Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Former President Carter says he won't visit Brandeis

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:18 PM
Original message
Former President Carter says he won't visit Brandeis
BOSTON (AP) Former President Carter has decided not to visit Brandeis University to talk about his new book "Palestine: Peace not Apartheid" because he does not want to debate Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz as the university had requested.

"I don't want to have a conversation even indirectly with Dershowitz," Carter told The Boston Globe. "There is no need to for me to debate somebody who, in my opinion, knows nothing about the situation in Palestine."

The debate request is proof that many in the United States are unwilling to hear an alternative view on the nation's most taboo foreign policy issue, Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory, Carter said.

http://www.masslive.com/newsflash/mass/index.ssf?/base/...

I agree with President Carter on all points.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. Cali, Dershowitz is one of the most extreme militaristic nuts out there.
Edited on Fri Dec-15-06 12:23 PM by Tom Joad
So he is an example of the "attack dogs" i was referring to elsewhere. He is saying that Carter is anti-Semitic.

Dershowitz, as many know, also supports destroying Palestinian villages whenever there is an attack on Israel. Among other not so noble actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. You don't debate with people you agree with, it is those you don't agree with
It is NO DIFFERENT than what the Iraq committe said, WE SHOULD BE TALKING TO IRAN AND SYRIA, which I also agree

Carter failed as a president, and when Iran fell, he ignored the warnings by our intelligence to get our people out of the embassy, but instead ignored it. Said that TMI and nuclear energy was safe, boycotted the Olymics

He will go down in history as the fourth worst president we had




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Debating buffons is different than talking to representatives of whole nations.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #7
43. and how would you represent Ahmadinejad? He is also a buffon
and anti-Jewish, but I believe we should talk with him

You are making lame excuses for Carter not wanting to debate. He has no problem peddling his book to a friendly audience though

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. hardly, after a quarter of a century out of office, Carter's stock has risen
and he was ahead of his time on energy policy and in many ways had a superb foreign policy. He looks better every day especially when compared with every president who has followed him, with the possible exception of Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. "He will go down in history...
... as the fourth worst president we had."

Which history book is this in? The History of the World according to Freepers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. Ford (with Kissinger) gave tacit approval for Indonesia to attack
East Timor. the result: hundreds of thousands killed. Was Ford a better president?

Nixon continued and escalated Johnson's war on the people of Southeast asia. Result: Millions killed.
Nixon a better president?

Bush the first attacked Iraq, and it resulted in hundreds of thousand dead. Was Bush the first a better president?

Bush the second... do i have to say anything here?

Reagan: Supported genocide in Central America, the Iran-Contra crimes... better president?

Or we can go way back... Polk started a useless war against Mexico. Killed thousands. Few, except Abe Lincoln, in congress opposed it.


What are the three presidents who are worse than Carter in your estimation? Why do you think all the others were better?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Was Calvin Coolidge a better President?
Edited on Fri Dec-15-06 01:21 PM by Scurrilous
How about Herbert Hoover or Warren G. Harding? Was Jimmy Carter worse than Andrew Johnson or Ulysses S. Grant?

For Carter to be 'forth worst,' at least two of these guys have to rank ahead of him. I'm curious to know which ones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Most Historians don't
rank Carter anywhere near the bottom. Those at the bottom are almost invariably, Harding, Johnson, Pierce and Buchanan, as well as a few others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. You don't want to go there Tom.
President Carter actually increased aid to Indonesia during his Presidency, and was little better than Ford on the subject of East Timor.
As I've said, I like Carter a lot, but painting him as some sort of two dimensional plaster saint, does a disservice to the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #18
32. Again, one of the many very valid criticisms of Carter. He also gave massive aid to
Israel. He toasted the Shah, and helped Marcos of the Phillipines. He acted like other US presidents, in many ways reprehensible.

Still, we both agree ranking Carter at the bottom of all US presidents, very few people agree with that.

The poster above is entitled to his opinion.. maybe he ranks Nixon as the best President in history, second only to ...we don't know. And it looks like we may never know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmejack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #4
16. In the books YOU write.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
33. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #33
41. I express my opinion, and you call me a right winger. If you have to resort to PERSONAL attacks
THAT SAYS EVERYTHING ABOUT YOU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Tom,
Save your lecture. Did I not make it perfectly clear that I agree with President Carter on all points?

