The World According To Jimmy Carter

LoneStarMadam wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
To Israel's supporters, everyone who criticizes Israel is an anti-semite.

I've seen Jews called anti-semites to their face.. because they had the temerity to say that maybe Israel shouldn't steal land and kill kids, even if they do have problems themselves.

Cycloptichorn

No, not everyone[/b] but when anybody blames israel for all of the palestinnians woes, then I do wonder about that person & do believe that he or she is an anti-Semite.

Perhaps you are unaware, but Israel is in fact responsible for the woes of many Palestinians and the architects of their current terrible situation.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Israel's Aparthied Wall Aims at Ethnic Cleansing
By Mustafa Barghouthi
Daily Star
October 27, 2003

The Israeli construction of the West Bank apartheid wall is clearly a politically motivated maneuver intent on reshaping the West Bank, rendering impossible a viable Palestinian state, and with it any lasting peace through a two state solution.

In reshaping the West Bank and slicing off huge portions of Palestinian land east of the 1967 border, Israel has also annexed thousands of Palestinians Palestinians it is now trying to expel through forceful expulsion but also through destroying any remaining quality of life within this isolated area of land.

On Oct. 2, the Israeli military released an order declaring all occupied West Bank land between the "security" wall and Israel's pre-occupation 1967 border a "closed zone." The order states that "no person will enter the (closed zone) and no one will remain there." Free access to the closed zone will only be granted to "Israelis." In this Oct. 2 order, General Moshe Kaplinski defines "Israelis" as any citizen of the state of Israel, resident of the state of Israel, and any one eligible to emigrate to Israel in accordance with the Law of Return, 1950. This means therefore, that while the 15,300 Palestinian residents in this 115 square kilometer area, or those in adjoining communities who own agricultural land here (180,000 people) must now obtain highly unreliable permits to validate their existence, any Jewish person from anywhere in the world is quite free to come and settle on this land.

The order stipulates that all crossing into the isolated areas is prohibited unless a "permit" from the occupation "civil administration" is obtained, which can only be done by land owners who "prove" that they have land residing behind the wall or are "officially registered" workers. Farmers and residents are fearful however that were they to apply for "permits" the well-grounded reality is that they would be denied on the basis that their Jordanian land certificates will not be recognized Israeli authorities are all too aware that the majority of Palestinian certificates are Jordanian since land registration in the West Bank took place under Jordanian rule prior to the 1967 occupation.

On the ground this policy is already causing extensive suffering. The prevention of access to land has meant that many families are losing their livelihoods farmers prevented access to their crops are forced to watch their untended crops rot either that or see their produce stolen by settlers free to wander through Palestinian lands.

The idea of applying for a permit to be on one's own land is rejected by Palestinians who have been on these lands for generations. Those few who have sought permits have been confronted with a haphazard policy of discrimination which randomly rejects applications for permits citing various criteria yet at the same time failing to establish any formal set of guidelines. Many heads of households for instance have already been denied permits to reside in their villages on the grounds that they were not born there. Furthermore those who are granted permits are not assured permanent residency rights the permits are to be renewed from "time to time" as demanded by the occupation civil administration.

Palestinian efforts to protest this latest stunt in Israel's ongoing colonization process have been met with severe punishment. The community of Jubara for instance lies west of the apartheid wall and is completely isolated within the de facto annexed area. Jubara has no schools or health facilities of its own. Residents have always depended on reaching nearby Kafryat for such services yet residents are doing their utmost to defy the occupation's system of expulsion and permits. As a result the village has remained under closure for more than 16 days no one is allowed in or out which, considering that all services are only available outside the village, is having stark consequences for the residents.

The obvious intention of the Israeli government is to see that the reality of forced poverty and starvation, brought on by the imposition of the wall and the new "closed zones" become so unbearable for communities in the northern West Bank that people choose to leave in the hope of finding a better life. The village of Jubara is just one of many cases being fatally affected in this latest attempt by Israel and its military to cleanse the recently seized "closed zone" of all its Palestinian inhabitants and thus annex the land, and its existing illegal settlers to Israel proper.

