Thursday, December 21, 2006

Dersh Dish:

Why Won't Carter Debate His Book?

You can always tell when a public figure has written an indefensible book: when he refuses to debate it in the court of public opinion. And you can always tell when he's a hypocrite to boot: when he says he wrote a book in order to stimulate a debate, and then he refuses to participate in any such debate. I'm talking about former president Jimmy Carter and his new book "Palestine Peace Not Apartheid."

Carter's book has been condemned as "moronic" (Slate), "anti-historical" (The Washington Post), "laughable" (San Francisco Chronicle), and riddled with errors and bias in reviews across the country. Many of the reviews have been written by non-Jewish as well as Jewish critics, and not by "representatives of Jewish organizations" as Carter has claimed. Carter has gone even beyond the errors of his book in interviews, in which he has said that the situation in Israel is worse than the crimes committed in Apartheid South Africa. When asked whether he believed that Israel's "persecution" of Palestinians was "[e]ven worse . . . than a place like Rwanda," Carter answered, "Yes. I think -- yes."


When Larry King referred to my review several times to challenge Carter, Carter first said I hadn't read the book and then blustered, "You know, I think it's a waste of my time and yours to quote professor Dershowitz. He's so obviously biased, Larry, and it's not worth my time to waste it on commenting on him." (He never did answer King's questions.)

The next week Carter wrote a series of op-eds bemoaning the reception his book had received. He wrote that his "most troubling experience" had been "the rejection of [his] offers to speak" at "university campuses with high Jewish enrollment." The fact is that Brandeis President Jehuda Reinharz had invited Carter to come to Brandeis to debate me, and Carter refused. The reason Carter gave was this: "There is no need to for me to debate somebody who, in my opinion, knows nothing about the situation in Palestine."

As Carter knows, I've been to Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza, many times -- certainly more times than Carter has been there -- and I've written three books dealing with the subject of Middle Eastern history, politics, and the peace process. The real reason Carter won't debate me is that I would correct his factual errors. It's not that I know too little; it's that I know too much.


Nor is Carter the unbiased observer of the Middle East that he claims to be. He has accepted money and an award from Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan , saying in 2001: "This award has special significance for me because it is named for my personal friend, Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan." This is the same Zayed, the long-time ruler of the United Arab Emirates, whose $2.5 million gift to the Harvard Divinity School was returned in 2004 due to Zayed's rampant Jew-hatred.

Zayed's personal foundation, the Zayed Center, claims that it was Zionists, rather than Nazis, who "were the people who killed the Jews in Europe" during the Holocaust. It has held lectures on the blood libel and conspiracy theories about Jews and America perpetrating Sept. 11. Carter's acceptance of money from this biased group casts real doubt on his objectivity and creates an obvious conflict of interest.

Carter's refusal to debate wouldn't be so strange if it weren't for the fact that he claims that he wrote the book precisely so as to start debate over the issue of the Israel-Palestine peace process. If that were really true, Carter would be thrilled to have the opportunity to debate. Authors should be accountable for their ideas and their facts. Books shouldn't be like chapel, delivered from on high and believed on faith.

What most rankles is Carter's insistence that he is somehow brave for attacking Israel and highlighting the plight of the Palestinian people. No other conflict in the world -- not even the genocides in Rwanda and Sudan -- evokes more hand-wringing in the media, universities, and human rights organizations than the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Jimmy Carter isn't brave for beating up on Israel. He's a bully. And like all school-yard bullies, underneath the tough talk and bravado, there's a nagging insecurity and a fear that one day he'll have to answer for himself in a fair fight.

When Jimmy Carter's ready to speak at Brandeis, or anywhere else, I'll be there. If he refuses to debate, I will still be there -- ready and willing to answer falsity with truth in the court of public opinion.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/12/21/why_wont
_carter_debate_his_book/


Please see CAMERA for all their good articles about Jimmy Carter's debacle!

http://www.camera.org/index.asp

Yes, Batya has written Alan Dershowitz to see if he was willing to sue Jimmy Carter on the grounds of 'defamation of a legitimate state'--and, at her suggestion, I wrote to David Horowitz about the same...

Unfortunately, it seems as it's a little difficult to sue ex-presidents. Alan sure capped Carter's pen, though; that first paragraph is a doozy!

17 Comments:

Blogger JINGOIST said...

Great post! Dersh sure seems to have figured out which way is up. Good for him. Does Jimmy have the Clinton habit of sending the IRS after his enemies? I know one thing, he won't appear on C-Span again!! If so Alan Dershowitz had better overpay his taxes. G-d bless him for his guts!

One more thing. Do you think Dersh has found G-d? For a long time I considered him to be nothing more than a greasy snake defense lawyer. As we all know, once you truly find G-d you never again want to be on the "wrong" side. He has spoken up on other issues in the last few years and surprised me.

