• Home
  • Friends
  • Groups
  • Share

SIGN IN | HELP
adershowitz.gather.com
  • profile|
  • posts|
  • photos|
  • videos|
  • comments|
  • friends|
  • groups
by Alan M. Dershowitz
Member since:
December 18, 2006

Ex-President for Sale

January 08, 2007 11:51 AM EST (Updated: January 09, 2007 10:22 AM EST)
views: 11610 | rating: 7/10 (135 votes) | comments: 477

It now turns out that Jimmy Carter--who is accusing the Jews of buying the silence of the media and politicians regarding criticism of Israel--has been bought and paid for by Arab money.  In his recent book tour to promote Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, Carter has been peddling a particularly nasty bit of bigotry.  The canard is that Jews own and control the media, and prevent newspapers and the broadcast media from presenting an objective assessment of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and that Jews have bought and paid for every single member of Congress so as to prevent any of them from espousing a balanced position.  How else can anyone understand Carter’s claims that it is impossible for the media and politicians to speak freely about Israel and the Middle East?  The only explanation – and one that Carter tap dances around, but won’t come out and say directly – is that Jews control the media and buy politicians.  Carter then presents himself as the sole heroic figure in American public life who is free of financial constraints to discuss Palestinian suffering at the hands of the Israelis.

Listen carefully to what Carter says about the media: the plight of the Palestinians is “not something that has been acknowledged or even discussed in this country... You never hear anything about what is happening to the Palestinians by the Israelis.” He claims to have personally “witnessed and experienced the severe restraints on any free and balanced discussion of the facts.”  He implies that the Jews impose these “severe restraints.”  He then goes on to say that the only reason his book--which has been universally savaged by reviewers--is receiving such negative reviews is because they are all being written by “representatives of Jewish organizations” (demonstrably false!).  So much for the media.

Now here is what he says about politicians:

“It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine, to suggest that Israel comply with international law or to speak in defense of justice or human rights for Palestinians. Very few would ever deign to visit the Palestinian cities of Ramallah, Nablus, Hebron, Gaza City or even Bethlehem and talk to the beleaguered residents.”

Each of these claims is demonstrably false, as I have shown in detail elsewhere. The plight of the Palestinians has been covered more extensively, per capita, than the plight of any other group in the world, certainly more than the Tibetans and the victims of genocides in Darfur and Rwanda.  Moreover, Carter totally ignores the impact of Arab oil money and the influence of the Saudi lobby.  In numerous instances where the Arab lobbies have been pitted against the Israeli lobby, the former has prevailed.

Even beyond these nasty canards, the big story that the media and political figures in America have missed is how grievously they, themselves have been insulted and disrespected by our self-righteous former president.  Carter is lecturing The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, CNN, and the major networks about how they are incapable of reporting the news objectively because they are beholden to some Jewish cabal.  He is telling Pulitzer Prize winning writers such as Tom Friedman and Samatha Power that they did not deserve their prizes.  He is telling George Will that his reporting is controlled by his Jewish bosses (sound a little bit like Judith Regan?).  And he is denying that Anderson Cooper is capable of filing an honest report from the West Bank. 

As far as our legislators are concerned, he is accusing Barack Obama, John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Patrick Leahy of being bought and paid for by the Israeli lobby.  On Planet Carter, even congressmen with no Jewish constituents would be committing political suicide by taking a balanced position on the Middle East.  What an outrageous insult to some of the best journalists and most independent political figures in the world. 

At the bottom, Carter is saying that no objective journalist or politician could actually believe that America’s support for Israel is based on moral and strategic considerations and not on their own financial self-interest.  Such a charge is so insulting to every honest legislator and journalist in this country that I am amazed that Carter has been let off the hook so easily.  Only the self-righteous Jimmy Carter is capable of telling the truth, because only he is free of financial pressures that might influence his positions. 

It now turns out that the shoe is precisely on the other foot.  Recent disclosures prove that it is Carter who has been bought and paid for by anti-Israel Arab and Islamic money.

Journalist Jacob Laksin has documented the tens of millions of dollars that the Carter Center has accepted from Saudi Arabian royalty and assorted other Middle Eastern sultans, who, in return, Carter dutifully praised as peaceful and tolerant (no matter how despotic the regime). And these are only the confirmed, public donations. 

Carter has also accepted half a million dollars and an award from Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan, saying in 2001: "This award has special significance for me because it is named for my personal friend, Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan." This is the same Zayed, the long-time ruler of the United Arab Emirates, whose $2.5 million gift to the Harvard Divinity School was returned in 2004 due to Zayed's rampant Jew-hatred. Zayed's personal foundation, the Zayed Center, claims that it was Zionists, rather than Nazis, who “were the people who killed the Jews in Europe” during the Holocaust. It has held lectures on the blood libel and conspiracy theories about Jews and America perpetrating Sept. 11.

Another journalist, Rachel Ehrenfeld, in a thorough and devastating article on "Carter’s Arab Financiers," meticulously catalogues Carter’s ties to Arab moneymen, from a Saudi bailout of his peanut farm in 1976, to funding for Carter’s presidential library, to continued support for all manner of Carter’s post-presidential activities.  For instance, it was the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), founded in Pakistan and fronted by a Saudi billionaire, Gaith Pharaon, that helped Carter start up his beloved Carter Center.  According to Ehrenfeld:

“BCCI's origins were primarily ideological. [Agha Hasan] Abedi wanted the bank to reflect the supra-national Muslim credo and ‘the best bridge to help the world of Islam, and the best way to fight the evil influence of the Zionists.’

As Ehrenfeld concluded:

“[I]t seems that AIPAC's real fault was its failure to outdo the Saudi's purchases of the former president's loyalty. There has not been any nation in the world that has been more cooperative than Saudi Arabia," The New York Times quoted Mr. Carter June 1977, thus making the Saudis a major factor in U. S. foreign policy.

”Evidently, the millions in Arab petrodollars feeding Mr. Carter's global endeavors, often in conflict with U.S. government policies, also ensure his loyalty.”


            It is particularly disturbing that a former president who has accepted dirty blood-money from dictators, anti-Semites, Holocaust deniers, and supporters of terrorism should try to deflect attention from his own conflicts of interest by raising the oldest canard in the sordid history of anti-Semitism: namely, that Jews have dual loyalty and use their money improperly to influence the country they live in, in favor of the country to which they owe their real allegiance.  Abraham Foxman responded to Carter’s canard as follows: 

As disturbing as Carter’s simplistic approach is, however, even more disturbing is his picking up on the Mearsheimer -Walt theme of Jewish control of American policy, though in much more abbreviated form and not being the focus of his work. Referring to U.S. policy and the “condoning” of Israel’s actions, Carter says: “There are constant and vehement political and media debates in Israel concerning its policies in the West Bank but because of powerful political, economic, and religious forces in the U.S., Israeli government decisions are rarely questioned or condemned, voices from Jerusalem dominate our media, and most American citizens are unaware of circumstances in the occupied territories.” In other words, the old canard and conspiracy theory of Jewish control of the media, Congress, and the U.S. government is rearing its ugly head in the person of a former President.

As noted above, the most perverse aspect of Carter’s foray into bigotry is that as he pours this old wine into new bottles he is himself awash in Arab money.  When a politician levels these kinds of cynical accusations against others, it would seem incumbent on him to show that his own hands are clean and his own pockets empty. 

            Accordingly I now call upon Carter to make full public disclosure of all of his and the Carter Center’s ties to Arab money.  If he fails to do so, I challenge the media to probe deeply into his, his family’s, and his Center’s Arab ties so that the public can see precisely the sources and amounts of money he has received and judge whether it has corrupted the process of objective reportage and politics by Carter and others who have received such funds.  Finally, I ask the appropriate government agencies to conduct an investigation into whether Carter should be required to register as a lobbyist for foreign interests. 

Let’s stop invoking discredited ethnic stereotypes, look at the hard facts, and actually see who’s being bought and sold. 

Alan Dershowitz is a professor of law at Harvard.  His most recent book is Preemption: A Knife that Cuts Both Ways (Norton, 2006)

Join the conversation and read Alan Dershowitz' exclusive six part series "Ex-President for Sale" on Gather at alandershowitz.gather.com

Join This Group
view all photos
You need the latest Adobe Flash Player.
Install the player now
Expand Tags: israelis, palestine, islam, united nations, torture, law, democracy, international relations, anti-semitism, middle east, conflict, alan dershowitz, professor, israel, terror, jew, palestinian, arab, harvard, hizbullah, lawyer, international affairs, arab-israeli conflict, united states, jimmy carter, jews, terrorism, jewish, islamic, politics
Expand To Groups: Gather Politics Essential, Alan M. Dershowitz
rate

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10
email
print
link to this page
Paste this link into an email or IM
Bookmark this post:
Facebook
Twitter
Delicious
Buzz
More

Comments: 477

Troy Stouffer Jan 8, 2007, 8:46pm EST
It is sad that a former President would go to these lengths to try to create a legacy for himself. Carter's longtime aide and founder of the Carter Center's Middle East foundation, Kenneth Stein, resigned over the book. He has even gone as far as to claiming Carter plagiarized and invented whole sections of the book. Carter's ties to Anti-Israeli money only highlights his own anti-Semitic tendencies. I seriously doubt that we will see an honest debate with the former President.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Dave McGill Jan 9, 2007, 6:43am EST
You have written a very interesting article, Professor Dershowitz, and it would certainly seem appropriate for Carter to divulge the extent of any financial ties that might have influenced his writings.

