All that furor over Carter at Cardozo, and who shows up? Jews for Jimmy!

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 65 Comments
Carter Former President Jimmy Carter was honored at Cardozo Law School (Image:

Cardozo Law School’s decision to honor former President Jimmy Carter generated a lot of bluster and outrage from the reactionary wing of the Jewish community. But after all that, the event with Carter came and went yesterday with a whimper.

There was no protest. Nobody blocked the door, as one alumnus had threatened to do to prevent Carter from entering. The former president strolled in through a side door without many people noticing. The activists who did come out were a small group of supporters of Carter, most of them affiliated with the National Lawyers Guild. They sent a radically different message than the one Alan Dershowitz and others disseminated in the days leading up to the event.

“We wanted to make it clear that not all Cardozo alumni are comfortable with bullying,” said Maria Chickedantz, a graduate of the law school and a member of Jewish Voice for Peace who was there to support Carter. “The entire Alan Dershowitz style of bullying–that’s what we’re against.”

Chickedantz was joined by about five other supporters of Carter. One held up a sign that read: “Jews for Jimmy.” Cardozo is a secular school but is affiliated with Yeshiva University, making the decision to honor Carter all the more noteworthy.

Law students lined up outside to enter the event, but nobody harangued them for wanting to see a former president. The students were excited about witnessing Carter at their school, who came to accept an award from the Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution for his peace work. Other figures the journal has honored include Dennis Ross, the former U.S. government official best known as a strong advocate for Israel inside presidential administrations, and Desmond Tutu. The journal’s editors say they had no intention to provoke a controversy. But the decision to honor Carter was a predictable spark for ginned-up furor.

Alumni from the school who are strong supporters of Israel put together a website decrying the decision to honor Carter. They urged other alumni to “condition any continued support of Cardozo, be it financial or otherwise, on the cancellation of this event” because of Carter’s “history of anti-Israel bigotry” and “for helping to mainstream the antisemitic notion that Israel is an apartheid state.” The group of alumni against Carter expressed dissapointment that the school’s leadership was “not prepared to take a moral stand and rescind the invite to honor Jimmy Carter made by the Cardozo Journal for Conflict Resolution.” Jewish organizations like the Anti-Defamation League and the Simon Wiesenthal Center also weighed in to criticize the fact that Carter was being honored for being a broker of conflict resolution.

Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor who has long sparred with the former president over Israel, also joined in on the action and challenged Carter to a debate at the school. With no proof, Dershowitz claimed that “it was Carter who advised Yassir Arafat not to accept the peace deal offered in 2000-01. That failure led to the deaths of more than 4000 Israelis and Arabs.”

Carter has long been a lightning rod in the debate over Israel in this country. He has used his prominent position as former president to voice support for the human rights of Palestinians. In 2006, Carter said that Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians constitutes “one of the greatest human rights crimes on earth.” His book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid generated immense criticism, which did not stop Carter from continuing to steadfastly speak out for Palestinian human rights.

The denunciations of Carter weren’t enough to persuade Cardozo and Yeshiva University administrators to pressure students to call off the event. Much like the Brooklyn College president’s stand in response to the furor over an event on the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, the administrators have defended students’ right to honor Carter. But they also affirmed their support for Israel, with Dean Matthew Diller telling the New York Times that “we are part of a Jewish institution and we stand for Jewish values and commitments, and part of that is support for Israel.”

Despite the fact that nobody showed up to protest Carter, Cardozo alumnus Chickedantz worried that the bluster would have a “chilling effect” on future plans for events that feature supporters of Palestinian rights. Palestine is “the topic nobody wants to touch,” she said. And while people e-mailed her to show support for her efforts in favor of Carter, she said many did not want to show their faces in public on this issue.

Indeed, the furor directed at any critic of Israel has already persuaded some students at Cardozo to keep silent, at least when it comes to talking to a journalist. I spoke to a handful of students outside, but nobody wanted their name to be published. One student said that while “none of us RSVPed for the controversy,” the back-and-forth over Carter had provoked some conversation in the school over the past couple of days. Another student remarked that he didn’t want to make a comment about the Carter controversy that could jeopardize his future job prospects.

About Alex Kane

Alex Kane is a freelance journalist and graduate student at New York University's Near East Studies and Journalism programs. Follow him on Twitter @alexbkane.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

65 Responses

  1. HarryLaw
    April 11, 2013, 10:44 am

    “Another student remarked that he didn’t want to make a comment about the Carter controversy that could jeopardize his future job prospects.” What a frightening future these students face if they are fearful of a] not getting a job or b] losing the one they have, simply for criticizing a foreign state, especially one that is recognized by most of the International community as being a rogue state.

