Trending Topics:

Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb is latest target in anti-Obama campaign

on 29 Comments
“Radical Rabbi” Lynn Gottlieb (right), standing next to Imam Abdur-Rauf Campos Marquetti whom conservatives will likely soon claim is the young Barack Hussein Obama.

Veteran peace activist and interfaith dialogue advocate Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb is the latest target in a campaign to attack Barack Obama in the run-up to the US presidential election.

Gottlieb is a cofounder of the Shomer Shalom Network for Jewish Nonviolence and serves on the advisory board and rabbinical council of Jewish Voice for Peace. She was also one of the first women to be ordained as a rabbi and was the first female rabbi in the Jewish Renewal movement.

In 2007, the Washington Post’s “On Faith” column, Ms Magazine editor Letty Cottin Pogrebin named Gottlieb one of America’s “50 Top Rabbis.”

However, on August 21 this year, the Obama–Biden presidential campaign launched its “Rabbis for Obama” initiative, presenting a list of over 613 rabbis who have signed on to support the Obama campaign. According to campaign, “this list of rabbis represents a broad group of respected Jewish leader[s] from all parts of the country. These rabbis mirror the diversity of American Jewry.”

But scouring through the list of 600+ rabbis, the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) zeroed in on Gottlieb, and on August 23, issued a press release “express[ing] profound outrage at the inclusion of radical rabbi Lynn Gottlieb” on the Rabbis for Obama list. The RJC accused Gottlieb of having “a long and troubling history,” citing the following as examples:

  1. Gottlieb is involved with Jewish Voice for Peace, “which the Anti-Defamation League has called one of the ‘top ten anti-Israel groups.’
  2. Gottlieb has visited Iran.
  3.  In 2008, Gottlieb attended a dinner event with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The RJC also attempted to contrive a connection between Gottlieb’s inclusion in the “Rabbis for Obama” list and Jimmy Carter’s upcoming address at the Democratic National Convention:

The fact that the campaign announced Rabbi Gottlieb’s participation in “Rabbis for Obama” at around the same time that it was announced that former President Jimmy Carter—who has met with Hamas and has been a virulent critic of Israel—will speak at the Democratic Convention, highlights not only the insensitivity of the Obama campaign to the concerns of the Jewish community, but also underscores why Pres. Obama has seen a significant erosion of support among Jewish voters.

The right-wing press then picked up the story and added more supposed examples of Gottlieb’s “extremism.” The National Review labeled Gottlieb “Obama’s Anti-Israel Rabbi” and claims that Jewish Voice for Peace “has even come out against the existence of Israel.” Adam Kredo in the Washington Free Beacon accused Gottlieb of being “a devotee of the far-left J Street,” while Jonathan Tobin in Commentary denounced Gottlieb as “a notorious anti-Zionist” who is “outside even the parameters of what the left-wing lobby J Street would consider ‘pro-Israel.’”

Both Kredo and Tobin point out that Gottlieb expressed support for the Olympia Food Co-op’s boycott of Israeli goods in 2010. Kredo links to a video where Gottlieb gave her support to the Co-op, and he notes that Gottlieb “signs onto the video by giving the traditional Arabic greeting, ‘Salaam Alaikum.’” It is unknown what significance Kredo finds in this traditional Muslim greeting, nor is it known why Kredo considers it more significant than the “Shalom Aleichem” that Gottlieb had preceded it with.

Responding to the charges

On her Facebook page, Gottlieb wrote a quick response to the charges:

I signed on to be a rabbi for Obama. There are no other clergy groups, such as Imams or Priests for Obama. Really, what Jewish person wants to vote for a guy who believes all Jews should move to Israel so that we can all finally convert and bring the end of time and go to heaven or be burned up in the apocalypse?

Being an Obama rabbi AND a member of JVP, I was compared to Jimmy Carter in the context of the Democratic Party’s insensitivity to the concern of Jews. (Jimmy is speaking at the convention, I’m not!) Both Jewish Voice for Peace and I are the objects of scorn in this piece.

I have been part of 2 civilian diplomacy trips to Iran in 2009, and did attend a 350 person dinner hosted by the Iranian Mission to the United Nations to honor interfaith relationships. Every person who spoke criticized the President for his Holocaust denial statements and his statement about wiping Israel off the map which is not helpful when trying to prevent a war between Iran and Israel. My speech is printed in Fellowship Magazine of the F.O.R. [Fellowship of Reconciliation].

