In the real world Mr. Carter, if college students are turning down your free
lectures, and "prominent Jewish Citizens" and members of Congress are privately telling you how great your attempt at non-fiction is you might want to reconsider the merits of your book. But then again, this all from the guy who said he had so much respect in the Middle East that if he were President right now, there'd be peace.
Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter defended his position on Israel in the L.A. Times Opinion section. My response is as follows...
Just because you're a former President doesn't give you the right to invent falsehoods, perpetuate lies and plagiarize maps without somebody calling you to account for such discrepencies. You still need to present accurate information, especially on a highly charged topic like the Israeli/Palestinian conflict where you can affect hundreds of thousands of lives because of your former stature as President.
First, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee is NOT the American-Israel Political Action Committee. AIPAC is NOT a Political Action Committee or a PAC. Getting such an obvious fact wrong leads the casual observer to question your attention to detail, something critical in this debate.
Second, a Carter Center fellow did not merely "take issue" with your book, he resigned his position over it. Ken Stein, the Carter Center fellow you refer to wasn't simply a fellow. Stein was the first Executive Director of the Carter Center and your primary adviser on Middle Eastern affairs from 1983 to 1996, something he now publicly says he no longer functions as.
"President Carter's book on the
Middle East, a title too inflammatory to even print, is not based on
unvarnished analyses; it is replete with factual errors, copied
materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply
invented segments," said Stein.
Stein also disavows any ties to "the research, preparation, writing, or review of President Carter's recent book."
In his resignation letter, Stein says
"My continued association with
the Center leaves the impression that I am sanctioning a series of
egregious errors and polemical conclusions which appeared in President
Carter's book. I can not allow that impression to stand."
Nor can you present a blatant lie referring to Israel as worse than apartheid Africa. Israel is the only Democracy in the Middle East, has elected Arab officials in the Israeli government, a free press, has Arabic and Hebrew as the official state languages, and more rights and privileges afforded to Arabs than any other Arab country in the Middle East.
Carter says "It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to
espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine, to suggest
that Israel comply with international law..." Last I checked, Israel withdrew from Southern Lebanon and received continuous rocket attacks as a result, whereas Hezbollah is still there, a clear violation of International Law.
Israel accepted the UN partion plan to create two independent states living in peace, whereas the Palestinians outrightly rejected it. Even though they were painful concessions, Israel was willing to make peace with the Palestinians in 2000, but the Palestinians again rejected it.
Carter criticizes Israel for requiring Palestinians to carry passes, the segregation of Israelis and Palestinians in the disputed territories and the security barrier (what Carter refers to as an imprisonment wall), all without a reason why. As if the events happening in Israel are in a vacuum and Israel is simply exercising its will upon the Palestinians for no apparent good reason.
Out in the real world, however, many violent Palestinians are trying to murder as many Israelis as possible, hence the passes, the segregation and the security barrier.
Out in the real world Mr. Carter, you cannot make peace with someone who does not want to make peace with you no matter how hard you try.
