Dave Goldberg wrote:

Tom, What angers me is not critisism of Israeli policies, or accusations of religous separatism in the state of Israel, but rather Jimmy Carter's apparant intellectual dishonesty. Please see What Would Jimmy Do?, Jeffrey Goldberg, Washington Post Book World, December 10, 2006. Dave Goldberg (no relation to the author) Springfield VA

Saw the piece and think it's fine. Doesn't change my post whatsoever though. I don't make a case for Carter's book, but for his basic criticism, which I see as quite sound. Saying he's somewhat partisan (not emphasizing Arab rejectionism enough, for example) doesn't make the crux of his argument invalid. It just makes his book weaker. I didn't offer a book review, just commentary on the debate and what I liked about where Carter focused his critique. Carter's argument needs to be dealt with head on, not seemingly discredited on the basis of factual errors and interpretations. But I liked the piece so I'm happy to cite in the blog. In the end, Israel's biggest long-term problem is that its nationalism is race-specific in a globalizing world where such state-sponsored "affirmative action" comes off as hopelessly discriminatory, whether you're talking Muslims in Tel Aviv or Paris or Los Angeles. By asking the Middle East to integrate itself truly with globalization, we commit them to ending such religious/racial discriminations in their countries. Ultimately, the same gets asked of Israel, and that's where I think U.S. support will falter, because I think the bulk of Israelis remained committed to keeping Israel a fundamentally closed club built to promote the interests of a single race. I understand that desire, even as I reject the premise philosophically. Then again, I'm an American.