Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Carter controversy

Former US president Jimmy Carter has created a stir with a book he has just penned under the title, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid".

We include both sides of the argument. First, here is something forwarded from Felix:

Jimmy Carter is now embroiled in the kind of controversy that no former president of the United States has ever been embroiled in before. The question is about simple truth. Carter has lied, lied so brazenly that he is not to be trusted about any assertion he makes ever again.

Conversely, here is something sent to us by the Moslem Public Affairs Committee (MPAC):

Jimmy Carter, the ex-US president, has defended his criticisms of Israeli policy in his latest book, saying he hopes to erode the "impenetrable wall" that stops Americans from seeing the true plight of the Palestinian people. His book has been criticised by pro-Israeli groups and led to the resignation of Kenneth Stein, a Carter Centre fellow.


Davis said...

This post should be removed.

NCF should not post anything from MPAC, nor should it be receiving its mail. To use MPAC as 'the other side' of any argument is at best misguided and at worst - with anything involving Judaism or Israel - offensive. They are an outfit unfit for any discussion, not least because they are deeply antisemitic.

Again, this post should be removed and any subscriptions to MPAC mailings immediately cancelled.

See excerpt from http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2006/11/mpac_and_irving.html

A sober and well informed report of the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism, published in September, commented on MPAC's role (paragraph 140):

The activities of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, MPACUK, have given cause for concern. Although its rhetoric is often extremist, MPACUK identifies itself as part of the mainstream British Muslim community, describing itself as “the UK’s leading Muslim civil liberties group, empowering Muslims to focus on non-violent Jihad and political activism”. Originally set up as a web-based media monitoring group, MPACUK’s declared first mission was to fight the perceived anti-Muslim bias in the media and to redress the balance. However, MPACUK has been criticised for publishing material on its website promoting the idea of a worldwide Zionist conspiracy, including the reproduction of articles originally published on neo-Nazi and Holocaust Denial websites, and is currently banned from university campuses under the NUS’s ‘No Platform’ policy. MPACUK are known to have removed an offensive posting from their website on one occasion, after complaints were made, but thereafter continued to publish similar material.

The report further remarks on MPAC's expounding antisemitic conspiracy theories. On examining MPAC's material at some length in preparation for my exchange with Mr Bukhari, I was clear that the organisation crosses the boundary where criticism of Israel becomes something more sinister and visceral.

Well, The Observer reports today (link taken from Harry's Place) that Mr Bukhari has donated money to, of all people, David Irving:

One of Britain's most prominent speakers on Muslim issues is today exposed as a supporter of David Irving, the controversial historian who for years denied the Holocaust took place. Asghar Bukhari, a founder member of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC), which describes itself as Britain's largest Muslim civil rights group, sent money to Irving and urged Islamic websites to ask visitors to make donations to his fighting fund.

Totally unsuitable. I will comment on Carter's book seperately.

William said...

With regard to your concerns about MPAC Davis - I suggest you prepare a posting in your own name specifying a comparatively current example (not one that they have apologised for) and then put it on this blog - AND if appropriate we can then take the issue up with MPAC.

Davis said...

Dear William,

since you are my esteemed mentor and I wish only to be respectful and not to dispute in public, let us carry on the details of this discussion elsewhere. I will post on MPAC as you suggest, but must wonder, which bit about Irving above did you not read?

Do I also have to post about Hizb-ut Tahrir or Combat 18, or can we ageree that they are antisemitic hatemongers, like MPAC, and that we should not quote them or be on their mailing lists?

I find this troubling, but as I say, I will put together a nice post soon...