Got 5min?
Find

Jimmy Carter's View of Israel

This "Jimmy Carter's View of Israel" video requires the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.
Download Flash

More From This Creator
More From People
More From Politics
Please Rate
Send
Favorite
Flag
Videos Shared:
376
Member Since:
11/28/07
www.rabbireflects.blogspot.com www.ehnt.org www.jonathanginsburg.net www.convertjudaism.org Rabbi of the Ezra-Habonim, Niles Township Jewish Congregation of Skokie, is a native of Chicago.
Video Info:
Views:2,075 Rating:0 Comments:4

Jimmy Carter's View of Israel -

Rabbi Jonathan Ginsburg talks about Jimmy Carter and his views of Israel in the context of the Israel...
Embed: (More)
Comment on this Video
  • Comments
  • Add-ons
  • Links
  • Transcript
By: Guest More than a year ago
+2
Give the the peace effort a chance. You might hate hamas as you hated Arafat before. But the fact is that Hamas i willing to agree to many things if only Israel comply with the same. You make a big issue of hamas innefective weak world war 2 rockets. But remember that Israels so called self defence is roughly 5 times more deadley than hamas attacks. If you attack an area as densley populated as manhattan with F16's and other modern weapons. Then I am not that religious so I don't understand why you need to kill "en masse". I guess that wahat you have to do when you are on a mission from God. The Canaanites probably got the same tratment. It could be valuable to now that military force as applied by Israel allway historically turned to be a bad strategy exept in situation of self defence. Self defence is what the Palestinians are engaged in.
Reply to this Comment
By: Guest More than a year ago
+1
(cont) for "being in conflict with the basic law of Knesset". What was so controversial then. Well, they demanded full equality between arab and Jewish citizens. Ergo, equality is against the constitution. Carters book is not the best in the subject. But he is the first one with with a popular platform that writes a book critical to Israels anexation of foreign territory. Arguments provided by the rabbi here is is not built on facts but on faith, therefore he can without blushing defend one of the most brutal military occupations in modern time. I suggest you to read Noam Chomsky's Fateful Triangle - The United States, Israel and The Palestinians. Allready Folke Bernadotte realized that it should be in the interest of Israel to make peace because maintining the upper hand by the help of arms only works in a very short time. Considering that Israel cannot even aford to finance this conflict but they instead rely on the US for financial support. If US pulls out Israel is in hyperinflation in a day.
Reply to this Comment
By: Guest More than a year ago
+1
(cont) to give up all military control and in doing so create the foundation for a two stae settlement in accordance with the pre-1967 borders. There are no foundation for an Israeli style open negotiation. It's just complaiance with international law. Even Hamas would be aimable to apeace in line with the 1967 borders. But again this again would result for instance in israel loosing the valuable water resourses and the valuable land of the west bank - so much for religious aspirations. carter today is the greates Humanist in US and one of the most admirable people in the world. He is in good company of course Both Desmond Tutu, and Nelson Mandela also definded Israel as a apartheid state. You are clearling using a free interpretation of the word democracy. Don't forget that Athens was a democracy for "all free men". of course half the population were slaves and the women wer left out. What kind of democracy do Israel have. Well the PLP party was barred from participation in the political system for
Reply to this Comment
By: Guest More than a year ago
+1
A missinterpretation of the whole conflict. There is only one God in the Palestine/- Israel conflict wrote the earthly laws. All religous references are null and woid in. Israel are no doubt a theocracy. It's the country of the Jewish people, not the contry, as in the case of for instance US, the country of it's citizens. There is are diffferent laws for the jewish population and the rest of the population - that consitutes apartheid. The evidence is ample. Barak's offer everybody knows by now would have been the end of a two state solution which everybody needs to comply with. It's quite uncontroversial to to expect Israel to comply with resolution 242. it's sad that childish interpretation of the word Land (indefinite tens) instead of The Land (definite tens) actually is used as a motivation by serious people. To keep land anexed in war is against every international convention so a it would never find it's way into a UN resolution. Israel need to return to the pre 1967 borders and give up all (end part 1)
Reply to this Comment
Engage your audience