New York, Feb. 26th, 2007

To the Editor:

"Film’s View of Islam Stirs Anger on Campuses" (Movies, 2/26) reports on Muslim student groups who have tried to pressure "Obsession: The Threat of Radical Islam" from being screened on some campuses. But, as in the case of the film “The Passion,” attempts at censorship always seem to have the opposite effect. And while there is little substantive criticism of the content of "Obsession," which to a large degree is a collage of film clips from extremist television programs and speeches in mosques which have been broadcast throughout the Arab and Muslim world, the defensive reaction to it by some seems rooted in denial and deflection rather than honest, but admittedly, more difficult, self-reflection and grappling with the issues than can lead to a more peaceful global environment.

For example, a Palestinian-American student at U.C.L.A., who was “disheartened to see “a film like this that takes the people who have hijacked the religion and focuses on them.” But much of the whole genre of documentary filmmaking is about focusing on bad people and advocating change. Last nights Oscar nominees included films that focus on child molesters, radical warlords and global polluters.

When more students and others react to the elements of racism, bigotry and hatred within their communities with the warranted introspection and vocal criticism - instead of reflexively shooting the messenger - there will be much greater potential for positive change.

Sincerely,

Robert Friedman
The writer is a volunteer discussion leader for “Obsession: The Threat of Radical Islam" and a filmmaker whose most recent documentary film is "More Precious than Pearls: One Man's Faith after the Holocaust"

A clip from "Obsession":

UPDATE: Steven I Weiss informs me that Campus-J has been following this story, and indeed it has. Campus-J NYU reporter Jill Goldstein has interviewed most of the participants in the controversy. Her first question to Rabbi Yehuda Sarna, - the Jewish students' advisor - seems to be typical "multicultural" knee-jerk desperation to avoid taking responsibility for actually criticizing anyone's behavior, by making an inane equivalency.

What do you think Jews at NYU should be doing about Jewish extremists who produce violence and violent rhetoric?

The root of violence is often dehumanization. In the Jewish community, some people not in official positions adopt rhetoric which associates Muslims or Arabs as a general group with terrorism. People should stand up and say, “at NYU, I know Muslims who are actually very nice.” I don’t think "Obsession" qualifies as violent rhetoric.

Gee thanks, Rabbi Sarna. OK, blame the victim time: people get violent because they are dehumanized. Does Rabbi Sarna tell girls whose boyfriends hit them, "you must have dehumanized him"? Does Sarna also advise his students to insist that Muslims not dehumanize Jews? Do Muslims at NYU say "I know Jews who are actually quite nice"? Do the Jewish students experience that as patronizing? I sure would, maybe the Muslim students do too. If all their 'Dialogue Group" does is exchange pleasantries, they certainly are not going to solve the problem of terrorism.

"At NYU, I know Muslims who are actually very nice.” What. Does. This. Have to do with anything? My parents knew very nice Germans who watched their friends be carried off to concentration camps. I don't care if these Muslims are "nice." Do they denounce terrorism by their co-religionists? Do they refuse to accept demonization of Jews and Israel? Do they make excuses for violent and bigoted behavior? Do they say one thing to the Jews and another thing to their fellow Muslims?

Robert Friedman, a volunteer for Obsession, said that the approach taken by NYU toward Muslim-Jewish dialogue was one of “denial” of the claimed danger represented by radical Islam. Do you think NYU’s Muslim-Jewish dialogue has resulted in denial?

I think the Muslim students know better than the Jewish ones how dangerous Islamic radicalism is.

See above.

I don’t think that anyone in the dialogue group would argue that it is wrong to pursue and try to stop terrorism; the question is its definition and to what extent this fight will harm innocent Muslims.

If you had half as much concern for the innocent Muslims being harmed by their co-religionists I would take you seriously. There are way more Muslims killed by other Muslims than by any other group. And if Muslims cared about it they would stop being "innocent" and do everything they can to stop it.

What do you think of Jewish-Muslim relations at NYU? How and why do you think it may be different from those at other universities and in larger communities?

Building bridges between Muslims and Jews is an emergency. Jewish students are not ambassadors of Israel; they are EMT’s at a crisis. They’re there to heal.

I do not know what planet this guy is on. Given the overwhelming predominance of Muslim violence against Jews to the other way around, the Muslims should be the ones doing the healing. And that's the least I can say about this kind of guilt-tripping and abused-spouse behavior encouraged by the NYU Jewish student advisor. Who is a rabbi. An Orthodox rabbi. God help us.

Fortunately, the students interviewed seem to be more level-headed. The ones involved in the dialogue group stress that they give as good as they get, which is more than you can say for Rabbi Sarna (although, to be fair, he may have to walk a much narrower tightrope than students do). Other Jewish student officials just don't accept the guilt-tripping.

Interview with the Prez of the NYU club for Conservative Jews. Watch this guy avoid saying anything controversial. Probably a smart move.The co-President of Gesher, NYU’s Israel club, also seems to have a healthy self-respect. I guess if you run the Israel club you have to.

What do you think of Jewish-Muslim relations at NYU? How and why do you think it may be different from those at other universities and in larger communities?

