The writer, a journalist, editorializes that we should listen to 14 people who resigned from the board of the Carter Center and adopt their perspective and his, namely not a "word" of criticism of Israel. Doesn't that make Israel a rather unique human institution? What other political entity can you name that is beyond reproach and that should be supported reflexively? This is the rhetorical tactic now being adopted by people like Mr. Wooten who suggest that when it comes to Israel here should be no public debate or dissent. Mr. Wooten and the 7% of the board that resigned from the board of the Carter Center presume that the issues are black and white, but that is little more than self-satisfying boilerplate.
OUR OPINION: Carter aside, Israel deserves total support ajc.com: "For my part, there can be no 'balance' in U.S. policy in the region. Retreating from Gaza in the summer of 2005, Israel did something this country would never have done, sending 25,000 soldiers to haul 8,500 of its citizens from their abodes, sacrificing their homes and land to the prospect of peace. What did they get in return? A rain of missiles.
With that example, with Hezbollah and Hamas, and a frighteningly dangerous leader in Iran who is no more than five years away from nuclear weaponry —- sworn enemies all —- you'll not find a word here that undermines support in this country for Israel. That was surely not Carter's intentions, but I fear it will be a consequence.
We have one permanent friend in the region and that is Israel.
When longtime Carter supporters speak out, as Stein and Konner and board members who resigned last week did, the rest of us should listen."
After you read the cited editorial, take a look at Carter's OPED in the WaPo, and draw your own conclusions.