Film overshadows fest
The question regarding the screening of “Rachel” is not about stifling discourse or freedom of speech. It’s about whether the SFJFF is an appropriate forum to show this film. Whether it’s appropriate or not depends on what the goal of the festival is.
Personally, I see the SFJFF as a venue to celebrate Jewish history and creativity, and I would like to think Israel is part of it. I don’t think this is another forum to discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and I think it is an inappropriate venue for screening “Rachel.” The only analogy that comes to my mind is screening a homophobic movie at the Gay & Lesbian Film Festival.
I think the organizers made a grave mistake and a disservice to themselves. When the festival starts, the only topic for discussion about it would be “Rachel” and the pro and con arguments by the pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian parts of the community. I hope the organizers have learned from this year’s lesson and will be more careful in their selection next year.
Reuven Segev | San Rafael
Kudos to SFJFF
In spite of, and because of, all the controversy created by the showing of a provocative political film at this year’s Jewish Film Festival, we are looking forward to another season of great movies, community building, fun parties and outside-the-box programming which reaches out to a new generation and new audiences with diverse viewpoints.
Presenting films such as “Rachel” honors what is now, after 29 years, a well-established tradition of innovation and curatorial risk-taking. We applaud and support the continued commitment to freedom of expression and cutting-edge programming which distinguishes this festival from all its progeny. Kudos to Peter Stein, Nancy Fishman and the festival board for their dedication and hard work.
Deborah Kaufman, founding director, S.F. Jewish Film Festival, 1980-1993
Alan Snitow
board president, 1986-1992
Alan Ramo
board president, 1992-1994
Howard Herman
board president, 1995-1997
Marcia Freedman
board president, 1998-2001
‘Diversity’ is OK to a point
The Jewish Film Festival has now scheduled Dr. Michael Harris to speak when Cindy Corrie speaks as invited. It is well known that Dr. Harris is pro-Israel and Mrs. Corrie is anti-Israel, which is not a proper balance, if that is what the SFJFF has now intended. This is as futile as trying to balance Palestinian terrorism and Israel’s self defense against terrorism. Being pro-Palestinian doesn’t have to be anti-Israel, but for many speakers and writers, support of the Palestinians often becomes hate and demonization of Israel.
An example of this anti-Israel stance are the statements and actions by Jewish Voice For Peace and American Friends Service Committee, which SFJFF executive director Peter Stein categorizes as “co-presenters” of the SFJFF. The Koret Foundation said that they are “two virulently anti-Israel, anti-Semitic groups that support boycotts, divestment and sanctions against the Jewish state.”
Stein has tried to justify the Rachel Corrie film and Cindy Corrie talk as “diversity of the Jewish people.” But many others judge the film festival by evaluating whether it aids or harms the image of Israel. The SFJFF has failed to realize that diversity that includes extreme opposition to Israel’s existence as a Jewish state is unacceptable and wrong.
Norman Licht | San Carlos
Misleading editorial
As co-presenters of the film “Rachel” at the S.F. Jewish Film Festival, we are appalled at j.’s misleading editorial (“Bad idea for SFJFF to invite Corrie’s mom,” July 17) regarding the appearance of Cindy Corrie at the film.
The editorial untruthfully smears both the International Solidarity Movement and Cindy Corrie. Anyone can visit the Web sites of either the ISM or the Rachel Corrie Foundation and view their missions, and see how misleading your editorial is.
You say that the Rachel Corrie Foundation is “anti-Israel,” but in fact the word “Israel” does not even appear in its mission or guiding principles. You claim that the ISM as an organization “calls for the destruction of Israel,” but this is flat-out false. The ISM clearly states that its mission and tactics are rooted in nonviolent strategies for achieving peace and justice. The Rachel Corrie foundation funds programs that “build understanding, respect and appreciation for differences.”
Your editorial says “We are all for free speech,” and of course, so are we. But while it may be your right to parrot misinformation that undermines reasonable and civil discussion, doing so is not truly in the spirit of free speech, nor is it very honorable.
Joel Frangquist
Cindy Shamban
Coordinating committee, Jewish Voice for Peace, Bay Area chapter
Not about free speech
I am writing to express my disappointment with the San Francisco Jewish Film Festival for presenting the film “Rachel” and providing Cindy Corrie with a forum at the screening to present her anti-Israel diatribes.
I understand that she has a right to free speech, but this is not a free-speech issue. Under the false proposition that they are taking a courageous stand by airing alternative views, the San Francisco Jewish Film Festival is merely providing a platform for a propagandist to spew her distorted anti-Israel hate. As Columbia University debased itself by legitimizing Ahmadinejad and his bigotry by offering him their stage, so is the San Francisco Jewish Film Festival debasing itself.
Israel has real enemies and it is the height of naiveté to sponsor these enemies.
David Marinoff | Oakland
Don’t stifle dissent
As someone whose Jewish identity is a core part of my being, I am appalled by the attempts at censorship by some in the Jewish community (including your disappointing editorial July 17), criticizing the JFF for showing “Rachel” and for inviting Cindy Corrie (“Bad idea for SFJFF to invite Corrie’s mom,” July 17). Whatever happened to our principled positions around free speech, and how could we have such a short collective memory of the impact of censorship on our community in the 1950s? I may find myself disagreeing with the views of Cindy Corrie, but I want to hear her perspective in order to make that decision.
Let all those calling for boycotts and other shenanigans come to the festival and tell us why they oppose Cindy Corrie, and for those who haven’t yet bought tickets for the festival, do it now to show the right-wing elements in our community that you will not be intimidated by their stifling of dissent within the Jewish community.
Richard Weiner | Oakland
No Jewish communal funds for SFJFF
I fully support the right of private Jewish groups to sponsor anti-Israel activities. However, I am outraged that Jewish community funds are being used to sponsor the “Rachel” event.
I cannot support the film festival in an anti-Israel effort. And mainstream Jewish organizations owe Israel at least this minimal level of support.
Suzanne Jacobs | Palo Alto
Thanks from filmmaker
I’m writing to express my impassioned support for the San Francisco Jewish Film Festival in light of the current controversy over the programming of the documentary film “Rachel” in this year’s festival and post-screening discussion with Cindy Corrie.
The San Francisco Jewish Film Festival has always been an invaluable venue for celebration, discussion and exploration of the meaning of Jewish community in all its many facets. As a showcase of ideas, dialogue and the best in Jewish cinema it is unparalleled and remains one of San Francisco’s greatest cultural treasures. I want to express my ongoing gratitude to the festival organizers and voice my support for their programming choices — as controversial and provocative as they sometimes are.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.
Jenni Olson | San Francisco
Filmmaker, “575 Castro St.” (showing in this year’s festival)
Fast on this
I read with interest the article about the organization “Ta’anit Tzedek”— Jewish Fast for Gaza (“Rabbis launch fast for Gaza,” July 17). It is admirable for rabbis to put their calls for social action into tangible efforts.
Perhaps I may suggest that their desire to have Israel negotiate meaningfully with Hamas to create a peaceful solution is a rather easy task. Israel has said many time, that they will negotiate if Hamas stops calling for the destruction of Israel, recognizes Israel as an independent and sovereign state, and stops firing rockets toward Israel.
You can see what Hamas has to do and then Israel will, I am sure, negotiate with the Hamas leaders for a full and peaceful resolution of all differences. Having this happen, then the rabbonim can continue their fast until the release of Sgt. Gilad Schalit as well as other Israeli prisoners being held by Muslim terrorist organizations.
Jon S. Levinson | San Carlos
‘Hopelessly out of touch’
Sad to see that Quentin Kopp (Letters, July 17) remains as hopelessly out of touch as he was during his ineffective stints as a “public servant.” Far from being repulsed, I’m cheered that j. featured a group of people who are simply trying to further the human experience, despite the efforts of Neanderthals like Kopp.
Gerald Klein | Albany
Fence or wall?
I object to the headline “Security wall progress minimal over 15 months” (Mideast shorts, July 17). Nearly all the lineal footage of the security barrier is chainlink fence. A fence is not a wall. The concrete portion is less than 5 percent and required to prevent sniping over the “green line” directly into Israel. Palestinian propaganda calls the barrier the “apartheid wall.” The j. supports this propaganda effort by using the same term. Please stop.
Benjamin Pollock | San Francisco
Equality first
As a queer Jew, I would like to thank all the straight Jewish allies, Jewish organizations and congregations that marched as the Jewish contingent in the San Francisco Pride Parade last month.
It was heartening for me to see you there, because of the recent defeats of gay marriage in California. Is it too presumptuous for me to expect that Jews could get that the issue of gay marriage is one of religious persecution versus civil rights? Certainly, if one were to look at Proposition 8’s supporters, one could see that the Mormon, Catholic and fundamental Christian churches were very politically and financially involved in that election.
What happened to the separation of church and state here? What if white people were allowed to vote on African Americans’ civil rights in the ’60s? How long should I wait in the back of the bus for ignorant, arrogant or homophobic people to decide we are worthy of equal rights?
And how many straight Jews will show up in support next year at Pride because it’s not fun feeling like a second-class Jew, and we all just want to be equal. Right? n
Laura Mae Alpert | San Francisco