I stand with JVP for selective divestment and boycott of settlement products (and support BDS), along with hundreds of thousands of other people, including tens of thousands of Jews, which challenges the message of ‘extreme’. Seems like adopting these tactics are becoming more mainstream all the time.

Jewish Voice for Peace has previously responded to the ADL’s false charges against the organization, and other commentators have made similar critiques of the ADL.

Gottlieb did in fact visit Iran twice, and none of her current critics have bothered to explain what they found so problematic about it. The trips were sponsored by the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), and as Gottlieb explained to me, the purpose was “building cross cultural and religious relationship among ‘enemy’ peoples so peace has a better chance of rooting itself among the nations. The global interfaith effort that is currently taking place reaches out to faith based individuals and communities without regard to their national identity.”

In fact, as part of the trips, the FOR delegation visited Iran’s Jewish minority community, attending services in three synagogues in Tehran, visiting a Jewish communal organization in Shiraz, and meeting with other Jewish individuals and youth.

As for Gottlieb’s “Dinner With Ahmadinejad” (which was the title of Kredo’s article), none of her critics bothered to provide details of the gathering and of what had transpired there on September 25, 2008. Kredo’s headline suggests that it could have been a personal and intimate evening between Gottlieb and Ahmadinejad, when in fact it was a gathering of hundreds, with several speakers criticizing the Iranian president.

The text of Gottlieb’s own speech that night is available online. As she states in the preface to her speech:

Meetings organized by peace and non-violence organizations and individuals with Ahmadinejad do not mean those attending agree or support specific Iranian governmental policies that are in conflict with the values of the peace community or the accompanying rhetoric about Israel, Jews or the United States…

At the Thursday dinner, most speakers who addressed and questioned the President took the opportunity to challenge him on several issues. They berated Ahmadinejad for his failure to state unequivocally that he mourns the death of six million Jews during the Holocaust, asserted their opposition to all nuclear weapons, bemoaned the Iranian record on human rights and in particular the execution of juveniles, the lack of religious freedom of expression, the persecution of the Bahai community and Iran’s denial that Israel has a right to exist as a nation state…

Ahmadinejad may be gone from power by June due to their elections. Whether he is or is not, those in the inter-faith peace community are looking to open channels with Iranians in the Department of Inter-religious Dialogue. For those of us in the Jewish community, it is important for us to note that, unlike most other Middle Eastern countries, Iran still possesses a small but significant Jewish community. Somewhere between 12,000 and 25,000 Jews reside mostly in Teheran, Shiraz and Esfahan. As the oldest extant Jewish community in the Middle East outside of Israel, how do we protect them, reach out to them and nurture their Jewish life in Iran? The possibility of real engagement is difficult in an atmosphere of aggressive rhetoric which does nothing to create a climate of rapprochement.

And here is an excerpt from her speech:

Peace is not envisioned as a quietist or passive stance. Rather shalom, the condition of harmony and well-being for the whole of society and the human heart of the believer is a condition that must be actively sought and publicly acknowledged for the sake of preventing violence and building peace.

That is why I stand here today, even when many of my co-religionists are dismissing, demeaning or boycotting this important conversation. I want to make clear that there are many thousands of Jewish people within my community whose voices are not heard, but nonetheless support dialogue as both a religious obligation as well as a way to give witness to hope…

As you are well aware, I come from a community that has experienced the genocidal results of hate speech leading to hate action. I know the country of Iran recognizes the Holocaust as I understand that there was a widely viewed television series dedicated to the memory of the victims of the Holocaust this past year in Iran which was watch by millions of people. I would like to remember for a blessing all those who have died in our world, on account of war.

I mourn the death of all young men and women sent to soldiering in conflicts not of their making.

I mourn one half a million Iranians who died in the Iran Iraq war,

I mourn the millions of Iraqis have been killed, injured and displaced by a war the United States initiated in Iraq.

I also mourn the forty million people who died in the second world war, including two million Armenians, one million Roma, tens of thousands who died on account of sexual orientation as well as those who were targeted for murder based on special needs. And of course, I mourn my own extended family, six million Jewish people who were murdered because European historical anti-Semitism made it acceptable to see us as less than human. Because of the Holocaust, I learned from the rabbis who ordained me and guide me, to be active in preventing further suffering of all human beings as a primary religious call to action. That is why I, like thousands of Jewish Americans, Israelis and Europeans have joined with other peace activists across the globe to work tirelessly for Palestinian human rights, as well as Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation through the path of non-violence.

As Gottlieb later explained to Larry Cohler-Esses for the New York Jewish Week, “I said what I had to say without insulting [Ahmadinejad] … I wanted to isolate him but not insult him. It’s tricky. It’s a fine line … because I wanted to keep the channels open.”

The real reason for the attacks

Why are right-wing groups attempting to smear Gottlieb based on innocuous or commendable actions from years past? Although the focus is on Gottlieb, the goal is to strike at Obama. By highlighting Gottlieb’s name among 600+ rabbis, and by calling on the Obama campaign to “immediately remove her from any formal or official involvement in the campaign,” the right is employing the same tactics it had used against Obama in the previous presidential election cycle.

In 2008, the targets were the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, prominent sixties radical Bill Ayers, and Columbia professor Rashid Khalidi. All were smeared and portrayed as “extreme”—Wright was portrayed as a “racist” “firebrand pastor,” while Ayers and Khalidi were described as “terrorists”—and their connections to Obama were exaggerated.

The purpose was to put Obama on the defensive and force him into a lose–lose situation: That is, if Obama did not repudiate his association with these people, he could be accused of “palling around with terrorists,” which would create a distraction for his campaign. At the same time, if he denounced his associations with these people, then it would give credence to the original accusations that Obama had previously been palling with terrorists and also undermine his attempts to build a base of support.

The right was willing to try to destroy these individuals in order to take Obama down a notch. However, in the case of Lynn Gottlieb, a.k.a. “Obama’s Anti-Israel Rabbi,” the connection is much more tenuous, and it remains to be seen how far the right is willing to smear Gottlieb before they give up and move on to the next target whom they suspect of being Obama’s weak link.

Update: Bill Kristol has written a letter on behalf of the Emergency Committee for Israel calling on Obama to “repudiate” several “anti-Israel figures” on the Rabbis for Obama list, including Gottlieb, although he does not specifically name the supposed problem rabbis. Meanwhile Haaretz has a brief interview with Gottlieb over her decision to endorse Obama.

Phan Nguyen

Phan Nguyen lives in New York and has a Twitter account: @Phan_N

Other posts by .

Posted In:

29 Responses

  1. piotr on August 23, 2012, 9:11 pm

    Emergency Committee of Israel is an astro-turf organization with a board made of three members, one being certain (Bad) Rachel Elliott, and another Bill Kristol. Kristol would do a decent (and thus unexpected) thing if he repudiated Mrs. Elliott who posted a rant that was unusually hateful and deranged. On the occasion of freeing an Israeli soldier from captivity, Rachel postulated that IDF should capture an assortment of Gaza terrorists (high risk activity, as opposed to prudent tactic of killing them from long range) and to feed them to “sharks and stargazers”. Stargazers are actually fish, but rather smallish, so it was like throwing victims to be eaten by “lions and badgers”.

    Besides deranged elements, the screed also had a rather unusual pileup of invectives.

  2. American on August 23, 2012, 9:49 pm

    “”Really, what Jewish person wants to vote for a guy who believes all Jews should move to Israel so that we can all finally convert and bring the end of time and go to heaven or be burned up in the apocalypse?”

    Hahahahah….I love,love, LOVE this woman! She is so right with the world and with herself she can handle her attackers.
    March right on Rabbi Lynn.

  3. annie on August 23, 2012, 10:40 pm

    awesome phan. i have been following this story (tweets!) but there was so much to say i didn’t feel i was up to the task. you really nailed it. gottlieb is an inspiring leader and peace activist. she’s been influencing people in a positive way for a long long time. this vilification is amusing to say the least. it makes me wonder ‘is this all they got’? demonizing gottlieb? get a grip! she’s an outstanding person. it just reeks of desperation.

    The fact that the campaign announced Rabbi Gottlieb’s participation in “Rabbis for Obama” at around the same time that it was announced that former President Jimmy Carter…

    ha! amusing, as if this ‘announcement’ connecting the ‘participation’ to our beloved president carter is supposed to be proof of anything. really, and the way they all pile on at the same time like lemmings is so…josh block-y of them. grow up and grow some cajones guys! originality plllleeeease.