    • Citizen
      April 11, 2013, 3:26 pm

      @ HarryLaw
      Yep. That’s the way it has been in America for many decades now. Amazing how a fanatical part of the 2% jewish in 98% Gentile America can keep America muzzled simply because they want to get, maintain, keep a reasonably profitable career in any profession. It goes to the core of what’s wrong with de facto America–it’s most essentially a political plutocracy.

      • thetumta
        April 11, 2013, 8:54 pm

        In the Jim Crow South of the 50’s, there are estimates that less than 10% of the population were ever active Klan members, but the wealthy among them controlled the Democratic party, the press and your livelihood. I grew up in a white, non-racist family, but the rule always was that what we talked about at home and who we were friends with was never voiced outside the home.

        I am a well paid, Yuppie professional now, but the song remains the same. The only difference now is that it’s the JKK, not the KKK. Frankly, I think they are much more formidable.


        P.S. President Carter must know this?

      • Citizen
        April 13, 2013, 7:52 pm

        @ thetumta
        Surely Carter must know it.

  2. rensanceman
    April 11, 2013, 12:38 pm

    A pivotal and dramatic moment during the McCarthy Communist hearings in the ’50’s was attorney Joseph Welsh defending a participant being mercilessly grilled asking McCarthy: “have you no sense of decency, sir?” Spectators in the court room burst into applause having witnessed a man confront the tyrannical bully, and which effectively opened the backed up floodgates of stifled anger at the sordid and evil manipulation of Congressional power. Having been exposed, McCarthy rapidly lost power and influence.
    Chuck Hagel had the chance to expose Zionist bullying but morphed before our eyes into an apologetic, craven coward. The stage is set for a “Joseph Welsh”‘ moment to finally spotlight the hijacking of our Government by a foreign power whose agenda calls for the U.S. to fight its wars , to its colonial expansion into lands not its own, and to protect it from the opprobrium of the world community of which it is, nevertheless, a pariah.

    • Abierno
      April 11, 2013, 7:00 pm

      And yet, it was Hagel’s failure to respond to the provocations, that underlined
      the “disproportionate” responses of his detractors who increased the irrationality of their lies and distortions to the point that it was clear without any comment,
      that the likes of Kristol and company have not only not a shred of decency but
      also no real commitment to the US, save the very comfortable lifestyle they enjoy.
      They and their fellow travelers indirectly espouse what Danaa stated very clearly
      on a previous post: “Democracy is for sissies, ” alluding to “American softies” –
      in this case by indirection alluding to such as Hagel, a much decorated American
      war veteran. And how many American softies have died or been grevously injured
      on behalf of existential Israeli fears? How many will again be called upon to give
      hearts, minds and lives in service of a country not their own?

    • richdonnagreat
      April 12, 2013, 10:22 pm

      The Joseph Welch moment was phony. Welch had outed his associate’s Communist ties to the NY TIMES weeks earlier. Look it up in the Times.

      • richdonnagreat
        April 12, 2013, 10:50 pm

        In thie April 16, 1954 edition of THE NY TIMES Welch States that he is replacing Fred Fischer of his firm with John Kimball because Fischer admitted he was a member of the National Lawyers Guild( an organization declared by the Justice Dept to be a Communist front organization). This was weeks before the the Joseph Welch moment. McCarthy cannot be accused of out Fischer when Welch already had done so in the NY TIMES weeks earlier.

      • piotr
        April 13, 2013, 9:13 am

        The articles in Wiki on Joseph N. Welch, his young associate Fred Fischer and National Lawyers Guild do not support what you wrote.

      • richdonnagreat
        April 13, 2013, 1:19 pm

        Get a copy of the NY TIMES for that date by microfiche or otherwise. That is the original source!

      • richdonnagreat
        April 13, 2013, 2:57 pm

        I do not believe WIKI is an acceptable research source in any legitimate academic institution.

      • tree
        April 13, 2013, 3:24 pm

        Wiki’s hit and miss. However, it makes it clear that, while Welch removed Fisher from the Army-McCarthy hearing case because of his earlier membership in the NLG, he did not fire him from his firm. It seems likely that he recused Fisher from the hearings to avoid just what McCarthy did anyway, which was smear Fisher as a Communist and seek to get him fired. That was McCarthy’s well documented modus operandi and it is on a whole other, more sinister, level than simply removing Fisher from that particular case.

