Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
The Library => The SGA => Topic started by: Tarheel on April 10, 2008, 06:13:17 PM
-
has never met a terrorist, dictator, thug, or America hater that he hasn't liked. Here's yet another example of why Carter needs to be committed to the nearest insane asylum. Or perhaps his Hamas friends will take him as a hostage. :silence:
Hamas confirms plan to meet Jimmy Carter
Would be highest-level U.S. audience for isolated terrorist group
JERUSALEM – The Hamas terrorist organization has confirmed to WND plans are in the works for former President Jimmy Carter to meet the chief of Hamas on a trip this month to Syria.
Sources in the Gaza Strip office of Ismail Haniyeh, the deposed prime minister of the Hamas-led Palestinian government, confirmed Hamas is in talks with Carter's representatives about setting up a meeting during his trip, scheduled for later this month.
The Hamas sources said no concrete date has been set but that Carter has expressed interest in meeting Hamas chieftain Khaled Meshaal, who resides in Syria.
In a statement to Fox News today, Carter's press secretary, Deanna Congileo, did not deny the former president was slated to meet Meshaal.
"President Carter is planning a trip to the Mideast next week; however, we are still confirming details of the trip and will issue a press release by the end of this week," Congileo said. "I cannot confirm any specific meetings at this point in time."
Earlier, Ahmed Yousuf, Hamas' top political adviser in the Gaza Strip, claimed to WND he wasn't aware of any Carter-Meshaal meeting.
"I don't know anything about any such meeting," said Yousuf, who advises Haniyeh.
Israeli security officials say Meshaal is responsible for coordinating all elements of Hamas and for calling for many of its major terror attacks.
Hamas is listed by the State Department as a terrorist organization. The group is responsible for scores of deadly suicide bombings, and thousands of shooting attacks and rocket firings against civilian population centers.
Just today, Hamas-allied gunmen took part in the deadly shooting of two Israeli civilians near the border between Egypt and the Gaza Strip.
FoxNews.com quoted a State Department spokesman in Washington stating the U.S. government is concerned about Carter's unsanctioned trip to Syria, which the Bush administration has been trying to isolate.
"The State Department has expressed our concerns and advised President Carter that past engagement with the Syrian regime has not produced positive results," the spokesman said.
If the meeting with Hamas takes place, Carter would be the highest-level American to meet with Hamas.
According to the London-based, Arab daily Al-Hayat, which first broke the story of Carter's planned meeting, the former president will represent his Carter Center foundation during his visit to Syria and will not travel in his capacity of former U.S. president.
John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, balked at that distinction.
"Maybe he'll give up his pension, but he's always a former president," Bolton told FoxNews.com.
The Fox News website reported it tried numerous times to reach the Carter Center for comment, but calls and e-mails were not returned.
from World Net Daily
Here's the link:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61180
-
You do realize that if Hitler were still alive, he and Jimmy would probably be golfing buddies. :blink:
-
You do realize that if Hitler were still alive, he and Jimmy would probably be golfing buddies. :blink:
Reminds me of a bad joke about pizzas and Jews...Jimmy Carter being an avowed anti-semite would like it I'm sure.
-
I heard this news this morning and I could not help but laugh. The short version of this story is that practically all of Israel's government officials are shunning Carter while he is in their country. The Shin Bet has declined to help the U. S. Secret Service to protect him while he is there (there's separate accounts of this...Carter officials have said that they requested protection but the Shin Bet says that they did not ask for it. I suspect that the truth is somewhere between the two accounts.) And Carter wanted to visit one of the jailed palestinian leaders but Israeli officials refused.
Here's the article:
Israel snubs Carter and declines security help
Mon Apr 14, 2008 11:34am EDT
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel's secret service declined to assist U.S. agents guarding former U.S. President Jimmy Carter during a visit in which Israeli leaders shunned him over his plans to meet Hamas, U.S. sources said on Monday.
"They're not getting support from local security," one of the sources said, on condition of anonymity.
An Israeli security source said the Shin Bet security service provided no protection to Carter during his visit to the Jewish state because no request was made.
Asked about the Israeli account, Carter's delegation, which had previously declined to comment, told Reuters in a statement: "The Carter delegation inquired with both the lead agent of the Secret Service detail (protecting Carter) and the State Department Regional Security Officer and were told unequivocally that an official request for assistance had been made."
American sources close to the matter said the Shin Bet, which helps protect visiting dignitaries and is overseen by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office, declined to meet the head of Carter's Secret Service detail or provide his team with assistance as is customary during such visits.
Carter, who brokered Israel's first peace treaty with an Arab neighbor, Egypt, signed in 1979, met Israel's largely ceremonial president, Shimon Peres, on Sunday. But Israel's political leadership, including Olmert, steered clear of the Nobel Peace Prize winner.
