]

Copyright (c) 2002 - Ingrid A. Rimland

ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny

April 16, 2002

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

Look what I found on www.whatreallyhappened.com!

A best-selling title comes to mind, used here facetiously:  How To 
Make Friends And Influence People.

Abe Foxman has really done it this time!  I can't help feeling glee - 
some 50,000+ plus librarians aren't going to forget this one, and 
=46oxman will reap more than just an earful!  Henceforth, there shall 
be no love lost!

[START]

An Act of Censorship:

		American Library Association
		Becomes Another Israeli Occupied Territory

		By Jeffrey Blankfort

	NEW ORLEANS-The embattled Anti-Defamation League's
National Director, Abraham Foxman, is "going to war - and he's
going to enlist American Jews as his foot soldiers," wrote the
No. California Jewish Bulletin's Garth Wolkoff this past May, and
he wasn't joking. The first battle took place in this picturesque
Gulf Coast port city  at the end of June and the ADL and its
allies emerged victorious. The occasion was the annual membership
meeting of the American Library Association and answering the call
to the colors were hundreds of Jewish librarians who descended on
New Orleans for a dual purpose: to overturn a resolution
criticizing Israeli censorship that had been approved at last
year's convention  and to demonstrate to their fellow librarians
that judging Israel was not only not the business of the ALA, but
also was not without career-threatening risks.  And they
succeeded, overwhelmingly. No, the colors they rallied to weren't
visible, but then they didn't have to be.

=46or a little under a year,  363 days to be exact, the American
Library Association had stood alone as the only major American
institution that had publicly and unequivocally condemned Israeli
human rights violations and specifically, acts of censorship
directed against Palestinian journalists, universities, and
libraries.

Headquartered in Chicago, the ALA, with 56,000 members is the
oldest and largest library association in the world, and according
to its outgoing president, Marilyn Miller, "it has engaged in
issues of human rights and intellectual freedom around the world
since its establishment in 1876."  In past years it has criticized
censorship in Chile, South Africa, the Soviet Union, and,
according to Miller "was one of the first and strongest voices to
defend Salman Rushdie." Taking on Israel, however, is another
matter.

Largely as a culmination of a nine-year effort on the part of
Chicago Public Library Research Librarian David Williams, (MELB
4/1 and 4/2) and the International Human Rights Task Force that he
took over as chair in 1990, the ALA had passed two resolutions at
its July 1, 1992 meeting in San Francisco.  The first condemning
Israeli censorship and human rights violations and the second,
protested the threatened expulsion of Palestinian librarian Omar
Al-Safi and may have been a factor in having the order withdrawn.
(MELB 4/1).

The main resolution referred to the "special relationship"
enjoyed by Israel with the United States, "as the recipient of the
largest amounts of annual U.S. aid per capita, and declared "the
U.S. a party to these censorship practices and other violations of
human rights."

To bolster the impressive documentation he presented
substantiating Israel's censorship policies, Williams  arranged
for Israeli journalist, Michal Schwartz, an editor of Challenge
magazine and herself a victim of her country's censorship, to
address the convention.  An Israeli brought by the opposition was
unable to offer credible rebuttal and both resolutions passed by
large margins.  Copies of the resolutions were sent to the U.S.
government, to Israel and to the PLO.

Obviously the matter would not end there. The ADL believes,
perhaps correctly, that neither it or Israel can afford a single
defeat in its hasbara, the Israeli word for public relations. If
the ALA was able to get away with criticizing Israel, who knows
who might do it next?  The counterattack against the resolution
and the character assassination of Williams began virtually the
next day and continued up to and after the vote in New Orleans.

In a statement following the rejection of the resolution,
Williams pointed out the implications of the entire issue:
"The significance of ALA's breaking with the public taboo on
criticizing Israel was taken very seriously by the Anti-Defamation
League and other Israel lobby groups whose role is to censor,
intimidate, and otherwise stifle public criticism of Israel in the
United States.  It is precisely because of the importance of U.S.
aid that they could not afford to let Israel be criticized in such
fashion by a mainstream professional organization."