As I read his book, I was appalled at his description of the treatment of the Palestinians, however, and I hope that the subsequent sections of your six-part series will address this issue.

In particular, it would seem to be a legitimate concern, if it is true, that they have been deprived of their most basic human rights such as assembling peacefully, travelling without restrictions, held without trial for extended periods, denied legal representation, etc.

There was also the claim that Israel intercepted foreign aid from Arab countries and from the U.S. that was intended for the Palestinians and that Israel acknowledged doing this but explained that it was because the confiscated funds might have been used to finance terrorism.

It was also stated in the book that conditions were so bad in Gaza that "fisherman are not permitted to leave the harbor, workers are prevented from going to outside jobs, the import and export of food and other goods is extremely restricted and often cut off completely and the police, teachers, nurses and social workers are deprived of salaries. Per capita income has decreased 40% during the last three years and the poverty rate has reached 70%."

The book also mentions the walls which surround Gaza and which are snaking through the West Bank. It gives an example of the wall that nearly surrounds the city of Qalqiliya with its 45,000 inhabitants "with most of the citizens' land and almost one third of their water confiscated by the Israelis."

We obviously have no first hand knowledge of what is actually going on over there, Professor, but it would seem that the real issue here is the validity of these claims regarding the treatment of the Palestinians. If this information is faulty, I hope that you will be setting the record straight for us.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Greg Schiller Jan 9, 2007, 6:59am EST
One of the more interesting dimensions to the troubles in the Middle-East is being played out at this moment in the West Bank and Gaza; the factional warfare among the Palestinians.

There is much to fault Israel for, but let us not fault them for the problems of others. The Palestinians are paying the price for choosing violence as a means to a political end, and now all politics in Palestine has become violent.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Greg Schiller Jan 9, 2007, 7:25am EST
In reference to the sea change in media coverage of Israel and the Palestinians, much of this is the byproduct of the domination of the media by the left.

Israel was once the darling of the left when it was the embodiment of democratic socialism during the 1960's. With the rise of the Likkud and the courting of religious support in the United State, the media as well as the academic and political left switched allegiance to the Palestinians whose Marxist revolutionary leanings were more in-line with their own.

What I find most odd about the media's new alliances is its counter-intuitive glee with Islamic/Fascist groups like Hezzbolah which one should attribute to nothing more than a schoolboy fascination with revolution.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Rony Kessler Jan 9, 2007, 7:53am EST
First of all Thank you Professor for keeping this issue up front. Our society forgets fast and Paris Hilton or Donald Trump easily push world conflicts to the side. Some how Arab vs. Arab is not as news worthy as Jew vs Arab. Aside from his wrong and imflaming title, and all the errors you point out, EX Pres Carter is guily of leaving the begining out. the history before 1047 and the role of the many Arab governments in creating the current situation. Why didn't Jordan and Egypt create an independent Palestinian State from 1948 to 1967? Why didn't they allow for economic developement? Why not point out that Israel is the ONLY democracy and that they have more than a million Arab citizens while most Arab countries don't even allow Jews in? The only reason Jews are not treated like second class citizens in Arab countries is because they are there.

Ex President Carter has not only sold his politics he sold his soul and his ability to EVER be considered fair or even handed. What a shame.
PLEASE keep up the excellent work you do in bringing out the truth.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Cheryl W. Jan 9, 2007, 8:00am EST
Thank you, Professor, for sharing this enlightening article with us. I have yet to read Carter's book, but now look forward to doing so.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
John S. (arizona) Jan 9, 2007, 8:16am EST
I personally think Jimmy Carter, though perhaps a nice guy, is one of worst Presidents we have ever had. I remember well when he was in office. I would give little credence to his thoughts or book on the middle east, or much else.
If not for Anwar Sadat wanting peace and willing to accept Israel's right to exist, together with billions in aid to both Egypt and Israel that we still pay today, Carter would have no standing at all.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Robert K. Jan 9, 2007, 8:24am EST
David McGill are you saying that if all those things are true, Israeli youth deserve to be attacked by rockets; Israeli commuters deserve to be blown up on buses; Red Crescent ambulances appropriately transport explosives to terrorists; violence and hatred against Jews and Israel belong in Palestinian and Saudi primary and secondary school textbooks? If there are wrongs to Palestinians, are you saying that they once accepted peaceful tactics to change the situation? You are correct to ask, but somehow there is never an answer to the above questions from you. Try answering them here and we will watch this "discussion" unfold.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Craig Olson Jan 9, 2007, 8:45am EST
What did you do for Ron Goldman and his Father? Or did you sell out to O. J. Simpson because he had a lot of money?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sam C. Jan 9, 2007, 8:57am EST
Unexcusable cruelty is unexcusable no matter the source. Israel believes brutal repression of Palestinian civilians just answer for random violence. Both acts are indefensible.

Is it common knowledge that Israeli interests heavily influence American foriegn policy and that many supporters of Israel, both Jewish and non-Jewish are part of the media establishment. What Carter claims on this is obvious fact, just as the repression of "real life" info on the ground in the refugee camps. The media also represses the extent of chaos in Iraq at the behest of the Bush admin which is rapidly failing in influence.

Mr. Dershowitz finds Carter illumination of reality a threat as any two sided argument on Israel which may affect American public opinion a threat. This is Israeli damage control. It is doubtful Carter's book will have much influence in America. If the Palestinians would ever adopt Ghandi-like tactics instead of idiot militarism Israel might really be in trouble.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sheryl O. Jan 9, 2007, 8:59am EST
Both Israel and Palestine are guilty of promoting hatred for and violence against each other. Both need to share in the responsibility for this horrible situation. I believe Jimmy Carter to be an honorable individual with a right to his opinion on this issue as a free American who no longer holds political office.

You bring up good points about the funding behind his library, Mr. Dershowitz. But perhaps the lack of funding from the Jewish community for his various efforts in the past since leaving office just goes to support his point that if you speak up about the injustices experienced by the Palestinians, you are punished for it.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mickey B. Jan 9, 2007, 9:24am EST
. "I suggest everyone get a copy of Carter's book and read it, so that you can think for yourselves about whether it is valid or not. I plan to do so; meanwhile, I'm really appalled to see this attack on Gather, especially with such an inflammatory title"

Kathleen,

The title of Carter's book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" is inflammatory. Carter has dashed all non-partisan pretenses when he chooses this biased title. Even his publishers questioned his choice. Also, Gather is a perfect forum to discuss such controversial matters.

Please read the book and publish an article if I am wrong. I certainly am not going to waste my time since there are so many more informative sources to read about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Plain ol' Becky S. Jan 9, 2007, 9:27am EST
So...Professor Dershowitz...When are you going to acknowledge that you are being paid by right wingers?

Jacob Laskin works for a website where David Horowitz is prominently featured, and Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld is the director of a think tank that includes Richard Perle, and several people who do commentary for Fox news. Everyone that I saw on the advirory board, seemed to have major Neo-con connenctions.

As well thought out as your article is, and it is worthy of consideration and thought, are you going to admit that you are being funded by the Neo-cons and that you may have an agenda against Carter? Given the tenor of your article, I would think that it would be only fair for you to disclose who you are really working for as well.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Christopher Weeks Jan 9, 2007, 9:28am EST
Alan, I assume that everyone advocating a stance on an issue has some kind of bias. Carters are friends with Arabs and so are Bushes. You have your own bias. Maybe President Carter is writing unforgivable lies and maybe not. Let's assume that there is no grand conspiracy of politicians and media moguls to protect Israeli interests. Why then do Americans care so little for the wrongs committed by Israel against the Palestinians?

Please don't read into this some kind of rabid anti-semitism. I'm pro-peace and realistic enough to believe that the only road to peace often includes war. I'm married to a jew with holocaust escapees as grandparents. But there is certainly plenty of behavior on the part of the Israelis that can not be seen as good faith peace efforts. (And I admit that I can never fully understand the mindset of either the jew-hating Arabs or the 'homeland'-defending jews.)

