Ken, I don't really see your point, either! It seems to me that you are skirting the issue somewhat, and I have been trying to understand what you are saying by reading and re-reading your article, but I am still left with a vague feeling and no clarity. Granted, the issue itself is muddled, but I feel you are trying to not step on any toes in your article. And in that case I respect your diplomacy, but also remained slightly confused.
What I do understand: Both sides, Israel and Palestinians, are responsible for this current mess, but Israel has by far the most power, resources, weaponry, and is backed by the US. That puts it in a bigger position of power, and also a bigger degree of responsibility - which is not the same as BLAME.
I also view Carter's book as something which tips the scale in a country where so much literature/media/politics supports Israel. This country's politics immediately backs Israel military without blinking. I don't see Carter's book being praised so much by liberals, either, as you mention - he's gotten a LOT of criticism from them, and has been dismissed as a blathering old fool, which is sad. If his book automatically sided with Israel, he wouldn't be in the hot seat at all. The term anti-semite is odd in this case, because anti-semite can be used for anyone who is against someone of Middle Eastern descent, not just against Israel and/or Jews, but also Arabic too. You see the term flung around whenever anyone picks apart Israel/Us politics, as though semites are only Jewish or of Israel descent, not Arabic at all.
Lastly, I don't view this at all as a religious issue - perhaps because, although I am of Egyptian and Middle Eastern descent, I am not religious at all. What I do see, however, is a struggle which is is more political than anything. Religion in this case is just something which I view more as a cultural.
Anyway, I've rambled long enough!
Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation