Biship Tutu Disinvited by University that Hosted Ann Coulter

[Purveyor]

Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu has been disinvited to speak at a St. Paul, Minnesota, university because of allegations that he made "hurtful" comments about Israel that might offend local Jews.

Tutu, widely revered for his opposition to South Africa's apartheid system, was proposed to the University of St. Thomas administration as a speaker for a spring 2008 event planned by the local chapter of a youth group known as Peace Jam International.
.
According to a university official, Doug Hennes, vice president for university and government relations, "basic background research" about Tutu turned up "some red flags" concerning "some things that (Tutu) had said about Israel."

Hennes told a St. Paul newspaper he made some inquiries, including one to a spokeswoman for the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas. The organization's representative called Hennes' attention to a speech Tutu made in Boston in 2002 that was reportedly critical of Israel's treatment of Palestinians.

---eoe---

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com:80/content/view/2570/81/

[fenriswolf]

1. jeez, god forbid someone has

a negative feeling for another country the spawns agression and is the major factor for disrupment in the middle east, oh wait thats right, a reflection on isreal is a reflection on the good ol usa and we cant say anything bad about them. icluding the fact that we fund isreal to a couple billion a year and the most up to date military hardware as well.

[burrowowl]

2. You have got to be kidding

Unbelievable!

[TomClash]

3. Not surprising at all

The Lobby rears its ugly head - so much for academic and intellectual freedom.

[Selatius]

4. I believe "hurtful" is defined as Tutu comparing the Occupation to Apartheid-Era South Africa.

And comparing the Palestinian enclaves isolated by Israeli colonial settlements and Israeli access roads connecting those settlements to Bantustans the apartheid government established in South Africa to pen in Blacks.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. Doesn't matter what he said.

The point is, that if they can invite the loathsome Ann Coulter, and justify her odious presence with an entirely valid free speech argument, and if Columbia University can invite a nutjob like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, they can sure as hell have Desmond Tutu, a Nobel Peace Prize winner fercripessake! I don't care whether somebody thought what he said was "hurtful." The remedy for speech you don't like is more speech. I'm sure Tutu would be willing to address and discuss his remarks if given the opportunity. Whatever happened to academic freedom?

[Selatius]

7. My best guess is somebody who donates big bucks to the school objected.

The background check was merely a pretense to give validity to the arbitrary decision. Ever since Reaganomics kicked in and money to universities was cut for tax cuts to wealthy folks, they've had to go to private donors to help off-set the loss of funding for research and development programs.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. That's probably what happened.

I hope all the embarrassing publicity they are getting now (not to mention that Tutu was just invited to speak at a nearby, not-quite-so-elite state college) will put a lot of pressure on them to re-invite him. If I were Tutu I'd be tempted to tell them to bugger off, but I'm sure he's a much better person than I am.

[Karenina]

18. This is what happened

http://www.alternet.org/audits/64314

"Minneapolis/St.Paul's City Pages just reported that members of the St Thomas Justice and Peace Studies program were thrilled when Bishop Tutu agreed to speak at the University" but administrators did a scientific survey of the Jews of Minneapolis, which included querying exactly one spokesperson for Minnesota's Jewish Community Relations Council and several rabbis who taught in a University program" and concluded that Tutu is bad for the Jews and should therefore be barred from campus."

Hey Rocky! I think I better get me another :tinfoilhat:

[Canuckistanian]

22. My guess is David Horowitz

I win.

[malaise]

6. Jimmy Carter said the same thing

and they were both correct. Will they ban Carter as well?

[Tom Joad]

13. sure, if they can get away with it.

[cascadiance]

9. How does she get in to so many places, as lame an individual as she is!

I just about puked yesterday when I was at Costco when I saw her book alongside the other bestselling hardbacks there. How does a blue company like Costco let that sort of trash in to their stores? I guess they need to at times try to say to the other side they are "unbiased", but I think there would be better books to choose to make that sort of statement.

Perhaps it might be worth a letter to Costco people to have it pulled!

[Tom Joad]

10. the old South African govt, did not dare try to silence him, knowing the great respect he has around

the world. Seems the reactionaries involved here show no such discretion.

See story here.
http://www.alternet.org/audits/64314/

[Tom Joad]

11. Take action. Sign this letter of protest. From Jewish Voice for Peace.

http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/jvfp/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=14061

[Pastiche423]

17. Thank you for the link to the letter

Signed!