The former U.S. leader has angered the Israeli government with plans to meet Hamas's top leader, Khaled Meshaal, in Syria, and for describing Israeli policy in the occupied Palestinian territories as "a system of apartheid" in a 2006 book.
Carter has defended talks with Hamas as an opportunity to gauge the group's willingness to accept Arab peace overtures.
He visited the Israeli border town of Sderot on Monday and said he was "distressed" by cross-border rockets fired by militants in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.
"I think it's a despicable crime for any deliberate effort to be made to kill innocent civilians," Carter said, adding that he hoped a ceasefire would be reached soon.
Israel said it rejected Carter's request to meet jailed Palestinian uprising leader Marwan Barghouthi, who is seen as a possible successor to President Mahmoud Abbas.
Barghouthi was convicted in 2004 of murder by an Israeli court over the killing of four Israelis and a Greek Orthodox monk in attacks by Palestinian militants. He is serving five life sentences.
"UNPRECEDENTED" BREACH
An American source described as "unprecedented" the lack of Shin Bet cooperation with the U.S. Secret Service, which protects all current and former U.S. presidents, as well as Israeli leaders when they visit the United States.
The Bush administration and close U.S. ally Israel oppose Carter's planned meeting with Meshaal, whose Islamist group won Palestinian parliamentary elections in 2006 but was boycotted by the West for refusing to renounce violence and recognize Israel.
Israel and the United States have sought to isolate Hamas, which seized control of the Gaza Strip in June from more secular Fatah forces loyal to Abbas. Abbas holds sway in the occupied West Bank and has launched U.S.-backed peace talks with Olmert.
Hamas leaders have offered a long-term truce with Israel in return for a viable Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip, but the group's 1988 founding charter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state.
(Additional reporting by Brenda Gazzar; Editing by Charles Dick)
Here's the link:
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL1464259420080414?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&rpc=22&sp=true
-
I heard this news this morning and I could not help but laugh. The short version of this story is that practically all of Israel's government officials are shunning Carter while he is in their country. The Shin Bet has declined to help the U. S. Secret Service to protect him while he is there (there's separate accounts of this...Carter officials have said that they requested protection but the Shin Bet says that they did not ask for it. I suspect that the truth is somewhere between the two accounts.) And Carter wanted to visit one of the jailed palestinian leaders but Israeli officials refused.
Jimmy clearly has his finger on the pulse of the world. Perhaps, Hamas "leaders" will welcome old Jimmy with a rusty saber and save the US from anymore embarrassment from this delusional clown. His antics have been bordering on sedition for years.
-
Well, the laughs just continue as Carter romps through the Holy Land (all emphasis, underlines, and subtexts are my own annotations):
Carter kisses Hamas terrorist
Former president also lays wreath at 'peace fighter' Arafat's gravesite
Posted: April 15, 2008
1:45 pm Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
RAMALLAH, West Bank – Former President Jimmy Carter today warmly embraced a top Hamas terrorist and laid a wreath on the gravesite of former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, whom Carter called a "peace fighter" and a "dear friend," according to Palestinian officials speaking to WND.
Visiting the West Bank city of Ramallah, Carter attended a reception with Nasser Shaer, a senior Hamas leader. The reception was closed to the media, but according to participants and the Hamas leader, Carter hugged Shaer and kissed him on each cheek, the customary greeting for good friends. Many U.S. diplomats refrain from kissing Palestinian officials.
"He gave me a hug. We hugged each other, and it was a warm reception," Shaer told the Associated Press. "Carter asked what he can do to achieve peace between the Palestinians and Israel ... and I told him the possibility for peace is high."
>>>And that I'd like to see Israel pushed into the sea and obliterated along with the Jewish people.
Shaer previously served as deputy prime minister and education minister in the Hamas-led Palestinian government, which was toppled last year. He served time in Israeli prison after being charged with terrorist activities.
According to Israeli security officials, Shaer functioned as a financial and communications link between cells of the Hamas organization in Gaza and in the northern West Bank city of Nablus.
Prior to embracing Shaer, Carter met with officials from Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah organization at the Muqata, the main Fatah headquarters.
Carter paid a visit to the gravesite of Arafat, who is buried just outside the Muqata. Palestinian officials who escorted Carter told WND the former president paused for a moment of silence at Arafat's grave before laying a wreathe there.
>>>Brings a tear to my eye.
The Palestinian officials quoted Carter stating Arafat was a "peace fighter and a dear friend of mine."
>>>Nothing about him being a terrorist but Carter has never met a terrorist he hasn't liked.
They also quoted Carter calling Arafat a "partner in representing the question of justice in the world."
