1/11/2007

The Honorable Jimmy Carter

The Carter Center

One Copenhill

453 Freedom Parkway

Atlanta, GA 30307

Dear President Carter,

As members of the Board of Councilors each one of us has been proud to be associated with the Carter Center in its noble struggle to repair the world. However, in light of the publication of your latest book Palestine; Peace Not Apartheid and your subsequent comments made in promoting the book, we can no longer in good conscience continue to serve the Center as members of the Board of Councilors.

[Though they were proud to have been associated with an organization engaged in a noble struggle to repair the world, that noble struggle is no longer, given Jimmy Carter's criticism of Israel, sufficiently important enough to keep these protesters on board. In other words, their belief in what is good and noble in this world begins and ends with what is good for Israel. I imagine that had a plane been in the air on its way from the Carter Center to deliver food to a starving people, the signers of this letter would have had it turn about in midair upon hearing of Mr. Carter's true criticisms of Israel. After all, better to let those innocents starve than to continue to do good work in the name of a Gentile who dares criticize Israel. If the Carter Center had previously thought these people to have been dedicated members who just happened to be Jews, perhaps the center now understands that these people were in fact dedicated Zionists who just happened to be members. The center should react to their departure with a party to celebrate the organization's cleansing.]

In its work in conflict resolution the Carter Center has always played the useful and constructive role of honest broker and mediator between warring parties. In your book, which portrays the conflict between Israel and her neighbors as a purely one-sided affair with Israel holding all of the responsibility for resolving the conflict, you have clearly abandoned your historic role of broker in favor of becoming an advocate for one side.

[What thug, hauled before a court for his brutish crimes, wouldn't prefer to engage a "broker" instead of a judge or jury? I would venture to say that nothing that has taken place in the Middle East in the last sixty years is too complex to be judged. By framing their every conflict or confrontation -- even their history -- as something to be brokered, Zionists seeks to subject historical truths and current diplomacy to their bartering ways, and keep foreign concepts such as equality and justice out of the debate. Notice that even in their carefully worded letter, they describe their fictional "honest broker" as a "role" to be "played," revealing organized Zionism's predisposition to reject the notion of ever subjecting itself to the uninhibited judgement of others.]

The facts in dealing with the conflict are these: There are two national narratives contesting one piece of land. The Israelis, through deed and public comment, have consistently spoken of a desire to live in peace and make territorial compromise to achieve this status. The Palestinian side has consistently resorted to acts of terror as a national expression and elected parties endorsing the use of terror, the rejection of territorial compromise and of Israel’s right to exist. Palestinian leaders have had chances since 1947 to have their own state, including during your own presidency when they snubbed your efforts.

["Two national narratives contesting one piece of land." This ingenious application of language identifies its authors as scoundrels who would have readers believe that the conflict is about perspectives rather than facts. Chutzpah put to type, from my seat. Imagine yourself, after having been kicked in the nuts by a crazed assailant, being informed that you possess not the rights of a victim, but the right only to a narrative -- a right also awarded to your assailant. Whose values are those? Certainly not America's, and obviously not the Palestinians. Prior to sixty years ago, the Palestinians possessed an actual homeland; it was the Zionists who possessed nothing but a narrative. Today, the Zionists possess a homeland, the Palestinians have next to nothing, and this change of circumstances is the result not of a narrative, but of treachery, deception, and hatred on the part of the Israelis!]

Your book has confused opinion with fact, subjectivity with objectivity and force for change with partisan advocacy. Furthermore the comments you have made the past few weeks insinuating that there is a monolith of Jewish power in America are most disturbing and must be addressed by us. In our great country where freedom of expression is basic bedrock you have suddenly proclaimed that Americans cannot express their opinion on matters in the Middle East for fear of retribution from the “Jewish Lobby” In condemning the Jews of America you also condemn Christians and others for their support of Israel. Is any interest group to be penalized for participating in the free and open political process that is America? Your book and recent comments suggest you seem to think so.