      • Citizen
        April 13, 2013, 7:58 pm

        @ richdonnagreat
        No, but anyone can go to WIKI on a subject, and follow the footnoted sources, and read them, and go from there… I do agree that with anything negative touching on Israel, WIKI is constantly subjected to hasbara bots changing content.

      • richdonnagreat
        April 14, 2013, 10:36 pm

        Her obviously removed him…but he also outed him as an admitted member of the Communist National Lawyers Guild..That is what Welch tells the Times weeks before the hearings..
        Therefore as I said before McCarthy could not out Fischer as a Communist because Welch had already done so in the Times( please don’t tell me that the National Lawyers Guild was a bastion of American patriotism.)

  3. just
    April 11, 2013, 1:00 pm

    Well done Cardoza and President Carter!

  4. Don
    April 11, 2013, 2:06 pm

    Hophmi…you may want to read the last 2 paragraphs of this post.

    “…many did not want to show their faces in public on this issue.”

    “I spoke to a handful of students outside, but nobody wanted their name to be published. ”

    “Another student remarked that he didn’t want to make a comment about the Carter controversy that could jeopardize his future job prospects.”

  5. James Canning
    April 11, 2013, 2:10 pm

    Jimmy Carter richly deserves many awards for his courage in opposing foolish American policy toward Israel.

  6. James Canning
    April 11, 2013, 2:13 pm

    Let’s remember 2008 Jimmy Carter was not allowed to address the Democratic National Convention, in person.

    • Citizen
      April 11, 2013, 3:38 pm

      @ James Canning
      Yes. The DNC barred Carter from speaking about Israel, and denied the Democratic support of international law on the status of Jerusalem–in prime time American TV!

  7. Cliff
    April 11, 2013, 2:23 pm

    Another student remarked that he didn’t want to make a comment about the Carter controversy that could jeopardize his future job prospects.

    I’ve heard the same about college students as well.

    The Israel Lobby and it’s campus wing make sure to tar and feather any and all opposition to Jewish nationalism/colonialism as antisemitic. That is enough to scare people away. Zionists know they’re themselves liars, and the charge is powerful enough to silence dissent.

    It’s only a few notable people who are able to withstand the mob.

    • Annie Robbins
      April 11, 2013, 2:34 pm

      The Israel Lobby and it’s campus wing make sure to tar and feather any and all opposition

      it’s called “name and shame”

      link to

      Reut’s call to “delegitimize the delegitimizers” and “name and shame” human rights activists has now become Israeli government policy.

      • seafoid
        April 11, 2013, 5:03 pm

        They have been doing it since forever, Annie. But it isn’t working as much these days. Too much logic is infiltrating the bot bubble and as you know they are to logic as vampires are to garlic.

      • braciole
        April 11, 2013, 8:02 pm

        As I keep saying it’s the Zionists who are doing the most to delegitimize Israel so delegitimizing the delegitimizers is compounding the effort and I hope they keep it up.

  8. Annie Robbins
    April 11, 2013, 2:29 pm

    Maria Chickedantz? i love this name! going back to read the rest of the story, but i just had to remark what a fabulous name this is, first time i have ever heard it.

  9. ritzl
    April 11, 2013, 2:45 pm

    I’m confused over the last graf in the piece. Is it to say that “pro”-Carter commenters were afraid to voice support for Carter, or that “anti”-Carter commenters were afraid to voice their opinion.

    I think it’s the former, but just asking.

    What does “None of us RSVP-ed for the controversy” mean?

    • Annie Robbins
      April 11, 2013, 7:53 pm

      it means none of them wanted an email trail or their names attached to the controversy.

  10. DICKERSON3870
    April 11, 2013, 2:51 pm

    RE: With no proof, Dershowitz claimed that “it was Carter who advised Yassir Arafat not to accept the peace deal offered in 2000-01. That failure led to the deaths of more than 4000 Israelis and Arabs. ~ Alex Kane’s article

    MY COMMENT: Who are you gonna believe, the American Alan Dershowitz or the Israeli Uri Avnery? Uri Avnery says that it was the actions of the Israeli government and its army during the second (“al-Aqsa”) intifada (following the breakdown of the 2000 Camp David conference and Ariel Sharon’s deliberately provocative “visit” to the Temple Mount) that “led to the deaths of more than 4000 Israelis and Arabs”.
    Personally, on matters pertaining to Israel, I have a lot more confidence in the opinions of the Israeli Uri Avnery than I do in the opinions of the American Alan Dershowitz.
    Go figure! ! !