The officials said Carter repeatedly accused Israel of not implementing its side of agreements that called on the Jewish state to ease travel restrictions for Palestinians and to dismantle what are termed illegal outposts, or West Bank Jewish communities constructed without governmental permission.
>>>Maybe that's because Hamas keeps firing missiles into Sderot and other Israeli cities
Israel earlier this month dismantled 50 anti-terror roadblocks as a gesture to Abbas. The Israeli-Palestinian agreements also called for an end of Palestinian terrorism, but more than 100 incidents of terrorism have been carried out in the past 45 days alone, security officials pointed out.
>>>See what I mean?
Tayeb Abdel Rahim, Abbas' secretary general, told Carter that Arafat's burial site in Ramallah was only temporary until his remains can be transferred to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Palestinian officials told WND.
>>>WHAT!? WHAT!? WHAT!?
In the years before his death in 2004, Israel and the U.S. attempted to isolate Arafat after he turned down a peace agreement in 2000 at U.S.-mediated peace talks at Camp David and, instead, returned to Ramallah to launch an intifada – or terrorist war – against the Jewish state.
Carter told reporters today he had requested permission to enter the Gaza Strip from Israel but was turned down.
He said he may meet with other Hamas leaders while visiting Syria later this week.
According to Hamas officials, Carter is slated to meet with Hamas chieftain Khaled Meshaal, who resides in Syria.
In a WND exclusive interview yesterday, Ahmed Yousuf, Hamas' top political adviser in the Gaza Strip, called Carter a "noble person" whose planned meeting with Hamas would help the terror organization "engage with the world community."
"Carter can achieve something no one else can. He is open-minded and has a very noble cause to come and meet with all people," said Yousuf, the chief political adviser to Ismail Haniyeh, the deposed prime minister of the Hamas-led Palestinian government.
Yousuf, the Hamas figure usually responsible for coordinating meetings with foreign officials, said Carter "should get credit because he is the one who really understands the (Israeli-Palestinian) conflict and knows what is needed to achieve peace."
>>>And that is the complete destruction of Israel and the Jewish people.
He indicated Carter's visit could help end Hamas' international isolation.
"If he comes and meets Hamas, this will also enhance the image and understanding between America and the Muslim world," said Yousuf, speaking by phone from Gaza. "Carter's visit is a good step and a positive step in the right direction. It would engage with the world community. To what degree he succeeds depends on the people in Europe and the U.S."
Yousuf blasted the Bush administration for "trying to block every attempt to lift sanctions against Hamas."
He accused "Zionists" and U.S. Jewish groups of "trying to sabotage" Carter's Middle East trip. "Some reports said American Jewish groups tried to stigmatize him with being connected to terrorism or working against Jewish ambitions at home," Yousef said.
>>>No anti-Semitism or anti-Americanism there! (sarcasm)
Asked if he believed Democrats would engage Hamas if the party takes the White House next year, Yousuf replied, "I do believe Democrats will make a drastic change in American foreign policy. I hope they are able to fix the damage done by [President] Bush and the Republicans and engage again in a very positive way with the Arab and Muslim world, where most of their vital interests lie."
Here's the link:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61655
-
Well, the laughs just continue as Carter romps through the Holy Land (all emphasis, underlines, and subtexts are my own annotations):
Here's the link:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61655
What a peace-loving people... If they would only send a small nuke over right now, we could solve a few problems all at once. :thumbsup:
-
What a peace-loving people... If they would only send a small nuke over right now, we could solve a few problems all at once. :thumbsup:
What the article did not say was that when Carter kissed the terrorist leader on each cheek he meant on each cheek of the terrorist's ass.
-
Hamas official Mushir Masri, in a fiery speech Friday to thousands of Hamas supporters in Gaza, said the meetings with Carter were proof that Hamas was not a terrorist group, but a national liberation movement.
"It confirms the failure of the U.S. and European policies of ignoring Hamas," he told the crowd. "It confirms that all the countries that assume Hamas is a terrorist group should reconsider."
Thanks Jimmy, you douchebag.
-
Yea I saw this a little while ago. Borderline treason!
-
Yea I saw this a little while ago. Borderline treason!
Borderline treason my ass... Mr. Carter is undermining the efforts of the current and future administrations of the United States. Even Barack al-Queada Obama is upset with Jimmy right now.
I really like this idea... http://www.ajc.com/uga/content/news/stories/2008/04/18/carter_passport.html
They should do it right now and leave his "bitter" ass over there!!!
-
Borderline treason my ass... Mr. Carter is undermining the efforts of the current and future administrations of the United States. Even Barack al-Queada Obama is upset with Jimmy right now.
I really like this idea... http://www.ajc.com/uga/content/news/stories/2008/04/18/carter_passport.html
They should do it right now and leave his "bitter" ass over there!!!
