Customer Reviews

The Case Against Israel's Enemies: Exposing Jimmy Carter and Others Who Stand in the Way of Peace

5 star:		(18)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

This is another winner from Mr. Dershowitz. He debunks all of the myths that Israel boycotters cling to and perpetuate. He makes factual arguments and names names. The truth is on Israel's side. Dershowitz does an excellent job at exposing people like Mearheimer and Jimmy Carter for what they are; anti-semites and people that are in denial about their own prejudices and project them on to Israelis. Before reading this book, I did not know that Jimmy Carter once supported private school and was opposed to busing because those policies would keep black and white students segregated from each other. Jimmy Carter essentially supported segregation, never got over his guilt and projects it on to Israelis. I also appreciate that Mr. Dershowitz exposes the biggest myth of all: that the Palestinian Arabs played no role in the Holocaust. If you have never heard of the Jerusalem mufti before, then the story will blow your mind away. This is a very important and timely read and I hope many people read it.

Before commenting on the book, let me mention that I studied Law and Medicine under Professor Dershowitz many years ago at Harvard Law School. The course was conducted as a running debate between the M.D. professor and Professor Dershowitz. Much could be learned by listening to both sides.

When it comes to Israel and Palestine (and its supporters in and out of the Arab world), there aren't very many debates. Instead, supporters of one side or the other make claims about the other side being at fault. The history is so involved and complicated that few people know enough about it to assess the assertions without doing a lot of research (something that is beyond the interest of most uninvolved observers).

Professor Dershowitz offers to debate critics of Israel, but they don't often take up the challenge. As a result, books like this one are important for helping to get a balanced view of the historical perspective and the current issues (as we all watch with horror as rockets are launched at Israel and Israel attacks those who launch them . . . often in civilian dominated areas).

Let me summarize the book's key points:

1. Former President Jimmy Carter got it wrong in his book, Peace, Not Apartheid. Professor Dershowitz clearly distinguishes what South Africa did to its African and "colored" populations from what Israel does to Palestinians. Carter's book seems filled with obvious errors which are detailed pretty thoroughly in an appendix. Yet Carter stands by the book being without error.

2. Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt mischaracterized the history of Palestinian-Israeli relations in a way that is either incompetent or corrupt. The fact-checking makes the two professors look pretty bad.

3. Those who want to boycott Israeli academics and divest from Israeli businesses are acting as though stifling free debate will help create peace, on the one hand, and that Israel is a rogue nation, on the other hand. Professor Dershowitz shows that the academic community doesn't support the boycotts and that the divestiture movement isn't based on a sound factual evaluation.

4. Those who oppose Israel's activities with regard to the Palestinians from either the hard left or hard right seem to be taking positions that are racist because they don't criticize regimes that are actually engaged in genocide or severe forms of racial discrimination. Many are also quoted as having made anti-Semitic statements.

5. Those who favor suicide bombers aren't interested in peace but are rather acting on religious beliefs that require that Israel be destroyed and eliminated, and he provides many quotes to support that view.

6. The Iranian atomic program is a danger to Israel and the United States because the current leadership is committed to destroying Israel and any nation that opposes what Muslims want to do. He provides many quotes to support these views from the mouths of the appropriate leaders.

In conclusion, he argues that

1. Israel has always been willing to trade land for peace, but Palestinians haven't.

2. Israel has the right under international law to take a proportionate response to attacks on its territory and citizenry.

3. Muslims, Arabs, and Christians have more rights in Israel than they do in Muslim countries.

4. Palestinian opposition to the Jewish presence in what is now Israel dates back to the Nazi era and includes collaboration in the Holocaust.

5. Most of the current social problems that Palestinians experience are a result of Arab nations not wanting to accept them in their countries rather than mistreatment by Israelis.

After having read the book, I wanted to understand why so many people are making such preposterous statements.

In thinking about how all these falsehoods could have occurred, I realized that it was a lot like watching two football fans argue about which fan's team was the better. Each fan is convinced of its team's superiority and isn't very aware of or sympathetic to the other side. And they really don't care if they get it wrong in making their arguments. Why? Their loyalty to the team is more important than the truth. It's about emotions . . . not about facts.

If someone is outraged to see Palestinians suffer from Israeli bombs, they will see the Israelis as guilty. If someone is outraged to see Israeli civilians blown up by Palestinian suicide bombers or Hamas rockets, they will see at least some Palestinians as guilty.