    SEE: “The Dogs of War: The Next Intifada”, By Uri Avnery, Counterpunch, 9/03/11

    [EXCERPT] . . . The second (“al-Aqsa”) intifada started after the breakdown of the 2000 Camp David conference and Ariel Sharon’s deliberately provocative “visit” to the Temple Mount. The Palestinians held non-violent mass demonstrations. The army responded with selective killings. A sharpshooter accompanied by an officer would take position in the path of the protest, and the officer would point out selected targets – protesters who looked like “ringleaders”. They were killed.
    This was highly effective. Soon the non-violent demonstrations ceased and were replaced by very violent (“terrorist”) actions. With those the army was back on familiar ground. . .


    • DICKERSON3870
      April 11, 2013, 2:59 pm

      P.S. ALSO SEE: “Netanyahu: Stupid Like a Fox?”, By Uri Avnery,, 06/13/11

      [EXCERPT] Last week, there was a repeat performance. The Palestinians all around Israel have declared June 5 “Naksa” Day, to commemorate the “Setback” of 1967, when Israel spectacularly defeated the armies of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, reinforced by elements from the Iraqi and Saudi armies.
      This time, the Israeli army was prepared. The fence was reinforced and an anti-tank ditch dug in front of it. When the demonstrators tried to reach the fence—again near Majdal Shams—they were shot by sharpshooters. Some 22 were killed, and many dozens were wounded. The Palestinians report that people trying to rescue the wounded and retrieve the dead were also shot and killed.
      No doubt this was a deliberate tactic decided upon in advance by the army command after the Naqba Day fiasco and approved by Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak. As was said quite openly, the Palestinians had to be taught a lesson they would not forget, so as to drive any idea of an unarmed mass action out of their minds.
      It is frighteningly reminiscent of events 10 years ago. After the first Intifada, in which stone-throwing youngsters and children won a moral victory that led to the Oslo agreement, our army conducted exercises in anticipation of a second Intifada. This broke out after the political disaster of Camp David, and the army was ready.
      The new [second] Intifada started with mass demonstrations of unarmed Palestinians. They were met by specially trained sharpshooters. Next to each sharpshooter stood an officer who pointed out the individuals who were to be shot because they looked like ringleaders: “The guy in the red shirt… Now the boy with the blue trousers…”
      The unarmed uprising broke down and was replaced by suicide bombers, roadside bombs, and other “terrorist” acts.
      With those our army was on familiar ground.
      I suspect very much that we are witnessing much the same thing once more. Again, specially trained sharpshooters are at work, directed by officers. . .

      SOURCE – link to

  11. Kathleen
    April 11, 2013, 2:57 pm

    Alex thanks for the report. So great that the school did not cave in. Carter ultimately one of Israel’s best friends…willing to speak the truth.

  12. Justpassingby
    April 11, 2013, 3:16 pm

    Are people here unaware that Carter apologized for his book in 2009?
    No need to overrate this man on the I/P question.

    • ToivoS
      April 11, 2013, 7:41 pm

      If I recall that was one big non-apology apology. Sort of like forgive me for telling the truth if the truth is causing you so much pain.

    • Kathleen
      April 12, 2013, 2:33 pm

      He never apologized for telling the truth. And he has been out on the front lines of this issue for decades and has been ruthlessly attacked and he just keeps telling the truth. Remarkable man. Truly one of Israel’s best friends

      • James Canning
        April 12, 2013, 7:23 pm

        Yes, Kathleen. And Israel needs more good friends like Jimmy Carter.

    • Citizen
      April 13, 2013, 8:06 pm

      @ Justpassingby
      Carter apologized for simply stating the facts of Israeli abuse of the Palestinians and saying that abuse was connected to Palestinian terror bombings/rocket attacks. He also apologized for anyone thinking his use of the term “apartheid” applied inside the green line. Considering the uproar and smears on a former US President who brokered a peace treaty that kept Israel secure for many years, and with all the advantages, and a former POTUS who’s much more well known by Dick and Jane for work like Habitat For Humanity, I hope the lawsuit stays in the news to show Americans just who rules them. Hurray for hasbara lawfare!

    • James Canning
      April 14, 2013, 7:28 pm

      Your suggestion or inference Carter changed his position is not correct.