As for Dershowitz being an attack dog, no doubt, but Dershowitz alone does not make the case that you stated in another thread, to wit, that the MSM is opening the gates to vile attacks against President Carter. You seem to be suggesting that any criticism of Carter's book is illegitimate. Sorry, I don't agree with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. I could research this more, but among other things, Dershowitz is
somehow trotted out by the press as some kind of respectable counterpoint to Carter.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. You made a sweeping and damning accusation and
You are unable to back it up with anything other than bringing up Dershowitz over and over. It's rather ironic that you so loudly decry slurs, but cast your own without evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #12
31. you accusing me of making a damning statement against the MSM?
Must be a first for DU. Everyone else thinks they are fair and balanced. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. Well, I certainly don't want to
defend the MSM, but the fact is, you have provided no evidence that the MSM, as you insinuated, is in cahoots with people people sliming President Carter. Yes, Dershowitz and fringe nuts like Glen Beck are sliming them, but you seem to feel that any criticism of his new book is out of bounds. You even voiced support for Finklestein's slurs. Heck, you posted the article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. If Carter's only defense is to say I won't debate someone because he knows nothing
then that shows what a dimished person he is, and how weak his position actually is

There are so many mis-representations in his book, and that is the real reason he is AFRAID TO DEFEND IT

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy M Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. What are some of the mis-representations in his book?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Why should he debate it?
Why shouldn't he just be invited to present his point of view?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tsuki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Or if he does debate the issue, debate it with someone who
knows the entire ME.

I can "hear" the "debate" with Alan Dershowitz now. First he'll lie, then when called on it, he'll scream the lie, and if that doesn't work, he'll personally attack Carter.

You cannot debate with a Republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Asking Carter to debate Dershowitz is like asking Hannity to debate
Paul Krogman on econimics. A total waste of time. I agree with Carter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #9
26. Alan Dershowitz is not a Republican
Disagree with him all you want, but he has been registered as a Democrat or as an Independant in every election in which he has voted.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #26
34. He is a defender of some of the most extreme policies of Bush.
Where he put a checkmark on a piece of paper is not important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. Tom, you clearly know nothing about Dershowitz
Edited on Fri Dec-15-06 03:31 PM by cali
outside of his militant support for Israel, and his rather facile argument about torture being legitimate in the ticking time bomb scenario. In virtually all other arenas, Dershowitz is a liberal democrat. Have you never heard of his book "Supreme Injustice", about the hijacking of the 2000 election? Guess not if you're insisting bullheadedly but completely erroneously that he's really not a dem and is a defender of bushco. He is against the Military Commissions Act, among other bushco policies, and was strongly against either Roberts or Alito.

I'm not a Dershowitz fan, but I dislike seeing that kind of baseless accusation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. support torture, go to prison. Or at least not be on my list of anything
i would feel any kind of political kinship to. I rerally go by issues. Support torture, and i part ways. Oppose human rights. Supporting bulldozing of communities. this is not okay. Dershowitz's overt anti-Arab Racism, not okay.

even if he wants a higher minimum wage.

I don't care what else he does.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy M Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. And get questions from students as Carter suggested....
that would be a much better format.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. He was invited to present his point of view and he did not accept.
The debate idea came from Carter's friend and former advisor who proposed it to the Bradneis University president.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pocoloco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #2
22. That was his polite response!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
30. you seem AFRAID TO DEFEND IT. who are the other 3 presidents
you said are worse than Carter? then all presidents are better?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divernan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
20. And Brandeis University is far from a neutral venue.
It's like asking an atheist to debate Jerry Falwell at one of the mega churches.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. That's a truly
insulting and borderline statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divernan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. Well, what if I said it was like asking Margaret Sanger to debate
the current Pope at Notre Dame? Now, my dad and brother were ND grads, and I know a lot of professionals - attys. and judges, who got their degrees there. My perception is that the school, its students and its alumni are VERY conservative on the issue of birth control, and that any audience from that community would be biased against, if not actively hostile to Sanger, and most importantly, not open to be swayed from the opinions with which they started.

Brandeis is in many ways, an outstanding school with many distinguished alumni. But on this issue of Palestine, do you really think that a debate on that campus would have an audience open to being persuaded by Carter's comments? I mean, we have seen for years here at DU the explosive responses between our own members over news of Israel/Palestine's tragic events.
From Brandeis' website, the background on the school is:
Israel Goldstein was a prominent rabbi in New York from 1918 until 1960 when he emigrated to Israel. He was an influential Zionist. Before 1946, he had headed the New York Board of Rabbis, the Jewish National Fund, and the Zionist Organization of America, and helped found the National Conference of Christians and Jews. On his eightieth birthday, in Israel, Yitzhak Rabin and other leaders of the government, the parliament, and the Zionist movement assembled at his house to pay him tribute.<2> But among all his accomplishments, the one chosen by the New York Times to headline his obituary was: "Rabbi Israel Goldstein, A Founder of Brandeis."<3>