When football is involved, the leagues supply independent officials to sort it all out. In the case of Israel and the Palestinians, no one is playing that role of independent officials any more. And I have to assume that few would want to be inserted into what could be hundreds of years of warfare.

It seems like a situation that will only escalate, until one side or the other has to give up because the cost of "victory" is too high. That's hardly a civilized or desirable resolution.

What's the answer? Well, if every nation is going to be at risk of these angry parties lobbing atomic weapons at one another, perhaps the time has come for the international community to realize that it had better supply those objective officials or bear a horrible price.

Who will step forward? I don't know, but I pray someone will.

Alan Dershowitz was exposed as a fraud by Norman Finkelstein in his book Beyond Chutzpah. Dershowitz is a brilliant lawyer, he was on OJ Simpson's defense team, but he is not after the truth. As a typical lawyer he will do anything to get his client off the hook. Read this book with an open mind and think of it as a defense brief not serious scholarship.

Anyone who has read other books by this author, such as 'The Case for Israel' and 'The Case for Peace' (both advocate for a two-state solution), will probably know what to expect here.

In 'The Case Against Israel's Enemies', Dershowitz clearly exposes those on the political Left and Right who undermine efforts to achieve a peaceful two-state solution. He points out how they spread mistruths, lies and double standards about Israel - often exposing rhetoric that is anti-Semitic and which seeks to eliminate the Jewish State from the world map.

Just like he did in his other books, the author also points to some of the hurdles to a two-state solution erected by Israel (i.e. expanding settlements) but these pale in comparison to the words and actions of those who hate Israel and condone the actions of Hamas, Hezbollah etc. Learning about Israel's enemies in more detail provides some explanation as to why we are still a long way off from a peaceful two-state solution and it is clear that these enemies do not want facts to get in the way of their arguments.

I would expect reviewers who only score one or two stars for this book to have not read it or they are still arguing that the occupation is the main cause of terrorism and hurdle to peace in Israel (Dershowitz explains why this theory is false or very weak). Generally, they still do not want to know that the Palestinians refused to accept offers of land on a few occasions and that the HAMAS charter calls for Israel's destruction. It is also possible that some people may not want to believe that their intellectual or political hero could sometimes be wrong, especially if they agree with their opinions on many other issues.

For anyone wondering where all this anti-Semitism comes from, I highly recommend `Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism' by Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin. This book will answer a lot of your questions although chapter 15 (What Is To Be Done?) falls somewhat short of the mark.

Dershowitz presents a clear case [as he usually does] for the truth. His propensity for fact and honest writing is outstanding. He refuses to accept the barrage of hatred and lies towards Israel that is so prevalent today. simply put, this is a brilliant book and a must read for anyone who seeks the truth.

On a personal note, having been born and raised in Apartheid South Africa I can attest that Carter's use of the word "Apartheid" to describe Israel is absolutely absurd and only used to sell his book of lies.

Alan Dershowitz has been having a rough few years when it comes to debating, after engaging in intense stand-offs with fellow scholars Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein. Dershowitz also has a major bone to pick with former President Jimmy Carter. To finally release all the rage, Alan has now written a book, "The Case Against Israel's Enemies," which reads like his own personal jihad against those he considers mortal enemies of the Israeli state. The book is a raving, ranting, classic lawyer's bashing of targets. It feels provoked more by personal vendettas than an actual devotion to the safety (or public image) of the Israeli state.

The book's main target is Jimmy Carter, whom Dershowitz now considers a villain because of his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid." Dershowitz rips Carter a new one for meeting with Palestinian, Arab militants, for condemning Israel's barrier walls, for basically promoting a middle ground instead of insane statist worship. The comparisons between Israel and South Africa are not new, even Desmond Tutu has made recent statements making the comparison but no doubt Dershowitz will also consider him some sort of apologist for terrorism. Dershowitz frames his argument in the book, as he does others, with a shallowness and simplicity that is an offense to real scholarship. His basic arguments are that Carter has no right to meet with the other side because they are "evil," criticism of Israel is wrongheaded because Israeli violence should not be condemned, only certain aspects of it. Dershowitz never really frames very well why Carter is an enemy of Israel, his only crime seems to be asking questions about the occupation and trying to get the other side's point of view across.