It became  clear to Williams that reversal of the censorship
resolution had become an ALA priority, as it increasingly came
under the influence of what he described as the "highly-organized
and well-financed [pro-Israel] political lobby."
Quickly taking charge was the ADL's Foxman who, according to
the Chicago Jewish Star  (June 11-24), held several meetings with
ALA leaders "to clarify Israel's position and to put the claims
against Israel into context."

"The longer these resolutions remain on the books as ALA
policy, the more legitimacy they gain among librarians and
educators," wrote Foxman in a letter to Peggy Sullivan, ALA's
Executive Director.

This was not the first time the ADL had gone up against
Williams.  In 1989, it challenged a bibliography he had prepared
on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that Chicago's chief librarian
and a number of Middle East scholars had considered balanced, and
through a "full court" mobilization of the area's Jewish
community, would have got away with censoring both the list and
Williams, had not their  plans been exposed in a local newspaper
column. But as the Village Voice's Robert Friedman points out (
July 27) "this is not just a cautionary tale about one librarian's
battle against book burning in the occupied territories.

"It is part of a larger story about the most powerful Jewish
organization in America, and its attempt to determine what should
be read in our nation's schools, what should be read in our
nation's libraries, and what should publicly be discussed at
public forums.

"Through its 31 offices across the country, the ADL monitors
school curricula, library acquisition lists, and public
conferences and symposiums, working behind the scenes to stifle
intellectual freedom."

The ADL, of course, would not have to go it alone, since its
policy of defending "Israel, right or wrong," is the guiding
principle of all the major Jewish organizations. So it was to be
expected that the 1000-member Association of Jewish Libraries
would weigh in with a letter protesting the resolutions. "Members
of AJL have been outraged by the actions taken by ALA, AJL
President Ralph Simon told the Jewish Star (June 11-24). That was
just once response.  (By the time of the convention, the largest
Jewish womens' organization, Hadassah, would play the most visible
role, with the ADL content to stay in the shadows due, most
likely, to the fear that publicity about its spy network would
inhibit it effectiveness.)

Sometime after the San Francisco convention, an ALA attorney,
commenting on the resolution, implied it was close to being
"seditious" and in American Libraries (March '93), ALA Councilor
Charles Bunge referred to the "embarrassing situation" caused by
the Council's passage of the resolution.  It was also apparent,
from American Libraries' Midwinter report, that "although the
resolution could not be rescinded, the Council would have done so
if it had not "already been widely distributed." As an alternative
step, the Council referred the resolution to the ALA's
International Resolutions Committee for "study and
recommendations."

At its Midwinter meeting in Denver, the wheels that were to
crush the resolution were picking up speed.  With the cooperation
of the ALA leadership, mass-produced letters and materials were
distributed denouncing the anti-censorship efforts as a front for
the "terroristic" and "fascist" PLO (as well as Hamas) and
suggesting, as Williams pointed out in a task force "Urgent Action
Alert," that "anyone who challenged Israel's repressive policies
was an antisemite and part of a plot to destroy Jews."

Williams reported that functionaries of the ADL and other pro-
Israel lobby groups were very much in attendance at conference
sessions, and that "the ADL representatives arranged with the ALA
Executive Office to have the customary guest registration fee
waived, were outfitted with membership instead of guest convention
badges," and directed to the business meeting of the Social
Responsibilities Round Table (SRRT) International Human Rights
Task Force Meeting.

"There," wrote Williams, "they copied down the names and
institutional affiliations of everyone present." In one instance,
an ADL operative grabbed a task force member who was engaged in
conversation, and whirled him around, saying he wanted to see the
name on his badge.  The tangible intimidation, says Williams, was
only beginning:

"With the active complicity of the ALA leadership, pressure was
brought to bear on librarians at all levels of the Association to
go along with revoking the resolution.  Wilfully distorting the
facts and context of Israel's repressive practices, the organizers
of this campaign also engaged in the most vicious personal
vilification of me=8A repeatedly equating criticism of Israel with
antisemitism."

Typical of this attack was a passage in a letter sent two weeks
before the convention to ALA President-Elect Hardy Franklin by
Ellen Zyroff Ph.D, the Principal Librarian of the San Diego County
Library, and distributed to ALA members by the ALA Council.

"This man is wild-eyed and dangerous," wrote Zyroff.  "I do not
know where his hate comes from, but it is palpable.  I do not know
who paid the fare for the speaker who flew from Tel Aviv
University, an institution known for activists against the state
of Israel, or for that of the other out-of-town-speakers
(referring to a 1991 forum in Atlanta) =8A. (emphasis added).

Marty Goldberg, head librarian at Penn State and co-chair of
the Jewish Librarians Committee (JLC), a subgroup of the ALA,
told the Jewish Star, that Williams "uses this as a platform for
his political agenda.  We should condemn the resolutions and get
the ALA out of the business of singling out one people, one
nation, one religion. This has no place in the ALA.  There are
issues of far more importance than censorship in Israel."  For
Goldberg, the ADL and the Jewish librarians, a "far more important
issue" was protecting Israel.

At the convention, Goldberg sent out a letter to JLC members,
suggesting they stay away from a Sunday night forum,  sponsored by
Williams' task force, preceding the vote on the resolution,
because of "the danger of physical violence." ((At the Midwinter
conference, Williams relinquished his chair of the International
Human Rights Task Force and was authorized by the SRRT to initiate
a new Task Force on Israeli Censorship and Palestinian Libraries.)

Goldberg's warning was ironic, since last year, a panel
arranged by Williams featuring Michal Schwartz and Khader Hamide,
one of the Palestinians fighting deportation in Los Angeles, was
repeatedly disrupted, first by noisy pro-Israel activists and then
by a false fire alarm.

This year's forum, entitled "Israeli Censorship:  Here and
There," drew an audience of about 120,  and proceeded without
interruption with members from the audience who supported Israel
receiving ample time to respond to the speakers:  Williams, Jay
Murphy, former editor of Red Bass magazine, and myself.

Williams informed the audience that the ADL's Foxman had once
again been invited,  and for the third time had declined.  In a
letter to Williams he had written that "We have consistently
refused to participate in your events because of the blatant
anti-Israel agenda=8A" Moreover, he didn't believe "that the
activities of the Anti-Defamation League are an appropriate
subject for your roundtable discussion."

In another clearly centralized attempt to sabotage the forum, a
450 word "anonymous letter" was sent to and published in Jewish
newspapers across the country signed alternately by "Concerned
Jewish Taxpayer," "Jewish Taxpayer," "Anonymous Librarian" and "a
librarian whose job would be jeopardized by identification," (the
latter being a classic example of the victimizer pretending to be
the victim).

The thrust of the letter was to infer that "since public
libraries are funded chiefly by local tax dollars,"  Jewish
taxpayers ought to know about the forum and its title. In a thinly
concealed threat in the next to last paragraph, the "writer" warns
that "If public opinion causes enough institutions and individuals
to stop sending in their hefty membership dues (often paid for
with public funds) perhaps the ALA will reconsider its
priorities."

=46oxman and the ADL didn't need to debate, nor did Goldberg need
to attend the forum to state their case.  The "fix" was already
in. Goldberg,  speaking at a meeting of the Jewish Librarians
group the day before had all but admitted as much.  Acknowledging
that he was usually a pessimist, he told his listeners that they
"shouldn't worry" about Monday night's vote. "The ALA Council," he
repeated several times, "wants out of this situation."

The meeting of the Jewish Librarians next morning was attended
by the Village Voice's Friedman, which caused Goldberg to declare
the proceedings "off the record," a ludicrous request at what was
advertised to be - and what has been ALA policy at all its events
since 1971 -  a public meeting.

At the meeting, ALA trustee from New Orleans, Helen Kuhlman,
who preceded her  remarks with the same "this is off the record,"
caveat described how on the Thursday evening preceding the
convention, she had hosted a reception for the ALA Council, the
ADL and Hadassah,  and that they had nothing to worry about.  What
exactly was going to happen she didn't say, but it was clear that
the long arm of Israeli censorship was about to be extended to
embrace the New Orleans Convention Center.

The Jewish Librarians later heard from a Young Republican
stockbroker type named Aaron Albert, who said he had worked with
CAMERA, a pro-Israel propaganda agency, as well as AIPAC, but
evidently had been brought to the convention by Hadassah.  Albert
brought with him a flyer, published by the women's group which was
to be distributed to ALA members the night of the vote.

The flyer carried a bold 48-point headline, "Let's stop
fighting yesterday's wars." It suggested that "a new era has
dawned" since the resolutions were drafted, and that the charges
of censorship against Israel were "outdated and nuanced.; [and]
grossly incompatible with the scholarly pursuits of the ALA." The
failed  "peace" talks in Washington became the cover for the
coverup:
"With the peace process between Israel and its Arab neighbors
now well underway; this is not the time for divisive, counter-
productive resolutions, etc."

Whether the flyer was actually needed or provided just a
convenient cover is debatable. Within an hour and a half of the
Jewish Librarians meeting, the first bomb landed. The ALA Council,
without any previous indication that the subject was to be on its
agenda, revoked the 1992 resolution. Moreover, the Council
approved guidelines for the future that will, in effect, allow
them to overturn votes of the membership.  At that meeting,
according to the report published in American Libraries (July/Aug.
'93), Pres. Miller noted that "The mail has been intense," and
that criticism has included the condemnation in the Jewish press
of the annual conference program on Israeli censorship.  She was
referring to the "anonymous" letter published in a number of
Jewish papers mentioned earlier.

Nancy John, chair of the International Relations Committee
informed the  Council that the Israeli censorship was the only
item on its  agenda.  At an earlier Executive Board meeting,
citing the "countless hours" the issue had consumed, suggested
that in the future, "refer these things to us; we know a little
something about international relations" (Amer. Lib., ibid.).
Now, ALA parliamentarian Edwin Bliss was asked to present the
options available to the Council for dealing with a resolution it
had passed, acted on, and now regretted.

"An organization has a right to change its mind," he said,
accord to the American Libraries report. Sticking by the  opinion
rendered at the Midwinter conference that it was impossible to
"rescind" something that had been distributed around the word, he
suggested the term "revoke." And thus, Councilor Bernard Margolis
so moved, the Council voted, and by a "safe margin" the resolution
was interred.  "By all accounts," noted American Libraries, "it is
the first time in in its history that the ALA has taken such an
action."

Prior to the vote, Pres. Miller announced that a special
"fact-finding" Task Force made up of three former ALA presidents
had been appointed to "review" charges that Williams engaged in
"censorship, personal harassment and suppression of freedom of
expression."

Moreover, Williams was requested to appear before the ALA
Executive Board the following day, preceding the  full membership
meeting, to answer criticisms that had been made against him.

Also on the carpet was SRRT chair Stephen Stilwell who was
questioned by the chair, Pres. Miller regarding the SRRT's control
over Williams' task force; the use of the ALA's name by the task
force; whether or not it received outside funding (clearly
implying a PLO connection) and why Israel was being singled out
all of which he calmly fielded in defending the work of the task
force and the resolution.

Miller acknowledged to Stillwell that the Council had received
"a huge stack of letters," and that "we all have been receiving
these letters and we're all under pressure."

Cesar Cabellero, head of Extension Services for El Paso
Community College, was the only member of the largely silent 13-
person board to speak up in the defense of the resolution.
"All our members have an inherent right to take stands on
social issues.  I don't think he should be questioned. SRRT has
the right to take positions.  I think this organization has a
right to single out countries for violations of international
freedom.  Some of our members are so sensitive they can't separate
principles from politics." There would be few such voices heard
for the rest of the convention.

Williams was up next and took his seat at the foot of the long
table. After he asked for and received permission to make a
statement Miller repeated her criticisms about using the ALA's
name and her "concern that we continue to pound on one country."
"If you go to such extraordinary lengths to prevent Israel from
being singled out, " Williams replied, "you become an extension of
the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in the U.S."

When asked,"How do you verify your facts?",  Williams  cited
the Committee for Article 19 (the human rights convention against
censorship), the Fund for Free Expression and the work of Israeli
sociologist and demographer, Meron Benvenisti and noted that the
ALA's International Resolutions Committee "did conclude, that the
documentation was, in the main, very accurate."