And while we might hear lots about Israeli gunships firing on Palestinian settlement -- and you might be able to demonstrate that we read more newspaper articles about that than the Rwandan genocide, that doesn't mean that they are framed the same way. No one ever tried to protagonize the Hutus' poor behavior.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Tony B. Jan 9, 2007, 9:29am EST
What Mr. Carter seems to "forget" is the fact that back in the late forties, the Palestinians were offered an opportunity to develop their own "country" alongside Israel. Instead, they plotted with their Arab neighbors, Egypt, Syria and Jordan, to attack Israel on their "day of Sabbath" in an effort to totally destroy the country of Israel. When the Israeli's turned the tables and began kicking butt on them, they immediately ran crying to the U.N., claiming to be the "victims" of a horrid Israeli attack and the U.N. forced Israel to return all of the land they had occupied during the war.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Wendy Hanawalt Jan 9, 2007, 9:31am EST
I disagree that there has been extensive coverage of the plight of the Palestinian people at the hands of the Israeli government. This is not a new issue by any means. I have heard reports as long as forty years ago of the repressive treatment of the Palestinians at the hands of the Israelis. Today's violence against Israelis MAY be a matter of reaping what you sew.

That said, you put your finger on what is, to me, THE crucial mitigating factor in this issue: the involvement of Arab countries who use Palestine to forward their own agendas. Criticism cannot fairly be leveled against Israel for basically defending itself against a number of countries bent on its annihilation. Those of us who are genuinely concerned about the plight of the Palestinian people must never mistake those Arab countries for friends: they aren't. Their national agendas and methods of governing are completely antithetical to everything the United States stands for, and anyone who thinks that these countries are truly interested in the wellbeing of the Palestinian people is crazy. Let's call it the way it is: we are "friends" with them because they have oil. We have prostituted ourselves as a nation to protect our right to driver Hummers on 128.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
TK Kenyon Jan 9, 2007, 9:36am EST
Alan Dershowitz has always been a sane and lucid writer, and this article is no exception. I had heard of Carter's ties to petrodollars in other contexts, though I'm surprised by the extent. Such ties to foreign interests should be disclosed by our politicians, even those who are retired. Such hypocrisy enrages me. I've always thought that Jimmy Carter was a bit of a monkey, but I never thought that the Islamists and their petrodollars were grinding the organ.

TK Kenyon
Author, RABID: A Novel, coming in April, 2007
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Carolion Grailbear Jan 9, 2007, 9:41am EST
Most important here to note that the CPT network (Christian Peacemaker Teams) which works with the Israeli Doves to witness the repression and brutality imposed on Palestinians living in Gaza, says nothing about Jews-buying-this or Carter anything; all they do is document things like Palestinian school children being stoned by Israeli illegal "settlers" who are being supported by the Israeli governent forces.

Rather than crying out "unfair to Jews" over all this, let's take a good look at all the GREAT Jewish teachers and philosophers who have assisted the movement toward political and spiritual freedom for the whole planet. Then let's acknowledge how very, very difficult it must be for the Israeli DOVES to stand up for human rights of Palestinian residents of Gaza, against the political and military weight of the whole Israeli [U.S.-backed] government.

HOW ABOUT A STANDING OVATION FOR THE GREAT-HEARTED WORK OF THE DOVES?
YES! FOR PEACEMAKERS!

And WIN-WIN SOLUTIONS ONLY, please, for the planet. No more victim-perp games. Let's have more people like the DOVES.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Doc, in the middle, holding on... Curmudgeon esq. Jan 9, 2007, 9:47am EST
when your subjects fire TANK ARTILLERY into fully occupied apartment buildings becasue someone 'MIGHT be in there', when a US Legislator stands on the floor of government and publicly calls Washington D.C. "Israeli held territory" and then quietly disappears, when it is VERBOTEN to even DISCUSS Israeli influence but 'praiseworthy' to cite the 'terrible terrible Arab influence' (it takes a "repressive regime" to know one it seems), and when NONE of the allegations is disproved or even discussed rationally, it's not an article it's a SMEAR.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Doc, in the middle, holding on... Curmudgeon esq. Jan 9, 2007, 9:56am EST
and I'm with David above...

"We obviously have no first hand knowledge of what is actually going on over there, Professor, but it would seem that the real issue here is the validity of these claims regarding the treatment of the Palestinians. If this information is faulty, I hope that you will be setting the record straight for us."
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mickey B. Jan 9, 2007, 10:06am EST
"So...Professor Dershowitz...When are you going to acknowledge that you are being paid by right wingers?"

Plain ol Becky S

Are you serious? You are obviously misinformed. If you know anything about Dershowitz he is a Jewish NY Liberal. Have you watched any of his debates? He has debated many conservatives such as Anne Coulter and won.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Greg Schiller Jan 9, 2007, 10:07am EST
What is ex-president Carter doing for the Kurds?

For that matter what is Syria, Turkey and Iran doing for the Kurds? Or shall we say doing TO the Kurds. I find it beyond merely hypocritical for the Arab world and their friends on the left to be wringing their hands at the admittedly lousy treatment of the Palestinians by the Israeli's while the very same governments are brutally repressing a minority group 10 times the size of the Palestinian population.

Or how about the Coptic Christians (original ethnic Egyptians) in Egypt?

I know, I know.......Kurds?, Coptic?, what's a coptic? Now back to our regularly scheduled red/blue clash........
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
amy l. Jan 9, 2007, 10:15am EST
Professor, thank you for your fascinating article and for bringing to light these relationships. Former President Carter's bias is greater than I could have imagined.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Alan M. Dershowitz Jan 9, 2007, 10:21am EST
I read with interest the thoughtful comments on my Carter article. I would like to now respond to some of them.

I consider myself pro-Palestinian as well as pro-Israel. In my book, The Case for Peace, I support a two-state process based on the end of the occupation and a Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem. That is why President Bill Clinton endorsed my book, along with former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Israeli Peace activist Amos Oz. But the evidence is clear that the situation of the Palestinians is self-inflicted. Had the Palestinians accepted the Clinton peace parameters, they would today be celebrating the fifth anniversary of Palestinian statehood, with no occupation, a thirty billion dollar head-start, and an end to violence. There is an excellent analysis of the Clinton peace proposal, which was rejected by Yasser Arafat, in today's New York Times by Dennis Ross, who was one of the engineers of the Clinton proposal. (I am linking it here and I urge you all to read it.) The election of Hamas has exacerbated the plight of the Palestinians because Hamas, being a terrorist organization, is ineligible for international aid. I completely agree with the response that said that if the Palestinians had adopted the passive-resistance tactics of Gandhi (or may I add, perhaps Martin Luther King), they would have forced Israel into recognizing their legitimate interests more quickly. It is difficult to get a country to end an occupation when to do so merely gives terrorists more territory from which to fire their rockets and organize their terrorist attacks. When Israel left Gaza it was hoping to exchange land for peace. Instead it got land for terrorism, rockets, and kidnappings. The same is true of southern Lebanon.

Now for some of the personal comments. I can assure everyone that I am the furthest thing in the world from a neo-con. I am a liberal Democrat who supported Bill Clinton and John Kerry (I also support the right of everyone charged with crime to have a zealous defense). I oppose much of the neo-con agenda and I assure you that I have never been paid one nickel by the neo-cons or any other right-wing organization. I would be happy to disclose all of my finances if Jimmy Carter would be prepared to disclose his. I have even contributed to Jimmy Carter over the years, as have many Jews, who have supported the Carter Center financially. The power of Arab money and the Arab lobby—a subject that Carter fails to address—is far greater than the power of any pro-Israel lobby, certainly with Jimmy Carter.

Keep the comments coming—I will have more to say about this in the days to come.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Elihu S. Jan 9, 2007, 10:40am EST
I'm not sure why some folks are so incensed at Professor Dershowitz at this juncture. Professor Dershowitz has done nothing more than 'call out' President Carter and ask that his claims be scrutinized in the light of day. Dershowitz has also asked that Carter be judged by the same criteria by which Mr. Carter measures others. A fair debate seems in order, here.

Professor Dershowitz points out that Mr. Carter's book contains a collection of particularly vile insinuations supported by outrageous allegations and then bolstered with easily verifiable falsehoods: Represntative of the latter is Mr. Carter's claim that the plight of the Palestinians is "not something that has been acknowledged or even discussed in this country... You never hear anything about what is happening to the Palestinians by the Israelis." Only someone who has assiduously ignored all media in the U.S. and abroad for the past 40 years could make that claim with a straight face. Mr. Carter is either exaggerating, lying or mistaken in a manner that would cast doubt on every other statement he makes in his book. Still, Professor Dershowitz has asked for nothing more than an open and honest debate of Mr. Carter's thesis. Mr. Carter has said when interviewed by NPR that he hoped his book would spark debate. Well, I say 'have at it', gentlemen. I hope and trust that he will accept Mr. Dershowitz' challenge. - If Mr. Carter does not rise to the challenge, then those who rely on Mr. Carter's version of the story should consider most seriously the myriad reviewers who have put the lie to Mr. Carter's allegations and take stock of their position acordingly.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Rory M. Jan 9, 2007, 10:43am EST
Methinks thou dost protest too much.

In your opening paragraph you say: " In his recent book tour to promote Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, Carter has been peddling a particularly nasty bit of bigotry. The canard is that Jews own and control the media, and prevent newspapers and the broadcast media from presenting an objective assessment of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and that Jews have bought and paid for every single member of Congress so as to prevent any of them from espousing a balanced position. How else can anyone understand Carter's claims that it is impossible for the media and politicians to speak freely about Israel and the Middle East? The only explanation – and one that Carter tap dances around, but won't come out and say directly – is that Jews control the media and buy politicians. "

I find this very telling. You have inferred your own conclusion as to what Carter is "really" saying and then spend the rest of your article criticizing him for having said what you inferred.

Jimmy Carter is the only President of the United States ever to have delivered concrete results for the state of Israel in terms of preserving its existence and fostering peace in the region. The Camp David accord, entirely Carter's doing, resulted in a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, the Arab nation that had previously been the main threat to Israel's peaceful existence. That peace treaty has endure now for thirty years. All other US Presidents have only managed to hold the line for Israel.

That Jimmy Carter (even Jimmy Carter, the author of the Camp David Accord) cannot start a debate on the Palestine-Israel conflict without evoking shrill cries of anti-Semitism is tantamount to proof of what he is saying about the inability to debate the issue.

Not because "Jews own the media" or because "Jews own the polticians", though there are many Jews who do have interests in media outlets and many powerful Jewish lobbyists and a lot of money donated to campaigns by Jewish supporters. Not because of some vast "Zionist conspiracy". But for many reasons, amongst them: anti-Arabic and anti-Islamic prejudice which is widespread in America and the rest of the Western world; geo-political interests tied in with the oil-rich nature of the region in which Israel is an important Western ally; the collective guilt many Westerners feel for our part allowing the Holocaust to happen; because Israel, Israeli politicians and some Jewish lobbyists cleverly use this guilt to shout down any debate that criticizes Israel (and before you characterize this as an anti-Semetic remark, let's be clear, it is merely human nature to use every advantage one has available, and Israel has had the advantage of the moral high ground being conceded on the matter of anti-Semitism due to the horror that resulted from it in the 1940s).

Are you claiming that there is no effective Jewish, pro-Israeli lobby in the U.S.? Surely not. Are you suggesting that there is no influence in the media of pro-Israeli lobbyists and journalists? Surely not. Are you saying that Jews, alone amongst all ethnic groups, do not vociferously defend their own? Surely not.

What amazes me is that critics of Carter's book have spent so much time debating the man, his motives, his connections, his credibility but so little debating the ideas and issues he has brought forward.

Sad.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Alan C. S. Jan 9, 2007, 11:02am EST
What about the occupation? What about the Jews inside and outside of Israel who agree with Jimmy Carter? If the West Bank and Gaza are not "Aparteid" then what are they? Disneyland? Please check out the following to become educated:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070108/cm_thenation/1155513

http://www.wrmea.com/archives/December_2006/0612022.html

http://youtube.com/watch?v=TgBsW3s5_xU

If anyone can dispute this information, go for it!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Ari T. Jan 9, 2007, 11:08am EST
So ... is this new to Carter (maybe a sign of age?) or did he always lack in character?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Nanci B Jan 9, 2007, 11:23am EST
At one point in the past, I was appalled at the level of pro-Israel propaganda fed to the American people and was far more supportive of the Palestinian position. I had great hopes that one day the media would catch on and begin to provide a level approach documenting the problems of the Palestinians.

Sadly, the media has switched from an overwhelming pro-Israel stance to an equally overwhelming anti-Israel stance. I have become far more pro-Israeli than I ever would have expected while reading the pro-Palestinian stories. They document a situation where the only acceptable course of action for the Israeli people would be to sit back, allow their land to be overrun by the Palestinians and to ignore any and all provocation from the Arab world. This is unacceptable for any sovereign nation.

As for President Carter, this article merely serves to document what I have long suspected. Actually, it is fortunate for Carter that the anti-Israeli groups are providing him with such an adequate financial base. Someone has to - we have more sense than that here in America.

Alan Dershowitz a neo-con? I almost fell off my chair laughing at that. As someone with 2 law degrees under my belt, I have long admired his legal acumen and trial stratagems in many (but not all) of his high profile cases but I have never been impressed by his too-liberal leanings. He would be laughed out of the room if he came to a meeting of true conservatives and I am positive the neo-cons would be no more welcoming.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Doc, in the middle, holding on... Curmudgeon esq. Jan 9, 2007, 11:26am EST
Rory pegged it pretty well...

"Are you claiming that there is no effective Jewish, pro-Israeli lobby in the U.S.? Surely not. Are you suggesting that there is no influence in the media of pro-Israeli lobbyists and journalists? Surely not. Are you saying that Jews, alone amongst all ethnic groups, do not vociferously defend their own? Surely not.

What amazes me is that critics of Carter's book have spent so much time debating the man, his motives, his connections, his credibility but so little debating the ideas and issues he has brought forward."
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
David Evans Jan 9, 2007, 11:29am EST
I am Jewish and I lived in Israel the first four years of my life. I still have strong internal personal connections to it. My experiences there have affected me and been with me my whole life. I do, however, respectfully disagree with you on what it is Mr. Carter is saying in his book regarding the discussion of Israel here in the states. I have seen and heard several of his recent interviews and I certainly have not agreed entirely with everything he has said. But my impression of what he has said regarding the public discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian situation is that there seems to be a taboo surrounding the issue. There is a reluctance to approach the issue objectively and indeed it is a very difficult thing to do.... that is just a fact, not an indictment. It is a hot potato that nobody really wants to hold onto for long. When the media discusses it it gets reemed either way. It's touchy in public because there are so little facts out there to discuss and in those that are there are difficult to descern how heavily tainted they are with Subjectivity. Carter has indicated that the discussion is occuring in Israel. I feel from what Carter has said so far that it is at least time to have a discussion here and to try in a human way to acknowledge facts that can be agreed on. Otherwise this seemingly endless trip on the circular round-a-bout will continue or crash terribly. It's like being stuck on one of those traffic circles in France or England, not knowing which exit to take or how to get there and refusing to discuss it with the fellow passengers in the car...so we just let the car drive on...
I do not think that Carter has been implying that the Jews are behind the "Taboo" here in the states (I personally don't think that that is the case either); it seems to be more of a conclusion you are drawing. I think that it is both Jews and Christians here that have self intrests involved and have difficulty talking about it.
Though his intention seems to be to initiate more disscusion of the human rights situation of the Palestinians, I do fault Mr. Carter for not drawing in enough of a broad broad view of the situation. What brought the Jews to Israel in the first place? How have they had to struggle to exist?
But I do think a discussion of the situation is important.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Katz no name want to resign Jan 9, 2007, 11:37am EST
Jews are not equal to Zionists, nor is LIKUD representative of Jewish people.
Israel is a modern invention based on lies, manipulation, and deceit.
It is time for the US to stop funding Israel, as they are not our friends, nor are they Jewish, in any manner of speaking. No religion justifies genocide and land theft.
No religion justifies fascist totalitarianism, or racism.
This is just another example of your treasonous misrepresentation of what is Israel, and what is it's leadership's manipulation of the USA.
Further, Israeli Mossad is a rogue operation that most likely took down our Towers, in order to manipulate the US into fighting Israeli wars of aggression.
You sir, are part of the big problem.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Olin Elliott Jan 9, 2007, 11:42am EST
I haven't read Carter's book, except for excerpts in the press, but I feel compelled to write because I feel that the conclusions drawn in Mr. Dershowitz article are problematic. As I said, I haven't read the entire book, but the quotes given by Mr. Dershowitz do not support his position. Recognizing that it is politically inexpediant in the United Sates to criticize Israel does not mean that we believe "Jews" own all politicians. Furthermore, criticism of Israel is not necessarily anti-semitic. I can oppose the government of Israel and not be against all Jewish people. If I criticized the government of Italy, very few people would accuse me of being prejudiced against all Italian people. And it is inescapably true that Israel is treated differently in international relations because of the protection of the United States. The US has used failure to abide by UN resolutions as an excuse to attack Iraq and work for sanctions against Iran. However, Israel is protected from these consequences when it acts outside international constraints because of the veto power of the US. Please understand, I am not supporter of Palestenian factions either. From the early days of the PLO to the present, Palestenians have often been their own worst enemies, embracing extremist positions, fighting among themselves, and sabotaging the possibility of peace repeatedly. There is more than enough blame for everyone involoved. But people seem to me more interested in attacking each other's character and credibility than in truly examining the issues involved.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Dr Miguel S. Jan 9, 2007, 11:46am EST
Carter was one of the most incompetent presidents the US ever had. He botched forign policy with Iran and now we are facinf a nuclear armed Western-hating mullocracy. He forced Israel to give away the Sinai for a worthless paper'peace' with Egypt. Egypt remains anti-US and anti-Israel and dictatorial as ever arming itself with the largesse of US taxpayers for a future war agaist Israel (very clever, NOT!) Lastly, the arabs have already 22 states, the mandate of Palestine was already partitioned by the Brits in the 1920's giving the arabs 75% of the land for the creation of the fictitious 'kingdom of Jordan'. Since 1993 the arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza have had autonomy and have been the largest recipients of the world's foreign aid per capita. What have they achieved: violence, corruption and an educational system and media that spews out only hatred of the Jews and 'the West'. I doubt that such a group could or should ever have a separate 'state'.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Plain ol' Becky S. Jan 9, 2007, 11:54am EST
Do I sincerly believe the Professor Dershowitz is a neo-con?

