Carter’s book was riddled with provable factual errors, all of which weighed against Israel or made Israel appear to be in the wrong.
Then, I’m sure you can provide an independent cite.
While I read some of non-independent criticism, main points of the book still remain. And, in many non-independent criticism are never addressed. For example:
from My Problem with Jimmy Carter's Book :: Middle East Quarterly
Now, factual parts of the above are all true; however, it is also true that some other people might give different (i.e. positive or affriming) interpretation of the above (for example, barrier prevents suicide bombers so who cares if that same barrier is on occupied land or if the barrier creates daily problems for residents).
So, I think criticism of this book is in viewpoint and factual issues relatively pale in comparison with the overall message.
Those are his opinions, not facts. But even so …
From your quote:
This is, in itself, an oddity. No-one claims that the situation on the West Bank is great, but really - one of the worst? That’s simply not credible.
I would suggest that the situation in Somalia would qualify.
:rolleyes:
Facts:
- illegal settlement construction
- continued human rights abuse
- continued confiscation of Palestinian land
- usurpation of water rights
- retaliatory bulldozing of Palestinian houses
I mean, what is this… 1st grade???
Now, again, you could disagree with President Carter’s opinion of those facts (even though I’d say it is pretty much in line with, often cited, civilized world).
As I said, amazing board.
Wrong.
Deemed “illegal” by a non-binding UN resolution, all other relevant treaties and UNSC resolution 242 call for a negotiated compromise.
Depends on what the actual claims are. Most turn out to be bogus, much like your claims that the 4th Geneva Convention’s proscribed rules of war are “war crimes”, and you just know that without having to actually find the relevant laws because of Serbian snipers, or some such.
And this is where bias becomes readily apparent.
There never was a sovereign nation of Palestine. Even under the previous sovereigns, the vast majority of the land that is now claimed as “Palestinian” was, in fact, Miri land and thus, state owned and only ‘rented’ by its occupants.
You’re free to leave any time now.
Well, then, based on “overwhelming evidence” I can see how average American one would conclude that Palestinians are just being selfish pricks.
So, fire away… f**k ‘em, eh?
Colorless green dreams sleep furiously.
Oh, that’s just rude, Fin. He’s not that bad.
His grammar? Naw.
The thought-salad that made up his last post? Heck yes!
I’m still trying to puzzle out how anything I said translates into “average American one would conclude that Palestinians are just being selfish pricks.” Or for that matter "So, fire away… f**k ‘em, eh? "
I mean, hell, there’s still a thread on the front page where I stated quite clearly that the Bridging Proposal was excellent and that the US should use economic leverage in order to force Israel to stop expanding its settlements in the West Bank. He seems to just be posting gobledygook based on a tenuous grasp of my actual argument.
Well, after watching that video I’m convinced. Israel can do no wrong – even God and Democrats are on their side.
And no wonder they sound so happy, plenty of reasons* for them to be.
*Warning. Graphic pictures of human suffering. If Palestinians still qualify for that title anyway.
Wait, you mean Israel’s bombs aren’t filled with pixy dust and love?
Wow Red, thanks for bringing this to our attention.
Your keen insight saves the day, as always.
Interestingly enough, I remember you handwaving away actual fascist demonstrators at a Danish rally, what, just a few days ago?
Evidently it matters when they’re at a pro-Israel rally, boy howdy!
Remind us again just how Israel should go about carrying out legitimate self defense without any civilian casualties, since you’re obviously not simply reflexively an anti-Israel partisan who demands that Israel just sit there and take rocket fire. Surely you’ll post, right away, telling us exactly how you’d prosecute the war. Right?
Cite?
In addition, would you please explain the difference in deaths between Palestinian refugees and pissed-off Israelis.? Because from all I can gather its the Mighty IDF who holds all the cards. The Best propaganda along with political control. Nevermind the surreal death tolls.
Seriously, I don’t expect for you to recognize a thing I’ve said.
~J
PS-Who do you think has more cheerleaders US-siders than any other Nation?
Carter’s book was riddled with provable facts, many of which, when considered in context, made Israel appear to the reading public exactly in the light. He referred to a whole book of facts in context, and dismiss Israel’s claims in a sentence. He might have made errors. I generally believe him and dismiss his detractors.
So you accidentally a Carter book? Seriously, there’s a few words missing there.
And Finn, I don’t care, calling him Noam Chomsky is just beyond the pale.
From 3m40s and the response to Bloomberg towards the end is also valid.
But I guess he is just a self-hating Jew isn’t he (along with all the other Jews that work on the show)?
Speaking as someone that has lived in multiple countries outside the US, the bias towards the Jews in the American mainstream media and in Politics is quite extreme. It helps that AIPAC was described by Fortune as the second most powerful lobby group in the US as well.
You can deny it all you want, but it is there.
Few, if any, are immune to propaganda.
Exactly. Finally we are agreeing on something. By showing the widespread destruction and human killing, alongside the lack of food, water, medicine and whatnot people might start to think that the Israeli invasion is a bad idea.
Not to mention that there could be independent verification of alleged destruction of civilian sites that had no connection to weapons and the alleged use of white phosphorus and cluster bombs. Cluster bombing is especially interesting as it would put pay to any claim that the Israelis were not being indiscriminate in their bombing.
Oh I see, they faked the widespread death and destruction, especially amongst civilians. Clever chaps, these Arabs.
Either you are so ignorant that you’re unaware of the widespread phautoxagraphy that came out of Lebanon, or you’re deliberately arguing disingenuously in order to make your argument as frustrating as possible. In either case, taking the bait isn’t worth my time.
Oh I admit that it happened, I just also accept there was a metric arseload of other stuff that wasn’t faked and that none of that really worked for Israel.
Is it weird that I don’t really agree with the idea that the only people that can verify Israel’s claims are Israel?
Do I even need to say it?
I assume I’ve just been whooshed, good show.
Simply to clarify in case I wasn’t wooshed, I was making reference to Chomsky’s phrase which demonstrated that even a grammatically correct sentence could have zero semantic value.
Post 26. Where, in reaction to actual fascists chanting things like “Hitler! Hitler! Hitler!” and “Gas the Jews!” your response was to… talk about Gandhi.
Never mind though, when it’s nasty pro-Israel supporters in New York, you’re oh so very outraged.
And, lo and behold, not one word of how you’d prosecute the war if you were Israel. Just, as usual, the normal extreme kneejerk anti-Israel partisan screed which denies them the right to self defense that every other nation on the globe has.
Roger, disingenuous argument then.
The only way to win that game is not to play.
Adios.
What on earth are you on about?
A few people faking things means that we should discount absolutely everything that happened in that war? Are you serious?
Seriously, are you comfortable with the fact that there is no way to independently verify Israel’s claims and that there are no independent investigations into claims of targeting civilians and of using white phosphorus and cluster bombs?
Just because Israel says that there were weapons we should automatically believe them? Don’t you remember the WMD fiasco?