[Judi Lynn]

27. Thank you, very much. Appreciate getting the chance. n/t

[gratuitous]

12. Oh no! Criticism of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians!

Please. And if there's a person on the planet who can discourse knowledgeably on the abuses perpetrated by the powerful over the powerless, it would be Archbishop Tutu. I wonder what the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas fears from Tutu?

[KG]

16. the truth.

the truth is what hurts when come to israels actions in palistine.

[tabasco]

14. Wow.

Further reinforcing my belief that I have entered the twilight zone.

[Union Yes]

15. Where are the student protests and walkouts?

Censorship doesn't sit well with any college student I've ever known.

[struggle4progress]

19. An open letter to Father Dease

... Pope Benedict was in the news a year ago for making comments that some thought insulting to Muslims. Based on the reasons you've given for your decision to not invite Tutu, I can only assume that if someone invited the Pope to speak at St. Thomas, your decision not to allow it would have been the same, for fear of insulting the Muslim community. You may well protest, "but the Pope's comments were taken out of context! He didn't intend to insult anyone!" What about Mr. Tutu's comments? Is it possible they were misconstrued? Is it possible that his point was that some of the decisions of Israel have been unfair to the Palestinian people?

Similarly, I hope we won't have any of the Republican Presidential candidates speak on campus - they might insult the Democrats, after all. The same would need to apply to the Democratic candidates of course, as we wouldn't want them to insult any of our conservative brethren. We also need to eliminate presentations by those pesky peace activists, as they might insult our friends in the military. To be fair, the reverse must also apply.

As you can see, your decision is a very slippery slope, and one that is not worthy of someone of your position. Since I am undoubtedly not aware of everything that went into the decision, I am challenging you to air the issues surrounding the decision in a public debate with members of your Peace and Justice Studies faculty, since as I understand it, they disagree with your decision. In the spirit of learning, free and academic speech, I think it would be of value to all of us at UST, and the broader Twin Cities Community, to better understand these issues. After all, what is more important to academic growth than a free and open debate amongst informed people who disagree? ...

http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/node/7382

[jazzjunkysue]

20. I TOLD you not to tell them he was black!

NOW they know!

[Karenina]

24. Superb!!!

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

[shenmue]

21. A Catholic university has no business pulling a stunt like that...

especially since the Church claims to support human rights. Also, if they invited Coulter, they should be fair and allow somebody from the other side of the political spectrum.

[Richard Steele]

23. Kick

[KaptBunnyPants]

25. What a loss for the students of St. Paul.

Desmond Tutu is the most compelling spokesman for Christianity I can think of.

[KamaAina]

34. Actually he will be speaking in St. Paul

but across town at Metropolitan State.

http://www.twincities.com//ci_7076331?IADID=Search-www.twincities.com-www.twincities.com

The youth group that wanted Tutu at St. Thomas moved its conference to Metropolitan State University, where the Nobel laureate will lecture April 11.

St. Thomas, meanwhile, found itself defending the decision after it surfaced Wednesday in the Minneapolis weekly newspaper City Pages. Officials also acknowledged a professor was stripped of her leadership post at St. Thomas' Justice and Peace Studies Program for the way she challenged the administration's decision.

To recap: Public university says Yes to Bishop Tutu. Christian* university says No AND retaliates against someone who stood up for him. Eurghh.

[Quantess]

26. Desmond Tutu offends some, but

Ann Coulter offends no one! She's a sunny, benign, commentator!

[entanglement]

28. Kick for Bishop Tutu - and shame on the cowardly officials who gave in to the Israel supremacists

[cali]

31. Really?

The Israel Supremacists? What evidence is there that the Israel Lobby had anything to do with this?

This was a horrible decision on the part of Catholic officials.

[JohnyCanuck]

29. The big irony is that when critics claim that

the Zionist/jewish lobby excercises its influence to stifle public criticism of Israel or Israeli government policy, there is a hue and cry from the pro-Zionists as to the utter ridiculousness of such an idea often accompanied with, if not outright accusations of anti-semitism, suggestions that the accusers are being naive in not realizing that just giving voice to such suggestions is evidence they have been negatively influenced by anti-semitic ideas and thoughts.

