Jimmy Carter: Israeli Apartheid - the liberal view.

Parent Cafe
121

<p>Misterflyer, I am not trying to justify the existance of Israel with the holocaust, you, however, were. Except you feel Israel should have been in Europe. The holocaust has taught Jews one lesson. That is that no matter how hard they try they can never assimilate and that to insure their security they must rely soley on themselves. How you like to interpret it varies amongst many people. I already told you why Israel Jews deserved statehood. You want the destruction of Israel, I wish you well, but you and Ahmidenijaid will meet the same fate, Arab terrorist and enemies have for the last 58 years. Some of those Arab leaders wisen up. Anwar Sadat, was ultimately a great man, despite all of the wrongs he made.</p>

<p>Maybe he still hated the Jews and Israel after the Egyptian-Israeli peace accords, but he understood that Israel was a reality and he was going to benefit off of its existance. The time will come when you will too.</p>

<p>Hussieni was not the ultimate Nazi. He was, however, the ultimate anti-semite and the ultimate terrorist. Moreover, he was the ultimate ally to the Nazis and since when do the losers of a war reap the spoils. Or to put it differently, since when are the victors punished and the losers rewarded?</p>

<p>Misterflyer says:“funny when I went to the Holocaust Museum in DC noone mentioned him.”</p>

<p>Yes. Very funny, indeed. </p>

<p>Here are some archived videos and photographs of Husseini from the Holocaust museum in DC on the museums website <a href=“http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007255[/url]”>http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007255&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I believe, misterflyer, you mispoke when you called me a kahanist. As a pro-Palestinian who supports a Palestinian Arab State in Gaza and parts of the Westbank along side a safe and secure Jewish state, a more appropriate political affiliation for me would be Likud, Kadima, Labor, Israel Beitanu, just to name a few, since all of those ultimately support the two state solution.</p>

<p>On the other hand, maybe I am a Kahanist who does not even know it. If you would be so kind to identify my Kahanistic traits, I would be forever grateful.</p>

122

<p>Husseini was in Germany from 1940’s onwards. What makes the Palestinian people responsible for what he did? Just because he is Palestinian? How does that link the Holocaust to Palestine. And according to the non-partisan Shaw Commision Husseini had no responsiblity for the 1929 Massacre, only Israeli apologists say he is responsible for it. Using my logic, you have again failed to link the Holocaust to Palestine, and therefore erases the validity of a Jewish state in its present location. I am all for one in Europe, so that does not mean I support anyone’s extinction. I just say let the wrongs be righted correctly.</p>

<pre><code>A state in parts of the West Bank and Gaza? How could that even be viable when there is no connection between the two regions? And you don’t even believe in all of the West Bank at that, even though Israel has no right to the West Bank according to all resolutions of the U.N.
</code></pre>

123

<p>And apparently you don’t even read the articles you link.</p>

<p>From that article.</p>

<p>:Amin al-Husayni was not directly involved in the outbreak of the Arab general strike and revolt in April 1936, and initially tried to act as a moderating voice when he did involve himself:</p>

<p>Not only that, again, linking Husayni to the existence of Holocaust fails because it shows that he was acting alone as one individual and had left Palestine by 1938.</p>

<p>LASTLY, :I wish you well, but you and Ahmidenijaid will meet the same fate, Arab terrorist and enemies have for the last 58 years:</p>

<p>It looks as if you are threatening violence against me as an individual, it sounds like an assault. If you do not completely repudiate what you have said I will be FORCED TO CONTACT THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THE CC BOARD AND ASK FOR YOUR IP ADDRESS AND REPORT YOU TO THE AUTHORTIES, is that clear?</p>

124

<p>UN resolution 242 implicitly allows Israel to hold on to parts of the West Bank, that is not according to me, but according to those who wrote it and ultimatey got it passed in the Security Council, Arthur Goldberg and Lord Carrington. </p>