Having failed to refute Williams' arguments, the Council
shifted to another tack - how he conducted the work of his task
force - and would not let go of it.  It would be used on the floor
of the convention, and afterward not only to undermine  the
resolution but to isolate Williams and effectively terminate his
task force.

"We have no problems with what you do," he was told, in seeming
contradiction to everything that had just taken place. "it's just
sometimes how you do it."

It was clear, that night, as we were passing out flyers -
Williams' facts competing with Hadassah's fiction - that something
was afoot. Jewish librarians in extraordinary numbers began
arriving for the meeting, most of whom, apparently, were not
regular participants in ALA meetings. (Since ALA is not a union,
its conventions are not delegated. Every member has a vote if she
or he can get there).

When the issue of reaffirmation of the Israeli censorship
resolution came to the floor - it was now certainly necessary
since the Council had revoked the previous one - the atmosphere
was so intimidating that a resolution  condemning Egypt, which the
SRRT was also going to present never got to the floor.
SRRT Chair Stillwell arose to defend the resolution, citing its
consistency with other actions by the Council such as its
resolution opposing the Gulf War. He pointed out that no one had
"disputed the truth of the allegations" in the Israeli censorship
resolution; rather the Council had succumbed to outside pressure
in deciding to revoke it.

His fellow SRRT member Sanford Berman called on the membership
to show its disapproval of the Council's revocation action and
reaffirm the resolution, but the votes just weren't there.
Speaker after speaker got up to defend Israel, to denounce the
resolution, to question the ALA's wisdom in taking positions on
international issues - something that  never seems to be a problem
until it comes to Israel - and, in the atmosphere of triumphant
intolerance that inundated every corner of the room - to all but
ask for Williams head on a platter, calling for a special
investigation of his activities and the end of the Task Force on
Israeli Censorship.  He certainly had pushed their button.
Under those conditions, other librarians, some of them Jewish,
who had supported the resolutions were clearly afraid to speak.

This time there was no progressive Israeli voice to shame the
flag-wavers with the truth.

=46ollowing an overwhelming vote to cut-off debate, the
resolution came to the floor.  The relative handful still having
the courage to swim against the tide, and who rose when the "aye"
vote was called, was no match for the hundreds of Jewish
librarians (and their intimidated colleagues) who loudly stood up
to declare the ALA another occupied Israeli territory.

"The vote was so lopsided it was ridiculous,"said ALA trustee
Kuhlman. "What happened at ALA has been put to rest in a very
definitive way" (No. Cal. Jewish Bulletin, July 16)
The following day, the SRRT "got the message." By a 9-4-1 vote,
it stripped David of his task force chair, with the stipulation
that until a replacement was found, every piece of correspondence
or literature he wished to circulate, had to be approved by the
SRRT chair.  Goliath had won this round.

The Jewish Librarian's Goldberg told the Washington Jewish
Week's  (July 8) Sam Skolnik, that one of his committee's goals
was to take international political issues off the ALA's front
burner and put more apparent concerns up front.  "Libraries in
this country have tremendous problems," he said. [The ALA]
shouldn't be involved in these complicated issues. Let's stay  out
of it."

Williams has other ideas and the last word.

"Although we were overpowered in New Orleans, this may well
turn out to be a Pyhrric victory for the Israel lobby.  In the
course of this long struggle, thousands of librarians were made
aware of Israeli human rights abuses, and the ALA officially
criticized them - causing great embarrassment for defenders of
Israel in the U.S.

"The subsequent spectacle of the ALA leadership going down on
its knees before the Israel lobby to exempt Israel from criticism
will not go unnoticed by all those who sincerely believe in the
consistent application of human rights principles.  This issue
will continue to haunt the ALA and the Israel lobby, until the
time comes when America is fed-up with supporting an apartheid
state in the Middle East."

* * *

In the weeks following the convention, the special task force
appointed to investigate Williams was canceled after (one would
like to think) the ALA comprehended the Kafkaesque nature of the
project and the sad contribution the ALA had already made to the
history of censorship.

[END]

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY:

"He who destroys a good book kills reason itself."

(John Milton)