The other two major targets which also show the book's faults are Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein. The general reader is an even better position to make judgements here because Dershowitz pouts and stomps over two debates he had with these individuals which you yourself can watch right now on YouTube. Dershowitz fails in dismantling any of Chomsky's or Finkelstein's scholarship or claims about his work. Never in these chapters does Dershowitz respond to serious allegations against him made by Chomsky and Finkelstein, allgations backed by scholarship. For example, Dershowitz likes to throw personal jabs and complaints, such as complaining about Chomsky not shaking his hand after a debate, but he never responds to very valid numbers and comparisons Chomsky presented when comparing Israel's doctrine of preemption to Nicaragua and Cuba's responses to much more serious terrorism conducted by the US. Dershowitz also rips and tears Finkelstein apart as a self-hating Jew just because he condemns violent Israeli policies, but he never responds to Finkelstein's exposure of Dershowitz sources cited in past books. During their debate on Democracy Now, Finkelstein exposed some of Dershowitz's laughable sources for his books, including a high school syllabus and a movie website for the film "One Day In September." Dershowitz also used an Orlando Sentinel editorial from 2000 for a chapter on UN resolution 242, as Finkelstein asks during the debate, "is this serious scholarship?" This is again, something you can see for yourself on YouTube or look at the sources cited in "The Case For Israel." Other passages where he attacks Chomsky are laughable because when he tries to refute points Chomsky made during the debate, he actually cites "student e-mails" for support, this is pretty sad. And of course, instead of dismantling Chomsky's or Finkelstein's work in detail, Dershowitz resorts to just describing scandalous, controversial incidents with blazing comments like "he defended a Holocaust denier!" "He met with terrorists!" "He's a self-hating Jew!" This farce has gone far enough, consider Dershowitz's campaign to keep Finkelstein from becoming a full professor, these are the actions of a maniac.

"The Case Against Israel's Enemies" fails because it doesn't feel like a serious look at the opposing point of view, instead it just comes across as rapid damage control. Anyone who wants to get a serious look into the current conflict will only find axe grinding and scholarly jihadism in this book. Dershowitz comes across as a madman trying to hunt down his enemies and snuff them out, he's like a Jewish Madame Mao. The politics of the book are disturbing because Dershowitz only promotes a worship of the state to the point where he justifies the brutal bombings and assaults on civilian targets because, hey, if you waved a Hezbollah flag in Beirut you should automatically become a military target! Had Dershowitz been a Russian during the Stalinist era he no doubt would have been feverishly writing articles for Pravda.

In the end, readers will need to read the book for themselves, but I suspect even some who liked Dershowitz's previous works such as "The Case For Peace" or "Preemption" might find themselves disappointed at this work which just puts big target signs on academic figures Dershowitz simply doesn't like because they rained on his parade.

This book is written from a perspective that I have never had anything to do with a law professor in Harvard university. As such I admit I find some of his points weird to follow. Having said that I do believe that his arguments are valid and strong.

One argument, he makes that has always puzzled me too is that Israel is small and insignificant so why do so many people spend so much time on it. There are many states much bigger, many more deaths, much more land, much worse and much more significant. While reading these critics of Israel in this book, clearly they have many different perspectives and views. What is clear is their criticisms of Israel are not based on what Israel or Jews are or do but somewhere else. There is little anyone can do about it.

After reading Imperial Hubris and Palestine Peace Not Apartheid I was looking forward for this book to get some insight from Israel's perspective but I was quite dissapointed reading this book. At the end it came across as a personal agenda and just a anger release vessel book instead of some clarification or any historical facts.

And I also did some research on the author to see his credibility (just a habit I have adopted, it helps to see what is author's personality). I came accross this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxYOEdbF1mA. (And many others). For me it is important how a person interacts with the audience and people he disagrees with.

Alan Derschowitz come across quite a rude person, anyone who disagrees with him he starts calling them bigot and liar. I am surprised that he is a professor at Harvard. Harvard needs to review his attitude and watch Doha Debates. Its a shame that such prestigious schoool hires people with Garbage attitude. Jimmy Carter and his wife are basically the ambassadors for peace in middle east not to mention Noble Peace Prize winners, while Mr. Derschowitz have no such awards. After doing some research on him and reading his book it doesn't come accross to me that he is looking for peace in Middle East.