<p>Comissions are not necessarily right and often hotly politial. The British absolutely needed to appease and placate the Arabs, something that they failed to do with the Peel Commision later on (this proved to be a British mistake). I am sorry, despite what that the Holocaust link says, and I did read it, all information about Hussieni points to the contrary. He was extremely violent and hateful. There are no two ways about it. As for the 1936 strike, HUSSIENI PRESIDED OVER THE COMMITTEE THAT AUTHORIZED IT. I understand that this is the holocaust museum, however, their article on Hussieni goes against what most mainstream historians now know, especially since they have his memoirs and ahve records of plenty of his inciteful speeches.</p>

<p>As a representative of the Palestinian Arabs in Western Palestine, his views were in line with his people. Even in exile Hussieni was the most popular Palestinian leader. He was even elected President of the National Palestinin Council.</p>

<p>The Palestinians were not directly responsible for the Holocaust. I absolutely agree with you. However, they were complicit with Nazi Germany and the axis. To me, the Holocaust is not the reason of Israel’s existance. I already told you why Israel should exist. I feel that the Arab complicity with the axis, outside a collectie punishmet that all “axis countries” should have to endure, is absolutely irrelevant.</p>

<p>Holocaust or no Holocaust, Israel would have been established. The Holocaust onl sped the process up because the world eye’s were open to Jewish suffering and to thei need for true security, which no country could offer.</p>

<p>Indeed, having a non-contigious country is difficult and a seperate Gaza and West Bank is not the absolutely most amazing soluton, but rarely do these amazing solutions exist. Things would might have been different had the Arabs accepted the Peel Commission recommendation or even agreed to negotiate on it with the Jews. Perhaps, had they accepted Count Bernatodes one-state solution or the other one-state solutions, things would have been different. Even the acceptancve of the 1948 partition plan would have ultimately insured a corridor through Israel which Palestinian Arabs could use. However, that ship has long sailed. After 58 years of war and terrorism, the Arabs have found themselves on the losing end, and nowhere are the victors ever punished and the losers rewarded.</p>

<p>Having said that, a viable state could exist between those two regions. Because they are a very short drive from eachother, an exclusive Palestinian highway flanked by walls could be established.</p>

125

<p>“It looks as if you are threatening violence against me as an individual, it sounds like an assault. If you do not completely repudiate what you have said I will be FORCED TO CONTACT THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THE CC BOARD AND ASK FOR YOUR IP ADDRESS AND REPORT YOU TO THE AUTHORTIES, is that clear?”</p>

<p>LOL. I must say, your reading and analytical skills are weak.</p>

<p>I am going to let you in on a little hint. Your fate is failure. To me your livelihood is an absolute necessity. The world needs people like you to remind them of threats to peace, of stumbling blocks to sucess, of the mind of a anti-semite. If you are even in trouble, let me know. Your preservation is oneof my utmost responsibilities to humanity.</p>

<p>As for your Shaw Report, it found Hussieni responsible and complicit for many of the other massacres and violent rots in 1929. The Hebron Massacre in 1929, under dispute as to the level of Hussieni’ encouragment, it is fact that he gave frequent and regular speeches full of hate and incitment. After which, Arabs would go rioting.</p>

126

<p>Oh so I’m wrong. The Holocaust wasn’t the mitigating factor to create Israel. Oh wow, well that throws off this discussion. You’re just trying to rewirte history now.</p>

127

<p><a href=“http://www.nakbainhebrew.org/index.php?lang=english[/url]”>http://www.nakbainhebrew.org/index.php?lang=english&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

128

<p>Misterflyer, name me 4 countries other than Israel that you believe do not have the right to exist.</p>

129

<p>Taiwan, which should be part of China. Kuwait which should be part of Greater Iraq -Syria in an Arab Union. South and North Korea, which should be united.</p>

<pre><code> FarmDad, now two questions for you. DO you believe in man-made Global Warming or do you believe it is God/or Jehovah turning up the thermometer?
</code></pre>

<p>Do you believe in evolution?</p>

130

<p>

</p>

<p>This hardly seems pertinent to a discussion of Israeli politics. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This is the only one I agree with, and yet it’s the only one that I don’t see as even remotely possible. Sad.</p>

131

<p>Unfortunately, Ari, the first question is pertinent because many people in America (i.e. Christian Right) support Israel because they think it is God’s policy and is part of Jesus coming back to save the World. They usually are the same people who don’t believe in global warming and evolution. Anyone but an Israeli apologist would see that.</p>

<ol>
<li>Taiwan is merely a U.S. military outpost and demographics will end that soon.</li>
<li>I believe Pan-Arabism was a good idea and Kuwait would be a good place to start because these divisions within Arabic populations have made it susceptible to Western influence and manipulation.
3,4. I believe if the United States stopped blindly supporting So.Ko and engaged No. Ko. it would be very possible.</li>
</ol>

<p>The reason I discussed Israel’s right not to exist << hah , I wish Dershowitz or Horowitz could read that<< was because all debates , arguments, or discussions relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict always return to the beginning, that being the 1881-1948 period in which Israel was wrought open the Earth.</p>

132

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes, I must admit I am nothing but an Israeli apologist and was silly for not making some tenuous connections. How awful of me. </p>

<p>:rolleyes:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Now this is where my expertise is useful. You’re ignoring many of the huge problems here. For one, unification of the two states means gigantic refugee populations streaming out of the DPRK. Neither China nor the ROK wishes to deal with that. How do you deal with the huge gap in development between the DPRK and ROK in a way that doesn’t lead to problems? The gap between West and East Germany, while pronounced, looks like a pothole compared to the gaping chasm between the two Koreas. There’s also the PRC issue. China has made it quite clear that they don’t want Korean refugees in Manchuria and elsewhere. The opening of the DPRK (or collapse, take your pick) would mean potentially millions streaming into regions China already has problems with.</p>

<p>How do you solve these very real problems and make reunification possible? And don’t tell me that I’m just looking for excuses. I’m probably a bit more interested in this issue than you are, despite the fact that I’m some airhead in your book, to be sure.</p>

133

<p>Israel apologist or not, not making the connection between the religiosity of those of the Christian right and supporting Israel (Just look at Pat Robertson and the bunch) is academic dishonesty, or ignorance at best.</p>

134

<p>

</p>

<p>Or maybe I just really didn’t get what you were insinuating. The first thing I think about when it comes to Israel isn’t global warming. Pardon me.</p>

135

<p>Your opinion regarding Kuwait is both chilling and revealing. Fortunately, in 1991, the entire Arab world with the exception of Iraqi Bathists and the Palestinian people did not agree with you. Regarding North and South Korea, yes it would be wonderful if the Korean peninsula could be united under principles of freedom, liberty, and economic prosperity, but that does not deny either country the right to exist just because you wish it so. With regard to Taiwan, I suppose that you also think that Tibet should not exist either.</p>

<p>Both natural and man-made factors contribute to the phenomenon of global warming. The only argument is to the significance of the man-made contributions against the sweep of geophysical history. With regard to evolution, you could just as easily have asked me if I believe in gravity or photosynthesis. Of course.</p>

136

<p>Back to the topic of Carter’s book. Carter has been accused of plagiarizing maps that were contained in “The Missing Peace,” a book published in 2004 by Dennis Ross who served as the United States’ chief negotiator under President Clinton during the Oslo and Camp David peace process, 1993-2000. Ross, whose reputation for balance and integrity has been unchallenged, is the definitive authority as to what was actually offered to Barak and Arafat at Camp David in July, 2000, and at the White House in December, 2000. </p>

<p>Carter’s book contains two maps that are virtually identical to maps contained in Ross’ book. In Ross’ book, one map that shows a fragmented Palestinian state on only 83% of the West Bank is labeled “Palestinian Characterization of the Final Proposal at Camp David.” A second map, which depicts a contiguous Palestinian state on over 91% of the West Bank, is labeled “Map Reflecting Actual Proposal at Camp David.” In other words, Ross’ maps demonstrate how the Palestinian characterization of the final Camp David proposal in July, 2000 does not match the reality of the actual proposal.</p>