Then we have this example of Bishop Tutu a man of character and with an outstanding reputation in the struggle for human rights and we see him denied an audience at a US university because he is critical of Israel's policy towards the Palestinians. It's like who am I supposed to believe, the pro-Zionists proclaiming their innocence and inability to exert control over free speech in the USA or my own lying eyes?

[cali]

30. The only problem with your analysis is that

this does not appear connected to the Israel LObby. The University sought out ONE person from the Jewish Community Council, and a few Rabbis. Father Frears has issued a statement saying that NONE of them requested that Bishop Tutu not speak.

This is a decision made by Catholics at a Catholic school.

And your characterization of the Israel Lobby as the Zionist/jewish lobby is not only inaccurate but slimy.

I'm firmly opposed to AIPAC's inordinate influence and to Horowitz, Dershowitz and others of that ilk, but this does not appear to be a case of the Israel Lobby exerting pressure.

Interesting and bizarre take on the known facts.

[JohnyCanuck]

33. In this case when I was referring to the pro-Zionist/Jewish lobby

I was using the term "lobby" in the generic sense of those unwavering supporters of Israel (which include Christian fundamentalists) in the US (and Canada) who support Israel come hell or high water and immediately get on the case of anyone in public life or the media who dares to imply or suggest that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is anything less than honorable or that the Palestinians do undergo unjustifiable and cruel treatment at the hands of the Israeli military and the settlers illegally occupying Palestinian territory.

It appears that the media and politicians knows that there will be a vociferous backlash if they publicly criticize Israeli policy, even if as in Bishop Tutu's, case the critics take pains to emphasize they are criticizing the policies of the Israeli government. Therefore public criticism of Israel has been muted in North America, and I have often seen the claim that there is more widespread and in depth criticism of Israeli policy inside Israel itself than is allowed to take place in public fora or in the media outside the country. E.g.:

Just last week, Danny Rubinstein, senior correspondent covering Palestinian affairs for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, was slated to speak to the British Zionist Federation – and then, at the last minute, his speech was canceled. The reason? Rubinstein had pointed out that "today Israel is an apartheid state with different status for different communities." (While many liberal Jewish Americans can't bring themselves to accept the apartheid comparison, that's not true of their Israeli counterparts who actually know what's going on in the West Bank. Former education minister Shulamit Aloni, for example, or journalist Amira Hass use the comparison. (The comparison first occurred to me on a visit to Kibbutz Yizreel in 1978, when the elders of my Zionist youth movement, Habonim, who had emigrated from South Africa to Israel, warned that the settlement policy of the then-new Likud government was designed to prevent Israel letting go of the West Bank. The population there, they told us, would never be given the right to vote in Israel, and so the result would be, as they presciently put it, "an apartheid situation.")

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174836

Here is a quote from an academic who is a Jew and who ascribes (as I did) the banning of Bishop Tutu to the influence of the "Israeli lobby."

During that speech, titled "Occupation Is Oppression," Tutu lambasted the Israeli government for its treatment of Palestinians in occupied territories. While a transcription clearly suggests his criticism was aimed at the Israeli government ("We don't criticize the Jewish people," he said during the speech. "We criticize, we will criticize when they need to be criticized, the government of Israel"), pro-Israeli organizations such as the Zionist Organization of America went on the offensive and protested campus appearances by Tutu, accusing him of anti-Semitism.

Hennes says the input officials received from "the Jewish community" in this case was confined to Swiler and a few rabbis teaching within St. Thomas's Center for Jewish-Christian Learning. "I think there's a consensus in the Jewish community that his words were offensive," Swiler reiterates.

That was news to Marv Davidov, an adjunct professor within the Justice and Peace Studies program.

"As a Jew who experienced real anti-Semitism as a child, I'm deeply disturbed that a man like Tutu could be labeled anti-Semitic and silenced like this," he says. "I deeply resent the Israeli lobby trying to silence any criticism of its policy. It does a great disservice to Israel and to all Jews." (emphasis added /JC)

http://articles.citypages.com/2007-10-03/news/banning-desmond-tutu/

[Karenina]

32. Could this be the "one step to far?"

:tinfoilhat:

[KamaAina]

35. Our sign language interpreter went there

when I pointed this out to her, she agreed with my assessment of the campus atmosphere as "stifling" and "oppressive", at least in terms of the staff.