Vol. 32, No.1                                                      April 05, 2006

THE TRUTH ABOUT ISRAEL!
BARBARA CAN RUN, BUT SHE CAN'T HIDE...

Here at The Patriot Returns we are always flattered when the New Caucus leadership can spare a moment from its "'round the clock negotiations"---after 41 months, this must be a rather large clock---to pay attention to our "disreputable e-mail" efforts. Thus you can imagine our collective joy when we were forwarded a copy of our Dear Leader's April 4th e-mail entitled "Setting the Record Straight." At the climatic moment of a hard-fought election campaign against the CUNY Alliance, and in the middle of a contract cave-in cha-cha-cha with Chancellor Goldstein, PSC president Barbara Bowen has taken the time to blast away at us. Makes us feel wanted, and kind of warm, all over.

What seems to trouble Barbara are our recent revelations of the New Caucus' particular, and peculiar, approach to Middle Eastern politics, especially its financial support for groups that advocate a radical anti-Israel agenda, and the New Caucus silence in the face of calls for academic and boycotts of the Jewish state. Before she started shouting "smear," or appealing to academic freedom, the Dear Leader should have paid attention to our not-so-fine print:

"The issue is not the merits of the anti-Israel musings from key New Caucus leaders. The question is a pragmatic one . . . " Remember: the key question is the validity of the Dear Leader's claim that her global crusades have boosted the PSC's standing with state and city political groups.

But since the Dear Leader has chosen to abandon the courage of her convictions and instead distort the record, we'll return to:

JUST THE FACTS, MA'AM, JUST THE FACTS

     Silence implies consent. In her rambling nine-paragraph statement, our Dear Leader asserts that describing her leadership as "'anti-Israel' is simply malicious." Yet she doesn't even bother to deny that:

How many Democrats in the State Assembly or State Senate---the people the Dear Leader claims have become more sympathetic to the PSC because of her global crusades---would consider this record to be "pro-Israel"?

     NYCLAW. You'd never know it from the Dear Leader's April 4th e-mail, but NYCLAW was formed to oppose not the war in Iraq but in Afghanistan. The Dear Leader knows it, even though she's now trying to conceal the fact. Indeed, she was present at the creation in late September 2001, while the stench of what once was the World Trade Center still wafted across lower Manhattan. As a "principal officer," Barbara placed her signature on, and her presidential prestige behind, a NYC Labor Anti-War Statement that included the following: "...the United States and its allies have already inflicted widespread suffering on innocent people in such places as Iraq, Sudan, Israel and the Occupied Territories, the former Yugoslavia and Latin America." Will Barbara now tell us how the US "inflicted suffering" in Israel and the Occupied Territories, and what the hell that had to with being head of the Professional Staff Congress?

     NYCLAW and the Dear Leader. Our Dear Leader further assures us, "I am not an officer of NYCLAW (the information on its website is outdated and we have asked to have it corrected), and I have not taken part in its policy discussions for several years." As The Patriot Returns never claimed that the Dear Leader was an officer of NYCLAW---we merely stated that she was one of 12 founding members of the organization---nor did we assert that the Dear Leader had taken part in recent NYCLAW policy discussions, we thank Barbara for confirming that we accurately described these points.

The Dear Leader doesn't attempt to deny NYCLAW's consistent anti-Israel animus. As NYCLAW itself explains it, "When top labor officials vocally supported Israel during the Jenin massacre, NYCLAW endorsed Palestinian self-defense, statehood and the Right of Return; picketed the Israeli consul's speech at the May 21, 2002 AFL-CIO Executive Council; and hosted a December 13, 2002 forum for visiting Palestinian trade unionists." Just what was NYCLAW "Principal Officer" Bowen's opinion when all this was transpiring?

     Public support for NYCLAW from the Dear Leader and the New Caucus. Although Barbara would have the membership believe otherwise, NYCLAW is much more than the local branch of US Labor Against the War; in fact, it helped to found the national organization. And the New Caucus's financial support for USLAW/NYCLAW has been sustained: $1000.00 in 2003; $2000.00 in 2004; sums still-to-be disclosed for 2005 and 2006. Kind of hard to reconcile these numbers with the Dear Leader's claim that "the PSC pays no dues to NYCLAW; nor has the union has made any contributions to 'anti-Israel groups.'" So we can only assume that the Dear Leader must believe that NYCLAW, which endorses "Palestinian self-defense, statehood and the Right of Return," cannot be termed an "anti-Israel group." By that logic, the Dear Leader is George Bush's #1 fan.

This public support extended beyond money: the Dear Leader also conferred the PSC's prestige on NYCLAW. The Dear Leader concedes that in March 2004, she named NYCLAW a "Friend of CUNY." This designation occurred just after NYCLAW proposed that all unions (1) demand "the right of all Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and land"; (2) "an end to U.S. military and economic support for Israeli Apartheid"; and (3) "divest all labor investments in Israeli Apartheid." As she smiled and handed over the "Friend of CUNY" award, what were Barbara Bowen's thoughts on this novel construal of apartheid? If the Dear Leader had distanced herself from NYCLAW by that time, as she now claims, why did she award the organization with this most prestigious of prizes?

