TO: Dr. John Hardman, M.D. Executive Director The Carter Center One Copenhill 453 Freedom Parkway Atlanta, GA 30307
Dear Dr. Hardman,
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.
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.
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.
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.
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."
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.
I am sure you will now understand why I cannot participate in your group advising President Carter.
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.
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.
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. Sincerely yours,
Melvin Konner, M.D., Ph.D. Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor Department of Anthropology and Program in Neuroscience and Behavioral Biology, Emory University Departments of Psychiatry and Neurology (by courtesy), Emory School of Medicine
anonymously sourced from either the web or a forwarded email.
Time to take a hard look at Israeli treatment of Palestinian
I feel that Mr. Hardman was the one who was guilty of mischaracterization when he said that President Carter's statement that Palestinians should make it clear that they will cease the suicide bombings when Israel agrees to follow international rules. I cannot see how such a statement condones the murder of Jews. I can't see how a reasonable person can agree with such a bizarre interpretation either.
Obviously Mr. Hardman is upset about something else besides the alleged inaccuracies in Carter's book. Why not just come out and say that he simply doesn't like the position that President Carter has taken? That is, that he calls into question Israel's policies and treatment of their neighbors. President Carter is in the company of a lot of good Jews who question whether it is a good idea to make the Palestinians' lives so miserable that they are willing to strap on explosives and blow themselves up. For my part, I admire President Carter more than ever. He is the first person from the US of such stature to make these points.
by
vidiot (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 247 comments)
on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 at 3:35:08 PM
I agree with the above opinion of piperson. And also would like to add that this is an example of what was expected by many, including, I'm sure, President Carter. Which makes his courage all the more admirable.
Mr.Konner is not content to simply disagree with Pres. Carter. He finds it necessary to, it would seem, destroy the Carter center and anyone associated with it that does not condemn Pres Carter for daring to speak his opinion. He apparently intends to use his position on the faculty to make sure that Carter and his center should be condemned by every living being. Possibly he will require this for anyone wanting to remain at the school or to be his friend.
Unfortunatly this is what happens when anyone dares to disagree with the right wing Israeli/Jewish,,, lobby?. A minority I believe in both Israel and the US, but a too quiet majority is also intimidated by these very same attack tactics.
I find it amazing that any sane person would think that what the Israeli's are doing to the Palestinians will bring peace. I also fear that by America backing Israel for decades no matter what they do, has caused us permanent damage throughout the world. We are the ONLY country to consistantly back Israel, no matter their trangressions. Doesn't that tell anyone anything?
My God America, get a clue. Read President Carter's book and learn something.
by
ShelleyD (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 at 7:05:24 PM
Thanks for the positive remarks and support for President Carter. If you have a minute, maybe you could write him a short note of support and send it to him via The Carter Center.(I tried to email my heartfelt support, but their screening process sent it back. Don't know why, so I sent it snail-mail.) President Carter is a man who's lifelong service has been for honesty and peace. I find nothing that he has said or written that would indicate that his mission has changed.
Peace,
by
Susan K. Baritell (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments)
on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 at 9:18:06 PM
President Carter has said in many interviews that he knew this book would be controversial. In my interpretation,I beleive he is calling for moderation ...on BOTH sides and in his previous book he discusses his deep dissapointment in being unable to negotiate a lasting peace agreement in the middle east.
A firm boundary needs to be set,giving the Israelis a home, while giving the Palestinians a fair living area. This agreement needs to have harsh punitive measures for any violations.
by
Brenda Walters (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 59 comments)
on Wednesday, December 27, 2006 at 1:05:52 AM
Carter hasn't gone nearly far enough exposing the brutality and criminality of the Zionist regime.
Israel was formed out of ethnic cleansing and terrorism. The Israeli terror gangs would murder people in a village, and then warn the rest that they would meet the same fate if they did not flee. That is how Israel went from 3% Jewish ownership to 100%. This is documented by Israel's own historians and admitted to by the war criminal leaders who peperpetrated it.
The calculated and ruthless expansion of the Israeli state goes on, unabated. They seize on pretext to pretext to lash out at their neighbors and attempt to steal more land and water resources. This is a long term plan, that has not changed dramatically since the beginning.
Israel can only continue its rampaging and dispossession of the rightful owners of the land because the US congress sees fit to send them $5 billion of US taxpayer money in the form of weapons and "loan guarantees" that never need to be repaid, EVERY YEAR.
Why would the US congress do this if it weren't greatly influenced by the Zionist lobby and Zionist influenced media (which makes and breaks politicians)?
Use your head man. It's all true. The evidence is smacking you in your face, but your Zionist mind-fuck ideology won't let you admit it.
"By way of deception, thou shall do war" is the Mossad motto. It is also the title of ex-Mossad officer Victor Ostrovsky's book, which all of you should read.
by
johndoraemi (17 articles, 12 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 166 comments)
on Wednesday, December 27, 2006 at 1:41:23 AM
Here is Jimmy Carter's Letter which defines his book much better than any critic in the world:
Phil
Palestine Peace Not Apartheid - 15 December 2006
A letter to Jewish citizens of America.
During my recent book tour I signed more than 100,000 books and was interviewed on 100 news media outlets. The high point for me was a meeting with leaders of the Board of Rabbis of Greater Phoenix, who announced before my arrival that they would demonstrate against my book. When they invited me to meet with them, I accepted immediately.
The six rabbis (three men and three women) and I were the only ones present except for a camera crew under the direction of Jonathan Demme, who was making a documentary about me and the work of The Carter Center. Demme reported that there was an equally large group of Jewish citizens demonstrating in support of the book and its call for a path to peace.
We first discussed the peace treaty I negotiated between Israel and Egypt in 1979, and the Holocaust Commission I announced on Israel's 30th birthday. Five of them had read my book completely and one partially, and I answered their questions about the text and title of PALESTINE PEACE NOT APARTHEID. I emphasized, as I had throughout the tour, that the book was about conditions and events in the Palestinian territories and not in Israel, where a democracy exists with all the freedoms we enjoy in our country and Israeli Jews and Arabs are legally guaranteed the same rights as citizens.
We discussed the word "apartheid," which I defined as the forced segregation of two peoples living in the same land, with one of them dominating and persecuting the other. I made clear in the book's text and in my response to the rabbis that the system of apartheid in Palestine is not based on racism but the desire of a minority ofIsraelis for Palestinian land and the resulting suppression of protests that involve violence. Bishop Tutu, Nelson Mandela, and prominent Israelis, including former attorney general Ben Yair, who served under both Labor and Likud prime ministers, have used and explained the appellation in harsher terms than I, pointing out that this cruel oppression is contrary to the tenets of the Jewish faith and the basic principles of the nation of Israel.
Having traveled throughout the Holy Land during the past 33 years, especially within the occupied areas, I was qualified to describe the situation from my own personal observations. In addition, The Carter Center has monitored the Palestinian elections of 1996, 2005, and 2006, which required a thorough and intimate involvement with
Palestinian citizens, candidates, public officials, and also the top political leaders of Israel who controlled checkpoints throughout the West Bank and Gaza and all facets of the elections in East Jerusalem.
I made it clear that I have never claimed that American Jews control the news media, but reiterated that the overwhelming bias for Israel comes from among Christians like me who have been taught since childhood to honor and protect God's chosen people from among whom came our own savior, Jesus Christ. An additional factor, especially in
the political arena, is the powerful influence of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which is exercising its legitimate goal of explaining the current policies of Israel's government and arousing maximum support in our country.
There are no significant countervailing voices. I am familiar with the extreme acts of violence that have been perpetrated against innocent civilians, and understand the fear among many Israelis that threats against their safety and even their existence as a nation still exist. I reiterated my strong condemnation of any such acts of terrorism. When asked my proposals for peace in the Middle East, I summarized by calling for Hamas members and all other Palestinians to renounce violence and adopt the same commitment made by the Arab nations in 2002: the full recognition of Israel's right to exist in peace within
its legally recognized 1967 borders (to be modified by mutual agreement by land swaps). This would comply with U.N. Resolutions, the official policy of the United States, commitments made at Camp David in 1978 and in Oslo in 1993, and the premises of the International Quartet's "Roadmap for Peace."
An immediate step would be the resumption of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, now absent for six years. President Mahmoud Abbas is the official
spokesman for the Palestinians, as head of the Palestinian National Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization, and has repeatedly called for peace talks. I asked the rabbis to join in an effort to induce the Israeli government to comply with this proposal.
In addition, I pointed out that the Palestinian people were being deprived of the necessities of life by economic restrictions imposed on them by Israel and the United States because 42% had voted for Hamas candidates in the most recent election. Teachers, nurses, policemen, firemen, and other employees are not being paid, and the
U.N. has reported that food supplies in Gaza are equivalent to those among the poorest families in sub-Sahara Africa with half the families surviving on one meal a day. My other request was that American Jewish citizens help to alleviate their plight.
The chairman of the group, Rabbi Andrew Straus, then suggested that I make clear to all American Jews that my use of "apartheid" does not apply to circumstances within Israel, that I acknowledge the deep concern of Israelis about the threat of terrorism and other acts of violence from some Palestinians, and that the majority of Israelis sincerely want a peaceful existence with their neighbors. The purpose of this letter is to reiterate these points. We then held hands in a circle while one of the rabbis prayed, I autographed copies of my book as requested, and Chaplain (Colonel) Rabbi Bonnie Koppell gave me a prayer book. I have spent a great deal of my adult life trying to bring peace to Israel, and my own prayer is that all of us who want to see Israelis enjoy permanent peace with their neighbors join in this common effort.
Sincerely,
Jimmy Carter
If anyone really wants to get to the bottom of the truth there are various cross references one can make.
1. What does President Clinton say? Did he Carter lie or tell the truth about what Dr. Hardman mentioned?
2. What did a number of the Rabbis say about the Phoenix meeting? Did Presdident Carter lie about them? They did pray no matter what Dr. Hartman says. They either prayed or they did not. About the other substance of the meeting? I know only what I read like everyone else who was not present was not at the Phoenix meeting.
The suicide bombings must be stopped immediately. There must be compromise on both sides. To think there will not be retaliation for any atrocious act is folly.
Phil
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 969 comments)
on Wednesday, December 27, 2006 at 12:42:07 PM
"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."
Before we can even begin to discuss the Israel-Palestine conflict, we have to stop throwing around the word "anti-semitic." True, the author doesn't precisely call Carter anti-semitic--a fine point I've come to appreciate during arguments with pro-Israel friends--but the implication is obvious.
The US Congress is controlled by all kinds of lobbyists, from big oil to big pharma to, yes, Israel. Sibel Edmonds has testified to the connections between the Republican leadership and Turkey, as an example of another foreign government's lobbying clout. This is NOT evidence of anti-semitism. As for the media's treatment of the conflict, I think it is obvious to anyone with an open mind that only one point of view is acceptable to the MSM, possibly as a result of the lack of the bipartisan pro-Israel consensus in Congress. In other words, there is no political opposition to a rigidly pro-Israel policy for the MSM to report. Carter's willingness to point out the obvious is NOT evidence of anti-semitism.
The epithet "anti-semitic," used indiscriminately to describe anyone who criticizes Israeli policy--including people like Jimmy Carter and Noam Chomsky, who are obviously NOT anti-semitic--shuts down all possibility of a rational discussion between people who disagree.
by
Patricia Goldsmith (26 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 17 comments)
on Wednesday, December 27, 2006 at 2:32:52 PM
"Further fallout from Carter's new book"
Again, Jimmy Carter believes fully in Israel's Sovereignty as a nation and her right to exist within safe borders. He believes that Israel has over stepped her bounds in response to Hamas who has avowed nothing less than the absolute destruction of Israel as a state. Hamas' position has nothing to do with people, has nothing to do with economics; Hamas' position has everything to do with religion. They believe the existence of Israel on what was part of the Muslim Empire is nothing short of blasphemy and will never rest until the borders of the Sovereign Nation of Israel is firmly under Islamic control again as it was before WW I. They have clearly stated their position about the destruction of Israel will not change even if it takes a thousand years.
Carter's book has nothing to do about Hamas' position or Israel right to exist. He has made it plain time and again he believes Israel has a right to exist as Israel within her pre-1967 borders. This book is about what is happening on the West Bank and Gaza and the right of a Palestinian State. Carter's book has nothing to do with the Arabs living in Israel with the full rights of Israeli citizens. As far as I have been able to piece togather, the Rabbis were upset about his use of the word "Apartheid" more than anything else. I agree that his use of "Apartheid" was not wise. Someone needs to do an interview with about five or six of those Rabbis to give us a consensus of their opinions about President Carter as well as his book, the interview and his letter. Until that happens, we all are just guessing.
Read his letter. He is very plain about his position. Here is one paragraph out the middle of his Letter to American Jews:
"We first discussed the peace treaty I negotiated between Israel and Egypt in 1979, and the Holocaust Commission I announced on Israel's 30th birthday. Five of them had read my book completely and one partially, and I answered their questions about the text and title of PALESTINE PEACE NOT APARTHEID. I emphasized, as I had throughout the tour, that the book was about conditions and events in the Palestinian territories and not in Israel, where a democracy exists with all the freedoms we enjoy in our country and Israeli Jews and Arabs are legally guaranteed the same rights as citizens."
pr
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 969 comments)
on Thursday, December 28, 2006 at 2:33:58 PM
8 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
