Wilton Library‘s first-ever writer-in-residence, Aisha Abdel Gawad, is drawing considerable public controversy after she refused to take part in a book festival forum because she stated the panel’s moderator was a “Zionist.”
Gawad, the author of Between Two Moons, a novel exploring “what it means to be a young Muslim in America,” according to her website, was scheduled to appear on an author’s panel called “Girls, Coming of Age” on Saturday, Sept. 21, at the Albany Book Festival, run through the New York State Writers Institute at the University of Albany in New York. According to news accounts, the panel’s moderator, author Elisa Albert, who is Jewish, received an email from the festival’s assistant director telling her that Gawad — along with another panelist, author Lisa Ko — was refusing to take part in the forum.
“Basically, not to sugar coat this, Aisha Gawad and Lisa Ko don’t want to be on a panel with a ‘Zionist.'” the email said. The NY State Writers Institute decided to cancel the event even though Albert said she would appear on her own after the other writer on the panel, Emily Layden, withdrew “in an effort to avoid controversy.”
Over the next 36 hours, the story appeared in online news reports, including on Yahoo.com, and spread widely on social media. A viral email campaign condemning Gawad’s withdrawal and the festival’s subsequent cancellation of the event as antisemitic was sent to a wide range of recipients, including NY congressional officials, U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona, U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer (NY), and Greenwich Academy (where Gawad teaches). On the distribution list locally were Wilton Library Executive Director Caroline Mandler, Wilton Public Schools Superintendent Kevin Smith, and the Wilton Board of Education.
One line from the email stated: Antizionism is a modern, socially acceptable form of antisemitism, and NYSWI at the University of Albany has a legal obligation to treat Ms Gawad and Ms Ko’s antisemitism just as they would any other form of racism.
On April 15, Wilton Library announced that Gawad had been chosen from more than 100 applicants from around the country — including poets, nonfiction writers and screenwriters — and named as the new Cornerstone Writer-in-Residence. The fellowship program, funded by the Wilton Library Endowment Fund, includes a $30,000 stipend and office space for one year to help the chosen writer complete their next project.
According to a February 2024 news release from the library, “In addition to completing their manuscript, the writer-in-residence will lead a series of library programs for all ages and offer outreach visits to Wilton schools during their residency.”
More than 2,000 emails were sent Sunday as part of the viral email campaign. GOOD Morning Wilton obtained a copy of the email, which included a paragraph about Wilton:
“Ms Gawad is the Cornerstone writer-in-residence at the Wilton, CT Library, and has accepted a $30,000 stipend and office space in exchange for leading programs at the library and at local schools. Ms Mandler, will you put up a sign on her office door to warn ‘Zionists’ to stay away? Will you ban books that offend her? Should Jewish patrons wear yellow stars lest she accidentally speak to a ‘Zionist’? Will ‘Zionist’ taxpayers receive refunds on their share of library funding, since they can’t attend her presentations? Superintendent Smith, Wilton Public Schools undoubtedly have ‘Zionist’ students and staff. Will you violate Title VI and tell Jews to stay home on the days Ms Gawad is coming in, to accommodate her aversion to speaking with people she disagrees with? What safeguards have you put in place to protect Jewish students from discrimination and harassment?”
While Gawad did not respond to GOOD Morning Wilton‘s emailed requests for comment, Mandler gave a short statement on Sunday.
“At this time, I am only able to say that the library is taking this situation very seriously,” she said.
Smith, who was still sorting through many emails about the situation on Sunday evening, said no specifics had been arrived at between the schools and library.
“At this point, all I can tell you is that the Wilton Public Schools does not have any relationship with Aisha Gawad,” he said.
“I received an invitation from the Wilton Library a week or so ago to have the schools engage with her this year in her role as Writer-in-Residence, but I have not followed up on that invitation,” he said. “Our school administration had no role in the selection of Wilton Library’s Writer-in-Residence and was not consulted with regard to planning any Writer-in-Residence activities.”
According to the library, “Abdel Gawad was selected by a committee that included representatives from the library staff, Board of Trustees, and contributors to the Endowment Fund, as well as authors and publishers.”
Gawad’s plan for the residency involves work on a new novel set in mid-20th century Cairo involving Egyptian performing arts.