Extremely disappointing book. Very badly written with nothing to prove. I would not recommend this book at all due to its personal anger towards the people author disgrees with. He seems like a confused man, trying to confuse the readers as well. Even a 10th graders can write better books than this.

Jimmy Carter dealt directly with Israel and Palestinian diplomats/public and shared his experience in his book. Scheuer was the CIA agent and had sevreal documents to quote while I don't think Mr. Dershowitz even had any dealing with any leaders from these countries neither seemed to communicate with the public of both countries. Save your $10-$15 for a better book. This is total garbage.

We are living in times of a bottomless hatred of Israel and it's people and friends that is frightening in it's irrational venom.
It certainly resembles the hatred of Nazis for Jews in the 1930s and 40's in it's sheer viciousness, what a Jewish women who witnessed Kristallnacht as a child on that excellent documentary Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West as 'the type of hatred that makes your hear beat faster'.
Liberal Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, describes being attacked by a mob of Israel-haters outside Faneuil Hall in Boston points out that this hatred is unexplainable on any rational basis. Phyllis Chesler describes this hatred as 'eroticized'.
Desrhowitz agrees and says that the hatred he saw there was 'passionate hatred, ecstatic hatred, orgasmic hatred, it was beyond mere differences of opinion'.
Again the type of hatred on would have seen at Hitler's Nuremberg rallies or during Kristallnacht.
Dershowitz points out that for a tiny country the size of New Jersey, with a population of 6 million , no other country has as many destructive enemies as Israel.
No other country has been targeted with divestment and boycotts, been the object of so many hostile UN resolutions, been singled out for editorial abuse in the international media , been the victims of as many aggressive protests on colleges and universities and been threatened with annihilation and physical destruction and genocide against it's people.
As an example of the genocidal rhetoric aimed at Israel's population, Hamas MP Ahmed Abu Halabiya speaking from a large mosque in Gaza in June 2003 thundered "Have no mercy on the Jews no matter where they are in any country...Wherever you are kill those Jews and those Americans who are like them...We will not give up a single inch of Palestine from Haifa to Jaffa'.
British MP Clare Short actually said that Israel will cause the end of the human race diverting attention away from global warming! Not China or the USA, but tiny Israel, one of the most environmentally conscious countries on this planet.

Dershowitz devotes one of the chapters in his book to condemning Jimmy Carter for his canards against Israel in his shameful and slanderous book 'Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid'
Carter has demanded that the European Union and the United States recognize the mass murderous and racist terror organisation Hamas, and has had cordial meetings with Hamas and Hezbollah leaders and has described Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah as very nice.
Dershowitz (who supports peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians a two state solution and territorial compromise) actually has discovered that Carter had pressuring Palestinian leaders to take the maximalist position of rejecting compromises and effectively settlement that Israel could reasonably accept without risking it's existence.