No, I don't. I do believe that he deserves the same kind of scrutiny for his articles that he has given Former President Carter. I do believe that people's motives and sources should be questioned when they make accusations of bigotry and collusion with people who would seem diametrically opposed to their public face.

So, Professor Dershowitz used the names of a couple of people as sources for his article who are connected to the Neo-Cons. Why can't be be questioned then, about his connection to those people, given his questioning of Carter? Only seems fair and balanced to me.

For the record, I am not a "follower" of Carter, nor am I an apologist. I believe that people make decisions, in good faith, for causes that they think will be advanced by their decision. Professor Dershowitz has done a lot of good work, legally and as a defender of the Constitution. I am aware of his background and his public face. So questioning his motives is done in the spirit of gaining knowledge, and not in the spirit of an attack.

Also, for record, I would love to hear Carter and Dershowitz debate, in any forum. This would be a lively and interesting exchange that may go toward furthering the understanding of situations in the Middle East. This is not a bad thing, in any light, and doesn't need to be a situation where you must take sides. Questioning peoples motives and their true goals is a healthy part of gaining understanding.

Bono works with Paul O'Neill, and visits George W. Bush in the White House. He is criticized by people who think he is selling out to the powers that be. Is he? Only he knows.

Mother Teresa takes money from people with horrible human rights abuses on their record, Christopher Hitchens questions her charitable bona fides. And yet, she did do much good.

Questioning people's motives, funding, and source material is just a way of figuring out the truth. If you are a lawyer, law student, journalist or common citizen, I see no harm in asking direct questions. Or in throwing tone and conjecture back in the face of people who are making accusations and implications.

I'm sure Professor Dershowitz understands the technique, and the intent. Even if he doesn't like the questions. I am looking forward to reading the rest of his series on this matter. However, I believe that I am allowed to ask pointed questions and to make up my own mind about his motives. This is a unique opportunity for a working mother of seven, I get to ask Professor Alan Dershowitz questions about one of his opinions and how he arrived at them. I'm not going to just look at him with rose colored glasses and blindly believe everthing I read.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Alan M. Dershowitz Jan 9, 2007, 11:56am EST
In response to Rory's comments, many people believe that President Carter has claimed far too much credit for the Camp David accords. In fact, peace between Egypt and Israel was accomplished primarily through the boldness and bravery of Egypt's Anwar Sadat and Israel's Menachem Begin. Moreover, Carter's role, whatever it may have been, does not justify his complete rewriting of history, his distortion of facts, and his parroting the anti-Israel line fed to him by his paymasters. I am surely not alone in criticizing Carter; several of his former colleagues have resigned from the Carter Center in protest and many of his former supporters—non-Jewish as well as Jewish—have been appalled at Carter's "blame the Jews" approach. (For example, Kenneth Stein, a fellow at the Carter Center and Schatten Professor of Contemporary Middle Eastern History at Emory University,
resigned his post at the Carter Center
over factual inaccuracies in 'Peace not Apartheid.')

In a democracy, lobbying is perfectly appropriate, and both Israel and the Arabs have extensive lobbying operations in the United States. Carter is part of the Arab lobbying operation. He is being paid by Arab sources to lobby for Arab interests. I am paid absolutely nothing and take my positions entirely based on what I believe is right.

Rory criticizes Carter's critics for not dealing with the merits of Carter's position. I have done so extensively elsewhere (see my article in the Jerusalem Post.). Moreover, I have written three books dealing with the merits of the Middle East conflict. I urge any readers who are interested in reading my views in greater detail to do so in these sources.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Tara M. Jan 9, 2007, 12:06pm EST
Mr. Dershowitz, thank you for your very interesting article and the resulting discussion. I have enjoyed reading it all and will follow it.
I thoroughly agree with your second to last paragraph. We should require this of all leaders, people, in such a position as his.
While I do not pretend to be as politically savvy as everyone else here, I would like to offer my humble opinion. Personally, I feel both sides are guilty of committing terrible atrocities against each other, and that both sides are guilty of teaching and fostering hatred to each other. This attitude has existed since Bible times, for whatever reason, right or wrong, and if they have not yet learned that hatred is getting them nowhere, then they never will. Peace between Israelies and Palestinians, if and when it is achieved, will only be achieved when both sides want it more than anything else in the world, if for nothing else than for the sake of their children. I also feel that the powers that be owe it to the world to tell both Israelies and Palestinians that this conflict will no longer be tolerated. Period. No country or political regime should support either of them. Either come up with a mutually agreed upon plan by a certain date, or it will be done for them.
I realize my views are simplistic. I do not think they can ever peacefully co-exist because neither side wants to.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Gerry Wass Jan 9, 2007, 12:11pm EST
After reading the entire thread, I'm more confused than when I began. I had held the strong opinion that the Palestinian situation is routinely unreported and that billions of U.S. dollars have poured into Israel to unjustly settle and steal Arab land. I have also been deeply impressed with many of President Carter's post-presidential actions, so I'm dismayed by the implications of what he is being accused of and the idea that he has succumbed to a desire for money. I'm not aware that he knows about Gather, so I don't know how we could address the accusations. Mostly I'm sad that this many years into the whole conflict we are still taking this combative tone instead of carefully gathering information and working to bring some real peace into this tortured area.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
J B. Jan 9, 2007, 12:12pm EST
I too thank Mr. Dershowitz for posting this article and following in the comments. It has been both enlightening and thought provoking. I also thank all that have made comments to help me learn a little more about this situation. My original take on the book and the interviews that I saw of Jimmy Carter go back to the title of this article. It appears to me as if our ex-president is for sale and while, that may not have been his intent (I believe him to be a good man), I worry that will be the net result of this book's efforts.

Can anybody point me in the direction of where there is a legitimate Palestenian peace proposal that openly and enthusiastically allows Israel not only to exist but where they will help defend Israel's right to do so?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Gerry Wass Jan 9, 2007, 12:18pm EST
Tara's comment popped up as I posted mine, so I simply wanted to say that your simplistic views are very powerful and profound, that I agree with you. It's high time that the whole world focused upon resolving such problems
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
jeff c. Jan 9, 2007, 12:18pm EST
A few random thoughts...

I understand that Israel must inflict harsh treatment (searches, checkpoints, etc.) on the Palestinian population as a matter of self defense. As a Jew, it pains me to see harsh treatment (brutality, etc.) that is unjustified.

I lived in Boston from 1996-2004, and sought every opportunity to hear Alan Dershowitz speak. I applaud his courage and conviction; it isn't easy to put oneself on the front lines of a debate as contentious as this one.

Giving Jimmy Carter the benefit of the doubt, I assume he believes a fair and honest debate in the United States will ultimately result in a renewed, U.S.-led peace initiative between Israelis and Palestinians. But I would ask Carter this: does the U.S. really need to pressure Israel into negotiations? Is Israel the problem here? After all, Oslo wasn't that long ago, and what the world learned then was 1) Israel once again was ready to trade land for peace, but 2) few if any Arab leaders have the courage to make peace with Israel, because they'd likely be signing their own death warrants. Now, of course, the dynamics are even more complicated, given Hamas' refusal to negotiate with Israel or honor past agreements with Israel. I would never suggest that the U.S., Israel, Europeans, Arabs, and the Palestinians should wait for the dynamics to change before again aggressively pursuing peace, but I'd encourage Jimmy Carter to at least acknowledge that Israel is not the primary roadblock to peace here.

Frankly, there's enough blame to go around, including the British missteps in the Middle East in the early 20th century, failed Israeli and Palestinian policies, and Arab antisemitism. At the end of the day, though, for me, it comes down to this: there will be peace between Israelis and Palestinians when Arabs stop trying to destroy Israel and reach out to it in peace. And despite what many may argue, I believe the Arab goal to destroy Israel has little to do with the plight of the Palestinians.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Yochanon B. Jan 9, 2007, 12:22pm EST
Let's all focus and help bring about an open and fair debate.
President Carter deserves an opponent worthy of an ex-President.

Professor Dershowitz has more than proven himself capable and, as a most recent example of his ability to document EVERYTHING he mentions, his book "The Case for Israel" is excellent and recommended to anyone who thinks there is a 50/50 moral equivalency, i.e each side is half wrong and half right. Wrong! look at the facts, the action, the history, the truth, if you can take it.