Morgan

3:18 AM  
Blogger The Merry Widow said...

No idea, but I pray so, the more the merrier!
Now if someone would do jimmah cahtah a favor and stick both feet in his mouth and tape them there!
Good morning, G*D bless and Maranatha!

tmw

3:46 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

What are we all doing up at 3 a.m.? LOL!

3:50 AM  
Blogger JINGOIST said...

DONAL here in civilizations it's 7:06! What are you doing up among them there heathens?

Morgan

3:58 AM  
Blogger JINGOIST said...

As I see it Jimmah (aka Mr.Peanut) now has a serious dilemma. Like any deluded or Jew hating fool, he is forced to confront and defend the practices of the Palestinians.

This is something exceedingly difficult for someone with even a marginally intact sense of morals.

Let's try the "kindest" explanation for "palestinian" murder bombings. Ready, 'they are forced into this behavior by a sense of desperation. The Israelis have stolen their land and they are victimized daily by Israeli aggression.'

This is the BEST explanation that the left and their Jihadi allies have! Aside from the problem that it's FACTUALLY wrong, it's makes infantile victims out of these Arabs! I know the lefties love that idea, but it makes it impossible to deal with them as adults!

Jimmy's an ass!

Morgan

4:09 AM  
Blogger beakerkin said...

Carter is a bitter man who has never
come to grips with his failed Presidency and the love of this nation for Ronald Reagan. Nixon spent his remaining years working with the administrations that followed. When Bill Clinton needed foriegn policy advice he asked Nixon and not Carter.

Carter has remained a bitter loose canon and blames his defeat on the Jews. The CSPAN caller who smacked him around hit the nail on the head and Carter can't deal with it.

4:56 AM  
Blogger JINGOIST said...

Damn good point Beak!

5:02 AM  
Blogger The Merry Widow said...

Not only that, Carter was one of, oh gosh I forgot his name, the admiral who dragged the Navy into nuclear power! Anyway every submarne captain had to passhis ungodly nasty exams before he would approve them for command! But his emphasis on knowing cut out a lot of great leaders! Carter was a "nuclear" officer, he had NO LEADERSHIP SKILLS! He has never gotten over this!

tmw

8:15 AM  
Blogger VerityINK said...

TMW--Do you mean Admiral Rickover?

BEAK Good point; and reagan bested him the SECOND he was in office, by doing what Jimmah could not1 He never got over that for sure!

JINGO--Even Jimmah's own colleague called him a liar, and the other one called him a thief!

TMW--I won't even talk about him being a Christian!

8:54 AM  
Anonymous cassie said...

Imagine, saying Alan "didn't know enough about the middle east"! If that were true, than Jimmy would be able to beat him easily in a debate.... something he'd jump at.

Obviously he CAN'T do that.

9:07 AM  
Blogger Brooke said...

Every time Carter opens his mouth, the rhetoric coming from it gets more and more vitriolic and hateful.

He's a sad little man.

9:12 AM  
Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

9:41 AM  
Anonymous z said...

I would love to see Dershowitz debate Chomsky...but it would be a blood bath for poor Norm...imagine, the truth versus his bs? I'd LOVE that! Sorry Dershowitz won't do it....I'm guessing he thinks it would be like debating Ahmadeinejad..what's the point? hilarious!

as for Carter, why hadn't the news covered the Post, SLate and the SF Chronicle's comments? I watched and watched, all three major cable channels and found nothing....only a very little bit of coverage of the guy who quite Carter after reading this book of mischaracterizations and lies. It's amazing how our TV journalists protect their own, isn't it? But, no bias, RIGHT?! (unAmerican as HELL)

10:01 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Morgan , dearest friend

I think that DERSH woke up to the evil and injustices committed agaianst Israel and fighting for and on Behalf of Israel became alomsot a form of worshipping ...

I love him for that even if I can't kiss his PUNIM...

batya

10:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jimmy Carter is a venomus,bitter and deluded old fool and anti-Semite in addition to being a whore for Fidel Castro. I truly hope this bastard contracts cancer and lingers painfully until he dies. Sorry to sound so angry at this time of year,but this man long ago divorced himself from any claim of integrety and decency a long time ago. Perhaps no other individual in Western society is more directly responsible for allowing the rise of Islamofacism then this man. Its no wonder he won't debate Alan Dershowitz;how can he? What could he possibly point to as a success in his years as president? J'Mac

2:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello batya dear!How are you? seems like ages since I've said hello. Happy hannuka to you. Johnnymac.

2:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello JM

Always great to run into you friend .

I am back to posting on FPM but sparingly...It is such a delight not to have to skip over the piles of poo left by the bug...

Merry Christmass to you and your family.

4:48 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home