Asked for comment on Gawad’s potential involvement with the school, BOE Chair Ruth DeLuca had few words.
“At this time, (the) Board of Education has no comment,” she said. “Despite receiving over 2,000 emails, the Wilton Library Writer-in-Residence selection and program has no connection to, or relationship with, the Wilton Public Schools.”
GMW has learned that Wilton residents have begun contacting the Board of Selectmen and Board of Finance about the story.
While she had only limited knowledge of the situation as of Sunday evening, First Selectman Toni Boucher shared her initial response.
“I just now learned of this and am deeply concerned,” she said. “Antisemitism in any form has no place in our society and certainly not in Wilton. I hope to find out more and may then be able to comment further.”
Cantor Harriet Dunkerley of Temple B’nai Chaim in Georgetown expressed her concern, stating that Gawad should not be kept in her role with the library.
“This is antithetical to everything the library’s mission statement stands for,” she said, “and I am shocked and saddened that those in charge did not engage in a more thorough vetting process before bringing Ms. Gawad on board.”
“Aisha Gawad’s refusal to appear on a literary panel that had nothing to do with Israel or Gaza simply because it was being moderated by a Jewish author is quite simply unacceptable,” Dunkerley said. “I cannot see how the library, in good conscience, can keep her in this role.”
Dunkerley cited the partial public funding of the library as part of its responsibility to not give this position to someone who, she said, is not acting in accordance with its mission to be inclusive.
“The very public backlash is already leaving a stain on everything Wilton stands for and is evidence that Ms. Gawad is not the right fit for our library’s Writer-in-Residence fellowship,” she said.
Editor’s note: the article and headline have been updated to better clarify that emails sent to Wilton officials called Gawad’s refusal to be on a panel with Albert a display of antisemitism.
Those who have stood up against antisemitism and have raised awareness need to commended
There should be no tolerance in a publicly funded library for antisemitism
She should be removed
Having an anti-Semite as a writer in residence is offensive and downright anti-American. Not a shining moment in the history of this town. Providing a platform for terrorism sets a dangerous precedent.
It is essential to recognise the distinction between anti-Zionism and antisemitism. Antisemitism, a form of hatred and discrimination, is unacceptable and must always be condemned. However, anti-Zionism is a political viewpoint that individuals have the right to express, and this should not be confused with bigotry.
We must allow people to speak their minds freely and fulfil their responsibility to engage in open discussion. If someone’s words incite hate, then we should all stand together in condemning those actions. But let us not allow misinformation or misinterpretation to lead to unfair accusations or a miscarriage of justice. It is our duty to ensure that freedom of expression is protected while standing firm against genuine prejudice in any form.
I completely agree with Mr. Ayoub. The time if for more discussion and less of cancel culture.
I have been completely in disagreement with Israels, past support of settlements and the treatments of Palestinians under occupation and have been there 5 times to see and live it firsthand. On the last trip the guards at the airport stole 5 boxes o medical supplies for surgery in Gaza only because I was taking it to Gaza.
The time for honest dialogue has come and hopefully religious leaders will work to bring us together and not tear us apart.
I find it odd that your cries for “more discussion and less cancel culture” and for “engaging in open discussion” are literally in response to Gawad refusing to speak on a panel with someone who may not share the same “political viewpoint”….!
Also, please stop speaking on our behalf and telling us what is and isn’t antisemitism.
Criticism of Israel’s government may not be anti-Semitic – in fact many Israelis do so, just as we in America aren’t always in agreement with our own politicians – but that is NOT the same as being anti-Zionist. Here, Gawad refused to be on a panel with a Jew to discuss a topic that has nothing to do with the war or politics, citing that she is a Zionist. In my book, it’s clear here that Anti-Zionist = anti-Semitic. If the library fails to take a strong stance here, it will speak volumes.
For a state representative of Wilton to defend, in this way, a blatantly antisemitic act—as evidenced by the vast proliferation of outrage in both the media and our town—by a woman who accepted OUR tax dollars in the form of a grant is disgusting. Thank you for reaffirming why I recently left the Democratic Party and will be voting for Republicans for the first time in my life.
Well said.
Totally agree with Mr. Ayoub. Meeting intolerance with more intolerance is not the answer. We need more freedom of expression, especially at a public library.
Hi Connie,
I would argue there is a big difference between intolerance: Refusal to participate in a panel back on the background of a fellow panelist and consequence: reactions happing because of your specific action.
I do believe we should here Ms. Gawad side of the story to seek the truth. But peoples actions have consequences and if it turns out she cancels on the panel because she would not work with a Jewish American author on books about girls coming of age then she should not represent our library. The same would be true if she refused a panel if there were a LGBT co panelist or any other group.
Tell that to Ms. Gawad who refused to even participate in an unrelated panel discussion with a Jew. Can’t argue freedom of expression when the other side refuses to participate.
It is more than ironic that you state “we must allow people… to fulfill their responsibility to engage in open discussion. Gawad has done the opposite of that. She has shirked her responsibility and shut down all discussion — about Zionism, anti-semitism and girls coming of age — and all because the moderator was a Jew. Shame on her and shame on the library for not vetting her more carefully.
Is her refusal to attend not a sign of prejudice? There was not an unfair accusation here. Reacting have been to Ms Gawad’s own words and actions.
“Girls, Coming of Age” has nothing to do with Israel and Zionism. Aisha Gawad’s refusal to sit on this panel with Jewish participants is antisemitism and is totally unacceptable for an individual funded by, and representing, Wilton Library. She should be removed.
In retrospect, A very poor choice indeed by the Wilton Public Library.
If the WOL has any further association with Ms. Gawad, this will be the end of my financial support of the library. There is no way justify her clearly anti Semitic stance.
Remove her immediately. No reason for any debate.
I have been living in this town so over 50 yeas and have always supported the library. There decision to name Aisha Abdel Gawad after what she did is totally unacceptable She should be removed and another writer should be chosen by the library.
Slow down……..pause……….collect information broadly………..consider………breathe………reflect…….gain perspective…….ask questions
Then respond
Pretty sure someone’s inability to share a stage with a Jewish person, which has been factually verified by news agencies, allows us to speed up……move quickly……make informed judgements on what we know to be true…..express our displeasure with the Wilton Library……breathe…..realize we don’t have to reflect or gain any additional perspective……and respond loudly that I don’t want my tax dollars or donations to the Wilton Library to support an antisemitic writer who now has a platform.
Perhaps the library should just look at its “peace” sign outside and realize that this runs counter to that.
As the child if Holocaust Survivors and the grandchild of 3 Holocaust victims I’m horrified that this person is being honored with an Artist in Residence. I’m a proud Jewish person and supporter of Israel. We continue to suffer from antisemitism in this country. It’s hard to believe this person who has publicly condemned a Jewish person is being allowed in our town to espouse their views. It is unacceptable and is plain prejudiced. Many of us had signs in our yards that said hate has no place here.
This isn’t about cancel culture. We should have zero tolerance for intolerance.
This is antisemitism, plain and simple. Most Jewish people are proud Zionists, as are a vast majority of Americans. Whatever outliers exist are just that. So saying that the two are not the same is just simply not rooted in reality, and only further exists to try to distance Jews from their ancestral homeland.
Zionism has been manipulated as a way to openly express Jew hatred – it’s very 2024, yet gives horrific 1930s vibes. We have seen this all play out before.
Refusing to sit on a panel moderated by a Jew is antisemitic. It’s also just the beginning.
This would not be debated for any other minority group.
Do the right thing, Wilton.
To quote an article by Atlantic writer Adam Serwer: “Don’t Equate Anti-Zionism With Anti-Semitism.
It is not anti-Semitic to want equal rights for all in Jerusalem, in Tel Aviv, in Gaza, in Ramallah.
There are certainly forms of anti-Zionism that are anti-Semitic, such as the belief that Jewish Israelis should all be expelled or that they should be forced to live as second-class citizens under an Islamist government.
But there is nothing anti-Semitic about anti-Zionists who believe that the existence of a religious or ethnically defined state is inherently racist, and that the only real solution to the conflict is “equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians in a single shared state,” with a constitution that would “recognize that the country would be home to both peoples and that, despite national narratives and voices on either side that claim otherwise, both peoples have historical ties to the land.” (the current ruling party in Israel under Netanyahu does not want a 2 state solution)
… It is not anti-Semitic to want equal rights in the land you share with others, and to oppose a political arrangement that has resulted in what Israeli human-rights groups justifiably describe as a form of apartheid. While Jewish Israelis retain their rights wherever they go within Israel’s borders, Palestinians are subject to draconian restrictions on their lives and freedoms depending on their location. ”
Ms. Gawad has every right, especially in the currant situation in which over 41,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 2023 and 1.7 million people have been displaced (80% of Gaza’s population), to express her political opinion.
You state that Ms. Gawad has every right to express her political opinion. I agree! However, the topic of the panel was about coming of age for teen girls. It was entirely unpolitical. Professionalism requires interacting with people with whom you disagree politically, especially in non-political venues. Maybe if Ms. Gawad had given Ms. Albert a chance, she may have found that they share a lot in common in their thinking about literature, feminism etc.
Additionally, you quote: “But there is nothing anti-Semitic about anti-Zionists who believe that the existence of a religious or ethnically defined state is inherently racist.”
Over 80 countries have government-endorsed religions (including Britain, Denmark, Italy and Spain), so obviously you would apply the same standard that they too are “inherently racist,” and it is ok for their supporters and citizens to be shunned, correct? Applying this standard only to Israel and not to other nations is inherently antisemitic.
There is so much in here that is entirely untrue. It’s upsetting to hear how many educated people have fallen victim to such diabolical misinformation. Of course “anti-Zionism” is “anti-semitism” because at is core “anti-Zionism” is a movement predicated on the removal of Jews from their ancestral home land and it has existed in this form for centuries. It is not a pro-Palestinian position at all. All these statements here ignore that one sides ultimate goal is everlasting peace while the others is complete destruction which has been evidenced for decades now. I’m also not sure that refusing to engage with a Jewish person on a panel is equivalent to “expressing one’s opinion” when it’s meant to silence someone else’s. Is that what we want at our library? Sorry you feel this way but I just cannot agree with such a hateful statement.
Dear Lynn,
Since you don’t seem to have any sort of understand of this conflict or the history of the region, let me help.
1. “It is not anti-Semitic to want equal rights for all in Jerusalem, in Tel Aviv, in Gaza, in Ramallah.” Unlike Gaza and Ramallah, 20% of Israelis are muslims and they have the same rights as everyone else who lives there. They even serve in the Israeli government.
2. “But there is nothing anti-Semitic about anti-Zionists who believe that the existence of a religious or ethnically defined state is inherently racist, and that the only real solution to the conflict is “equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians in a single shared state,” with a constitution that would “recognize that the country would be home to both peoples and that, despite national narratives and voices on either side that claim otherwise, both peoples have historical ties to the land.” So you believe that the 56 muslim nations are racist? Then you shouldn’t have a problem with one Jewish nation the size of NJ that gives every person of every creed equal rights simply because it’s Jewish. What you are asking for already exists.
3. “(the current ruling party in Israel under Netanyahu does not want a 2 state solution).” The Palestinians were offered a state many times throughout Israel’s existence. Guess what? They refused, because THEY do not believe in a two state solution. What do you think “from the river to the sea” means? Do you know which river and which sea that is? It means to remove all Jews from the land and make it only for arabs.
4. “While Jewish Israelis retain their rights wherever they go within Israel’s borders, Palestinians are subject to draconian restrictions on their lives and freedoms depending on their location. ” Yes, because Palestinians during the first and second Intifada’s came into Israel and bombed civilians on buses and in cars. Just as all sovereign nations have security checkpoints when non-subjects enter their territory, so does Israel. If you want less restrictions on their ability to enter Israel, tell them to get rid of Hamas.
5. “Ms. Gawad has every right, especially in the currant situation in which over 41,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 2023 and 1.7 million people have been displaced (80% of Gaza’s population), to express her political opinion.” I believe the word you’re looking for is “current” and no one has a problem with Ms. Gawad expressing her political opinion–we have a problem with our taxpayer dollars being given to her in the form of a grant by our library whose mission is “…[to] strive to be a place where everyone is made to feel welcome. Every day, we open our doors, our hearts and our imaginations to even greater possibilities.”
Is Ms. Gawad making Jews, 95% of which are zionists, feel welcome? Or is she a bigot who has no problem taking money from Jews when it benefits her but refuses to even sit next to one on a panel completely unrelated to Israel?
Please read more about the history of the region before you start defending the indefensible.
Lynn and Mohammed,
I respectfully disagree on Anti-Zionist not being the same as Antisemitism. Once upon a time there may have been a difference but now in a post October 8th 2023 (Note: October 8th not the October 7th) it became abundantly clear that all the Anti-Zionist calls had become a dog whistle for antisemitism when targeting Jews under the guise of anti-Zionism sprung up before Israel even had time to react.
It is not for other communities to tell me what is or is not antisemitism but for me as a proud American Jew to tell you what the current wave of antisemitism looks and feels like to me. Some of my family escaped pogroms in eastern Europe in the 1920s. Others were lucky to have fled Poland just before WWII. Some of my family landed in Canada, Australia, or smuggled into Israel (which the British blockaded from the Jews during the Holocaust after the Arab Revolt in the late 1930s with itself was a pogrom against Jews). Even America the country to which I was born and love was closed to the Jews, my people in our most desperate moment in modern history with Jewish refugees returning to Europe to be tortured and killed.
I have been shocked at the vulgar outpouring of hate towards Israel. Israel was maligned and criticized in their darkest hour when they had yet to react. While Israel was still dealing with terrorists on their soil, still mourning the dead, tortured, mutilated, and raped (which the UN refused to recognize). I have had people trespass on my property and steal my Israeli Flag yard signs This makes me worry for my and my family’s safety. What is next?
Israel is inseparable from being Jewish for most Jews for multiple reasons. Religiously we are the people of Israel. We pray toward Jerusalem. We say next year in Jerusalem at our seders. Our Torah (bible) tells the story of our return to Israel after Exile in Egypt. For secular Jews Israel is the one Jewish state, the one and only place that guarantees our future when the next tyrant or mob tries to exterminate us. We have had 3000+ Years of tyrants and mobs. We will not give up our right to self determination and life. Israel is the only “safe” (I use it in quote because Israel sadly has never been safe as others have always sought to destroy it) place for up to retreat to when the next pogrom happens when the border next closes everywhere else. We have a living memory of generations we know that sadly it is only a matter of time till the next time. Israel was there to welcome the 800,000 Arab Jews forcibly kicked out of their home in the late 1940s and 1950s while the Arab world attempted to ethnically cleanse us just mere years after the Holocaust in Europe.
Yes it is possible to criticize Israel and not be antisemitic as it is possible to criticize Israel and not be anti-Zionist. Israel has issues. Its government has issues and pointing out issues is legitimate. What is not legitimate is saying that the country should no longer exist. What is not acceptable is holding it to a standard like no other country. Israel has and will always have a right to defend itself from its neighbors including Hamas and Hezbollah destroying it. Israel has non Jewish citizens (including 2 million Muslims) with full right as a democracy. It also has the right to self determination and must remain a Jewish State lest we be pushed off our own land again. Unfortunately 4000 years have proved that like all people the Jews need at least one state to be protected as their own. The Palestinians of Gaza have a right to exist and to their own self determination but right now Hamas, their elected power has determined it wants war and to destroy Israel. We the Jews will fight back and we will win for we have nowhere else to go. We will not do this with joy but with grim determination and the hope that someday the Palestinian people will love their own lives more than our deaths. I encourage all to read the Hamas charter and respect that they mean it when they say there goal is to destroy Israel so they can go into to globally genocide the Jews from the whole world.
FYI:I used to be Liberal. I supported others and thought I had allies. And while I still supported other groups be they LGBT, (Black/Brown/ Asian), poor, or just wanting the right to live in peace I realize I have far fewer allies then I thought. I was raised on the Jewish version of the golden rule “Do not do unto others as you would not want done to yourself.” aka living and let live. But now I am aware that those I thought were allies on the left and will not let me and my people live. Sadly I must now fight and stand up for myself and my people. I have become a political orphan who demands civil and reproductive rights for all but also demands that as a Jew my people remain safe. I find that no party reflects my values and values my life. It has been a hard journey this year!
