Skip to main content

Class Action Suit Against Ex President Carter

I suspect the judge will throw the case out as being a misuse of the court process. Time will tell.

Lawsuit: Carter Guilty of Consumer Fraud, Foists Lies on Readers

by David Lev
While former U.S. President Jimmy Carter has a perfect right to his anti-Israel opinions – and certainly has the right to publish a book full of those opinions – he does not have the right to fob off a work of fiction as fact. That, says Israeli activist attorney Nitzana Darshan-Leitner, is what has earned him the opprobrium of dozens of people who bought his book, “Palestine: Peace or Apartheid.” And now, says Darshan-Leitner, she is representing those unhappy customers in a class-action lawsuit against Carter, in order to get them a refund.
Of course, Darshan-Leitner tells Israel National News, the issue is not simply one of consumer fraud. “During the trial, we will of course have to examine the facts in question, and we will of course unveil the falsity of much of what he writes. Carter makes numerous claims in the book that he knows to be false, and we know that he knows them to be false.”
According to the complaint, filed in a New York court, Carter, “as a former American president and self-proclaimed Middle East expert ... knew that substantial and material portions of the book were untrue, and has failed to advise the public,” putting him in violation of New York State's Consumer Protection Laws, “specifically New York General Business Law section 349, which makes it unlawful to engage in deceptive acts in the course of conducting business.” The lawsuit also includes Carter's publisher, Simon and Schuster, as a defendant, since it allegedly refused to correct the facts, despite receiving numerous complaints from irate customers.
Among the errors in the book, says Darshan-Leitner, is Carter's misrepresentation of UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 336, which he cites as proof that Israel must withdraw to the 1949 armistice lines. “Even a child reading the documents will note that the resolutions say 'withdraw from land,' not 'all the land' captured in 1967,”� Darshan-Leitner says.�
Carter wrote this�despite the fact that Lord Caradon (British diplomat Hugh M. Foot), who authored the resolution, specifically stated that this was not the intent of the resolution. In a discussion in the House of Commons in 1969, Caradon said that “it would have been wrong to demand that Israel return to its positions of June 4, 1967, because those positions were undesirable and artificial.” The suit cites this and numerous other quotes by Caradon and others affirming this fact.
In addition, the suit says, Carter falsely depicted the 1949 armistice lines as an international border (they have never been recognized as such), that Israel has never “granted appreciable autonomy to the Palestinians” (thus ignoring the establishment and continued existence of the Palestinian Authority), and that Syria was prepared to accept a demilitarized Golan Heights (Syrian diplomats specifically denied that).
In all, the suit cites over 50 specific facts that Carter got wrong, either out of ignorance or deliberately. Evidence contradicting Carter's assertion is brought from publicly available sources, including newspapers and books, as well as in affidavits from former members of Carter's own inner circle and negotiating teams.
Darshan-Leitner said that neither she nor her partner in the lawsuit, David Schoen of Montgomery, Alabama, contacted Carter, since he has asserted many times, in print and in the media,� that his statements are�accurate. “Besides, many readers have contacted him and his publisher, only to be completely ignored. After their pleas for accuracy were not answered, they turned to us, and hence the lawsuit.”
As the readers of the book, which sold about 200,000 copies, can be assumed to be reasonably well informed on Middle East affairs, the insult to their intelligence was all the greater, the attorney says. “Carter continuously portrayed his book as being accurate, and it was on that basis that readers bought the book. Imagine their disappointment, frustration and anger at being presented with a work of fiction.”
Readers spent on average $27 for the book, so Darshan-Leitner is seeking about $5 million in compensatory damages in order to enable all customers to get their money back – plus, of course, punitive damages and court costs.
And she has no fears that a judge will refuse to hear the case because of politics – because, although the context is political, the case is really about misrepresentation, slander, and consumer rights. “The lawsuit will expose all the falsehoods and misrepresentations in Carter's book and prove that his hatred of Israel has led him to commit this fraud on the public,”� Darshan-Leitner added. “He is entitled to his opinions, but deceptions and lies have no place in works of history.”



Popular posts from this blog

MarsEdit 4

I've been using MarsEdit for just over seven years. I started with version 2, and then upgraded to version 3 in 2010.Now, in 2018, I just upgraded to version 4. This is my first post with the upgrade and I'll report on it in a little while as I get used to the new version.Here is what Daniel of Red Sweater Software has to say about his product:Browser-based interfaces are slow, clumsy, and require you to be online just to use them. Browsers are perfect for reading web content, but not ideal for creating it. If you're serious about writing for the web, you need a desktop blog editor. If you're lucky enough to have a Mac, nothing is more powerful, or more elegant than MarsEditRich and Plain Text Editing MarsEdit's editor switches easily from Plain to Rich Text, so you can work in whichever format you prefer. Love Markdown? MarsEdit can preview it and convert it to HTML if needed.Wildly Compatible Works with WordPress, Blogger, Tumblr, TypePad, Movable Type, and any …

Resistance Is Futile

Some of the trains that run from London Kings Cross to Cambridge divide at Cambridge. Part of the train goes on to Kings Lynn and the rest stops at Cambridge and does the run back to London. Perhaps it picks up other carriages coming from somewhere else, I don’t know but it seems likely.When you get on the train and before it sets off, there’s a public announcement announcing how the train divides. It explains that the train is composed of eight carriages and that passengers wanting to travel beyond Cambridge should ensure that they are in the front four carriages.The rear four carriages are of course nearest the barrier, so we choose to sit in one of those carriages if for no other reason than that we don’t have to walk so far to find a seat.So there we are and the voice comes over with the announcement. And then there is a pause and then a voice tells you what carriage you are in. So we hear ‘Six of Eight’ or ‘Seven of Eight’ – and every time I hear it I think of Star Trek, ‘Three o…

Business For Britain Is Concerned With Business For Britain

This report in the New York Times today

LONDON — Is British business fretting about the risks of the country drifting out of the European Union? Or does it crave a looser relationship with Continental allies, one free from meddlesome regulation?
The answer to that question remained unclear Monday after a newly formed group of business leaders argued for a renegotiation of Britain’s membership terms — echoing the policy of Prime Minister David Cameron, who in January promised voters a referendum on whether the country would remain in the Union.
The new group, called Business for Britain, is intended to counter the intervention of pro-E.U. business leaders who have warned of the dangers of Britain slipping out of the 27-nation bloc and its single market of 500 million people. A statement released Monday to announce the group’s formation was signed by about 500 executives.
I think this opinion in the New York Times article is interesting:

Never much attracted to the idea of European unity,…