  13. Citizen
    April 11, 2013, 3:50 pm

    Even pure jewish zionists cannot deny Carter’s contributions to humanity; that they could smear Carter is evidence of just how much “fact” can be bought in America. Who doesn’t know about Carter’s heavy work in Habitat For Humanity? link to

    link to

  14. Daniel Rich
    April 11, 2013, 5:07 pm

    This is how’ our best friend in the ME’ treats former [US] presidents: Israel snubs Carter, declines security help.

  15. thankgodimatheist
    April 11, 2013, 6:36 pm

    OTH…”Great Neck Synagogue Cancels Speech by Pamela Geller”

    The Great Neck Synagogue has cancelled a planned talk Sunday by activist Pamela Geller, Geller announced Wednesday.

    “Due to relentless intimidation, bullying and threats, the Great Neck Synagogue is cancelling my talk,” said Geller to Patch. “It is a very sad day for freedom-loving peoples when fascist tactics trump free speech.”

    A coordinated campaign by prominent officials to cancel Geller’s appearence has been underway since last month.
    link to

    • Cliff
      April 11, 2013, 9:21 pm

      As a ‘freedom-loving’ person, I applaud her cancellation!

      And good on the Jewish community for refusing to give platform to an bat-shit crazy Islamophobe.

  16. LanceThruster
    April 11, 2013, 7:52 pm

    Saw Pres. Carter on the Daily Show talk about how the number of cases from a parasitic worm acquired from dirty water has dropped to next to nothing from the hundreds of thousands (millions?) due to his foundation’s work. I chafe every time he’s badmouthed for whatever reason because he makes me proud of what my species can accomplish when their hearts are in the right place.

    • Bumblebye
      April 11, 2013, 8:51 pm

      Carter’s simply the best.
      Guinea worm:
      link to

      The critters can reach up to 4ft long, and the cure now is essentially the same as it was recorded in 1500BC.

      • LanceThruster
        April 12, 2013, 6:39 pm

        Thanks Bumblebye – What a great and informative link. I remember being thoroughly tickled by the story and Pres. Carter’s genuine joy (and Stewart’s) over the results, but sort of tuned out on the gory details as they were just horrific.

        It was so cool the bottled parasite Carter gifted Stewart with.


      • RoHa
        April 12, 2013, 11:56 pm

        “The critters can reach up to 4ft long…”

        #All things bright and beautiful,
        All creatures great and small…#

      • LanceThruster
        April 15, 2013, 4:05 pm


        Too funny!

    • RoHa
      April 13, 2013, 12:00 am

      I’m sure rude people would want to draw an analogy between Carter’s useful work in supressing that parasite, and his useful writings about Israel.

      I, of course, would never make any such comments.

  17. Daniel Rich
    April 11, 2013, 8:16 pm

    “Asserting that no individual has done more than former President Jimmy Carter to defame Israel and to challenge its right to exist, a group of readers filed a class action suit against Carter and the Simon & Schuster publishing company, back in February, 2011, alleging that Carter’s book, “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,” contains numerous false and knowingly misleading statements intended to promote the author’s agenda of anti-Israel propaganda and to deceive the reading public instead of presenting accurate information as advertised.” – The Jewish

  18. Nevada Ned
    April 12, 2013, 1:27 am

    “Although Carter came under ferocious attack by the Israel lobby – he was alleged to be a plagiarist, in the pay of Arab sheikhs, an anti-Semite, an apologist for terrorism, a Nazi sympathizer[1], and a borderline Holocaust denier[2] – his book still landed on the New York Times best-seller list and stayed there for months, reportedly selling several hundred thousand copies in hardback.”
    Norman Finkelstein, Knowing Too Much: the American Jewish Romance with Israel is Coming to an End, p. 25.

    [1] Ezra HaLevi, “Exclusive: Jimmy Carter interceded on behalf of Nazi SS guard,” 18 January 2007; link to
    [2] Deborah Lipstadt, “Jimmy Carter’s Jewish Problem,” Washington Post (20 January 2007)

  19. Citizen
    April 12, 2013, 5:41 pm

    There’s some serious accusations going on against Carter: link to
    He’s accused of “old fashion anti-semitism of the first order.”

    • MHughes976
      April 13, 2013, 2:00 pm

      Thanks for reference. Well, Carter does seem to be interpreting Mark 7 and related texts both rather uncritically and in a fashion as unfriendly as possible towards ‘Second Temple’ Judaism. The Corban tradition is genuine enough but there’s no other evidence that it was used as form of evading responsibilities. Jesus’ testing of the Syrophoenician woman by reference to her race as ‘dogs’ seems to be glossed as behaviour that would seem to her to be typically Jewish, rather than shockingly different from what she might have expected from a benevolent healer. However, there’s no rule even of sensitivity or politeness that says that all negative attitudes towards the religions of others is excluded. And there’s a million miles, wouldn’t you think, between being occasionally critical towards Anglicanism and being unable to assess British actions fairly? I might wince, I suppose, if my religion was accused of favouring moral evasiveness or racism but an insistence that you’ve just got to be nice all the time about everyone’s religion is misleading in itself.