     Tell the Truth! The Dear Leader continues: "Neither the PSC nor I have any link to a third group, 'Labor for Palestine.' I had not even heard of this organization until last week."

Either her hearing, or the PSC membership's credulity, must be strained; this statement suggests either disingenuousness or incompetence. NYCLAW's major initiative in spring 2004, just as the Dear Leader proudly named it a "Friend of CUNY," was sponsoring creation of . . . " Labor for Palestine," which urged full divestment from Israel and compared Israel to apartheid-era South Africa.

     The Dear Leader and Michael Letwin. We wonder: does the Dear Leader normally give "Friend of CUNY" designations to organizations whose activities she knows nothing about? In her conversations with her old friend, NYCLAW head Michael Letwin, did the issue of NYCLAW's sponsorship of Labor for Palestine come up? Did she ever discuss with Letwin the possibility of the PSC adopting a pro-boycott position?

It's safe to say that the answer to the latter two questions is yes. On March 24th, 2006, the PSC's anti-war list-serv asked the following question, "Who from the PSC attended yesterday's Labor for Palestine Forum at the Grad. Center?" The next meeting of the group, moreover, was devoted to the very same issue.

In light of this e-mail, will the Dear Leader reconsider her statement that she had never heard of Labor for Palestine before The Patriot Returns mentioned the organization?

     The PSC's "Palestine Resolution." Finally, the Dear Leader reveals, "When NYCLAW asked the PSC's Peace and Justice Committee to participate in a NYCLAW conference that opposed Israel 's policy on Palestine, the PSC declined."

Hmm . . . We thought she just said that she didn't know anything about NYCLAW's position on Israel? To resolve this apparent contradiction, the Dear Leader should release all material from the "Peace and Justice Committee" regarding its proposed "Resolution on Palestine." Since she has assured all CUNY faculty that she's not "anti-Israel," there'd be no reason to suspect that the resolution would strongly condemn Israel, right? That way, the entire membership can analyze the differences between the positions of the PSC and of NYCLAW on this issue.

     Bob and weave. When all else fails, the Dear Leader offers vacuous statements that make no pretense of explaining why adopting anti-Israel positions shows that the Dear Leader's emphasis on global crusades improves CUNY faculty's chances of getting a good contract.

"The PSC," she asserts, "has maintained an unbroken tradition from its founding through the present in support of religious freedom" and against religious discrimination. (That obviously explains the recent appointment of Timothy Shortell, who has written that all religious people are "moral retards," as Brooklyn College grievance counselor.) "The current leadership," the Dear Leader reveals, is not "anti-Semitic." ( How reassuring. We're not aware anyone had claimed that they were.) "The PSC is founded on the principle of academic freedom." ( Again, no one denies the fact. If she has to return to the classroom---gasp!---after this month's elections, academic freedom will protect the Dear Leader's right to organize all seven of her Literature courses around her own very special "pro-Israel" ideology, if she so chooses .)

THE MESSAGE

So, in the end, how to interpret the Dear Leader's bizarre April 4th e-mailing? An unfavorable view would note that the New Caucus leadership has taken a series of positions on Israel consistent with their own militant ideology but not shared by a majority of the membership, and so now our Dear Leader seeks to deceive and obfuscate. A more charitable view would suggest that her time ineffectively running the PSC has left the Dear Leader burnt out; and that she needs a period back in the classroom, away from union business, to recharge her intellectual batteries.

For CUNY faculty, however, the issue is not the merits or demerits of the anti-Israel musings from key New Caucus leaders; or even explaining the Dear Leader's now-desperate obfuscation attempts. The question is simple and is pragmatic: given political and social conditions in New York City and New York State, who could possibly believe that embracing radical anti-Israel efforts will improve the PSC's bargaining position in Albany or Gracie Mansion? The Dear Leader believes that it will, and promises to do more if and when we get a contract. Does a majority of the CUNY faculty agree with her?

WILL SHE NOW TAKE A PUBLIC STAND?

To clear up any lingering doubts about the consistency and coherency of her positions on NYCLAW, "Labor for Palestine," and Israel, we suggest that Barbara follow the advice of the Anti-Defamation League. In order to counter what they describe as "anti-Israel boycott campaigns, especially the initiative to sever academic ties with Israeli institutions, along with divestment campaigns," the ADL calls on "labor leaders . . . to speak out against divestment." Will Barbara now do so? Or, will the President of the Professional Staff Congress continue to obfuscate and vacillate on a subject of great importance to the membership, and to her fellow citizens of the City and State of New York?

Once again, we call upon Barbara Bowen to:

We'll be waiting to read your answers. We expect that the membership will be waiting to see them, too.

Sharad Karkhanis, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus

Forthcoming issues of The Patriot may be accessed at http://www.patriotreturns.com/.
Archived editions are available at http://www.patriotreturns.com/archive.htm.