Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Right-wing hysteria over Carter, Israel

Posted by Evan Derkacz at 2:08 PM on December 6, 2006.


Carter scares the s**t out of them...
story.carter
Boo!

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

You read that right, Carter scares the s**t out of right wingers.

Time's 2004 Botch Blog of the Year, Powerline, has suggested more than once that Jimmy Carter is a traitor. Conservatives from Michelle Malkin on down applauded a nasty C-SPAN caller who slung insults at the president on-air recently, and cries of AHA! have arisen over an email from a former Carter colleague who's breaking with him over the president's latest book on Palestine.

The hysteria behind the name-calling is quite simple: He scares the bejeezus out of rightwingers. He's a Navy Vet, an evangelical minister, an American President, a Nobel Prize winner, a best-selling author, and a world-renowned philanthropist.

The email came from Dr. Kenneth W. Stein, professor of Israel Studies at Emory University, partner of the Carter Center. It will be promoted as proof, PROOF!, that Carter's latest book is some anti-Israel screed, to be ignored and the president castigated.

Leaving aside the fact that Stein's departure is admittedly a hollow gesture (Many still believe that I have an active association with the Center and, act as an adviser to President Carter, neither is the case... Since I left the Center physically thirteen years ago, the Middle East program of the Center has waned as has my status as a Carter Center Fellow.) this email may more appropriately be seen as the book's seal of approval.

Stein claims in his email that the book "is replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments," though he declines to cite them. I don't doubt that he's found his differences, but those remain to be seen.

On the other hand, although Stein and Carter did coauthor a book some years ago, their approaches to the Israel/Palestine conflict have diverged markedly since then. Stein now sits on the board of editors for the Middle East Quarterly, a journal published by the fanatical fantasy-plagued neocon, Daniel Pipes, who also heads up a McCarthyite site called CampusWatch. The Middle East Forum, another associated project, boasts among its experts, neocon William Kristol and Joseph Farah, editor of rightwing yes-mag WorldNetDaily.

Juan Cole does not hold the MEQ in high esteem: "It publishes scurrilous attacks on people. There's no scholarship. It's a put-up job. As for Pipes himself, let's just say that he's not a full professor at a major university."

Pipes is a middle-brow bigot toward Arabs and Muslims, so having an associate of his break with you is, to my thinking, not too bad a thing. It's also interesting and fun to compare the language of CampusWatch to the language of Stein's Carter crit.

Here's an excerpt from Carter's book, whose "title [is] too inflammatory to even print":

There are two interrelated obstacles to permanent peace in the Middle East...

1. Some Israelis believe they have the right to confiscate and colonize Palestinian land and try to justify the sustained subjugation and persecution of increasingly hopeless and aggravated Palestinians; and

2. Some Palestinians react by honoring suicide bombers as martyrs to be rewarded in heaven and consider the killing of Israelis as victories.

In turn, Israel responds with retribution and oppression, and militant Palestinians refuse to recognize the legitimacy of Israel and vow to destroy the nation. The cycle of distrust and violence is sustained, and efforts for peace are frustrated. Casualties have been high as the occupying forces impose ever tighter controls. From September 2000 until March 2006, 3,982 Palestinians and 1,084 Israelis were killed in the second intifada, and these numbers include many children: 708 Palestinians and 123 Israelis. As indicated earlier, there was an ever-rising toll of dead and wounded from the latest outbreak of violence in Gaza and Lebanon.

The only rational response to this continuing tragedy is to revitalize the peace process through negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians, but the United States has, in effect, abandoned this effort. It may be that one of the periodic escalations in violence will lead to strong influence being exerted from the International Quartet to implement its Roadmap for Peace. These are the key requirements:

a. The security of Israel must be guaranteed. The Arabs must acknowledge openly and specifically that Israel is a reality and has a right to exist in peace, behind secure and recognized borders, and with a firm Arab pledge to terminate any further acts of violence against the legally constituted nation of Israel.

b. The internal debate within Israel must be resolved in order to define Israel's permanent legal boundary...

Digg!

Tagged as: neocons, israel, jimmy carter

Evan Derkacz is an AlterNet editor. He writes and edits PEEK, the blog of blogs.


Hitler, Darwin and the Sasquatch
They're all inter-related, you know.
Post by General JC Christian. July 9, 2009.
After Casting Sole No Vote on Slavery Memorial, Rep. King Keeps Digging Deeper
This is one contorted excuse.
Post by Steve Benen. July 9, 2009.
Airing of Grievances: Right-Winger Incensed over 'Commie's' Jab at 'Saturday Night Fever'
Oh, and Pinochet was a good guy, damnit!
Post by Roy Edroso. July 9, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
John Dugard:
Posted by: rwa on Dec 6, 2006 5:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
" The United Nations for nearly 40 years has condemned Israel's military occupation, together with colonialism and apartheid, as contrary to the international public order.

In principle, the purpose of military occupation is different from that of apartheid. It is not designed as a long-term oppressive regime but as an interim measure that maintains law and order in a territory following an armed conflict and pending a peace settlement. But this is not the nature of the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Since 1967 Israel has imposed its control over the Palestinian territories in the manner of a colonizing power, under the guise of occupation. It has permanently seized the territories' most desirable parts ­ the holy sites in East Jerusalem, Hebron and Bethlehem and the fertile agricultural lands along the western border and in the Jordan Valley ­ and settled its own Jewish "colonists" throughout the land.

Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories has many features of colonization. At the same time it has many of the worst characteristics of apartheid. The West Bank has been fragmented into three areas ­ north (Jenin and Nablus), center (Ramallah) and south (Hebron) ­ which increasingly resemble the Bantustans of South Africa.

Restrictions on freedom of movement imposed by a rigid permit system enforced by some 520 checkpoints and roadblocks resemble, but in severity go well beyond, apartheid's "pass system." And the security apparatus is reminiscent of that of apartheid, with more than 10,000 Palestinians in Israeli prisons and frequent allegations of torture and cruel treatment.

Many aspects of Israel's occupation surpass those of the apartheid regime. Israel's large-scale destruction of Palestinian homes, leveling of agricultural lands, military incursions and targeted assassinations of Palestinians far exceed any similar practices in apartheid South Africa. No wall was ever built to separate blacks and whites."

ajc.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: John Dugard: Posted by: lotus23
» RE: John Dugard: Posted by: rwa
» RE: John Dugard: Posted by: lotus23
» RE: John Dugard: Posted by: rwa
frank67
Posted by: frank67 on Dec 7, 2006 8:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All everyone needs to remember (assuming you're old enough to remember) is UN Resolution 242. Resolution 242 simply says: "Israel must evacuate the West Bank." pretty cut and dried!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

UN Resolution 242
Posted by: pg on Dec 7, 2006 9:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since I am not old enough to remember I looked up UN Resolution 242 it "also calls for the recognition of all established states by belligerent parties (Israel, Egypt, Syria, Jordan) of each other and calls for the establishment of peace and secure and recognized boundaries for all parties. -and- it is also binding on Israel and the PLO by agreement owing to its incorporation into the Oslo Accords."

It does not sound so "cut and dried"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Carters book is KA KA
Posted by: robflam on Dec 7, 2006 10:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at the New York Times today. Carters’ book is a mess of misinformation. Carter has shown himself to be a bit of an anti-Semite. There are Palestinian members in the Israeli parliament. All the governments in the middle east together do not have as many as the Israelis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Carters book is KA KA Posted by: Astroboy
News?
Posted by: american on Dec 7, 2006 11:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Listen, there was a time not so long ago when Israel and Jewish issues did not have the primacy that they do in the ostensible "mainstream media" [OMSM]. Imagine a newspresence (one word, if you will) without this influence, where, perhaps, the rational expectation - footed in the mean, average, or typical heritage of American's interests - that major noteworthy events such as, say, the killing of millions of people in central Africa or the theft of $350 million in Germany or whatnot is not necessarily eclipsed by the capture of, say, two Israeli soldiers. The number of Americans of German stock, to extend on the previous point, who ostensibly may want to be review from time to time the goings on of things in their country of origin is no small number relative to the stated 5% of people in this country who are Jews. Yet, stories about Israeli and Jewish issues eclipses any other single subject of "reporting" within the "news" milieu of the media including that of America itself for the reason that reporting about America itself in the “OMSM” is engineered for Israel-advantageous comity. So, if, say, an American politician comes out "not for" Israel or the Jewish agenda in this country, the "reportage" is not of the substance of what the politician argues but of degree of "anti-Semitism."*

*(The term “-Semitism,” by the way, is only used when one is against a Jewish person, group, idea, or position; the term “Jew” or “Jewish” is used when the position is neutral or positive. It is akin to the person that claims sole responsibility for the win, who in turn claims the whole team could have done better at the loss.)

If an individual takes up the task of challenging, say, Israel’s refusal to extradite Jews who have been indicted for embezzlement, money laundering or racketeering, news pieces appearing in the OMSM – impossibly – are about the individual’s anti-Semitism and not at all about the substance of the individual’s argument. This is a phenomenon that has repeated itself thousands and thousands of times over. Either you know this or you do not, but it’s a fact. And it is a fact you better get real about. Because, whether you want to take it in or not, the Jews and Israel have propagated some of the most abominable actions of our age. Examples include the war against Iraq (refs: Project for a New American Century; Office of Special Plans), theft and sale of American nuclear secrets (ref: Rosenberg trial), the attack of the USS Liberty during the six-day war, and many, many other heinous acts against the rest of humanity in ways both subtle and grand.

You may not believe that I am not against all Jews given the foregoing. No, it is up to the individual. Many Jews are nice, present, people. Looking at the visible, preposterous, actions of our time as well as the subtler yet powerful drifts of Jewish involvement, which shine like gold in a pan of gravel when you look at the big picture; and although it’s hard as hell to piece together a conspiracy, it’s also terribly difficult to deny it. I would rather this were not the case, but I would rather be for truth and against suffering. When we go along, we deny truth and allow suffering, just not our own.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: Palestine Peace Not Apartheit by J. Carter
Posted by: Plexius on Dec 7, 2006 12:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I want to know is why Derkacz didn't post the title of the book (see title above), other than mention that even the title inspires controversy? This is the only article I've ever read wherein a book section is quoted without attribution. Doesn't that constitute some sort of copyright infringement? At the very least it seems kinda cowardly.

P.S. This is the only Derkacz article I've ever had a beef with. I think he normally does a very fine job in his writing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are many Muslim countries around the world
Posted by: Ellie1 on Dec 7, 2006 12:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If they care so damned much, why don't they create their OWN Muslim state, cede some land for a Muslim homeland. Israel is such a small country, and the only Jewish state in the world. Let the Muslims put their land where their (loud) mouths are and create their OWN homeland. Let Jerusalem be an international city like the Vatican, which is not part of Italy. All Muslims want to do is destroy Israel-and control the rest of the world if they can.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HO HA
Posted by: larry278 on Dec 7, 2006 12:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is interesting. Former Prez Jimmy Carter scares the feces out of a portion of the radical right. Do they mean the Jimmy Carter who was reviled for: being frightened by a bunny while in a boat, failing in an rescue of hostages held in Iran by elements of US armed forces allegedly due to poor planning or service rivalries [called by some the Jimmy Carter Desert Open] & other alleged failures or the Jimmy Carter who spends time building houses for the working poor, is trusted to monitor elections by most, engages in humanitarian causes?
To brand Jimmy Carter an anti-semite, guilty of treason & conspiracy to committ mopery is absurd. The radical right is behaving in an interesting way since 11/8/06. They are frothing at the mouth & other sites. Take heart. While W no longer is speaking of staying the course in Iraq, he & Tony Blair did allude to winning a victory in Iraq on 12/7/06. W isn't given to quick changes of behavior or policy. Even the radical left must acknowledge that W & crew have consistantly violated the U S Constitution, waged war on flimsy, if any, pretexts & given Israel a blank check on dealing with Lebanon & Muslims of all sorts & engaged in crimes against humanity. While W does grimace when questioned by MSM, he doesn't change his policies rapidly.
One wonders if W & his radical right supporters or Jimmy Carter & friends will be judged by history to be less effective & more prone to treason.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Algodees
Posted by: algodees on Dec 7, 2006 9:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is any criticism of Israel deemed to be anti-Semitical? Why does Israel get to disregard UN resolutions calling for a fallback to pre-1967 boundaries? Let's face it, Israel is a country only because and as long as they have the force to keep and defend it. When the Palestinians have the appropriate power then they will get their country back. Unfortunately for the Israelis the time will eventually come when the U.S. will no longer want to defend Israel because of the cost or other self interests. The West seems to have different standards for dealing with the Israelis than the Palestinians. As for President Carter, he is a good man who garners much more respect outside of the U.S. than within it and that is a shame.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]