I think Jewish Muslim relations are fine. I’m working with Muslims in a few different contexts and I have no problem talking politics or Israel or anything else with them and saying what I think. . . . I can say, and I do believe, that radical Islam is the biggest threat facing Israel and the US and I can listen to a Muslim say that occupation is the biggest threat and we can talk about that, but I also believe, or else I wouldn’t be so invested in all of this, that the political conflict will end some day and the better job we do now of building positive personal relationships and creating a basis for moving forward when the time comes, the better off we’ll be when a political solution is found.
I really can’t say what the difference is between NYU and other universities except to say that I think we largely lack a radical anti-Israel and to an extent anti-American element that’s found among students and especially faculty of other universities.

Tell it.

What do you think Jews at NYU should be doing about Jewish extremists who produce violence and violent rhetoric?

I don’t think NYU should be doing anything about violent Jewish extremists because there are none at NYU and there are very few in the world. Just because there’s a pervasive and widespread threat from radical Islam, doesn’t mean there has to be a Jewish version too. Let’s be honest. On the other hand, if NYU wants to get together a vigilante group to round up the few settlers living in a few isolated west bank towns who are smashing Palestinian car windows, and if I can get credits for it, count me in.

Heh. I like this guy. Somehow I don't think he sees himself as an EMT.

The Co-President of "KESHER: Reform Jews at NYU" also refuses to take the bait.

What do you think Jews at NYU should be doing about Jewish extremists who produce violence and violent rhetoric?

This is a leading question and I do not feel I can give an answer to it without any context to it.

Robert Friedman claims that the VP of the Dialogue Group misrepresents his position.

The Dialogue Group President acknowledges the worthiness of all participants, but leaves us with this:

We have a responsibility to drown the hate out with a positive message. Robert Friedman believes Muslims should have self-introspection in order to address the radicalism within their faith community. I say, why dwell on the negative; why not invest our time and energy in coexistence. We should race to join together with our friends of all faiths to refute the message of hate and intolerance.

But. Robert Friedman's point. Is. That the latter is dependent on the former.

All these folks, and especially Rabbi Kumbaya, need a good dose of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, not so much to sign onto her views (and I don't agree with all of them), but to learn from an excellent example of rigorous self-respect and assigning of responsiblity. Let's roll the tape again.

Steven and Jill also summarized their interviews for an article at JTA, which places the NYU screening in the context of the controversy over other campus screenings:

At Pace, Hillel President Michael Abdurakhmanov claimed that administrators used threats to keep his group from screening the film. A Pace spokesman called that “implausible,” while acknowledging that Pace did want to avoid screening the film after copies of the Koran were found in toilets at the school.

At Brown, the Muslim Student Association protested when Hillel invited one of the film’s interview subjects, Nonie Darwish, to speak on campus. Her appearance was canceled, then rescheduled without Hillel sponsorship. [If you follow my link, you'll find that it was a bit more complicated than that-Judith.]

At NYU, the screening of “Obsession” was co-sponsored by Muslim and Arab student groups and the interfaith Middle East Sustained Dialogue Group. That co-sponsorship is “really a testament to our strength as a community,” said sophomore Jordan Dunn, president of the dialogue group. If so, that “strength” comes from the fact that NYU Jewish students take a different approach to engagement with Muslim groups than at other universities, where Jewish groups often condemn Muslim extremism and become upset when the Muslim groups don’t do so as well. At NYU, the confrontational approach is seen as unproductive.

Rabbi Yehuda Sarna, manager of religious life at NYU’s Bronfman Center for Jewish Student Life, told CampusJ that Muslim-Jewish relations at the school are particularly good because of the presence of Khalid Latif, the school’s Muslim chaplain. Latif, 24, who also is a chaplain at Princeton University, has developed a reputation as an engaging, moderate spiritual leader. The NYU Jewish community’s philosophy is to “always participate” in dialogue, Sarna said, noting that events that might cause controversy at some campuses — such as a lecture by former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last semester — have been transformed into opportunities for dialogue.

I'll give them credit for having both the Muslim and Jewish groups sponsor the screening, not to mention a speech by Netanyahu. Yes, if you confront people they usually get resistant. But you don't get anywhere, if you never tackle hard issues because one side emotionally blackmails the other by threatening to leave whenever they are criticized. In a personal relationship we would call that "controlling," which is often a tactic of bullies who also manipulate by getting their victims to assume responsibility for the bully's violence, and guilt-trip the victim into repeatedly rescuing the relationship for fear of being seen as uncaring.

Friedman didn't think the dialogue group was as mutually respectful as they think themselves.

“The scary aspect of the NYU audience was the seeming inability to criticize any of the horrific Islamist actions and behavior in general, as shown in ‘Obsession’" . . . Friedman told CampusJ that dialogue participants at NYU were in “denial” about Muslim extremism, and that this produced a double standard in which “ ‘dialogue’ in this group meant Jews and Israelis with mea culpas and the Muslims and/or Arabs critiquing Israel and the West.” Friedman asserted that “Jews in particular are the most introspective, self-critical group on earth,” but Jewish self-criticism was not matched by similar introspection from Muslim students — something he said surprised him.

"Jews and Israelis with mea culpas and the Muslims and/or Arabs critiquing Israel and the West" is a feature of every "dialog group" I've ever participated in. Sarna's curious characterization of the Jewish students as "EMTs" encourages this political masochism. Richard Landes excellently describes the dynamic at work here, and that article should be required reading for everyone involved in this controversy at NYU.