So again respectfully it is for me to tell you that in the current world when Israel is singled out like no other nation, when DEI is for all minorities but the Jews, when there are massive Anti-Zionist rallies demanding the destruction of Israel and therefor they death of millions of Jews, that Anti-Zionist is in fact Antisemitism.
“I used to be Liberal. I supported others and thought I had allies. And while I still supported other groups be they LGBT, (Black/Brown/ Asian), poor, or just wanting the right to live in peace I realize I have far fewer allies then I thought.”
Right there with you, my tribe-mate!
Ms. Gawad does indeed have the right to express her opinion, but why would she express it in a way that shuts down discourse completely? And how can you possibly claim that she is expressing a “political” opinion, when nothing about this talk was political, and in fact, Ms. Albert is a opposed to Netanyahu’s policies, is a supporter of a two-state solution and has publicly written that she “weeps for the Palestinian people”? So what exactly is Ms Gawad protesting here? It seems obvious to me that her only problem with Ms. Albert is the fact that she is a Jew. I will not address the rest of your misinformation, as Nicole Wilson-Spiro, Daniel Wohlberg and Edie M. Lev did such a good job.
You are conflating the silencing of another person’s voice as free expression of her own To be clear, Ms. Gawad did not just “express her political opinion”. She did the opposite. She refused to sit on the panel in order to squelch Elisa Albert’s right to do the same. Albert wrote an open letter, just 5 days after the October 7 attacks condemning those who at the time defended Hamas’s attack. Ms. Gawad refused to sit on the non-political panel because Albert dared to state her opinion, labeling her a “Zionist”. Ms. Gawad has yet to walk back that ill-fated decision.
This is a reminder that FULL, REAL, VERIFIABLE NAMES and email addresses are required. GMW will not consider emails received from “Wilton Resident” or “Peace Now” or something similar. Thank you.
I think without hearing from the author in residence herself about why she withdrew from the panel, all the good people in this forum are just projecting current debates onto a specific situation. We have a writer in residence let them write and tell us a story that gives some meaning to this beyond the platitudes and name calling.
Mr. Wild,
Well said. This is when we as a community should have open and honest discussion about the differing views and opinions that people have regarding this topic. No one has the final voice as this is the United States and freedom of expression must be protected. I think if we are the community we believe we would ask more questions about why she said this and try to understand her views. Shaming will not work.
Keith, you are everything wrong with the democratic party and the reason I will be voting red for the first time in my life. Go take your performative BS back to your handlers in D.C. and leave Jews to decide what qualifies as antisemitism.
Edie, I hope you mean you will be voting red only in local elections and not in national ones!!
Applauding!!
Tom,
I agree the next step is to hear from Ms. Gawad in her own words. She should have a chance to explain her side of the situation. We should not put words in her mouth based on hearsay. However the fact remains as it unfold this situation does not look good and depending on what she says we as a town supporting our library have the right to reevaluate this fellowship. If she does not have a compelling explanation for refusing to be on a panel as a writer with an American Jew then I do not see a compelling reason to keep her as a writer in residence.
Jonathan. I completely agree. If the reasons for declining to participate were based on the moderators identity then game over. However, if this was an attempt to protest the moderator specifically due to their actions or words that are deemed harmful then the story changes.
To extend your later post. If someone declines to be on a panel because the moderator is black then that is unacceptable however would it be different if that person was say Louis Farrakhan whose words and actions are hateful and often discriminatory.
Until we understand the motivation behind this its really hard to judge.
Ms. Gawad’s response does not impressed me.
To Quote from the Norwalk Hour:
“To me, her labeling of anyone who questions a war as a ‘terrorist apologist’ seemed a form of silencing inappropriate for a literary forum committed to free discussion,” Gawad said. “As an Arab, Muslim writer, I made the private choice to withdraw from the panel because it did not feel like a productive forum for me.”
This lead me to look up Ms. Alberts actual public statements.
Ms. Albert was clear she is talking about it being unacceptable to support Hamas a “literal” (pun intended given the topic) terrorist organization kidnapping and killing civilians. Further Ms. Albert makes it clear she is willing to talk to people of an opposing view point.