    • James Canning
      April 13, 2013, 2:57 pm

      Thanks, Citizen. Carter said: “If a Jew married a gentile, that person was considered to be dead. . . ” This is “anti-Semitic”? Or simply the truth?

      • Citizen
        April 13, 2013, 8:27 pm

        @ James Canning
        There are many groups that shun their own if they marry outside the group, e.g., Amish, Roma. Some Jews do the same. This type of shunning “the other” culture use to be mainstream in the USA when it came to white-black marriages, coupling, etc. Among many minorities, both religious and/or ethnic, it’s still apparently considered OK, a form of PC “diversity.”

      • James Canning
        April 14, 2013, 1:52 pm

        Yes, Citizen: many groups try to prevent marriage outside the group. And groups tend to downplay or conceal the degree of mating outside the group that takes place.
        Roman Catholic nuns even tried to discourage sports activities between Catholics and non-Catholics, years ago.

  20. James Canning
    April 13, 2013, 2:53 pm

    Has the “strong advocacy by Dennis Ross”, in favor of Israel, made resolution of the Israel/Palestine problem more difficult?

  21. Citizen
    April 13, 2013, 7:11 pm

    This is part of Israel’s “lawfare” OP. The complaint alleges that the defendants’ misrepresentations, all highly critical of Israel, violate New York consumer protection laws, specifically New York General Business Law section 349, which makes it unlawful to engage in deceptive acts in the course of conducting business. While acknowledging Carter’s and the Publishing Company’s (First Amendment) right to publish his personal views (And market it) , the plaintiffs assert that the defendants violated the law and, thus, harmed those who purchased the book.

    The suit is the first time a former President and a publishing house have been sued for violating consumer protection laws by knowingly publishing inaccurate information while promoting a book as factual.

    This is a joke–I have not checked out Carter’s public 2012 apology yet, but have no clue why he would do so.

    Imagine if a class action suit was brought under the same NY consumer product law against all the authors and publishers of many, many highly misinforming books about the I-P history, e.g., From Time Immemorial. And everything Dershie ever wrote.

  22. Citizen
    April 13, 2013, 7:24 pm

    Still have not been able to dig up anything much on Carter’s apology or apologies, as he seems to have made several regarding his book. There’s this:

    Carter apologizes at Brandeis, but stands ground on ‘apartheid’.(NATION)(Jimmy Carter)

    National Catholic Reporter
    February 9, 2007 | Colbert, Chuck | Copyright

    President Jimmy Carter brought his case for peace between Israelis and Palestinians to Brandeis University. In addressing a crowd of 1,900 at the Jewish-sponsored university, Carter spoke for 15 minutes, and answered students’ questions for 45 minutes. He was received warmly, often being interrupted with applause, even as students tossed some questions critical of his point of view.

    In a defining moment, the former president apologized for a passage in his controversial new book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. The sentence reads: “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 Road …

    Unfortunately one has to subscribe to read the rest–what on earth did he say in the book that would make a class action law suit against his book other than a frivolous lawsuit subject to reverse damage claims?

  23. Citizen
    April 13, 2013, 7:46 pm

    OK, here’s at least a substantial hint of the scoop–see if you can make sense of it all: link to

    In light of the information on wikipedia (and you can go to the sources), the lawsuit against him and his publishers is just frivolous, and a direct attempt to muzzle free speech. Skimming all the information there, I wonder at Carter’s use of Apartheid as applicable only to life for Palestinians beyond the green line. His attempt to get Americans information about the I-P Conflict and US role enabling it is actually very meek in that he expressly says Israel is a real democracy–not a hint of the 50 or so Israeli laws applied within the green line that clearly discriminate against non-Jewish citizens of Israel. I also don’t know why he never debated Dershowitz. Any takers?

    • James Canning
      April 14, 2013, 1:55 pm

      Citizen – – Jimmy Carter has to weigh carefully just how much of an uproar he should cause, in order to be most effective in delivering his message.
      What do you think John Kerry could do, regarding ending the Israeli occupation of the West Bank?

Leave a Reply