<p>In his book, Carter not only reproduces maps remarkably similar to Ross’ maps, but he changes the labels in a way that entirely misrepresents their meaning!!! Carter labels the first map as “Palestinian Interpretation of Clinton’s Proposal 2000” and the second map as “Israeli Interpretation of Clinton’s Proposal 2000,” creating the false impression that what the Israeli’s claimed was the proposal was only their interpretation and not the actual proposal. Regardless as to whether Carter is guilty of plagiarism, he is demonstrably guilty of dishonesty in his false representation of the maps and their implications.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/09/opinion/09ross.html?_r=1&n=Top%2FOpinion%2FEditorials%20and%20Op-Ed%2FOp-Ed%2FContributors&oref=slogin[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/09/opinion/09ross.html?_r=1&n=Top%2FOpinion%2FEditorials%20and%20Op-Ed%2FOp-Ed%2FContributors&oref=slogin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Furthermore, Ross’ book actually has a third map that reflects the proposal that Clinton offered to Barak and Arafat at the White House in December, 2000 in a last ditch effort to close a deal before Clinton left office. This map depicts a proposed Palestinian state comprised of 100% of Gaza and 95% of the West Bank (in contiguous land), with another 1 to 3% of land to be taken from what is now Israel. This is what Barak accepted and Arafat rejected, not the alleged non-contiguous Bantustans as claimed by Arafat, Carter, and other revisionists. Arafat rejected a viable Palestinian state and reverted to suicide bombings not for the reasons that he and revisionists such as Carter have claimed, but because after decades of telling his people that the entirety of Israel was occupied territory that would be reclaimed, he could not accept the reality of a two state solution.</p>

137

<p>FarmDad–your disclosures are shocking and sad. </p>

<p>Interesting–President Nixon lived long enough to redeem himself from Watergate & become a statesman. President Carter has lived long enough to become a dupe or a fool.</p>

138

<p>More on this (Will post link when available)</p>

<p>Another Academic Shuns Carter and His Center</p>

<p>Melvin Konner, physician and professor at Emory University, declined an invitation to be part of a group advising President Carter and The Carter Center on Carter’s recent book on the Mideast. Konner notes especially that “President Carter has proved capable of distorting the truth about such meetings and consultations in public remarks following them. In particular, he mischaracterized the meeting he had with the executive committee of the Board of Rabbis of Greater Phoenix, saying he and they had positive interactions and prayed together, when in fact others present stated that the meeting was highly confrontational and that the prayer was merely a pro forma closing invocation.” Konner says also that “in television interviews I have seen over the past week, President Carter has revealed himself to be so rigid and inflexible in his views that he seems to me no longer capable of dialogue.” </p>

<p>Here is the full text of his letter declining the invitation, no link available:<br>
TO: Dr. John Hardman, M.D. Executive Director, The Carter Center</p>

<p>Dear Dr. Hardman,</p>

<p>I am sorry to say that after careful and frankly painful reflection, I have decided not to participate in your group advising President Carter and The Carter Center regarding his recent book on the Middle East conflict. During our telephone conversation on December 11 (perhaps not incidentally my late father’s birthday) I spoke from my heart when I agreed to participate; it is not easy for me to lose one of my greatest heroes.</p>

<p>In less than a week since then, events have progressed in such a way as to persuade me that I cannot in good conscience participate in such an effort. </p>

<p>First, President Carter has proved capable of distorting the truth about such meetings and consultations in public remarks following them. In particular, he mischaracterized the meeting he had with the executive committee of the Board of Rabbis of Greater Phoenix, saying he and they had positive interactions and prayed together, when in fact others present stated that the meeting was highly confrontational and that the prayer was merely a pro forma closing invocation. (See “Letters,” The New York Times, Dec. 15, 2006, p. A32.) However modest my reputation may be, I will not jeopardize it by participating in a meeting that might subsequently be so starkly misconstrued.</p>

<p>Second, in television interviews I have seen over the past week, President Carter has revealed himself to be so rigid and inflexible in his views that he seems to me no longer capable of dialogue. In an interview with Soledad O’Brien of CNN he failed to address a single one of the criticisms she quoted from various experts in a very serious tone of voice, pointing out that she was not reading the worst of the criticisms; he began laughing inappropriately while she spoke, and when she asked him how he would respond to the criticisms he stated, “With laughter.” In a number of interviews I have seen and heard him respond to highly specific questions merely by stating again and again in one form or another, “My book is completely accurate.” This rigidity of thought and complete failure to engage criticisms from much greater experts than me about his numerous and serious errors of commission and omission make it clear to me that an attempt by me to advise him would be pointless and counterproductive. In addition, his repeated public insinuations that the Jews control the media and the Congress˜well-worn anti-Semitic slurs that, especially coming from President Carter, present a clear and present danger to American Jews˜are offensive to me beyond what I can politely say.</p>

<p>Third, I am now carefully rereading parts of this very puzzling and problematic book, having read it through once quickly. I am not going to point out again here all the mistakes and misrepresentations pointed out by others (to take just one example, his flat contradiction of the accounts by President Clinton and Dennis Ross of events at Camp David at which they were present and he was not)˜none of which he has answered—nor explain the grotesque distortion caused by his almost completely ignoring Jewish history between ancient times and 1947 (he devotes five lines on page 64 to that millennial tragic story and mentions the Holocaust twice; his “Historical Chronology” at the outset contains nothing˜nothing˜between 1939 and 1947). However, I will call your attention to a sentence on p. 213 that had not stood out for me the first time I read it: “It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel.” </p>

<p>As someone who has lived his life as a professional reader and writer, I cannot find any way to read this sentence that does not condone the murder of Jews until such time as Israel unilaterally follows President Carter’s prescription for peace. This sentence, simply put, makes President Carter an apologist for terrorists and places my children, along with all Jews everywhere, in greater danger. </p>

<p>I am sure you will now understand why I cannot participate in your group advising President Carter. </p>

<p>However, if I may, I will share this advice to you: If you want The Carter Center to survive and thrive independently in the future, you must take prompt and decisive steps to separate the Center from President Carter’s now irrevocably tarnished legacy. You must make it clear on your web site and in appropriately circulated press releases that President Carter does not speak for The Carter Center on the subject of the Middle East conflict or the political role of the American Jewish community. If you do not do this, then President Carter’s damage to his own effectiveness as a mediator, not to mention to his reputation and legacy will extend, far more tragically in my view, to The Carter Center and all its activities. </p>

<p>Meanwhile, in my own private and modest public capacity as a university professor and writer, I will work very hard in the foreseeable future to help discredit President Carter’s biased, intemperate and inflexible mischaracterizations of the reality of Israel, Palestine, terrorism, and the American Jewish community. I will urge all my colleagues and students to do the same. And, most painfully, I will discourage any connection with The Carter Center until such time as you make perfectly and publicly clear your independence from President Carter on this tragically difficult set of questions, which he has chosen so dangerously to distort and oversimplify. </p>

<p>I emphasize that I have been a decades-long supporter of President Carter and of The Carter Center and have defended him, his legacy, and The Center’s work at every possible opportunity. It is a grave loss for me to acknowledge that this will no longer be possible.</p>

139

<p>How do you plagerize a map? seriouslly, borders are what they are, rivers are where they are, cities are where they are, and we are to agree with FOx man Ross that HIS version of the middle east maps are correct. even though he has an agenda himself?</p>

<p>to claim map plagergism is a desperate attempt to find anything to dis a book that people don’t agree with</p>

<p>guess if it supported Israel more, the map “plagerism” would be a none topic</p>

<p>I am fascinated that anyone who doesn’t think Israel is perfect is bashed…and Carter, gee was smack dab in the middle</p>

<p>Oh I forgot, Israel has never ever done anything bad…that is it…that their policies have always been honest, that they treat everyone with fairness and dignity, and they have the right to do what ever they want</p>

<p>How could I forget</p>

140

<p>" claim map plagergism is a desperate attempt to find anything to dis a book that people don’t agree with"</p>

<p>I don’t understand what you meant. Dennis Ross was employed by the Carter Center and worked closely with President Carter for many, many years. What possible motive could he have had to disparage Mr. Carter? What would have made him so desperate that he would speak out against Mr. Carter in the New York Times?</p>