French Act Properly, Callil Howls

Yesterday I posted about the conscientious and proper act of the French Embassy office in NYC to cancel use of its auspices for a book party for Carmen Callil’s Bad Faith, and Ms. Callil’s calumny that the cause was the complaints of “Jewish fundamentalists.” (Did France Cave to “Jewish Fundamentalists”?) Please visit my post, and the Media Bistro and Guardian reports below, to see what utter rubbish are their reports and Ms. Callil continue to exhibit her prejudice.

Once those responsible at the French Embassy office in NYC read the book, they decided to rescind their invitation. I and a few others, acting independently, had brought the matter to the Embassy’s attention, and as I demonstrate in my post yesterday we hardly fit the pejorative caricature Ms. Callil presents as “Jewish fundamentalists”, a further proof of her biases.

By all accounts, the book is a meticulous work on the depradations of a Vichy official’s anti-Semitism, but the author’s postscript equated current Israel and Israelis with the Vichy. Even a very favorable reviewer in the Christian Science Monitor (quoted and cited in my post yesterday), an expert on the period, criticized Ms. Callil’s historically and factually baseless accusation.

Today, Ms. Callil’s prejudicial attitude is repeated in her interview by Media Bistro:

She was politely furious about the turn of events—after all, this party was one of the main reasons she'd come to the U.S.—and full of scorn for the "fundamentalist Jews" whose protests had led to the cancellation, convinced none of them could possibly have had a chance to read the book. "They see the word 'Israel' and they ignite," she argued. "This sort of thing isn't good for democracy, and it's not good for America. Isn't this a violation of that amendment you have?"

No, it is not a violation of the First Amendment, Ms. Callil. It is the First Amendment as it should be: Americans speaking out freely about what is wrong with your book. And, as quoted in my post yesterday, the French Embassy rightfully agrees that its auspices should not be used to further your prejudices against Jews or Israel. We had pointed out to the Embassy that, “when the embassy of a government sponsors a speaker on a topic, that government in effect endorses that speaker’s views.” The Embassy’s press release canceling the event agreed:

Although the French Embassy was looking forward to the presentation of a work exploring the darkest hours of French history, it could not endorse a personal opinion of the author expressed in the postscript of the book.

London’s Guardian, of course, chimes in with sympathy for Ms. Callil.

The row over Callil's book is the latest element in a dispute about restrictions on freedom of speech in the US in relation to comments on Israel.

The Guardian then goes on to recount that anti-Israel speaker Tony Judt had recently had his invitation to speak at the Polish Embassy rescinded, after complaints by the ADL. The Polish, like the French, acted properly, to not allow their countries to be associated with extremist views, but by the Guardian it’s presented as a “free speech” issue. It’s NOT.

Neither Ms. Callil nor Mr. Judt have the “right” to use the property of the French or Polish embassies as their soapbox. Both governments, once alerted to the misuse of what would be their nations’ endorsement, correctly rescinded their invitations.

Let’s hope Ms. Callil has really learned something about America, which still has citizens who do exercise their rights to stand up for Israel, and about France and Poland, which still have governments that can distinguish between right, wrong, and even wronger, irresponsible extremism by her.

UPDATE:
AntiWar.com is hysterical in their reaction:

Having made a clean sweep of Embassy Row, the intellectual shock troops of the IDF (American branch) are now no doubt preparing an assault on Publishers’ Row: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux is reportedly bringing out a book-length work by Mearsheimer and Walt, elaborating on their thesis. You don’t have to be Nostradamus to see, with a fair degree of certainty, an organized effort to spike their book.

If FS&G, the Mercedes Benz of the publishing world — which has brought out works by T.S. Eliot, William Golding, Hermann Hesse, Czeslaw Milosz, Isaac Bashevis Singer, Aleksander Solzhenitsyn, Philip Roth, Susan Sontag, and Tom Wolfe — can be intimidated into silencing the Lobby’s critics, then what institution in American society is immune?

Let’s hope so! Any “institution” that engages in irresponsible, baseless, biased attacks upon Israel, or upon Americans’ rights to stand up for Israel, not to mention freedom or civilization, should not be immune. It’s been 36-years since I served in the USMC, and I’m proud to enlist in what the AntiWar hysterics call the “IDF (American Branch)”, at least if I can find its elusive, mythical recruiting and run-the-world office!

UPDATE #2:
The writer of the Media Bistro report linked above, today takes umbrage at my calling his piece “utter rubbish.” Above that, he misnames and misspells my name, although it is clear on my posts. He utterly ignores the responsibility of a government’s embassy to not provide a soapbox for disreputable views, instead arguing that a booking is a booking. Then he criticizes me for blaming the press for covering differing views, when what I criticized as “utter rubbish” was shoddy reporting, which he evidences again in his follow-up. He might read the Christian Science Monitor review of Ms. Callil’s book, referred to above and linked and quoted in my original post, and this New York Times review, both well-qualified to discern Ms. Callil’s gratuitous comment as unsupported and unacceptable.

The book’s one incongruous note is a last-minute, three-sentence analogy between the events described here and the treatment of Palestinians by Israel. This passage has become controversial because it led to the cancellation of a reception for Ms. Callil at the French Embassy in New York on Monday. But the real, apolitical problem with these remarks is that their grandstanding is unearned by the book and incongruous with Ms. Callil’s overall probity. The rest of the time she allows her readers to think for themselves.

UPDATE #3:
The Media Bistro columnist just wrote me, “Let me clarify my position for Mr. Kesler and his readers.” He has corrected the error in his column he made in my name. Thanks, and the first rule of journalism is get the name correctly.

The writer says that, “Based on what I know about how the event came together and fell apart, the French Embassy either failed to do the due diligence that would have enabled them to reject the concept of a party for Bad Faith from the onset, or it punked out on its commitment to Callil and Knopf because of a handful of complaints.”

The writer, thus, continues to ignore the information in his hands that I reported in my original post and the French Embassy confirmed, that they hadn’t been aware of Ms. Callil’s postscript. The Media Bistro writer continues “utter rubbish” reporting.

The Media Bistro writer continues: “The fact that a government body hosts a cultural event does not imply that the government endorses EVERY viewpoint of its featured guests….” Au Contraire. The French Embassy explicitly said just the opposite in its press release, quoted in entirety in my original post, that sponsoring a speaker’s book and her does imply endorsement, and Ms. Callil’s postscript is unacceptable and contrary to French policy.

Knopf and Ms. Callil can rent an auditorium and anyone can hear them. They have no “right” to the auspices of an Embassy. Knopf and Ms. Callil, obviously, sought the French Embassy venue as a governmental endorsement. The French government, seeing the error and misuse of its auspices, properly rescinded the invite.

The Media Bistro writer feels his presentation of Ms. Rabinowitz’ calm and knowledgeable replies was sufficient to puncture Ms. Callil’s characterization of her critics as “fundamentalist Jews.” It may be for those who are intimate with Ms. Rabinowitz, but few likely are. The Media Bistro writer failed to in any way present that Ms. Callil further exposed her own biases by her intemperate and false remark.

Update #4:
The Media Bistro writer has asked me to identify him by name: Ron Hogan.
He has also asked me to refer to his web site as mediabistro.com.