    • ToivoS on August 23, 2012, 11:31 pm

      Sorry Annie but these kinds of charges can stick in a Presidential election. Rabbi Gottlieb is obviously one delightful human being. Unfortunately she has tried to work for peace — omg she visited Iran, she has engaged in dialogue with Palestinians. These are crimes that can be spun as anti-American and anti-Semitic actions. We will soon know if these charges stick. If the Obama campaign quickly repudiates Gottlieb that will be the answer.

      If that happens, could someone explain: why we are supporting Obama?

    • MRW on August 24, 2012, 12:50 am

      I agree, annie, about Jimmy Carter. I’m getting fed up with these smears.

      In fact, the vilification of Gottlieb is low-rent shooting by people who are so dual-loyalty they have no loyalty whatsoever to the basic American value that permeates the First Amendment. There is no other group in the USA who does this other than Israel-Firsters. None. Their sense of entitlement to destroy reputations, careers, and livelihoods for that Bolshevik piece of dirt in the ME is amazing. And what is more amazing is that they get away with it. They are a cancer on US civil society. Gottlieb shouldn’t have to apologize to anyone. She should have fired off a challenge, a public challenge, to have each one of her critics admit publicly who comes first, America or Israel. If America, she should tell them that free speech and the free practice of religion is enshrined by law here unlike Israel. If Israel, she should tell them to register with FARA. Gottlieb should put propeller drills on her tits and nail them to the wall. Half of America would cheer with her. Instead, she grovels to explain. They don’t deserve it.

      • Mooser on August 24, 2012, 2:32 pm

        “Their sense of entitlement to destroy reputations, careers, and livelihoods for that Bolshevik piece of dirt in the ME is amazing

        “Bolshevik?” Are you sure? “Bolshevik”? Or did you misspell ‘borscht soaked’ or something?

      • piotr on August 24, 2012, 7:37 pm

        I am only guessing, but Russian Social Democratic Workers Party split into “majority” = Bolshevik faction and “minority” = Menshevik faction. By analogy, Kadima are Mensheviks and Likud are Bolsheviks.

        And I do not see groveling in Gottlieb replies but uses an occasion to state her agenda with conviction and a lady-like grace. This is a TV duel, who scores better — a classy lady or a junkyard dog in a suit?

      • ToivoS on August 25, 2012, 2:30 am

        piotr you might be guessing but I think you are wrong. The charge of Bolsheviks refers to the fact that the communist parties of Eastern Europe did in fact support the founding of Israel. Many Jewish communists were if not Zionists worked actively with them in those day. In fact my father, not Jewish at all, was a communist who fought along side Yugoslav partisans during WWII and told me stories about how they helped smuggle Jewish refugees out of Nazi occupied Europe and hence eventually into Palestine. In those days both the Jewish left and right worked to build the state of Israel.

        This notion that Israel is the result of some Bolshevik conspiracy is part of an old antisemitic meme that blames Jews for the Bolshevik revolution that gave rise to the Soviet Union.

      • MRW on August 27, 2012, 12:32 am


        fought along side Yugoslav partisans during WWII and told me stories about how they helped smuggle Jewish refugees out of Nazi occupied Europe and hence eventually into Palestine.

        They built the tunnels all over Kosovo for that effort. Albania was Nazi-occupied territory, so it was incredibly dangerous. I grew up with the kids of some of those refugee Serbian partisans who risked their lives and those of their family to help not only the Jewish refugees but over 500 US airmen who had landed in enemy territory. When threatened with death for doing so, when uncovered, they refused to talk, and many died as a result. I was sick when we bombed them in 1999.

      • ToivoS on August 29, 2012, 9:53 pm

        I missed this comment from few days back. @mrw I was sick when we bombed them in 1999.

        Me too. I was fairly active in the antiwar effort, as marginal as it was, to stop it. This was the beginning of a pattern that has become more clear today. When a Democratic administration makes war, it becomes a humanitarian cause. When a Republican makes war it is imperialism. At least in the US. The antiwar movement has become dominated by Democratic Party operatives. Example: move on. com.

        What it all comes down to is that Clinton was in deep doo doo because of the Lewinsky scandal and needed a little war to distract the American people. It was this and little more that allowed the US to turn what had been our loyal ally in wars against the Germans in WWI and II into today’s total enemy.

  4. ColinWright on August 23, 2012, 11:46 pm

    Gottlieb is involved with Jewish Voice for Peace, “which the Anti-Defamation League has called one of the ‘top ten anti-Israel groups.’”
    Gottlieb has visited Iran.
    In 2008, Gottlieb attended a dinner event with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.”

    Oh, we are losing our minds.

    I’ve visited Iran. Admittedly, the Shah was still in power at the time, so I suppose that lets me out.

    And didn’t it occur to anyone that claiming ‘a Jewish Voice for Peace is one of the top-ten anti-Israel groups’ is a bit of a non-sequitur — at least at first glance? What? Is it that Israel isn’t Jewish or that Israel isn’t for peace? Offhand, and without checking, wouldn’t ‘a Jewish Voice for Peace’ be one of those groups that wants a ‘nice’ Israel?

    • Woody Tanaka on August 24, 2012, 8:30 am

      “And didn’t it occur to anyone that claiming ‘a Jewish Voice for Peace is one of the top-ten anti-Israel groups’ is a bit of a non-sequitur ”

      No, it’s just one of those slips that reveal truth. Even those in the pocket of the zionists know that israel has no interest in peace, that its program is war and oppression.

      • eljay on August 24, 2012, 8:58 am

        JVP is “anti-Israel” because, unlike hateful and immoral Zio-supremacists within and without Israel, it doesn’t advocate for an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State”.

        According to JVP’s Mission Statement:
        •Israelis and Palestinians have the right to security, sovereignty, and self-determination within political entities of their own choosing.
        •Israel must end its occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, completely withdraw from these Occupied Territories and relinquish all its settlements, military outposts and by-pass roads.
        •Jerusalem has to be shared in a manner that reflects its spiritual, economic, and political importance to both Israelis and Palestinians, as well as to all Jews, Muslims and Christians.
        •The plight of Palestinian refugees needs to be resolved equitably and in a manner that promotes peace and is consistent with international law. Within the framework of an equitable agreement, the refugees should have a role in determining their future, whether pursuing return, resettlement, or financial compensation. Israel should recognize its share of responsibility for the ongoing refugee crisis and for its resolution.
        •The parties must equitably distribute water and other natural resources.
        •Diplomatic negotiations between the two parties must be held unconditionally. Countries other than the U.S. should be involved in peace negotiations. An international peacekeeping force should be established to protect all civilians.

      • Fredblogs on August 24, 2012, 11:21 am

        It’s not a non-sequitur, it’s just that they have an Orwellian name. They are for the end of Israel, not for peace.

      • Woody Tanaka on August 24, 2012, 1:58 pm

        “It’s not a non-sequitur, it’s just that they have an Orwellian name. They are for the end of Israel, not for peace.”

        Nonsense, Fredo, unless you believe that the essence of “Israel” is a brutal, racist oppression of another people in their own land. Because JVP is clearly against that.

      • eljay on August 24, 2012, 6:19 pm

        >> It’s not a non-sequitur, it’s just that they have an Orwellian name. They are for the end of Israel, not for peace.

        They are for the end of Israel as an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State”. To decent people, that’s a just and moral stand to take, but I can see how a hateful and immoral Zio-supremacist like you might find that offensive.

      • Cliff on August 24, 2012, 6:45 pm

        The end of Israel as we know it yes. Israel as a racist, war-mongering colonialist, rogue apartheid State.

      • ColinWright on August 24, 2012, 7:14 pm

        Fredblogs: “It’s not a non-sequitur, it’s just that they have an Orwellian name. They are for the end of Israel, not for peace.”

        What they are for is exactly what that mission statement says they are for. An Israel that conforms to what are now universally accepted ethical standards. A ‘nice’ Israel, in a nutshell. I don’t think this is possible, but it certainly speaks well of the members ethically that they are trying to bring it about.

        If you feel that this implies the end of Israel, all you are doing is agreeing with my position — which is that ‘Israel’ is a necessarily evil proposition, and therefore cannot endure if it adheres to ethical standards.

      • piotr on August 24, 2012, 7:56 pm

        In other words, JVP are for the end of Israel as we know it. I think that Israel does have a potential to do better, but if not … Austro-Hungarian monarchy was a nice state in many respects but it did not have what it takes to stay whole.

      • Fredblogs on August 27, 2012, 1:22 pm

        I do not agree with you. Please don’t try to pretend agreement where there is none. They are for an Israel that is “nice” in the same sense that Gandhi wanted Great Britain to be “nice” to the Nazis, to not use violence to oppose even their own destruction and subjugation as a people.

      • Mooser on August 27, 2012, 1:40 pm

        Let’s see, we’ve got the mission statement from JVP and we can easily see if their actions match up with their mission statement. And then we’ve got Fredblogs bald statement: “They are for the end of Israel, not for peace” without s ingle bit of evidence, not a single link, not even an anecdote offered to support his charge.
        Now, which am I gonna believe?

        It’s really kind of sad, every day he comes here, and every day he tries the same tricks, and every day gets rhetorically shot down, and up he pops tomorrow. Ziocaine amnesia, it’s very harrowing to look at the long-term results.

      • Mooser on August 27, 2012, 1:42 pm

        ” to not use violence to oppose even their own destruction and subjugation as a people.

        Why should they be destroyed or subjugated? I’m sure the Zionists will be allowed to leave, probably everybody will be so grateful to see them go they’ll just call it a wash, and give them amnesty. After all, if the Zionists get airlifted out, how can the Palestinians stop them?

      • Fredblogs on August 28, 2012, 1:47 pm

        Thank you for demonstrating my point Mooser. That the destruction and subjugation of Israel is what you people call “peace”.

  5. Kathleen on August 24, 2012, 8:50 am

    How radical a Rabbi Gottlieb committed to her belief in peace and justice.
    How radical Rabbi Gottlieb committed to the rule of law.
    How radical Rabbi Gottlieb committed to UN resolutions.
    How radical Rabbi Gottlieb committed to the state of Israel based on international laws.
    How radical Rabbi Gottlieb committed to the state of Palestine based on international laws
    How radical Rabbi Gottlieb committed to Palestinians being able to farm their own land.
    How radical Rabbi Gottlieb visiting Iran a country that has signed the IAEA’s Non Proliferation treaty that Israel continues to refuse to sign.

    Rabbi Gottlieb one of my new heroes or are you supposed to say heroine? What a wonderful, soulful committed individual. Willing to take a big risk and set an incredible example of being so committed to peace and justice. Thank you Rabbi Gottlieb

  6. piotr on August 24, 2012, 9:40 am

    I think that we need to keep that attack in context. In 1980s Republicans invented slogan “X. Too liberal for too long.” and for a while it was helping in elections. To GOP operatives, if you want to provide medical care to the entire population of USA you are a dangerous leftist (strangely enough, this practice is approved for Israel!).

    Clearly, Democrats should rather explain that universal availability of medical care is a good idea on merits rather than enter arid discussions if it is a radical idea or not.

    And what if Rev. Gottlieb did have “personal and intimate” dinner with the President of Iran? She could politely but frankly raise humanitarian issues that impact the image of Iran and the fate of many people there, and of course, issues related to peace. Horror! And if the dinner lead to anything else, this is an issue for Mr. Gottlieb and Mrs. Gottlieb, and perhaps Mrs. Ahmedinejad, but I kind of doubt it. I think that Mrs. Ahmedinejad would probably be present too.

  7. susan schuurman on August 28, 2012, 2:41 am

    The man Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb is standing next to in the photograph above is my friend Imam Abdur-Rauf Campos Marquetti. He and Rabbi Lynn cofounded the Arab-Jewish Peace Walks here in Albuquerque, leading walks from her temple, Nahalat Shalom, to his mosque, the Islamic Center of New Mexico. They have since gone to other places of worship. Abdur-Rauf is now imam at Taha Mosque in Santa Fe. He and his wife are also producers of the award-winning public access TV show, Islamic Forum of New Mexico, which can be seen on YouTube. It features stunning original nature photography with Islamic chant/prayers. I love this photo, capturing the moment these two inspiring leaders release peace doves in a symbolic gesture that Muslims and Jews and other faiths as well as secular folks can come together in mutual respect and a sense of community.

Leave a Reply