I don't expect Carter to accept the debate, but we should all demand it of him, as we should full disclosure of his financial support.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
lise s. Jan 9, 2007, 12:22pm EST
19 And hear, O earth: look, I bring evil on these people, exactly like the product of their own thoughts, because they have not listened to My Words, nor to My Law, but they rejected it!
I don't care whose money HE uses to pay you with, warn them, Mr Jimmy, warn them!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mr. Basketball Jan 9, 2007, 12:32pm EST
Takes a fair amount of guts for someone that schills his products relentously on the cable TV talk shows, to accuse the ex-Pres. of being "for sale." I'll take the Ford-Carter alliance and their leadership style anyday, to the high pitched shrill rantings of the quite obviously biased Dershowitz. Any time he can get in front of the cameras regarding sensational legal cases....he'll do it. Follow the $$$
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
bill giltner Jan 9, 2007, 12:44pm EST
I have not words to express how little I think of you and your argument, Mr. Dershowitz.

Thanks, Gather, you piece of trash, propaganda mechanism.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Bion H. Jan 9, 2007, 12:47pm EST
Fascinating evolution of the same tit-for-tat mentality that powers the entire Mid-East fiasco. Whether it is politics or religion, extremism is the problem not the answer. Readers should review Mr. D's tags for a little insight. I wonder what J. Carters tags would be?

This bespeaks of the recent quote by Dennis Overbye

"... the conscious mind is like a monkey riding a tiger
of subconscious decisions and actions in progress,
frantically making up stories about being in control."
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Craig E. Jan 9, 2007, 12:49pm EST
The Islamic extermists that control "Palestine" will not rest until Israel no longer exists and the Jewish people are exterminated.

I can't understand why seemingly rational people would feel that Israel is at fault for attempting to exist. But then I know that some people's eyes are forever clouded; they were made NOT to see the truth.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
bill giltner Jan 9, 2007, 12:49pm EST
Dershowitz: How Low Can You Go?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mickey B. Jan 9, 2007, 12:50pm EST
Bill Giltner,

You believe that 9/11 was caused by the US goverment (loony). As a result your comments have little validity in this discussion.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Sue B.© The Sting IS Worse Than the Buzz Jan 9, 2007, 12:53pm EST
Still teaching at Harvard Law School?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
chris macrae Jan 9, 2007, 12:53pm EST
I am not well versed in American politics but have worked in 30 countries. I am not sure if your introduction at the top of this thread is unbiassed. What I would like to say -as a Scottish In ternationalist : we are a nation who mostly were forced to leave our lands by 1850 due to English Empire taking our country over and valuing sheep as worth more than people - is that every side needs to stop creating apartheids at geographical borders. And those with the biggest power or most money need to lead in setting te example. In a networked world , boundaries are our greatest risk. Take every climate crisis. Nature cares not a jot where man draws landlines. If we are to resolve any worldwide sustainability challenge then we will have to get to the stage where we no more discriminate across land boundaries than we do within, respecting every peaceful human being and their rights to give all children at least basic equality of rights. My grandfather was turned from being a British Raj judge in Bombay in 1920s to being the legal editor of India's constitution of Independence in 1940s; if he was alive today he would ask that you at least consider the century of Gandhi's Satyagraha being celebrated through 2007 http://peacecentury.tv http://crisisclimate.tv http://guidemakers.net
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mickey B. Jan 9, 2007, 12:55pm EST
"Takes a fair amount of guts for someone that schills his products relentously on the cable TV talk shows, to accuse the ex-Pres. of being "for sale." I'll take the Ford-Carter alliance and their leadership style anyday, to the high pitched shrill rantings of the quite obviously biased Dershowitz. Any time he can get in front of the cameras regarding sensational legal cases....he'll do it. Follow the $$$"

Tim,

This is classified as a rant w/ no substance. You have not addressed one piece of the article but have instead gone for cheap shot attacks. This is a unique opportunity to ask questions and you have blown it. Go home.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
George L. Jan 9, 2007, 1:02pm EST
I learned long ago that name-calling and personal attack are the tactics of those who do not have the facts on their side.

Jimmy Carter is a courageous man.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Jimmie (Hey! Let's Gather!) Harris Jan 9, 2007, 1:03pm EST
I hesitate to say anything critical of you, Professor Dershowitz, for fear you will assume that I am anti-Israel, an nothing could be further from the truth.

So I will, instead, say something critical of Gather.com. I was appalled to click on the Dershowitz link and see a large advertisement for this six-part series spread across the top of the page. I have never seen any other Gather writer get such exposure. I guess "selling out" is popular among all kinds of folks.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
BTN V. Jan 9, 2007, 1:07pm EST
Well it seems many of the crazies have joined this conversation. If you think any one of the following;
1- Jews control the media
2- Jews were responsible for 9/11
3- The Palestinians want a 2 state solution and want to live in peace
4- 5 Million Jews are bullying 250 million Arabs

then you're part of the problem.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Randy- Being true to myself Jan 9, 2007, 1:07pm EST
This is only an all out attack if you disagree with Alan Dershowitz . It is a wonderful exposure of a terrible president if you agree with Mr. Dershowitz . The truth is more in the middle, with Mr. Dershowitz giving information he has at hand, and his opinion. We are still allowed to do that people. Jimmy Carter made a lot of allegations, and opinions in his book. Is there a difference? No the difference is only in which side of the political spectrum you align yourself with.

As we can see, there are people with no maturity, or respect who would stoop to name calling, and plain rudeness. This shows little of their character, and the truth in words written by those who they attack.

Why is it, that Jimmy Carter has yet to answer the questions brought about by many, including his main assistant about the inaccuaracies, and out right misrepresentations? CAn we look into this.

Respectfully Mr. Dershowitz, I would prefer less meat into the articles, so that all can look into the information you provide, and give reasonable responses. If they can handle giving a reasonable response, with so much bitterness already displayed.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mickey B. Jan 9, 2007, 1:08pm EST
"Jimmy Carter is a courageous man."

George L.,

Can you be more specific? Please back up your assertion.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mickey B. Jan 9, 2007, 1:10pm EST
George,

How Courageous is Carter since he turned down a chance to debate Professor Deshowitz. I would indicate his actions say other wise.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
BTN V. Jan 9, 2007, 1:15pm EST
Jimmy Carter was the worst President we ever had. And we are suffering still because of the 4 years he spent in office. Unforunately not only has he not learned from his mistakes while in office his poor judgement has only gotten worse with age.

It was his choice to write this book and his choice to not only present a one sided view but also distort the facts (and I'm being kind.) If you'd like to read what one of the people who was there has to say about Carter read Dennis Ross's piece in todays NY Times.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Scott Goldstein Jan 9, 2007, 1:15pm EST
Mr. Dershowitz, you completely miss the point here- "The plight of the Palestinians has been covered more extensively, per capita, than the plight of any other group in the world, certainly more than the Tibetans and the victims of genocides in Darfur and Rwanda."

You are talking about in ALL media. Sure, coverage of the Palestinian plight is heavy in other countries, but most certainly not in the United States. I am news-junkie and I don't think I have once seen a piece on the plight of the Palestinians on any of the big 3 (CNN, MSNBC, Fox News).

Coverage in the U.S. is what is important since the assertion is that Israel's case is being advanced by the United States where we can not have an open discussion about our support for Israel without being labeled anti-semites.

Mr. Dershowtiz, I am a Jew, and THAT is demonstrably the case. Every time someone even tries to prevent another view on Israel than the AIPAC/ right wing view, they get called anti-semites. For example, Mersheimer and Walt. Their piece wasn't that well done, but yet their assertion was proven TRUE only because you and others did exactly what they asserted you would, called them anti-semites.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Rick McGirr Jan 9, 2007, 1:16pm EST
In your first sentence, you expose your bigotry, then you go on to talk about someone else's. Are you that full of yourself?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Rocket Eighty-Eight Jan 9, 2007, 1:19pm EST
OK, you've attacked the messenger AND proven Carter's point -- that anyone who dares speak ill of Israel will be subject to relentless attack. Are you going to try to refute the substance of the book, or just stick to character assasination?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Rick McGirr Jan 9, 2007, 1:21pm EST
Mr. D, could you please explain to us, what is "Arab money"?
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Randy- Being true to myself Jan 9, 2007, 1:21pm EST
Mr. Dershowitz ; I had the opportunity to reread your article that you offered. I find you lay out quite an agenda to go through, and actually prove. It is a big task, but if done, it may shed a lot of light onto this issue. I have found nothing our of the ordinary, or so mean spirited as to be given an onslaught of people who disagree, and their harsh rhetoric.

I find many are trying to silence your words, and not dispute your words. I am seeing those who want to turn this information, and series from that of information on Jimmy Carter to one of you and your true intentions.

These are not of the most worthy endeavors, to say the least. I look forward to you offering more substantiated information, to your opinions, and ascertions.

Again, thank you for stepping up, and giving an indepth point of view on a very important issue.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mickey B. Jan 9, 2007, 1:27pm EST
"Are you going to try to refute the substance of the book, or just stick to character assasination?"

Robert Taylor,

Are you serious? Re read the article or did you skip it and comment first. The professor took passages directly from the book and discussed it.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Larry Kluth Jan 9, 2007, 1:27pm EST
This, to me, is just another case of religious faith gone astray. What a shame that in the 21st century, so many people rely on religious faith instead of logic and reason. The real problem here is; people in power and influence are trying to fulfil biblical prophecy. Our born again President is doing it. The state of Israel is a done deal (1948) now we have to find a way to reconsile the displaced people. When mankind accepts the fact that there is no supernatural help out there to make us understand each other, we may learn to live together. The Big-Bang and evolution are facts of life. There is no life after this. We will all have to do as much as we can in one lifetime to make this a better world.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Hillel S. Jan 9, 2007, 1:30pm EST
With the recent release of previously classified intelligence documents incuding cables that not only confirm that Yasir Arafat knew of the murder of the U.S. ambassador to Sudan, Cleo Noel, Jr. and George Curtis Moore in 1973, but identify him as the person who ordered their murders, what did Jimmy Carter know and when did he know it? It strains credulity that Carter, who took office in 1977 was unaware of Arafat's role in this heinous crime. A tape was made of Arafat ordering the murder which was turned over to the State Department in 1973. Moreover, as Doug Brinkley has written (and never denied by Carter), our former Georgia President wrote speeches for the Palestinian dictator. This has got to be a shameful first in our history. Fascist dictator murders U.S. diplomats, then U.S. President lionizes him and shills as his speechwriter.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Ramzi Z. Jan 9, 2007, 1:32pm EST
Dershowitz has totally discredited himself when it comes to the middle east. He has espoused teh views of the extreme right in Israel. There is more praise for Carter's book in Israel than amongst pro-Israel Jewish circles in the US.

See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070108/cm_thenation/1155513

and what was Carter's crime?? calling a spade a spade? refering to the situation in Palestine as Apartheid? well, guess what? it is. Anyone who has been near Palestine can only describe the system as one of apartheid (ask the south Africans, they would tell you). But God forbid we shoudl compare the Israelis with the old South African regime.. oh no.. not the "civilized" Israelis who are supposed to be the light amongst nations.. well, facts are facts, Israelis are destorying homes, stealing lands, imposing collective punishments, imprisoning democratically elected leaders, and more horrible things. and they are doing it with our tax dollars (gee, I wonder why the world hates us...)

So, back to Dershowitz point... oh yes.. Carter took money from the Arabs.. quelle scandale.. quelle crime... so what? Many institutions have taken money from all kinds of international sources. If we are to send back all the money that international governements are sending to the US we would go bankrupt in an instant. Ah, but it's not any money.. it's Arab money.. you know.. Arab, as in the new boogey man.. the new "communist".

Bravo Mr. Dershowitz.. Bravo on your efforts to become the new McCarthy... yes, let's go around seeking all sources of Arab money.. let's question anyone out there with relations to anything Arab or Muslim.. let's unleash the thoguth police on them.

It is interesting that Dershowitz prefers to use the term "Jew" as opposed to "Zionist" or "Proi-Israel".. it really brings back the tired equation of "Anti-Israel = Anti Semite"... well, guess what, we ain't buying it. What Carter's courageous book tell us is that it's ok to question Israel.. that this apartheid state has failed judaism.. that it no longer has (and never had) a monopoly on all things Jewish.

And as far as the media, when was the last time you watched a news show which hosted an "Arab World Specialist" who was actually an Arab? think about that... it's always some neo-con with major pro-Israeli point of view. You need an expert on "terrorism", call in the Israelis.. since they are such experts at it (mainly at inflicting it), that they can't seem to stop it.

Sadly, there is no debate in the US about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict... thank god for the internet and international news sources, including Israeli ones. For here, in the good old USA, land of the free, the thought police headed by the likes of Dershowitz are making sure that anyone that tries to bring any balance to the matter is exposed as an anti-semite.. is discredited.. is questioned.. that their financial history is scrutinized... that their personal life are studied...

So, rather than join the growing number of Jewish intellectuals who are speaking out against what Israel claims to be doinbg in the name of Jews worldwide, Dershowitz has chosen to join the likes of Daniel Pipes and Ann Coulter...to play dirty.. to go on the attack...

for shame, professor, for shame...
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Kastle Brill Jan 9, 2007, 1:33pm EST
I believe that there are reasons that Carter, and others, continue to berate Israel for its actions towards the Palestinians. One of the reasons is the unconscious acceptance of anti-semitic premises. In the case of anti-black prejudice, it has become accepted that many liberal whites in the U.S. have reactions to black people which their conscious minds try to examine whether such reactions are racist. If they find them so, the reactions are rejected. When it comes to the actions of Isreal, the liberal community or left community tend to not to examine underlying assumptions for anti-semitism. Another reason for attacks on Israel's actions is the disappointment that Israel is not perfect or at least not better than it is. Other groups are able to respond imperfectly, or to attempt various actions in solution of their problem. Jews are apparently not among those groups. One doesn't have to think that Israel's actions are always the best ones, to understand that this small country has been under continual attack, either by direct war, by terrorism, or both since its inception. OTH, I do wish AD seemed a little less so completely sure that he has the only brains or "mouth" in the room. Not every discussion is a trial. And his position on torture discussions, has given legitimacy to grotesque positions and actions of the US government. And descreased his own intellectual poisitions.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
adrien burke Jan 9, 2007, 1:34pm EST
Beyond all the name-calling and labelmaking, there is one sad, incontrovertable, seemingly irreversable fact: The Palestians have less land than they did a year ago (which was much less than they had the year before, and ceertainly less than they had a decade ago) and they will have less land they will have less land yet in a month or a year.

That being the case, any talk by supporters of Israel about wanting peace is ridiculous.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
deminn from Minnesota Jan 9, 2007, 1:35pm EST
"Pot, meet kettle" doesn't really address the overall correctness of Carter's position that though a religious democracy compared to the economic based one that is the US, Israel by our standards is guilty of human rights abuse and, though sanctioned and admonished multiple times by the UN, still retains a fundamentally apartheid-like state as outlaw among progressive nations.

The sort of religeoethnic tier-ing of citizenship enshrined as fundamental constitutionally in the state of Israel is not something we would tolerate in the US. It points out a major difference between the nations. As such, this is not something US citizens should by mandate be required to support nor should it be allowed by those who chose to.

No amount of "he started it," "He's just as bad," or Pavlovian assignation of anti-Semitism at so fundamental disagreement changes the raw correctness of that reality and until it is confronted and dealt with, there will be no lasting peace possible in this region of the world. That said, who seem to be the parties failing to embrace peach and progress in your mind? Those who recognize the disconnect or those who refuse to and blame those who won't accept their values as supercitizen in the world?

The most responsible course of action of traditional US sensibilities is an immediate termination of government foreign aid and ban on private transfers of wealth from the US through any means which ultimately benefit this rogue nation state perpetuated in part on an embrasure of human rights abuse.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Alan C. S. Jan 9, 2007, 1:36pm EST
Again, WHAT ABOUT THE OCCUPATION OF GAZA AND THE WESTBANK? IS IT APARTHEID? IF NOT, WHAT IS IT? FORGET ABOUT CARTER AND DERSHOWITZ. ALL OF THIS DISCUSSION IS A SMOKE SCREEN HIDING THE REAL ISSUES. I CHALLENGE YOU TO CHECK OUT THE FOLLOWING:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070108/cm_thenation/1155513

http://www.wrmea.com/archives/December_2006/0612022.html

http://youtube.com/watch?v=TgBsW3s5_xU

If anyone can dispute this information, go for it! If not, shut-up!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Lauren G. Jan 9, 2007, 1:38pm EST
I too am appalled to see this type of article on Gather. It sensationalizes Jimmy Carter's words and actions.

1) "The only explanation – and one that Carter tap dances around, but won't come out and say directly – is that Jews control the media and buy politicians."

Way to put words in someone's mouth! What Carter is really saying is that there is a Jeweish Lobby. That's not scandalous and erroneous. It's TRUE and even discussed int he NYTimes.

It's certainly OK for Jews to have their own lobby to advocate their politcal interests. It is the Anmerican way. It is also, however, the American way, to criticize a powerful lobby's influence on our elected representatives whether it be oil, agricultural, or Jews. If a lobby is too powerful it can end up influencing our leaders to represent the interest of a few instead of that of many. This becomes problematic when it leads to unchecked price-gouging from big oil, farmers paid to burn their crops in Idaho, or America to take an international stance that causes us to be under attack.

2) Professor Dershowitz accuses Carter of receive Arab money. The BUsh family has received more Saudi money than any other American family and Bush remains stolid in his support of Israel's right to exist. While I personally do not find it palatable when individuals receive lobbying money of this sorts, it's a politcal reality commited by all politicians, pro-and anti-Israel.

This article is incredibly sensationalist. It draws erroneous assumptions from Carter's words and actions. (When and where did Carter say ever say jounralists did not deserve their Pulitzer Prizes.)