C. Ruggles Smith, desperate for a way to save something of Middlesex University, learned of a New York committee headed by Goldstein that was seeking a campus to establish a Jewish-sponsored secular university, and approached Goldstein with a proposal to give the Middlesex campus and charter to Goldstein's committee, in the hope that his committee might "possess the apparent ability to reestablish the School of Medicine on an approved basis." Goldstein was concerned about being saddled with a failing medical school, but excited about the opportunity to secure "a 100-acre campus not far from New York, the premier Jewish community in the world, and only 10 miles from Boston, one of the important Jewish population centers."<1> Goldstein agreed to accept Smith's offer.

Goldstein then proceeded to recruit George Alpert, a Boston lawyer with fund-raising experience as national vice president of the United Jewish Appeal.

George Alpert (1898-September 11, 1988) was a Boston lawyer who had worked his way through Boston University School of Law. He cofounded the firm of Alpert and Alpert. His firm had a long association with the New York, New Haven and Hartford railroad, of which he was to become president from 1956 to 1961<4><5> (He is best known today as the father of Richard Alpert (Baba Ram Dass)<4>). He was influential in Boston's Jewish community. His Judaism "tended to be social rather than spiritual."<6> He was involved in assisting children displaced from Germany.<7>. Alpert was to be chairman of Brandeis from 1946 to 1954, and a director from 1946 until his death.<4>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
23. Carter was asked simply to speak at the University, NOT to debate
Edited on Fri Dec-15-06 02:05 PM by oberliner
President Carter was asked to speak about his book by the Faculty Senate Chairman at Brandeis.

The request included no mention of any debate and no invitation to Dershowitz.

This appears to be the timeline:

1. Carter is asked if he is interested in coming to Brandies to speak about his book by Harry Mairson, Faculty Senate Chairman

2. Carter is urged by a long-time friend of his (Stuart Eizenstat - a Brandies trustee) not to accept the invitation for fear that the professor may have had "an agenda" in inviting the former president.

3. A member of Carter's staff asks that the invitation to speak come from the president of the university (Jehuda Reinharz) rather than the faculty member.

4. The friend who advised Carter not to accept the original invite (Stuart Eizenstat) then suggests to the university president that he invite Carter to debate Dershowitz on campus

5. The university president thinks this idea is a good one and extends the invitation.

6. Carter refuses to come to the campus.

http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/20...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
27. You agree that Dershowitz "knows nothing about the situation...
in Palestine"?

Why do you think it's inappropriate for Pres. Carter to debate him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. Why didn't Carter just accept the initial request to speak?
This was before there was any "debate" proposal floated at all, an idea that came from one of Carter's friends/former advisors.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. from the article
"Before accepting, Carter sought advice from longtime friend and former adviser Stuart Eizenstat, a Brandeis trustee.

Eizenstat told Carter not to go because he did not know whether Mairson had an agenda.

A member of Carter's staff then asked Brandeis President Jehuda Reinharz to make the invitation instead.

Eizenstat said he suggested to Reinharz that Carter come to Brandeis and debate Dershowitz.

A debate "would make this a real academic exercise," Eizenstat said.

Reinharz said he thought a debate was "a terrific idea."

Carter, apparently, did not.

Mairson received a written reply from Carter's appointment secretary saying that he would not visit the campus."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
37. Too bad. He could have swatted Dershowitz's
nonsense down and perhaps educated a few folks.

Can't say I blame him in refusing to debate Professor Torture Warrant, however.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #37
40. I would like to see him debate Pres. Clinton
but that will never happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ermoore Donating Member (474 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
38. Not gonna play well . . .
This quote isn't going to play well:

"The debate request is proof that many in the United States are unwilling to hear an alternative view on the nation's most taboo foreign policy issue, Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory, Carter said."

I mean, c'mon, a request for a DEBATE is cause for him to claim that people are unwilling to discuss an issue? I understand what's he's saying there, but that statement does seem pretty stupid.
Also, it makes it look like he's just scared of debating Dershowitz, who I think would probably make him look like an idiot.

Carter's probably not the fourth worst president, but he's not a good one either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-15-06 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. I am talking about worst president's in my lifetime
Edited on Fri Dec-15-06 10:03 PM by still_one
Obviously, bush junior is number one on that list

Second, what is wrong with debating?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Nov 27th 2014, 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC