Answer the Questions
Why won't Jimmy Carter answer the series of questions that I and many students have now put directly to him:
-Was Carter asked his advice by Yassar Arafat, or anyone else in the Palestinian Authority regarding whether to accept or reject the offer of Palestinian statehood proposed by President Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak at Camp David and/or Taba?
-If not, did Carter offer any advice on this or related issues or express any views about the matter before the end of January 2001?
-If he gave any such advice, what exactly was it?
-Did he say before or at the time of these negotiations what we know he said thereafter, namely that "there was no possibility that any Palestinian leader could accept such terms and survive"? (What does this say about Carter's views of the Palestinian people?)
The circumstantial case that Carter in fact gave such advice to Arafat is quite compelling. We know from Carter's biographer Douglas Brinkley, that Arafat did seek Carter's advice about how to improve the image of the P.L.O. in America. We know that Carter actually drafted some statements for Arafat. We also know that Carter offered advice to other dictators and enemies of the U.S. and that he did not hesitate to undercut other American foreign policy initiatives in North Korea, Cuba, Syria and other trouble spots in the world.
We know that Carter believed that Arafat should not accept the offers of statehood made at Camp David and/or Taba.
There are, therefore, three alternative possible scenarios. One, Carter gave Arafat the advice he believed, namely that if he accepted the offer of statehood, he would not survive. Two, Carter gave Arafat advice he did not believe, namely that he should accept the offer even though Carter felt Arafat could not survive such acceptance. Three, he gave his friend Yassar Arafat no advice about the most important offer of Arafat's life, one that if he turned down would likely make him a pariah among the very Americans whose support Carter was helping him garner.
It seems extremely likely therefore that Carter would have communicated his views to his friend Arafat at the crucial period of time, especially since he believed that if Arafat accepted these offers he would have been assassinated. How could Carter not caution his friend about these fears? How would he have felt if Arafat had accepted the offer and then been assassinated? It is possible, of course, that he did not; that he kept his views to himself, though I find that extremely unlikely.
Carter can answer this important question by simply telling the truth, and producing the relevant documentation and support. During his appearance at Brandeis he invited students to email him questions that he could not answer during the highly structured question and answer period when all questions were filtered through a self selected and biased committee. During my talk, I urged students to ask him these questions. He promised that he would answer all questions. He has not, to my knowledge, answered these. Carter's silence in the face of this circumstantial evidence is quite compelling.
If Carter in fact advised Arafat against accepting statehood, I can certainly understand why he would be reluctant to admit it. Even Prince Bandar has said that Arafat's decision to reject the offer, without even a counter offer, was a crime against the Palestinian people and against all Arabs in the region. If Carter had strongly advised his friend to accept the offer and Arafat had listened, there would have been no intifada, no four thousand needless deaths, no security barriers, no checkpoints and nothing that Carter could falsely call apartheid. There would instead be a Palestinian state on ninety-seven percent of the previously occupied territory, with its capital in Jerusalem and a thirty-five billion dollar Marshall Plan.
President Carter, answer the question. You owe it to your readers. You owe it to the world.
Alan Dershowitz is a professor of law at Harvard. His most recent book is Preemption: A Knife that Cuts Both Ways (Norton, 2006)
Read Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4 of “Ex-President for Sale”
Join the conversation and read Alan Dershowitz' exclusive six part series "Ex-President for Sale" on Gather at AlanDershowitz.gather.com 
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 73
After the pal state destroys Israel, the world will say 'We are sorry, it won't happen again".
http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ai=214&ar=1374wmv&ak=null
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=1366_take_this_check_and...&only
"And he told Prince Alwaleed bin Talal bin Abdul Aziz Alsaud to take his $10 million and shove it sideways up his oil rig: Giuliani Says City Won't Accept $10 Million Check From Saudi."
Dhimmi Carter however, said he would be glad to accept the money.
I ask again, have you, not your students, written this question directly to President Carter? untill you have stop your complaining, it is getting to be a bit like a gossipy backstabbing office party.
However, this article seems antagonistic from the first line - as in a harsh cross-examination, which I do not think is a reasonable way to treat an ex-president, with the possible exception of George W. Bush once he leaves office (humor), just kidding. Seriously, questions can be asked in a more productive way.
Additionally speculations about the past and what would have happened if? ... are useless for deciding fact in the present. Although such questions may be interesting and enlightening for fiction readers and to students they have no place in a journalistic article in my opinion. Is it fair to continuously refer to Arafat as Carter's friend? If the implication of facts show that Carter is anti-semitic or acted against the best interests of Israel or the US in light of the Islamic hatred of both today, some examination of that would be productive, but I doubt Carter would want to go anywhere near this now that such hostility and rudeness has been shown to him ... and I have little sympathy for Jimmy Carter on this issue.
