Rachel Tabachnick, until last month, reported on Christian Zionism twice a month as a contributor to Zeek, the Forward’s companion site. This week, she brought me the troubling news that Zeek’s editor, Jo Ellen Kaiser had forbidden her from writing on this subject or on John Hagee. This happened in the aftermath of legal threats made by Ari Morgenstern, Hagee’s chief Jewish PR flack to Sam Norich, the Forward’s publisher.
I discovered that other writers have received either resigned or faced similar cease and desist orders from Kaiser. Joel Schalit, Zeek’s online editor, who engaged many of these writers originally to write for the publication, announced his resignation due to editorial and philosophical disagreements with its direction. Originally, he was supposed to have left in July (and part, though not all of his reason for leaving involved editorial disagreement). But due to the fracas involving Tabachnick, he resigned on May 22nd.
Originally, Schalit and Kaiser came to Zeek from Tikkun Magazine. They left their jobs as editors there after a similar argument with Michael Lerner. He didn’t want Tikkun to turn into a publication that over-emphasized coverage of the Israel. He wanted to publish on subjects less confrontational, less divisive. He wanted more Diaspora, less Israel. Kaiser and Schalit left over precisely this argument. Yet here Kaiser makes almost the same choice herself, instead of Lerner. She mistakenly sees Christian Zionism and Hagee as essentially an Israel related story and not a Diaspora story. That’s what to her makes it tangential, rather than essential.
I disagree. John Hagee is one of the big stories not just for Jews concerned about Israel, but for all Jews. His manipulations and fraudulent representations of Christian Zionist theology, his support for a radical right wing agenda not just in Israel but in the U.S. should make every Jew sit up and take notice.
Returning to Tabachnick’s work, Zeek double and triple-checked the material Tabachnick had written over the past year and couldn’t find a single error. Despite this, Kaiser determined that discretion was the better part of valor and decided that protecting Zeek from legal jeopardy was more important than standing by her writer.
The Forward’s publisher, Sam Norich, fielded complaints he received about Tabachnick’s writing from Ari Morgenstern. I do not know what role, if any, Norich played in decisions made about Tabachnick. I should add that I made repeated attempts to interview both Norich and Kaiser for this story. I even e-mailed Kaiser a series of questions which she said she would answer. Later, she said she was having second thoughts. I sent e-mails and left a voice mail message for Norich and his sole response was to publish a comment, about which I wrote this post.
I do not know whether Kaiser put Tabachnick on hiatus solely to protect Zeek from the threat of a lawsuit from Hagee’s goons; or she was concerned about jeopardizing Zeek’s relationship with The Forward as well (Zeek shares The Forward’s web server); or this was part of her editorial pruning of Israel-related material and authors from the publication. Most importantly, I do not know whether threat of lawsuits had anything to do with The Forward’s agreeing to publish Hagee’s piece. At the very least, even if the timing of these matters is purely coincidence it does not look good.
While Alan Dershowitz boasts that he invented the term lawfare to describe the use of legal fora by Israel’s enemies to battle against it (this Wikipedia article disputes his claim and notes it originated seven years before he says he coined it), he makes no mention of a similar strategy among the pro-Israel right. Besides the Hagee-Morgenstern threats, the Israeli rightist Im Tirtzu, recipient of $200,000 in CUFI funding, regularly threatens legal action against those who criticize it. In fact, when Didi Remez created the Facebook group, Im Tirztu–Fascist Movement (what else is new?), to mock the group. Ronen Shoval immediately threatened Didi, who responded with a three page letter from his attorney, Michael Sfard, explaining why Shoval had not a snowball’s chance in hell of an apology. That’s the posture Jo Ellen Kaiser should adopt: “Serve a paper and sue me, sue me, what can you do me?”
Further troubling, is that Rachel Tabachnick and her partner in Talk2Action, Bruce Wilson, published several comments in the Hagee online thread which consisted of quotations from the pastor which rebutted the claims in his article. Those comments disappeared from the site (those quotations can now be read here along with amplified archival material attesting to Hagee’s views) . Now, when you visit the Hagee article you cannot publish any comments. This makes it appear to be an editorial retreat not just by Zeek, but by the Forward itself.
So why would Ari Morgenstern and John Hagee be burned up by Rachel Tabachnick’s attacks in the pages of Zeek? Clearly, even if there was no specific quid pro quo between Hagee and the Forward that resulted in his work being printed there, Hagee’s in the middle of a charm offensive in the Jewish community. He’s seeking to purify his soul of past sins against Jews unfortunately by lying his way out of them.
Many Jewish journalists (Sarah Posner, Max Blumenthal, etc.) are writing about Hagee and attacking his views, but few, if any are published in Jewish publications. Zeek is the exception. Until now, with the megaphone offered by The Forward’s website, Zeek offered some of the most damaging material exposing the seamy underbelly of Hagee’s anti-Jewish theology. This proved especially nettlesome to Hagee and his court Jews, Morgenstern and CUFI director David Brog. That’s why they undertook to silence her.
I note too that both Andrew Sullivan and the Washington Post Faith blog published letters from Morgenstern rebutting attacks on Hagee. I wonder if Morgenstern took them to the woodshed as he did Sam Norich? What, if anything, were the nature of those conversations? Did they too involve legal threats? I do know for a fact that Hagee’s lawyers wrote threatening letters to Rabbi Haim Dov Beliak’s Jews on First, a group that combats Christian fundamentalism.
Unfortunately, Zeek’s editor Kaiser determined that fighting a war against CUFI would deter Zeek from issues more central to its mission. She determined that exposing Christian Zionism was tangential and not worth the fight. To this I say, if you want to have a relevant progressive Jewish publication how can you NOT take up this cause? If you want to brand yourself as a crusading enterprise with a distinct message, what better way to do this than by saying to Ari Morgenstern in the words of his beloved president: “bring it on?”
Personally, I think that Zeek has missed a sterling opportunity. It would’ve found allies in this fight it didn’t know it had. It would’ve gain readers, gained traction, gained credibility. Not that it doesn’t have those things now. But it would’ve had them in spades if it had addressed these issues differently. Now, all it has is a reputation for flinching in the face of the assault by right-wing Christian Zionist bullies and their Jewish enablers.
Apparently, Hagee isn’t the only force in the right-wing community from whom Zeek is flinching. After being told to stop writing about Christian Zionism, Tabachnick wrote a story criticizing Phyllis Chesler for the role she played in supporting an effort by evangelicals to kidnap a Muslim child who came under sway of Christian missionaries. After reading the story, Kaiser was none too happy with her author and approached Chesler for a rebuttal. The rebuttal strangely did not rebut any factual statement in the original story. It did not find any errors, in fact it wasn’t substantive at all.
As a result of Kaiser’s flight toward the bunker (Phil Weiss’ description of The Forward’s behavior) Chesler’s allies in the far right Jewish world smelled blood in the water. Hit pieces on Tabachnick were published by Frontpagemagazine and American Spectator. Which goes to show that when you retreat in the face of such an onslaught it only emboldens the political bullies.
Another word on Hagee’s alternate charm-threat offensive in the Jewish community. Besides legal threats, he uses honey (or cash as the case may be) with those in the community prone to accept such blandishments. I’ve already covered the $500,000 gift from Hagee to Elie Wiesel’s foundation (the latter wiped out by an overly trusting reliance on Bernie Madoff’s financial acumen), which likely played some role in Wiesel accepting an invitation to keynote CUFI’s national convention this year.
The organization hosts Nights to Honor Israel along with co-sponsoring local Jewish federations, which receive individual gifts generally in the $100,000 range for their troubles. In an age when Jewish philanthropy toward Israel is receding, federation campaigns are looking everywhere they can for replacement funding. CUFI presents an exceptionally attractive alternative. But it should be noted that these gifts do not support local federation philanthropy. Instead, they go into the coffers of the Jewish Agency or individual CUFI donees (often settlement-oriented), which is the midst of a shakeup that involves absorbing evangelical forces into leadership roles (essentially a slow motion takeover). In this project, the evangelicals work hand in glove with handsomely compensated Jewish leaders like Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein. The $58-million CUFI has given to Israel projects (many of them far-right settler oriented as I’ve documented here) over the past few years is another bone thrown to Israel and Diaspora Jewry to lull it into complacency.
But as Rabbi Eric Yoffie wrote so presciently in The Forward last year, American Jews and their federations should not be tricked by such tempting offers. Do not think there is no price to paid, no quid pro quo. Hagee is not doing this out of the goodness of his heart. He’s not even doing out of the goodness of his heart toward Israel, as he claims. He, like every other powerful figure, has his own agenda. That agenda includes conversion of the Jews in order to bring the End Times and Jesus’ return. Missionaries like Hagee are no longer the hit ’em on the head types who use heavy-handed tactics that are transparent to the naked eye. They’ve become far more sophisticated in their methods. They do outreach. They seek allies. They work their way into communities and even nations, like Israel. They do good. They keep the more objectionable aspects of their agenda under wraps. They wait patiently for their opportunity.
Now, Hagee-allied groups are ensconced in Israel and doing missionary work to Jews and Muslims. They don’t do this under Hagee’s official banner. He’s a bit too sophisticated for that. They work under Maoz Israel Ministries, which Hagee and two of his fellow CUFI ministers have publicly endorsed.
That’s why I simply don’t understand why Zeek has allowed itself to be cowed by Hagee. Nor do I understand why The Forward has given its heksher in the form of coveted space on its op-ed page to Hagee’s smooth talk about Jews. This is definitely not their finest hour.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Has the ‘Forward’ gone into the bunker? (mondoweiss.net)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://i0.wp.com/img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?w=640)
Hagee, like most Christian Zionists, is the slickest, cagiest form of anti-Semite. It is no wonder that almost all CZs are also Dispensationalists. They “love the Jewish people” because they’re hoping Jesus will come back sooner, and kill all the ones who won’t convert to Christianity.
Along with everybody else disgusted with these people, I can only assume that it’s a case of each side exploiting the other for their own purposes. Both are confident that, in the end, THEIR side will be “The Winners.”
Actually many Christian Zionists today, including many of Hagee’s CUFI leaders are not dispensationalists, an important point because it impacts their activism. They still have a very literal end time narrative (which is also anti-Semitic), but have abandoned the pre-Trib Rapture, meaning that they believe they will still be on earth and will have to fight evil themselves.
The activism from this group is equally, if not more dangerous. They teach young people that they must be warriors for the end times therefore the movement is increasingly militant. Also, they teach that the 1000-year Christian utopia will not begin until a “believing” Israel calls for Jesus as their messiah. This has made proselytizing much more aggressive and Talmudic Judaism increasingly demonized. A number of CUFI leaders are at the center of promotion and support of Messianic ministries in Israel and internationally.
Ah, the “Joel’s Army” fantasy.
I was under the impression that post-Trib (or mid-Trib) folks were still following the “Dispensations.”
Richard Silverstein did ask me to comment. Unfortunately, his request for a comment came on a Shabbat just before I left for a two-day retreat–as I informed him, I was unable to respond in full until my return today.
I want to clarify two points, one personal, one about Zeek.
First, I did not leave Tikkun over differences around Israel coverage. Silverstein never asked me why I left Tikkun. I have no idea where he received this information, but it is absolutely incorrect.
Second, Zeek has not ceased coverage of Israeli politics or even of Christian Zionists. I decided to put our coverage of Christian Zionism on hiatus for three months while we determine our editorial direction. I communicated this to all our writers. We will continue to publish articles about Israeli politics in the next three months, and I believe it is likely that we will resume some coverage of Christian Zionist activity in Israel–I just wanted to take a breather to reassess our editorial position.
Zeek is a catalyst for conversations about the Jewish tomorrow. Our role is to engage Jews around questions of Jewish identity. How American Jews relate to Israel, and specifically the Israel-Palestine situation, is critical to our understanding of Jewish identity. We will continue to bring out provocative, hard-hitting articles on this topic.
First, you & I discussed a possible interview several times during this past weekend. I told you I couldn’t wait till Tuesday & asked you to answer questions via e mail. You agreed. I sent the questions to you. YOu then told me you were having 2nd thoughts about pariticpating based on what I posted about the Hagee op ed. I then urged you to respond & not allow me to publish w/o your input. You didn’t reply, which I took as a “No.” If it wasn’t you should’ve replied and said so.
You didn’t bother to read the Forward article to which I linked which says explicitly what I wrote about your departure fr Tikkun. That reporter didn’t make up the editorial differences out of whole cloth. That’s what he reported.
If you do continue publishing articles about Christian ZIonism and Israel you’re going to have to do so without some of the contributors who’ve contacted me who believe either they’re no longer welcome at Zeek or who’ve already told you they’re leaving. Good luck in finding replacements & I hope you treat them better than you’ve treated those writers who’ve contacted me about their situation at Zeek.
YOU were the one who said that Israel coverage and Christian ZIonism were “tangential” (your word) to Zeek’s editorial direction. I can quote chapter and verse via your e mail. So I’m afraid you’re attempting to rewrite history. If my criticism makes you reassess your editorial decisions all well and good. But don’t attempt to become a revisionist w/o acknowledging your previous statements. Not to mention the writers who’ve contacted me who I mentioned who believe your previous statements about their possibly not having a role in the “new” Zeek.
And there is one other disingenuous comment in what you write. Rachel Tabachnick isn’t the only writer you’ve suspended from contributing. You have asked other writers not to write on usual political subjects they contribute to Zeek.
It just proves, some people can be bought… accepting money from this Hagee creep is certainly going to end in a mess.
Hagee is not aware of himself, oblivious to suffering of others, and likely feels he is above other Christians, (in his predictable megalomaniac style), feeling he is immunized by his slick CZ agenda. But in his own theology, Jesus would be kicking his ass out of the temple with the other money-changers, specifically on this point.
If only he could live for a moment in Gaza, in front of the gun of an IDF soldier, he might change his mind who God is…
How do you know that’s the reason for her gag order? (I smell a trend here ;-)) Otherwise you suggest Kaiser caved in to threats of litigation.
I understand you’re referring to Hagee’s published views before this Forward article. Hagee is one of the principal proponents of Christian Zionism. So how are his publications fraudulent rather than true representations of what Christian Zionism is?
Not sure what your first question means. But I make my judgements based on previous e mail correspondence w. Kaiser.
No, I’m referring to his revisionist version of his views in The Forward which are totally at variance w. his previously expressed views. Look over my post about the Hagee article in which I compared what he wrote in the Forward w. quotations fr. past statements.
Hi Richard,
Thanks for taking on this difficult issue. Rachel Tabachnick has just posted a collection of John Hagee quotes, from Hagee books, sermons, and other media, that radically contradict his Forward op-ed.
See:
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2010/5/25/124234/555/Front_Page/Hagee_in_His_Own_Words_Part_Two
Statement Concerning CUFI’s Response to Zeek Magazine’s Coverage of Christian Zionism
As the largest Christian Zionist organization in the country, Christians United for Israel (CUFI) contacted the editors of Zeek to request that they seek comment from our organization if the publication was to run further stories concerning Pastor John Hagee, CUFI, or Christian Zionists.
This request is in accordance with the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics, specifically the second statement in the first section of the code which states “Journalists should:” “Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.”
Initially Zeek’s editor did not agree to this request; that decision prompted CUFI to contact the Forward’s publisher due to the two organizations’ co-marketing agreement. Zeek has now agreed to our request, therefore CUFI considers this matter closed.
At no point in time did anyone affiliated with CUFI threaten Zeek or the Forward with legal action.
Liar, liar pants on fire. Jo Ellen Kaiser had a conversation with Sam Norich after the two of you spoke and she told her staff to prepare for a lawsuit and she hired a pro bono attorney for just this eventuality. So I’ll let my readers be the judge of which narrative is more credible.
And if what you claim is the truth why wouldn’t Sam Norich talk to me directly and confirm what you say? And btw, if what you claim is true and Zeek has agreed to vet its articles with you before publication after you made such a request of Sam Norich, then that means that NOrich was less than candid in his claim that he has nothing to do with anything that happens at Zeek. Indeed it appears that Norich has interceded on CUFI’s behalf and gotten Zeek to alter its editorial policy in your favor. Interesting.
Oh & Ari while we’re at it–did Hagee write the op ed or did you or Brog write it for him? And if you claim he did write it himself does this mean that all future utternaces he makes will not contradict any of the statements in the Forward piece & will conform to this new leaf Sam Norich claims Hagee has turned over?
In the end ‘Zeek’ is a website just as this is. Its up to its owners to decide who posts.
If Tabachnik wants to set up her own anti-CZ website she can (although ‘Jews on first’ has beaten her to the punch in being first)
And that way she won’t be ejected for her own views.
Well probably not.
PS I have a bit more faith than you do that Tikkun, Zeek and the Forward can read their readers.
David,
That’s not correct. Zeek has a website but it also puts out a print publication. And Zeek has staff, editors and so on. It’s also organizationally tied to the Jewish Daily Forward, which is over 110 years old.
As far as your comment that you “have a bit more faith… that Tikkun, Zeek and the Forward can read their readers,” I’m not quite sure what you mean but if you’re suggesting the cited publications pander to their readership I’d respond with this – are news services to give readers what they expect or are they to report news and facts ?
The Forward (or Zeek or Tikkun) isn’t a news service (eg the JTA)-it’s mostly opinion pieces.
From ‘The Nation’ to ‘The National Review’, opinion journals do give their readers what they expect, at least 99% of the time. (The other 1% of articles are there to show they are ‘open-minded’)
Actually The Forward is a newspaper which contains straight news reporting and opinion. Just because Hagee’s piece was in the opinion section doesn’t justify publishing lies that are totally at variance w. every other statement he’s ever made on the same subjects.
Interesting article! Christian Zionists, Dispensationalists, Protestant Fundamentalists in general are the elephant in the living room that no one wants to admit is there, for the international press or the secular US press. I would guess most European journalists assume Americans are as secular as they are (Ha!), lots of US journalists are converts to secularism and don’t want to think about what they’ve left behind. How many discussions have I read on what Bush’s goals in Afghanistan or Iraq were! No one wants to consider what is obvious to me: he was pursuing the Rapture, the End of Days. He made no secret of it when he tried to recruit Chirac to his coalition. (What he meant when he said G-d talked to him is a whole ‘nother subject!)
Anyway, keep up coverage of Dispensationalists and Israel, Richard. The subject is a gift which will keep on giving!
Comments on Hagee OpEd on The Forward now possible —
http://forward.com/articles/128316/