[Once again we have Zionists howling and protesting over the suggestion that Israel's lobbyists and supporters wield too much power over what is thought and said in America, and once again they avoid issuing the challenge that is most effective at disproving a false accusation: the demand for evidence. Where is the challenge to Jimmy Carter, this man they allegedly have respected for so long, to provide the evidence of this Jewish influence? The answer is, of course, that that challenge is secured by the same lock and key that suppresses every other question that possesses the potential to unravel the sacred "narratives" of Zionists. The last thing the signatories of this letter want is for Carter to wheel out into public view the cartloads of evidence that support his bold statements. No, stay the Zionist course: attack Carter politically and personally -- no holds barred. After all, what loyalty or respect is owed him?]

In the past you would inject yourself into this world to moderate between the two sides in the pursuit of peace and as a result you earned our admiration and support. Now you repeatedly make false claims. You wrote that UN Security Council Resolution 242 says that "Israel must withdraw from territories" (p. 38), but you know the word “must” in fact is not in the resolution. You said that since Mahmoud Abbas has been in office there have been no peace discussions. That is wrong. You wrote that Yassir Arafat told you in 1990 that, "The PLO has never advocated the annihilation of Israel” (p. 62). Given that their Charter, which explicitly calls for Israel's destruction, was not revised until the late 1990s, how could you even write such a claim as if it were credible?

[As is demonstrated, the disdain they show for facts of one sort has not soured them to facts of all kinds. In the paragraph above they've seized upon a word incorrectly inserted into a referenced UN Resolution, while they themselves suspiciously fail to mention that the resolution in question makes the Israeli withdrawal from the territories a "requirement."] 

You denied on Denver radio on December 12 that Palestinian Prime Minister Haniyah said he would never accept or negotiate with Israel. However the BBC monitoring service reported just the opposite. In fact Haniyah said: "We will never recognize the usurper Zionist government and will continue our jihadist movement until Bayt al-Maqdis (Jerusalem) and the Al-Aqsa Mosque are liberated. When presented with this fact you said, "No he didn't say that, no he did not do that, I did not hear that." These are not points of opinion, these are points of fact.

[How pathetic it must be, when attacking a man who has unambiguously entered his thoughts into print, to have to issue across America an all-points bulletin on him as he exhaustively hawks his book in the hopes of seizing upon a tidbit open to interpretation or dispute. Of course, you can't issue an all-points alarm without a network of dedicated Israel-firsters spread throughout the nation.]

And finally, it is a disturbing statement to write: "that 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." In this sentence you clearly suggest that you are condoning violence against Israelis until they do certain things (p.213). Your use of the word “Apartheid,” regardless of your disclaimers, has already energized white supremacist groups who thrive on asserting Jewish control of government and foreign policy, an insinuation you made in your OPED to the LA Times on December 8, 2006: "For the last 30 years, I have witnessed and experienced the severe restraints on any free and balanced discussion of the facts.” According to Web site monitoring by the Anti-Defamation League, U.S. white supremacists have enthusiastically embraced your suggestion that the Israel lobby stifles debate in this country, saying it confirms Jewish control of government and foreign policy as well as and the inherently "evil" nature of Jews. If you doubt the support you are giving and receiving, please refer to:

[Jimmy Carter made an obvious error by believing that his attempt to insert into the Palestinian political process a pathway to a peace agreement would be seen in the spirit in which it was offered. He should've realized that by attempting to exert direction over any aspect of the Palestinian political process he would be trespassing on territory already claimed by Israel and its supporters worldwide. He apparently forgot that in the two narrative illusion to which this dispute has been reduced, Israel alone does the talking.] 

http://www.adl.org/main_Anti_Semitism_Domestic/carter_reactions_ws.htm

From there you can get to the postings of four different White Supremacist organizations that both support and make use of the contents of your book and what you have said in public.

As a result it seems that you have turned to a world of advocacy, including even malicious advocacy. We can no longer endorse your strident and uncompromising position. This is not the Carter Center or the Jimmy Carter we came to respect and support. Therefore it is with sadness and regret that we hereby tender our resignation from the Board of Councilors of the Carter Center effective immediately.

Sincerely,

Alan Abrams

Steve Berman

Michael Coles

Jon Golden

Doug Hertz

Barbara Babbit Kaufman

Liane Levetan

Jeff Levy Leon Novak

Ambassador William B. Schwartz Jr.

William B. Schwartz III

Steve Selig

Cathey Steinberg

Gail Solomon