Carter played a role in persuading Arafat in 2000 to reject the then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak's generous offer of a contiguous Palestinian state including all of Gaza, 95 % of the West Bank and parts of Jerusalem. Arafat rejected the offer and launched the intifada that has led to loss of thousands of Israeli and Arab lives.
Therefore far from preaching and pointing fingers Carter should hang his head in shame for the blood on his hands.
Most importantly Dershowitz demolishes the charge by Carter of Israel practising Apartheid (the system of rigid racial segregation that was exercised by the government in South Africa between 1948 and 1994). He quotes two prominent Black South African woman ,who have courageously stood up against the violent tsunami of anti-Israel hatred and the campaign slander and libel against Israel, Rhoda Kadalie and Julia Bertelsmann : "Israel is not an apartheid state...Arab citizens of Israel can vote and serve in the Knesset. Black South Africans could not vote until 1994. There are no laws in Israel that discriminate against Arab citizens of separate them from Jews. South Africa has a job reservation policy for White people; Israel has adopted pro-Arab affirmative action programmes in some sectors. Israeli schools , universities and hospitals make no distinction between Jews and Arabs. An Arab citizen who brings a case before an Israeli court will have that case decided on the basis of merit, not ethnicity. This was never the case for Blacks under Apartheid"
Carter has accused Israel of genocide while referring to the genocide in Rwanda as 'ancient history' and condemned those who use the word 'genocide' in reference to the mass murder by Sudan's government in Darfur in which hundreds of thousands of Black Africans have been butchered, millions displaced and hundreds of thousands of women raped.
Derhshowitz also has a chapter condemning both extreme Left anti-Israel bigots (such as John Dugard, Richard Falk, Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein and Michael Lerner) and extreme right anti-Israel bigots (such as Pat Buchanan, Robert Novak, Neo-Nazi David Duke, Joseph Sobran and Taki Theodoracopulos).
He confronts such leftwing extremists as South African UN commissioner John Dugard who has justified suicide bombings against Israeli women and children and compared Arab terrorists who target Israel women and children to the resistance movements that fought against Nazism during World War II.UN commissioner Richard Falk (a supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah and well as a variety of despotic regimes including Iran and Zimbabwe) who has compared Israel's defensive actions in Gaza to the Nazi Holocaust.
Norman Finkelstein has stated that Israel's human rights record is worse than that of Nazi Germany and called on the world to support openly genocidal terrorist and anti-Semitic organisation Hezbollah whose leader leader Hassan Nasrallah said of the Jews after the 2006 Lebanon War "If they gather in Israel it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide"
Hezbollah carried out the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish community center killing 87 men, women and children.
One of the most important chapters is the Case Against Boycotting Israeli Academics, taking on a vile and racist campaign by far-left academics to ban any co-operation between their universities and Israeli universities and to ban all Israeli academics (regardless of their political views) as well as the campaigns for divesting from Israeli businesses.
The author points out the hypocrisy of these boycotts in attacking the campaign by Britain's largest labour union, UNISON, for an economic, cultural sporting and economic boycott on Israel.
As Dershowitz points out: "These unions (and other institutions) did not call for boycotts of any other countries such as China (which has occupied Tibet for over half a century and denies academic freedom to Tibetan critics, among other abuses), Russia (which has brutally suppressed the Chechens) North Korea (which is probably the most oppressive, closed and tyrannical state on earth) , Iran (an oppressive theocracy and supporter of terrorism whose president often threatens genocide against Israel, or tyrannical regimes in Myanmar, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Syria, Belarus, Libya, Zimbabwe and so on".

The author points out that the terrorist organizations that Israel is defending her population against (such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad) not only deliberately and predominantly target Israel's civilian population but also deliberately put their own civilians in the line of fire, knowing that casualties among Arab populations will result in more strident hype against Israel in the world.
Therefore for the terrorist groups, both Arab and Israeli casualties are a win-win situation. Israel has done more than any other nation in modern warfare
to avoid civilian casualties . Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza in 2008/2009 was a reaction to thousands of missiles fired at Israel population centers, often targeting school and Israeli children on their way to school. The reason Israeli deaths have been lower than the Palestinian terror networks have intended was because of Israel's measures taken to protect her own civilians and in many cases what could only be put down to miracles (as if Israel must apologize that more of her people have not died), and the fact that Palestinian spokesmen have counted among their casualties the suicide bombers themselves armed terrorists, terrorist leaders, Arabs killed by Palestinian terror bands themselves, bomb makers whose bombs have exploded prematurely and those killed in the vicinity , Arabs hit by rockets aimed at Israel and even people killed in the gunshots fired at Palestinian rallies.

This book is vital to read for those who want to investigate the vile charges levelled against Israel and the motivations and moral turpitude of her enemies.
Highly recommended.

Israel contributes more to the sciences and the arts, to technology and the environment than any other country of similar size, all the while defending herself against the genocidal attacks of the most violent regimes. Yet Israel likely receives more condemnation at the UN, in the media and across college campuses than any other country, including the worst violators of human rights.
In his previous book, "The Case for Israel", Dershowitz defends Israel against the false and unfair accusations leveled against her. In this book he makes his case against the accusers, from the radical left to the radical right, from academics and presidents to suicide bombers. He focuses on the most recent enemies of Israel and their efforts.
Dershowitz is not writing against mere criticism of Israel, and indeed devotes the book to constructive critics of Israel. He writes against those who are disproportionate and duplicitous in their criticism. He carefully exposes both the falsehoods of their criticism and their double standards. His criticisms are devastating, and are often original and insightful.
This book is well organized and written clearly. The coverage is comprehensive and detailed. The criticism is up to date and pertinent. I recommend this book highly. Readers may also be interested in Dershowitz's "The Case for Israel" and Bard's "Myths and Facts".