I think Ms. Gawad’s view point and actions should not represent our library and out town. I think although she may not intend to be antisemitism her actions can be interpreted as such and that she would do well to meet with Jews and Zionists to learn more perspectives rather the snub them and remain insular. Please see my about comments on why Anti-Zionist absolutely is the new Antisemitism.
For the folks that disagree with me are wondering yes I feel for and worry about the innocent people in Gaza. What is happening to then is a tragedy, it is unfair, and it is war. But their government could stop it by returning the hostages and not firing missiles into Israel daily.
Tom Wild, didn’t you hear? Gawad has not responded to requests for comment.
In a comment to The Free Press Albert reflected on what might have been: “Perhaps they might have hopped that train to Albany with some awareness that, while the moderator of their panel is a fellow novelist whose lived experience and history and inheritance and education and understanding and fear and trauma and grief and shame are profoundly different from their own, there might still be something—no matter how minor, or how seemingly banal—to learn from me. Perhaps, in my wishful scenario, they might even have found it within themselves to hold space for difference, and to maybe, just maybe, grow ever so slightly in the process. Perhaps, were they just that smallest bit more open-minded, they would have managed to teach me something in turn.
“Anyway,” she concluded, “I’m sorry we won’t have the chance to meet and talk, because it would have been super cool to understand them better. And, dare to dream, I could have offered them some understanding of myself in turn.”
To all on any side of this issue I have two challenges:
1) Is it good/correct/fair to cancel or remove someone without them having a chance to respond? I hope the answer is a resounding no, we should be asking questions and seeking answers from Ms. Gawad before taking action.
2) When hearing about a Jew or Zionist canceled try substituting Black or LGBT. If the story now makes your skin crawl or seems wrong and unfair then we are talking Antisemitism
“There is a devastating accusation circulating that I refused to be on a literary panel with another writer because she is Jewish,” said Gawad, a Stamford resident who also teaches English at Greenwich Academy. “Nothing could be further from the truth. I ultimately withdrew from the panel because of this writer’s public rhetoric, which I felt mocked anyone who expressed grief over loss of Palestinian life.”
To be clear, the organizers of the Albany book festival made public that Gawad would not sit on a panel with a person who is a “Zionist.” She has not disputed that claim. Instead, she has accused Albert of holding Zionist views she finds unacceptable. There is only one public statement by Albert on the conflict that I can find. You can read it for yourself here.
Gawad’s comments on it aside, I have trouble interpreting it as mocking Palestinian loss of life, since it explicitly states, “We weep for the plight of the Palestinian people and for the ignorance and naïveté of so many who believe that anyone but Hamas is responsible for their current suffering.” Similarly, “Meanwhile, our hearts are broken and our hopes for peace are dashed yet again, but we have long memories and a powerful will to live.” Albert shares exactly what her political views are, and they are left-wing Zionism: “[I] would love to discuss the absolute necessity of a two-state solution, the complete removal of Netanyahu and his cronies, a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria…”
Albert probably researched Gawad, just as Gawad researched Albert. Albert would have been able to see Gawad’s Instagram (which was public until very recently) where she accused Israel of being “oppressors” and “perpetrators of horrific crimes” who create “concentration camp[s]” to effect “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide.” She may have noted that Gawad signed an NYU petition, which accused Israel of “genocidal and apartheid actions” and demanded that the university participate in BDS and disband NYU Tel Aviv. Despite Gawad’s rather specific views on the Israel/Hammas conflict, which Albert certainly disagreed with, Albert moved forward to participate in the panel on coming of age for girls, because that is what professionals do.
Wilton is full of people of every religion and no religion who hold every possible view regarding the conflict. I certainly find some of these views abhorrent, and so do you. But we manage to live together in relative harmony. Gawad cannot represent our community because she is not willing to sit on a panel about a totally unrelated topic with people who disagree with her on this issue. That means she cannot effectively fulfill her job description, which includes “lead[ing] a series of library programs at the library and in the community, including outreach visits to the Wilton Public School.”
Ms. Gawad made her first public statement yesterday to The Connecticut Centinal:
“In private communications with the organizers of the Albany Book Festival, I expressed my concern over the moderator’s public rhetoric. I felt deeply uncomfortable with her statements that mock anyone who expresses grief over the loss of Palestinian life or calls them a ‘terrorist apologist’,” wrote Gawad.