Former Presidents don't answer to newspaper columnists or students.
You'd think with the BEATING this guy has taken over this near slanderous attack here Gather'd have muted this stuff by now..
Since the tone of your first paragraph is almost as accusatory as is the article by Dershowitz the facts belie your statement that it would be "rather easy" for President Carter ........
On the contrary, you have made it emphatically clear that it would be virtually impossible for Carter to "put this controversy to rest!"
If you read one comment above yours, Bruce has nailed it down quite accurately for this article.
As I've stated before, I understand Dershowitz's feelings on this matter and I believe they totally color his objectivity in dealing with the subject. Carter wrote his book. If you don't like it don't buy or read it. He's stated his case. If you can prove it a lie, do so with documentation. Don't just keep shouting for him to debate it. You can present the same facts in a book as you can in debate.
I appreciate your reasoned comments even though I disagree with your concept.
Thanks!
Nonsense.
>> It seems that no one can criticize Israel without being called an anti-semite.
A blind person could clearly see that most of Israel's enemies are in fact anti-semitic, the statement is a reasonable one given certain facts. While it is not a crime to be anti-semitic there is a different standard application for statements made in a public forum or the media that attack a racial or religious group particularly for those connected with public policy.
Freedom of speech is very much alive Peter even if you never get it right. The truth value is the decision of the readers who are only human.
The fact that it was Jimmy Carter who said all of these things is the point ... in that is seemed to me and many others totally unexpected or plainly incorrect.
>> There is no denying his humanity and integrity
I'm certainly surprised by what Carter has said.
So after condemnation of tactics you turn around and use the same against Dershowitz ... why not just come out and say what think instead of using this message board to imply it. I also do not think Carter is standing tall, I believe he has tarnished his image permanently in many people's eyes.
I'm left wondering if these attitudes he had kept the Israel-Palestinians issue alive to reach around the globe and boil over to the point it is at today?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dershowitz-Finkelstein_affair
Finkelstein's criticisms of Dershowitz
In Beyond Chutzpah, Finkelstein provides evidence that in at least two instances, Dershowitz reproduces errors in Peters' citiation of original sources, and claims Dershowitz did not check the original sources he cited. The book was published by the University of California Press (UCP) on June 1, 2005 despite threats of legal action and an appeal to the Governor of California by Alan Dershowitz [1].
Finkelstein noted that in twenty instances that all occur within about as many pages, Dershowitz's book excerpts the same words from the same sources that Joan Peters used, largely in the same order. Several paragraph-long quotes that the two books share have ellipses in the same position, Finkelstein pointed out; and in one instance Dershowitz referenced the same page number as Peters, although he was citing a different edition (a 1996 edition) of the source, in which the words appear on a different page.[2].
Finkelstein suggests that this copying of quotations amounts to copying ideas, and plagiarism is defined as "passing off a source's information, ideas, or words as your own by omitting to cite them." [3]. "Finkelstein does not accuse Dershowitz of the wholesale lifting of someone else's words, but he does make a very strong case that Dershowitz has violated the spirit, if not the exact letter, of Harvard's prohibitions of the first three forms of plagiarism." (Michael C. Desch, The American Conservative, December 5, 2005) [4].
Noting Dershowitz's lack of knowledge about specific contents of his own book during a debate,[5] Finkelstein also sarcastically claimed that Dershowitz could not have written the book, and may not have even read it. He later cited the presence of "unserious" references, including the web site for a documentary film [6] and an online high school syllabus [7], as further evidence that the book was ghostwritten.[8]
October 3, 2003 letter to the Harvard Crimson that Dershowitz reproduced exactly two of Peters' mistakes, and made one relevant mistake of his own. In quoting Mark Twain, "Dershowitz cites two paragraphs from Twain as continuous text, just as Peters cites them as continuous text, but in Twain's book the two paragraphs are separated by 87 pages." Furthermore, still quoting Twain, although Dershowitz cites a different edition of Twain's Innocents Abroad than Joan Peters cites, "the relevant quotes do not appear on these pages in the edition of Twain's book that Dershowitz cites." The quotes do, however, appear on the pages Joan Peters cites for her edition of Innocents Abroad. Finally, Finkelstein notes that "Quoting a statement depicting the miserable fate of Jews in mid-19th century Jerusalem, Peters cites a British consular letter from 'Wm. T. Young to Viscount Canning.' Dershowitz cites the same statement as Peters, reporting that Young 'attributed the plight of the Jew in Jerusalem' to pervasive anti-Semitism. Turning to the original, however, we find that the relevant statement did not come from Young but, as is unmistakably clear to anyone who actually consulted the original, from an enclosed memorandum written by an 'A. Benisch' that Young was forwarding to Canning." Finkelstein concludes that "It would be impossible for anyone who checked the original source[s] to make th[ese] error[s]." Dershowitz has not responded to these charges, but characterized the excerpts as quotations that historians and scholars of the region cite routinely, such as Mark Twain and the reports of government commissions.
The conclusion Finkelstein drew from the similarities was that Dershowitz had not researched his sources directly, but instead in twenty instances had used Peters' book and without crediting her. Finkelstein found a mis-attribution that he said supported this conclusion. In writing his book, Dershowitz had attributed an Orwellian neologism to Orwell himself, when actually Peters had coined it in her book in an allusion to Orwell, in which she mentioned him by name (her neologism "turnspeak" resembles the 1984 author's "Newspeak"). The mistake by Dershowitz, Finkelstein said, fit a pattern of cribbing from Peters while not crediting her. Academic propriety demanded that she be credited, he said.
Norman Finkelstein attempts to debunk The Case for Israel in his book Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Misuse of History, which was published by University of California Press on August 28, 2005. Dershowitz responded to the imminent publication of Finkelstein's book by threatening the publisher[10], claiming it contained massive libel and stating that the book should not be published. Additionally, Dershowitz asked California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in a letter to quash the book[11], but Schwarzenegger's legal advisor replied that the governor will not intervene in issues of academic freedom. Dershowitz responded in his book The Case for Peace, and alleges a politically motivated campaign of vilification spearheaded by Chomsky, Finkelstein and Cockburn against several pro-Israel academics.
On the basis of Finkelstein's comparisons, political commentator Alexander Cockburn joined him in concluding that Dershowitz had drawn his excerpts directly from Peters' book. This he characterized as unscholarly. Noting a footnote in which Dershowitz referred to the controversial status of Peters' book and said that he did not "rely" on it for "conclusions or data," Cockburn assessed Dershowitz furthermore as having more or less lied about what Cockburn and Finkelstein concluded he had done. Echoing Finkelstein's charge of plagiarism, Cockburn called on Harvard to fire Dershowitz as a professor.
Oxford academic Avi Shlaim has also been critical of Dershowitz, saying he believes that the charge of plagiarism "is proved in a manner that would stand up in court" (Times Higher Education Supplement, 16 December, 2005 (12)).
1. http://www.workingtv.com/finkelstein.html
2. http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=1
3. http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=50
4. http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=98
5. http://www.democracynow.org/static/dershowitzFin.shtml
6. http://www.sonypictures.com/classics/oneday/html/timeline/index.html
7. http://www.umich.edu/~iinet/worldreach/assets/docs/israeli-palestinian_conflict/studentkeydates.html
8. http://www.theexperiment.org/articles.php?news_id=1991
9. http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=349123
10. http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/politicsphilosophyandsociety/story/0,,1545972,00.html
11. http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/politicsphilosophyandsociety/story/0,,1545972,00.html
12. http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=112
>> Perhaps you will consider extending this series and devote
>> one article to his central question: Have the actions of the
>> government of Israel hindered the resolution of the Israel-
>> Palestine issue?
I am sure most interested in this international mess have asked
and been asking that problem and spending a lot of time on it.
Are you implying that it is to Israel's benefit to not solve this
problem ... I think that you are, just to be a jerk. Time only
works against Israel in any measure I have ever heard anyone
speak about. So your comment is useless and just meant as
an insult any way I can look at it.
In a Jerusalem Post column attacking Ben-Gurion University professor Neve Gordon, Alan Dershowitz wrote this:
"A case in point is Dr. Neve Gordon of Ben-Gurion University , who has defamed so many people, as well as the nation of Israel . He also recently defamed me by saying that I had tried to prevent the publication of Norman Finkelstein's latest anti-Zionist screed, Beyond Chutzpah. In fact, as I specifically wrote in my letters to Finkelstein's publishers - as Gordon knew, because I released the letters - "I have no interest in censoring or suppressing Finkelstein's freedom of expression." ( 8 November 2006)"
It is simple to resolve definitively whether Dershowitz attempted to suppress publication of my book. Dershowitz alleges that he has "released the letters" he wrote my publisher. Not quite. He has never released the letters his lawyers at Cravath, Swaine & Moore wrote my publisher. He has never released the letter he wrote Governor Schwarzenegger. Readers interested in learning the truth should request these letters from Dershowitz: dersh@law.harvard.edu. If what he's saying is true, Dershowitz has nothing to hide.
Speaking of unanswered questions Mr. Dershowitz: Will you post a copy of your letter to Gov. Schwarzenegger? You owe it to your readers to put this controversy to rest. You owe it to the world!
I read the first two articles and I later went to the Brandeis Hoot, the student paper there, and read a transcript of Carter's Q&A where they asked him about his Saudi funding. Here is his response from the transcript:
Carter: "I had my staff go down the detailed records of The Carter Center since 1981. Every contribution that we have received has been publicized in the Annual Reports. Our income and expenditures every year is thoroughly audited by internationally recognized auditing firms. Of the total amount of contributions that we have received from all the Mideast Arab nations combined, the amount has been 2.7 percent. Of that amount, 71 percent of their contributions have gone for health programs in Africa, 21 percent have gone for our Carter Center's endowment, five percent went for our original construction of The Carter Center buildings, and 3 percent have gone for elections, economic development, and so forth. Part of that money that helped us with the cost of elections in Palestine came from some of those donors. We have never had a Mideast donor who wanted to be anonymous. All of them have been publicized. I might add that I have never received one cent personally, either from Mideast contributors or from The Carter Center. This is the (Carter Center's) 25th year. I've always worked without any salary whatsoever. When I do receive an award, for instance from Sheik Zayed of the United Arab Emirates, one of those names. That was, I believe, a $200,000 award because we had the outstanding environmental achievement of the year. The reason was that we had initiated a system of farming in 15 nations in Africa that ended the slash and burn technique that they had used in the past, and the $200,000 award was given, awarded to me. I gave the check to The Carter Center. When I received the Noble Peace Prize, I didn't keep a penny of it, because a lot of it was for the Carter Center's work. I gave it to The Carter Center, a little bit to my wife's additional program down at Georgia Southwestern College on Caregiving. I received a $100,000 award from the Rotary International Organization and another $100,000 from the Lions International. All that money went to The Carter Center. So, I've received no benefit at all personally from those sources, and I never will. Thank you."
Dershowitz owes Carter an apology or at least a re-rehash of the first two articles. I was looking for some substance here instead of more character assassination. I know it's a free site but I was hoping to get more than I paid for.
Sorry for not sticking my head up your's or AD's ass Bruce. Feel free to skip my posts here.
Charles,
Please provide the precise context and content of Carter's admission of the above -- or is this more of your opinion.
Bruce, you wrote:
jeffc:
>> Perhaps you will consider extending this series and devote
>> one article to his central question: Have the actions of the
>> government of Israel hindered the resolution of the Israel-
>> Palestine issue?
I am sure most interested in this international mess have asked
and been asking that problem and spending a lot of time on it.
Are you implying that it is to Israel's benefit to not solve this
problem ... I think that you are, just to be a jerk. Time only
works against Israel in any measure I have ever heard anyone
speak about. So your comment is useless and just meant as
an insult any way I can look at it. //
Many, many, many ordinary people and political scientists do in fact believe that it is and has been in Israel's interest NOT to walk the roadmap to peace. Many have lost their lives because of both Israel's and this administration's foot dragging, in particular. So sorry you see this as an "insult" either to Israel or to yourself. Having said that, it should go without saying that of course the palestinians and others have done their share of footdragging and sabotage of the process and, I believe, that is precisely what Jimmy Carter was trying to address. There have been many untold heros on the road map but few in this administration or in Israel's counterparts to this Administration. To Olmert's credit, most recently, he has asked everyone to tone down the rhetoric.
Oh Canada, Yea!
Mr. Dershowitz,
I don't think Mr. Carter is for sale and somehow I think you must realize this by now. On the other hand, you may have sold a bit of your own soul in the writing of this series.
The prostitute Carter did nothing to stop the unstable Islamic dictatorship Pakistan from getting nukes and Pakistan has admitted sharing that technology with Allah doesn't even know whom.
The prostitute Dhimmi carter did everything including commiting the felony against private citizens engaging in diplomacy by assisting N. Korea in obtaining nukes.
The prostitute Carter took an illegal loan from a bank headed by a Pakistani terrorist. I wonder if that why he allowed them to acquire nukes.
Little Dhimmi carter created and empowered the terrorist theocracy of Iran.
So when you wake up one day and a major US city is gone because of nuclear terrorism, or when we live in a state of nuclear black mail, thank the most evil man that ever lived, the one who has so many fools fooled , our own little Dhimmi, littlle Dhimmi Carter.
PS , he was no nuclear engineer, that is a fraud. He took a corrsepondence class about nuclear energy.
saying is that you sound anti-Israel, if not what is your point?
I do associate the Middle Eastern Arab states with militant Islam,
and exporting the concept or militant Islamic Jihad. Many of the
population as being controlled in a low-tech totalitarian way
which I believe has to be ended to avoid a virtual repeat of a Nazi
Germany kind of situation. I know there are many fine Arabs,
and Muslims in the world outside of this cancer that is growing
for specific reasons in the Middle East.
I do not think I'm uninformed, nor ignorant of what is happening
in the Middle East. I have my opinions but I continually challenge
them. But I do believe in Israel's right to exist and be secure in
it's borders.
It is the militant Islamic terrorist countries that are hurting themselves with all this concentration on hating and destroying Israel and the west.
First, it is not going to happen. Second the intelligencia in Iran and other countries knows that it is not helping them in the world to spend their money on nuclear weapons and concerning the whole world with wild talk about destroying America and Israel.
I cannot believe you are expressing what you think is an informed view of the Middle East Dave?
>> aren't 100 % of American children taught to fear Islamic
>> terrorism, by their President?
Do you have any sense of proportion? President Bush does not
teach American children to hate Islam, 911 did that. Bush has
carefully and publically reminded the country that this is NOT
Islam, Peter, if you remember or care.
President Bush "used" 9/11 to promote a particular agenda and, yes, he was sitting reading a goat story to children when the planes hit. When he made his pronouncements "you're with us or against us" and talked about the evil axis [and in so doing launched HIS campaign from Iraq to the greater middle east] what WAS he doing? Did all the little children -- and their parents -- cover their ears and shut out the scary words? Were his words PROPORTIONATE to his intent? As for reminding the country that "this is NOT islam," that too was a very calculated part of the agenda --and how could you not understand or forget his State of the Union address; i.e., we live in a DEMOCRACY and IRAQ and others in the Middle East, and all around the world, can have one too. In fact, he insisted over and over that Iraq is a fledgling democracy that we must support and nourish, since we went to all that trouble to bring them the opportunity of voting.
We used to aspire to bringing democracy to the communists all around the world; now the communists are the red haired stepchildren [even though Putin and Bush look deeply into each other's eyes] and the Iraqis are the darlings of democracy and Syria and Iran are the terrorists! Bruce, you are living in a parallel universe.
Yes, you are missing it. Your comments to Peter reveal that you are missing it.
I would have to imagine that you think Americans are brought up to the xenophobic to all other cultures ... is that right.
I wonder how do you explain that there are many many stories I have heard in the media about schools or camps in Israel that bring children of both cultures together to bond them and learn about each other. It is significan to me that I have never heard once about the reverse.
It is also significant to me that I have heard people breaking ranks with the Palestinians such as Walid Shoebat who tell of their childhoods where they are taught in rote and reginmented ways that Jews and Americans are evil and it is good to kill them. I have never once heard the reverse.
While I think the goal of the Islamic society is to program all their children in a monolithically totalitarian way to further their military aims, I do not think that is anywhere on the radar screen of Israelis or American schools with Muslims.
I gather you totally disagree with me on that, correct?
If this is an example of X logic no wonder we disagree.
Our favorite prostitute Dhimmi Carter, interfered with the press to supress a show on PBS showing Saudi beheadings of innocent people. This was unprecedented.
I NEVER KNEW DHIMMI CARTER WAS JEWISH, AFTER ALL HE DID TRY TO CONTROL THE PRESS, RIGHT ?
Does anyone remember this ?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/princess/reflect/harvard.html
A day later, then acting Secretary of State Warren Christopher expressed reservations about the film. On May 9th, Mr. Christopher sent a letter to PBS president Lawrence Grossman relaying the concerns of the Saudi government, which had been expressed in a letter from Saudi Ambassador to the U.S., Sheik Faisal Alhegelan. In this letter, Christopher also conveyed his own reservations about the sensitive nature of the film's contents. The Christopher letter reads as follows:
.......
The Times, saying that the White House approved the letter, also reported that: "This was the first time … the State Department had been asked by a government to intercede in advance of a televised film. He (Hodding Carter) said there had been many protests in the past about movies that had been shown."
Newsweek reported that: "… It was the first time the State Department had ever interceded on behalf of a foreign complaint over the airing of a television program. The decision, said one official, was taken 'at the highest level.'"
Reaction to the Acting Secretary's letter in the American press was swift and severe. The New York Times noted that, as a former Assistant Attorney General, Christopher knew better than to encroach upon First Amendment rights and presumably acted "on orders."
Let's see, a guy who could not run a peanut farm and had to have it bailed out by a bank that was fronting for terrorists, a guy that ran the worst economy America ever had, a guy that tried to beat up a killer swamp rabbit
Gee is Africa lucky, he is going there to tell them what to do ????
What does the bank do when you bounce a check ? They take more of what you don't have.
If you love terror and hate America, if you have no common sense, you are gonna love Dhimmi "al Palestine" Carter
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=118&x_article=1273
And on what evidence do you base this nonsense Bruce? You do not think the last 5 years have been a process of indoctrination by the Whitehouse? That the term Islamofascist is not a term which is used to foment paranoia and hatred against Muslims to instill in the western mind that Islam is our greatest threat? If you do NOT believe that, you are giving a very good impression of someone who has succumbed to the propaganda.
Prior to 9/11 did you consider Islam as such an omnipresent, and/or sinister threat?
Finkelstein has a good rebuttal to many of Dersh's claims against him in a recent article Dersh wrote about him at his website at this link:
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=876
I agreed with Chomsky when I asked him about Carter's book and he responded that its conclusions are "generally correct" and that "The published criticisms that I've seen ranged from idiotic to depraved."
Dershowitz has been making a career lately out of spewing the most vitriolic garbage that he surely knows is not true. Sadly he does not realize that his methods have lost him support in general.
"His pathetic behavior traces back to what was probably our first contact. In April 1973, Dershowitz wrote a scurrilous attack in the Boston Globe against Israel's leading human rights activist, Dr. Israel Shahak, the chairman of Israel's League for Human and Civil Rights, in which he even went so far as to support a government effort to destroy the League by methods so outrageous that they were at once declared illegal by the Israeli courts. I responded, correcting his slanders and fabrications – that is, every single substantive statement. He then tried to lie his way out of it, even descending to falsification of Israeli court records. I responded again, citing the actual court records and responding to his new lies and deceit."
Read the entire letter by Chomsky here:
http://www.chomsky.info/letters/20060817.htm
Carter seems to be the new target of Dersh with claims that he is being bought by Saudi money even though the Carter Center only gets 2.7% of their funds from them. All the funds go into operating the Carter Center or supporting the Center's programs in Africa or election monitoring.
When will the serious debate start? Doesn't Dersh have anything else better to do than writing error filled books and then complaining about other peoples books?
Dershowitz got outed and now he is not just on a right-wing pro-Israel crusade, but also a on personal crusade against people who recognize his low level of expertise on the subject.
All I see in the attacks on Carter is an extreme intolerance.
Presidents politics. No insted this most inept of all Presidents bad mouths our President, I am not even sure what he has been saying about Israel and the Jewish people in general, but I do know it ishas not been to add somthingpositive to the situation. He has been not only irresponsible but anti-semitic. Apparently the true colors of a large faction of the left is becoming very apparent, they not only hate their own country, but are very anti-semitic. did anyone catch teh news story about how this group of Democrats were led in a hateful prayer by an Imam? I heard the prayer on the radio, I am sorry but no American politicain should sit through a prayer that identifies enemies and the fate of those purported enemies.
Fellow Americans it is time we wake up and realize we are under attack not only from without, but from within, this isn't only about anti-Jewish rhetoric by what should be a responsible ex-President, this is about a fanatical religious push to topple all of us and we have Democrats allying themselves with this enemy.
Islam = murder Islam = no peace
INVOLVE MUSLIMS FIGHTING NON-MUSLIMS OR EACH OTHER!
There are many trouble spots around the world, but as a general rule, it's easy to make an educated guess at one of the participants: Muslims vs. Jews in "Palestine," Muslims vs. Hindus in Kashmir, Muslims vs. Christians in Africa, Muslims vs. Buddhists in Thailand, Muslims vs. Russians in the Caucasus, etc...
When muslims murder each other, as in Darfur, or Iraq, or Iran or .... which muslim is to blame ? The Jewish muslim of course
what do you expect from a religion that worships a child molestor and a murderer, muhamed was both
Halimi, who was praised as a hero of the Jewish people by Rabbis and Knesset members alike, was tortured and murdered by a Muslim gang in Paris one year ago, for being Jewish. "Anyone who dies for the Jewish people and the Jewish ideal dies for Kiddush Hashem" Israel's chief Sephardic Rabbi Shlomo Amar said.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359821487&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
I see that there are a few die hard stalwart supporters here of Mr. Dershowitz's caliber that think just like he does, peas in a pod it seems (BTN is missing so far, but rest assured that he will show up).
We have these usuals such as Martin L and Mr. X to show 'that' side 'the' way. Then there are a relatively few others in support ... we can all see who they are, by their fruit they shall be known ... very fearful and hate filled ... actual bigots and borderline cases ... often attempting to transfer their own bigotry (normal routine for such) on to those that would disagree with them.
Then there are MANY that stop by for a while and give honest opinions and ample facts to make their points about the case in question ... eventually they just go on about other business after seeing the light ... which is within them and but informs them of the 'darkness' in the mind of the real 'haters' here ...
Later others come by also attempting to add some light to the darkness ... but the darkness insists upon staying in the dark, and the light leaves it's message and departs ... but the darkness has nothing better to do so stays on and defends it's dark master Mr. D. ... pretty simple when you get right down to it.
The dark fears and hates the light ... let the truth in and there is nothing left ... the darkness likes it's darkness ... it will hide in any crack or crevice to avoid the light of truth.
>> The dark fears and hates the light ... let the truth
>> in and there is nothing left ... the darkness likes it's
>> darkness ... it will hide in any crack or crevice to
>> avoid the light of truth.
The truth? which is? do you have a point?
Perhaps you should go check the protagonists of the two greatest wars in history and tell me where the Islamic world played it's role? From my recollection no Islamic country played ANY SIGNIFICANT part in WW1 or WW2. Vietnam? Korea? Help me out here.
I do recall that Israel has invaded Lebanon, not once but twice. That it occupies stolen land. That the United States, Britain and the coalition of the less able invaded Iraq, and Afghanistan (though I fully endorse that particular intervention, although it was YEARS too late.) I'm sure there are plenty of other examples. Oh, and we won't go into the imperialism of western powers in the 19th century.
So, Martin, where do your comrades get this irrational hatred and loathing from? To my mind Islamic countries have plenty of legitimate grievances. They have trash who appoint themselves as the defenders of Islam, who disgrace, and are an abomination to the religion, (Al Qaeda and it's surrogates). However Christians have the same problem, Jews too.
Only in the past 6 years has this hatred become evident, where once, with the exception of Iran and Libya (in the more recent past), the Islamic world had been the West's friend, particularly in the last 25 years. Now however the West's beast from hell, which it created in Afghanistan in the 1980's, coupled with it's support for the Israeli regime. has to put it bluntly, come right back to bite it in the ass. The monster it created has now turned on it's master.
However now it's master is using the monster for it's own purposes, to instill the hate and fear which you Martin, and others personify so tragically. Well done George Bush and his henchmen for creating yet more misery for this planet to endure.
Dershowitz' rant on the "Ex-president for sale .." has devolved into egoistic demands for Carter to respond to his personal challenge. Failure to get a personal response appears to have surprised the good "doctor". Jeff C's presentation of Carter's response was most appropriate and helpful in dispelling all these accusations about money.
The primary issues of Carter's writing appear to be (1) Israel has not produced peaceful results resolving its conflict with Palestine despite the successes of its military ventures and acquisitive land policies and (2) any politician or leader who dares intrude on this process with suggestions or observations other than support will suffer the outrage of those who pretend to speak in behalf of Israel.
Not much to criticise about those observations ....
One with an open mind, not locked into denial, could surely tell which commenters here relate to which set of words. IMnsHO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_College
Jimmy Carter, former President of the United States (While stationed nearby in the Navy, Carter took an extension course taught by the College for the Navy. He never entered, or graduated from, the college. The college has no record of his attendance, but did not keep records for nonmatriculated students at the time.)
The man is an intellectual amoeba compared to Dershowitz, and did and is doing more damage to America than any other nation, or individual, or force of nature.
I was shocked! Could this be true? It certainly was not what I remembered of Carter's background although granted; it was a long time ago. Is Carter really, as Martin states: "an intellectual amoeba," who took an extension course as the basis for his nuclear education? Although I was suspect of the statement from someone who cannot spell Carter's first name, I felt that I had to research this further and so I went to:
http://www.submarinehistory.com/PresidentCarter.html
In 1943, Carter received an appointment to the U.S. Navy Academy and became a member of the Class of 1947. After completing the accelerated wartime program, he graduated on 5 June 1946 with distinction and obtained his commission as ensign.
After completing two years of surface ship duty, Carter chose to apply for submarine duty. Accepted, he began the six-month course at the U.S. Navy Submarine School, Submarine Base, New London, Connecticut from 14 June to 17 December 1948.
Carter became Qualified in Submarines on 4 February, and served as Communications Officer, Sonar Officer, Electronics Officer, Gunnery Officer and Supply Officer.
Carter was assigned to duty with Shipbuilding and Naval Inspector of Ordnance, Groton, Connecticut, as prospective Engineering Officer for the precommissioning and fitting out of USS K-1 [BARRACUDA] (SSK 1/SST-3). K-1, the first postwar submarine built, which was under construction by Electric Boat Division, General Dynamics Corporation, Groton, Connecticut. Known as "Killer" submarines, this class of submarine was designed with only one purpose: to detect and kill members of the formidable and ubiquitous Soviet undersea fleet. Carter played a important role in development of key operating systems for this submarine.
Carter served as Executive Officer, Engineering Officer, Operations Officer, Gunnery Officer and Electronics Repair Officer. During this tour he also qualified: Command of Submarine. Equipped with the most advanced sonar, fire control, and torpedoes, K-1's massive sonar array on the ship's bow could detect sounds at great distances, allowing the crew to analyze propeller noises to identify each target. Jimmy Carter's later dissertation would describe a new technique for determining the range of a target just by analysis of passive sonar information.
When Admiral Hyman G. Rickover (then a captain) started his program to create nuclear powered submarines, Carter was interviewed by Rickover and accepted for the new program. On 1 June 1952, Carter was promoted to Lieutenant. Carter was detached on 16 October 1952 from K-1 for duty with the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Division of Reactor Development in Schenectady, New York. From 3 November 1952 to 1 March 1953, he served on temporary duty with the Naval Reactors Branch, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, DC to assist "in the design and development of nuclear propulsion plants for naval vessels." From 1 March to 8 October, Carter was preparing to become the engineering officer for the USS SEAWOLF (SSN 575). Contemporary with the USS NAUTILUS (SSN 571), the Navy's first submarine to operate on atomic power, SEAWOLF was built to test a "sodium cooled" nuclear reactor while NAUTILUS tested a pressurized water cooled reactor. He assisted in setting up training for the enlisted men who would serve on SEAWOLF.
Martin was right! "Lies and lies and lies" were told by "an intellectual amoeba!"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_College
but the fool could not get into the naval Academy for over a year because the fool did not understand math. Maybe thats why the prime Rate in the US was over 20% under Dhimmi Carter. Maybe thats why his failed peanut farm had to be bailed out by terrorists.
Dhimmi Carter did find Arafat very sexy though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_College
In 1980, the American people fired Carter, having found out that his con didn't work anymore. Reagan won virtually every state. And please remember many considered RAY GUN a right wing lunatic. Thats how bad Carter was by comparison.
Little Dhimmi Carter also screwed up the Olympics during his term. THE US did not compete.
The Olympics were canceled because of problems we were having with Russia at that time. (I didn't research this, just going on memory). I know a lot of Americans disagreed with that decision because the athletes had worked so hard to be able to participate.
I sincerely believe that Carter had so many problems with Billy that he neglected a lot of his presidential duties. Their stay in the White House reminded me of the "Beverly Hillbillies".
Carter's Habitat for Humanity program restored some of the respect he had lost. He should have continued in that line and kept a low profile. Lately, I have seen more and more of Jesse Jackson in him and that is alarming. (No racist statement there, it is just that Jesse Jackson is always sticking his nose in where it doesn't belong.) Jimmy Carter should be sitting in his rocker on the front porch of his home and writing his memoirs instead of stirring up more conflict.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,914056,00.html
"The furor began when Carter was asked in Indianapolis to explain his recent statement that there was "nothing wrong with ethnic purity being maintained" in neighborhoods. Carter replied that he wholeheartedly supports open-housing laws that make it a crime to refuse to sell or rent a house or apartment on the grounds of race, color or creed. But he opposes Government programs "to inject black families into a white neighborhood just to create some sort of integration." Said he: "I have nothing against a community that is made up of people who are Polish, or who are Czechoslovakians, or who are French Canadians or who are blacks trying to maintain the ethnic purity of their neighborhoods. This is a natural inclination." "
His story begins with Iran and the downfall of the Shah. Admittedly the Shah was a dictator but he was the best that Iran and the West had, allowing all to choose their dress and form of prayer and a totally Western leaning policy. It was James Earl Carter who engineered the downfall of the Shah and allowed the Ayatollahs to rise, thus beginning the cycle of Islamic terror and an Iran which threatens world peace.
As to Israel, Carter claims that Israel is an Apartheid State - a most ludicrous statement. Israel has an unblemished record on freedom of prayer and movement, with a multi-coloured rainbow of citizens. Women have full rights, there is freedom of sexual choice, freedom of prayer (Jerusalem alone has 52 Christian denominations!) indeed, to all who do not wish harm to Israels existence there is absolute freedom of movement. Mr Carters diabolical book and its claims prove that he has vested interests in Arab countries which demand he blacken the name of the only dmocracy in the region and the only country which does not flog or stone to death gays, women suspected of indecorous behaviour, or those of faiths other than Islam. Hezb-Allah and Hamas, offshoots of Iran, are constantly kidnapping and killing those of other faiths, particularly Christians.
Let us go back to basics and understand what Professor Dershowitz is saying. If not for James Earl Carter, his unwise decisions and bad leadership, the Middle East and most certainly the entire Western World would be a different and safer place. Surely this alone stamps him the least successful President in history.