Just as many journalists and politicians lobby for Israel's right to exist for moral reasoons, because they believe the Jews have a right to their homeland, Carter also has moral motivations of his own, that the Palestinians' plight is neglected and deserves to be acknowledged and understood. Money is flwoing in and out of the pockets of people n both sides of the issue.

I for one, believe this is a solely religious issue. I do not believe any scrap of land, any grain of earth on this planet was promised to anyone by any god. I believe that America is acting out of religious principles when it should not. If Americans really cared about giving Jewish people a safe place, they would establish one elsewhere. Instead, it seems religion, as usual, is blinding people to the need for peace and causing countless deaths. Maybe we should just sew the "holy land" with radiation so no one gets to live there!
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Rick McGirr Jan 9, 2007, 1:43pm EST
I wonder how a president who brought Sadat and former terrorist Begin together to make peace that has lasted some 30 years can be labelled so forgetfully. Far be it from me to tout the morality or rectitude of any US president, but Carter did what everyone else seems to have forgotten how to do: he made peace by not making war. I'm sure JC would count both Sadat and Begin as his "close personal friends", if they were still alive. I submit that the prevailing wisdom, yours included, Mr. Dershowitz, has us trundling quickly toward global strife. I further submit that the world needs more men with the strength of vision and personal goodness to scuttle their own egos in search of understanding and peace, men like Jimmy Carter.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Will Fights Jan 9, 2007, 1:44pm EST
Mr. Carter (who I think is finally out of the running for the title of "Worst President Ever" since the Current Occupant's reign) has posted a letter to the Jewish Community on his website concerning this book. You may want to check it out.

http://www.cartercenter.org/news/pr/carter_letter_121506.html
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Aaron Chan Jan 9, 2007, 1:46pm EST
Almost everything Carter said is in agreement with peace groups on all sides, human rights groups, international law, and the opinion of much of the world outside the US. Much like global warming, it seems only in the US is where this issue is debated. It's the US that vetoed UN calls for actions to hold Israel to international law over 30 times. The solution for a just-peace with security for all has been laid out in past agreements and UN resolutions, and the US has been the biggest roadblock to their implementation. Carter's assertion that the Israeli occupation of Palestinians can be called "apartheid," is correct. The word in Hebrew that Israelis use to describe the situation is "hafrada," which means separation, which is what "apartheid" means. Additionally South Africans who visited the region have also made similar claims. Bishop Tutu was recently in Gaza to investigate and condemn the Gaza siege. There was an op-ed in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution by a former anti-apartheid South African, John Dugard, that goes into more details of the comparison. However many Democrats have been quick to condemn Carter's book, because they are afraid to lose their newly found political power in congress and risk losing the future presidential elections, by associating themselves with Carter's stance. If Americans knew that our tax dollars are being used to perpetuate the Israeli Apartheid against Palestinians and that this is the main source of anger of Arab/Muslims towards the West, perhaps they could convince their congress person to support Carter to help end the occupation and bring peace. The US under Reagan supported Apartheid in South Africa, but as the international community became more informed they eventually were able to push the South African government to end the oppression. So hopefully we'll be able to compare Palestine to South Africa in that respect too. As for Dershowitz, most of what he has written is refuted by people like Norman Finkelstein (www.normanfinkelstein.com) and there are plenty of Jewish peace groups that would disagree with such as Jewish Voice for Peace, Israeli Commitee against house demolition, and Betselem.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
marcus brooks Jan 9, 2007, 1:48pm EST
Alan Dershowitz's article is venomous and violent in its position. I do believe that fmr. President Carter had bashed opponents he thinks financially and politically adversed his failing book. But, that is all it is, futile blustering. Consider who Carter was. The gentleman may be historically responsible for the birth of Mideast terrorism as "we know it". Forget about the Jewish and Arab conflict of 1948, the Six Day War of 1967, Yom Kippur War of 1973, 1982 Beirut occupation against the PLO, and all the Infidaths. When Iranian nationalists seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran for 444 days in 1979, that gave terrorists the idea of global impact through their violent actions. He also horribly failed in foreign policy when a Marine helicopter, attempting the hostages' rescue, crashed in an Iranian desert. Carter is only known for flashing big, pearly whites. He is not known for being a heady president. He may be anti-Semitic. If he is, he'll go down like Mel Gibson and Michael Richards. Both are spending their overpaid incomes on medial spins and damage control. I feel sorry that real Middle East tragedy is being put aside during this political mud-slinging.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Doc, in the middle, holding on... Curmudgeon esq. Jan 9, 2007, 1:49pm EST
Never defend, always attack. It is a losing position for it exposes the weaknesses of your point.

Gathers' members are a pretty sharp lot generally...
They can see through specious smears like this, and as much admiration as many of us have for the Jewish people, it has become yet another 'terror tactic' used to negate ANY QUESTION of the actual working of the Israeli lobby.
Gather has had and lost some fine commentators, mostly because Newspaper, TV and Magazine writers aren't comfortable being disagreed with in near real-time. Your average 'letter to the editor' even in a newspaper will almost always run weeks after the item being complained about... I think it is why they have such trouble KEEPING commentators.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Robert N. Jan 9, 2007, 1:51pm EST
My Biasis is: Violence begats violence, begats violence, begats violence. These battles have gone on in the mideast for millennia. Character assassination is just one kind of violence, and Mr. Dershowitz is guilty of some of it here. I respect Mr. Dershowitz for much of what he has done in the past, and I will continue to read the articles in this series for that reason. I also respect Mr. Carter and I will be interested to see if he responds to this challenge or if he reacts in kind ( as have some of the other commentators above). Most likely he will do neither though perhaps if Mr. Dershowitz presents cogent challenges to Mr. Carters thesis as opposed to his character, he will. I hope so, as both are highly intelligent, reasonable and compassionate men and their debate just might provoke a real solution to this ongoing and terrible problem. Thanks to Gather for hosting this timely and provocation debate.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Mark Fradl Jan 9, 2007, 1:54pm EST
The fact that Alan Dershowitz begins this "discussion" accusing Carter of antisemitism does not bode well for the remainder of the articles. I'd like to point out to him, and other posters, that being against many of Israel's actions does not make you "anti-Israel", much less antisemitic. If I yell at my child for hitting his sister it doesn't mean I hate my child.

Let's see a discussion of the issues - please show me where in the media the plight of the Palestinians gets much coverage. Show me the amount of press reports a suicide bombing in Israel gets as opposed to the amount of press reports you see about Israel littering Lebanon with tens of thousands of cluster bomblets.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Susan O. Jan 9, 2007, 1:57pm EST
I have to agree with everyone who finds it wrong that gather has allowed this to be Mr. Dershowitz soap box. I have read many articles but have never seen any of them promoted like this. Why should he have any more space than anyone else with a thought to share.
I agree Carter was not a very good president but that is the american process. We elected him. We didn't do it again. Or is it possible the Arabs elected him?
Will gather grant JC the same forum?
I appreciate getting a different point of view, having my eyes opened. I do thank you for that.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Elaine K. Jan 9, 2007, 1:57pm EST
I am thrilled that you are here writing these articles. Education and information are the cures to bigotry. All of this reminds me of a saying I learned long ago. First they came after the Jews and I was not Jewish so I did nothing. Then they came after the Catholics and I was not Catholic so I did nothing. Then they came after the Christians and I was not Christians so I did nothing. Then they came after the Buddhist and I was not a Buddhist so I did nothing. Then they came after me and no one was there to help.

The Pope has already felt the need to apologize for quoting a history book because it inflamed some militant groups. The Dutch have had their problems after an editorial cartoon. So they have been coming for the Jews since the 1948 founding of the State of Israel, the Dutch and now the Pope. As a Jew I think the peoples of the world need to wake up before there is no one there to help.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Alan Waldman Jan 9, 2007, 1:57pm EST
Dershowitz is wrong and Carter is right, I believe. In recent years, Dershowitz has been part of that large faction of my fellow Jews who believe that any criticism of the current awful Israeli government is anti-semitic and evil. Carter is one of the most principled figures on the world stage. He justly and rightly points out that Israel tries to snuff out criticism of its rotten policies towards Palestinians and Lebanese. What Israel needs is a Labor government. Labor PM Barak hammered out a peace deal with Clinton and Arafat--but then, tragically, Arafat backed out. When the hideous warmonger Sharon ruled, Arafat came back and said he had changed his mind and was willing now to accept the Barak-Clinton-approved proposal. Sharon refused to consider it. The current Olmert government is not quite as intransigent, bullying, stupid and irrational as Sharon was, but it's pretty bad, and its invasion of Lebanon to free one prisoner it could have easily negotiated a prisoner swap for, was massively foolhardy and harmed Israel too.

The middle east will never have happiness until Israel and Palestine each have wise leaders devoted to negotiating peace. Currently, neither has.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in
Hillel S. Jan 9, 2007, 2:01pm EST
What I really love are Jews who declare their Jewishness only when they are condemning Israel. The other 364 days a year they're proud secularists. O yes, and they give generously to NPR.
reply to this comment
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Join Gather »
Already a member? Sign in