Mustafa Barghouthi is director of the Health, Development, Information, and Policy Institute in Ramallah, Palestine and the general secretary of the Palestine National Initiative.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Quote:
Yes, that is what we have to work with, and it's not enough to parrot the accusations further. When you say:

Foxfyre wrote:
He probably is a very decent man. But a rewrite of history born out of anti-Israeli or worse, anti-Semitism, is not a decent act.

... that implies that you hold the opinion or that it is an accepted fact. If you don't know if the accusations are true and don't intend to take the time to find out, then at least have the decency not to further the accusations.

No it doesn't. It only implies that IF he writes out of anti-Israeli or anti-Semitic bias, it would be indecent to do so.

Foxfyre, if I were speaking of you and said "Foxfyre is probably a decent person, but buggering boys with turkey basters, especially when they don't want you to, is indecent", what would you take the implication to be. I think you're backpedaling.

Quote:

The reviewers of his work seem to think that to be the case.

No, the reviewers with a clear pro-Israel bias seem to think so. Why would you take one biased opinion over another?

Quote:

Based on other experience watching an dlistening to Jimmy Carter I definitely hold open that possibility.

Specifically what things did you see or hear that convince you to hold open that possibility.

Quote:

You had no qualms about criticizing Israel on the Israel, Hamas, etc. thread when you did not have all the facts.

Specifically what are you talking about?

Quote:

Please present your evidence that the three reviewers (or I) am wrong about Jimmy Carter's book or the anti-Israeli bias that sure seems to be in there.

It seems to be there because someone told you it is? I don't need to present evidence because the reviewers never make the case. There's nothing specific to refute but "he should have said..."'s. It's wholly one person's opinion and completely subjective.

Quote:

Okay I just read Chapter 17 offered HERE
I have to say, he sure doesn't spend many words criticizing the Palestinians and expends quite a few criticizing Israel.

And where was he indecent, anti-semitic, or dishonest?

Quote:

And in the discussion of the Camp David etc. accords, he completely omitted Bill Clinton's efforts on that score.

Is the book about Clinton's efforts?

BTW, when I said I had only read the first chapter, it was actually the first 4 -- they go fast on the audio books. I felt I should clarify. Thanks for posting the link to chapter 17.

0 Replies

These responses from those who have read Carter's book pretty much explains the "truth."

A reviewer, avid reader, 11/29/2006
Carter At His Best
I read this wonderful book in two days. Finally, an American president has the courage and the profound sense of justice to stand up against The Israeli-American lobby and tell the Truth as he sees it. Mr Carter presented the facts and exposed the deceptive lies that have been carried on by our white house, our congress and senate and the vicious Israeli lobby who worked shamelessly hard to distort the facts from the American public with unwaivering help from our media networks. mr Carter's candid, compassionate and honest detailing of the historical facts about the Palestinian tragedy and his profound sense of the continuing injustice meted out against the Palestinians is honorable & amirable. He clearly explained why the Israeli illegal occupation of Palestine is nothing short of apartheid because of the blatant grab of land, oppression of Palestinians and the cruel imprisonment of children. Congratulation Mr Carter. It is a must read book and justice will prevail when the truth comes out.
Also recommended: Please read Rashid Khalidi's 'The Iron Cage', Robert Pelton's 'Licensed to Kill: Hired Guns in the War on Terror'

Mike, A reviewer, 12/03/2006
Eye-opener
I have learned a lot from this book. It is amazing what facts our (US) media does not report about the Palestinian-Israeli crisis. There are two sides to every story--this book opened my eyes to the side you never really hear about.

Samer K. Fam, A reviewer, 11/30/2006
The first outsanding book about the middle east
In simple words, president Carter laysout a platform for a true peaceful road map. There are lots of places in this book where the reader feels he is out of his comfort zone...as an American, I beleive so much in the only man that brough peace not war to the middle east...MY best

Reader, A reviewer, 11/30/2006
the real truth
finally some one with jimmy carter experience speak the truth about the stiuation in the middle east. this is some one who won the Noble prize for peace. Tank and F16 never bring peace but a true, fair, and honest dialogue. this expresedent seen it all and done it all.

Sam, hopeing for Middle East Peace, 12/08/2006
Great Book, Eye opening
This book lays out the plan for Middle East Peace. It gives you a behind the scenes look at past events, and lays out the frame work for a lasting peace. I recommend this book to anyone who wants to understand more about the Middle East.

Hanna Hanania ([email protected]), A reviewer, 12/10/2006
Recommand Reading
Outstanding book.

Yez Kaoosji, A reviewer, 12/09/2006
An Honest Assessment
President Carter has once again proved that one needs to rise above politics to examine issues as they are, and to boldly address the core problems. With statesmanlike honesty he has called the Middle East situation what it really is. It takes courage in the USA to criticize Israel, and this book demonstrates that Jimmy Carter has that courage. This book should be required reading for anyone who genuinely cares to understand the Middle East situation, and the role of the modern state of Israel which was created out of British controlled Palestine following World War II.

A reviewer, A reviewer, 12/09/2006
Why they hate us
It is for the first time an american president have the courage to say the right, what people is facing and why america is hated all over the arab world, this is only because of blind support to israel, this what made israel state out of law.

A reviewer, Mike from Carlsbad, 12/10/2006
Kiiling the Messenger
I found this book to be both informative and enlightning. Anyone interested in learning the background of this tragic situation, from the perspective of both the Palestinians and of the Israelies, should take the time to read this book. As an objective observer of this conflict, it's ironic to me that the same politicians and others who have been critical of the book are the same people who previously held President Carter in such high esteem as an elder statesman, a champion of human rights and as a watchdog for fair elections around the world. No past president in my lifetime has accomplished so much with his life in attempting to use his influence and stature to try improve the condition of humanity, domestically and in Third World countries. He has been universally viewed as a man with the the highest degree of integrity, ethics and compassion. A man who has held fast to his convictions and has had the courage to speak out about unpopular issues. In doing so, he has earned the respect and credibility of millions of people around the world. He was one of the first mainstream politicians to speak out against the war in Iraq, long before it became popular to do so. Prior to the publishing of this book, he would have been given a standing ovation at any Democratic party function or speaking engagement and now these same politicians and others who would have been on their feet at these functions have been viciously attacking this courageous man of peace. It's the ultimate in hypocrisy and a classic example of killing the messenger.

A reviewer, A reviewer, 11/25/2006
Unpopular truths from our most honorable exPresident
Please understand, I HAVE read this book. I read it in one sitting. It is a straightforward discription of the realities of why there is no peace between Israel and the Palestinians from a man who was deeply involved in the many negotiations of the last 30 years. Ultimately although it is true that Palestinians have used violence to resist their occupation, the sad truth is that Israel has never made any real attempts to negotiate a viable peace, but instead uses every harsher tactics to maintain the occupation and confiscation of Palestinian territory. Mr. Carter continues to be the voice in the wilderness crying out what we must do to have peace. As he says in his last chapter, the way is actually very simple if Israel and the United States decided to pursue it.

0 Replies

After clicking on Fox's link I realized that I've already read that piece and in fact linked to it on the other Carter thread. I don't see any dishonesty, anti-semitism, or anything else in that chapter. Maybe there's something specific there that someone would like to dispute?

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
To Israel's supporters, everyone who criticizes Israel is an anti-semite.

I've seen Jews called anti-semites to their face.. because they had the temerity to say that maybe Israel shouldn't steal land and kill kids, even if they do have problems themselves.

Cycloptichorn

No, not everyone[/b] but when anybody blames israel for all of the palestinnians woes, then I do wonder about that person & do believe that he or she is an anti-Semite.

Perhaps you are unaware, but Israel is in fact responsible for the woes of many Palestinians and the architects of their current terrible situation.

Cycloptichorn

I am also aware of the pallestinnians wreaking havoc everwhere they go. Heard about the latest Hamas evil that happened in the Gaza strip just today?
What in the world is good about a peoples that have said they will drive the Israelis into the sea? You think the Israelis should just set there & twiddle their thumbs? Iran is also threatening the same thing. Israel was given to the Jews by the UN, you know, that hell hole on high that so many here seem to believe is the best thing since sliced bread.

0 Replies

LoneStarMadam wrote:

What in the world is good about a peoples that have said they will drive the Israelis into the sea?

I hear this a lot. Does anyone know who actually said this and when?

0 Replies

LoneStarMadam wrote:

What in the world is good about a peoples that have said they will drive the Israelis into the sea?

FD wrote:
I hear this a lot. Does anyone know who actually said this and when?

Is this anything like "I'm a uniter, not a divider?" or "We will be welcomed as liberators!"

0 Replies

FD, I have explained as much as I know on this subject. All your questions have been answered by me or via reference to the sources provided, but you have essentially rejected those. Rewording the same questions and putting them out there again won't elicit a different response from me and I prefer not to play that game. If you don't see what some of us see in Carter's writing or more precisely in what Carter has omitted from his writing, then you don't see it. I accept that.

C.I. cherry picked glowing reviews and that is his prerogative. I could go to Amazon.com and copy and paste numerous scathing review--probably the bulk of the more than 100 reviews left there--but what would that prove? You seem to dismiss anybody who disapproves of Carter's book on the basis that they are biased.

I presume you think everybody who likes the book isn't biased.

I will leave you with one more book review, this time from CAMERA:

Jimmy Carter Distorts Facts, Demonizes Israel in New BookSOURCE

0 Replies

Where does Carter say the Arabs are blameless and the Isralis are at fault for all the conflicts? I didn't even read the book, but I know better than to believe such trash without the accuser providing evidence from the book.

The writer also claims the Palestinians have been offered a viable state. Prove it. How in the world does anyone establish a "viable state" when their property is taken away without any legal recourse? Talk about bullshet, your article is full of it.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:

What in the world is good about a peoples that have said they will drive the Israelis into the sea?

FD wrote:
I hear this a lot. Does anyone know who actually said this and when?

Is this anything like "I'm a uniter, not a divider?" or "We will be welcomed as liberators!"

Bill Clinton offered Arafat 95% of what Arafat wanted, but that wasn't good enough, Arafat wanted the Israelis gone from Israel, drive them into the sea
http://wwwisraelnewsagency.com/regionalhistory.html

0 Replies

Defenders of Israeli anti-semitic and anti-Jewish atrocities against Palestinians should steer clear of the videos available on this page. "Israeli Attack on Peaceful Protesters in Occupied Gaza" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxBU-Otdefk

0 Replies

blueflame, It's against 14, 15 and 16 year olds who were peacefully demonstrating.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

FD, I have explained as much as I know on this subject. All your questions have been answered by me or via reference to the sources provided, but you have essentially rejected those.

No, they haven't. And that's why I keep asking them. Neither you nor the reviewers you cite have shown passages in the book that are anti-semitic, dishonest, or indecent. I understand the reason is because you can't find any and you wish to redefine those words to mean "critical of Israel", which won't fly.

Quote:

Rewording the same questions and putting them out there again won't elicit a different response from me and I prefer not to play that game.

There is no game. I'm aware that you can't answer the questions because you don't have the resources to answer them, which makes me wonder why you're so willing to join in the condemnation.

Quote:

If you don't see what some of us see in Carter's writing or more precisely in what Carter has omitted from his writing, then you don't see it. I accept that.

It is not possible for me to see what you see since neither of us have read the entire book and you have not specified anything in it to justify your parroted accusations. What can you "see" in his writing not having read the book? You're only complaint is that he is "critical of Israel". That isn't enough to justify the accusations that were made.

Quote:

You seem to dismiss anybody who disapproves of Carter's book on the basis that they are biased.

No, I'm dismissing clearly biased reviews. Can you find me an unbiased review?

Quote:

I presume you think everybody who likes the book isn't biased.

You presume too much. I think that pro-Palestinian groups will probably love it but they would also clearly be biased. Still, I think there is a lot of useful information in the book about what life is really like for others in the middle east besides Israelis. Some of us are curious about that, others don't think it matters.

Quote:

I will leave you with one more book review, this time from CAMERA:

Another unbiased review.

0 Replies

When you say "unbiased", do you mean one that agrees with Carter? Is that the only truly unbiased sources you would accept FD?

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

When you say "unbiased", do you mean one that agrees with Carter? Is that the only truly unbiased sources you would accept FD?

Crikey, McG. How about just one that is not affiliated with a pro-Israel group? Do you mean to tell me that if I posted four reviews from people or publications that had strong ties to the Palestinian cause you would take those at face value?

0 Replies

Actually, to be fair, the Goldberg review wasn't as biased as the others. That's probably the best I'm going to get.

0 Replies

I suspect that unless Carter gets raving reviews--FD has not complained that such reviews already cited are biased--nobody is going to be able to criticize Carter's book without FD thinking they are biased. And FD, that looks very much like bias. Smile

(I love ya, you know, and I don't care if you are biased on the side of Carter.)

The thing is, I can't find that any of the critics have misrepresented the problems with the book and I agree with them that what appear to be deliberate omissions of fact that would have mitigated the facts Carter cites indicates a very strong bias on Carter's part. Whether this represents antisemitism, I can't say because I don't know his heart. But it is pretty obvious to me that he has come down solidly on the side of the Palestinians and their supporters while scarely representing Israel's side of it. That suggests a strong anti-Israel bias.

0 Replies

Another link to Carters wrongheadedness, although it's probably futile to post another since some will never accept that a democrat could be so wrong.
http://mideasttruth.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=348

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

I suspect that unless Carter gets raving reviews--FD has not complained that such reviews already cited are biased--nobody is going to be able to criticize Carter's book without FD thinking they are biased. And FD, that looks very much like bias. (I love ya, you know, and I don't care if you are biased on the side of Carter.)

I have to call bullshit. I'm not parroting the claims of the other reviews, which were not even published in major papers but were individual reviews on Amazon (or wherever) that I don't feel hold any weight compared to what has been posted. I did not post those reviews to make my case. I have not addressed them at all or claimed that they were right in their criticism. If I were, then you would be correct in accusing me of bias. Are you saying that the reviews you posted are not biased?

Quote:

The thing is, I can't find that any of the critics have misrepresented the problems with the book and I agree with them that what appear to be deliberate omissions of fact that would have mitigated the facts Carter cites indicates a very strong bias on Carter's part.

The fact that you agree with them without having read the book I find astonishing. I don't agree or disagree, but I recognize that they are expressing an opinion and have not raised any factual challenge to the book at all. Goldberg, in fact, appears to be challenging Carter's claim that there is apartheid in the Palestinian territories -- a claim he himself made in the New Yorker 2 years ago and was excoriated by CAMERA (source of another one of your "unbiased" reviews) for. Neither you nor the reviewers you cite can substantiate your claims of anti-semitism, obscenity, or dishonesty. Your sole criticism seems to be that his book makes Israel look bad.

Quote:

Whether this represents antisemitism, I can't say because I don't know his heart.

Oh, but you already did say, or at least implied.

Quote:

But it is pretty obvious to me that he has come down solidly on the side of the Palestinians and their supporters while scarely representing Israel's side of it. That suggests a strong anti-Israel bias.

It's obvious to you, based on some pro-Israel book reviews that you've read. If he's wrong about life in the territories, show me. What specifically is he wrong about? That's what I'm asking, have been asking, and will continue to ask. I would love a debate on the merits of his argument. What I don't enjoy is having to reign in the personal trashfest that immediately follows the release of unpopular opinions. You and others here, as well some op-ed writers immediately jumped on the discredit wagon because you don't like what the book says. It's a clever way to avoid having to challenge his arguments, but it pretty much exposes your own and their clear biases.

0 Replies

The World According To Jimmy Carter

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know