“As an Arab, Muslim writer, I made the private choice to withdraw from the panel because it did not feel like a safe forum for me,” she continued, explaining she was surprised the event was cancelled after she and Ko had declined to appear with Albert.
“I oppose anti-Semitism and have dedicated my professional and personal life to not only fighting anti-Semitism, but also racism, Islamophobia, and hatred of all kinds,” said Gawad. “I find it deeply hurtful and saddening that the festival chose to make public my private choice.”
As Ms. Wilson-Spiro noted in the comment above, I don’t see any sort of mocking of Palestinian suffering or those who express grief over loss of life in Albert’s piece that she penned for Tablet Magazine back in 2003. In fact, her words express quite the opposite sentiment of what Ms. Gawad claims in her statement. In it, Albert writes, “we weep for the plight of the Palestinian people,” and “our hearts are broken and our hopes for peace are dashed yet again.”
Upon thorough review of Ms. Albert’s social media accounts, I also struggle to find anything that could be considered “mock[ing] anyone who expresses grief over the loss of Palestinian life.” I do, however, see plenty of references to terror-apologists, which perhaps Ms. Gawad felt personally targeted by.
Given the fact that Hamas is a designated terror organization by the US and the EU, I don’t see how anyone, including Ms. Gawad, can use accusations of being a terror-apologist to deflect their own bigotry.
So essentially, Ms. Gawad’s own defense straight from her own mouth is: I said what I said, but I didn’t think what I said would end up in the press.
Sorry, ma’am. That is not an acceptable defense to refuse to sit on a panel with someone who, to the best of my knowledge, *very respectfully* disagrees with your position.
While her statement might have some spin in it. I believe it would be acceptable for her to withdraw if she felt unsafe in a situation for a personal obligation. For me I believe that she should share her communication with the organizers with the library board so that they can assess if what she is saying in the press was what she communicated to the event organizers.
I think everyone in the world deserves the right to feel safe. In the end, that is what everyone is really fighting for anyway.
This story isn’t even true. If you read Aisha Gawad’s statement it’s clear that the organizers canceled the panel. The allegation that she even used the word “zionist” and the strange presumption that she also clearly and secretly meant it as a slur, isn’t even verified as happening. It comes from the organizer allegedly quoting her. Isn’t that hearsay? And also Aisha Gawad and her family are receiving death threats over this??! The editors of this story should really consider taking it down or at a minimum the headline should be changed.
And I’m not sure how people are missing this as objectionable, unless they somehow don’t agree it’s objectionable, but if you do “thoroughly” look through Elisa Albert’s social media, pretty quickly you find that she says gross things like that Jewish Voice for Peace aren’t “authentic” Jews, or reposting and pinning comments comparing Rashida Tlaib to hitler, or describing the people she disagrees with as [with apologies for the vulgarity] “yet another sad ass assimilated Western [vulagrity]” or “u bastard [vulgarity]” and “u ignorant [vulgarity]” and laughing and joking about the idea of islamophobia. Anyone can look this up on her public instagram, right now, which is kind of brazen almost a week after receiving all this media attention. Honestly I’d probably skip that panel too, and skipping it seems less and less like anything close to anti-semitism and more like just the right thing to do.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The original words quoted as vulgarities have been redacted. Rather than not approve the comment for publication, which we could have done per GMW policies for commenting, we chose to redact the words and let the comment stand. For further reference, please visit our website and Terms of Use.
The panel organizers have the receipts and published them on X. You should take a look. They clearly state that Aisha Abdel Gawad requested that the panel change the moderator because of her support for Israel. When they refused, she then decided to not participate to make a statement.
I find it ironic that you take offense to Elisa Albert’s opinions that she shared on her own social media that are not nearly as inflammatory as what Aisha Abdel Gawad shared on hers. The only difference is that Aisha Abdel Gawad privatized her social media in the last 48 hours, while Elisa Albert has her still public. Luckily, someone smartly screenshot those offensive posts before she went private.
No one here agrees with anyone sending her family death threats. That is unacceptable. However, telling a news organization to remove a story because you just don’t like it sounds exactly like what Aisha Abdel Gawad attempted to do to Elisa Albert–muzzle her because you don’t like what she has to say.