I like it. When I say treason I mean a hangable offense. Hence why I say it's borderline. Can't we just take his liver pills away?
-
While agree with 0 % of what Jimmy Carter did, You guys do have to realize that if peace is ever to be realized that they have to be brought to the negotiating table. If your response is that they are all terrorists (which I Agree), it still doesn't change the fact that we can't ignore them or just attempt to kill them all. Both solutions will only attempt to validate their retarded beliefs and bring more to their cause.
-
While agree with 0 % of what Jimmy Carter did, You guys do have to realize that if peace is ever to be realized that they have to be brought to the negotiating table. If your response is that they are all terrorists (which I Agree), it still doesn't change the fact that we can't ignore them or just attempt to kill them all. Both solutions will only attempt to validate their retarded beliefs and bring more to their cause.
Well, I respectfully and vehemently disagree. Don't fall for the idea that these people maintain any of the same values as us. They have no respect for human life. These individuals are willing to strap a bomb to their chest, walk into a crowded shopping mall, and blow themselves up to kill as many "infidels" as they can. They also don't respect the concept of this "negotiating table" that you speak of. How many times have they come to peace agreements with Israel, and then turn around to be the first to fire rockets into Israel's cities targeting civilian populations? Even their religion scoffs at the idea of these agreements. They see them only as opportunities to re-arm and prepare for their next offensive assault.
Nobody is suggesting that we "ignore them," and the last time I checked, we're not attempting to "kill them all." We're breaking their spirit, which is the point of any military action. Best of all, it's working contrary to what you hear in the evening news. There have been no terrorist attacks against Americans since September 11th, 2001. They tried in Syria, but that was foiled by Syrian security forces. There have been no other embassy bombings, and there have been no attacks against any of our military bases outside of Iraq and Afghanistan. Compare that with those of the Clinton years where we suffered at least 12 notable terrorist attacks from Muslim extremists, likely associated with al-Qaeda, around the world.
Simply put, there is no peace with these people in their current form. They need to be broken down further. Historically speaking, Neville Chamberlain believed that he could negotiate peace with Hitler. When you have some time, look up and read his "Peace for our time" speech. Six months after their "agreement," Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia. You can't negotiate peace with an enemy that feels emboldened. You have to break them down, destroy their spirit, kill their leaders and squelch their beliefs. Then, you can start talking about peace.
-
Well, I respectfully and vehemently disagree. Don't fall for the idea that these people maintain any of the same values as us. They have no respect for human life. These individuals are willing to strap a bomb to their chest, walk into a crowded shopping mall, and blow themselves up to kill as many "infidels" as they can. They also don't respect the concept of this "negotiating table" that you speak of. How many times have they come to peace agreements with Israel, and then turn around to be the first to fire rockets into Israel's cities targeting civilian populations? Even their religion scoffs at the idea of these agreements. They see them only as opportunities to re-arm and prepare for their next offensive assault.
Nobody is suggesting that we "ignore them," and the last time I checked, we're not attempting to "kill them all." We're breaking their spirit, which is the point of any military action. Best of all, it's working contrary to what you hear in the evening news. There have been no terrorist attacks against Americans since September 11th, 2001. They tried in Syria, but that was foiled by Syrian security forces. There have been no other embassy bombings, and there have been no attacks against any of our military bases outside of Iraq and Afghanistan. Compare that with those of the Clinton years where we suffered at least 12 notable terrorist attacks from Muslim extremists, likely associated with al-Qaeda, around the world.
Simply put, there is no peace with these people in their current form. They need to be broken down further. Historically speaking, Neville Chamberlain believed that he could negotiate peace with Hitler. When you have some time, look up and read his "Peace for our time" speech. Six months after their "agreement," Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia. You can't negotiate peace with an enemy that feels emboldened. You have to break them down, destroy their spirit, kill their leaders and squelch their beliefs. Then, you can start talking about peace.
First off, "Breaking spirits" is not the point of any military action. Military action has one simple point, kill or be killed. To destroy their entire foundation and leadership. That may work when fighting a single enemy, lets say a country such as Germany. However, attempting to destroy an entire religion has never and will never work. Do you honestly believe there is a way to "squelch" the entire Islamic religion? I know the argument is, "Well, these arent a representative of the entire Muslim Nation, they are extremists." That may be true to an extent, but I promise you that an attempt at squashing their beliefs and trying to destroy their spirit will only result in more "moderate" Muslims joining their cause. Taking care of the organizations such as Al Queda is imparative, but groups such as the Palestenian's cannot just be "squashed." Don't forget that they were forced out of their homes and off of their land when other countries, namely U.S. and Britain, deided to simply give their land to the new Jewish nation. I am not saying it was right or wrong, I am just pointing out the fact that there is a basis for their uncivil disagreement.
-
First off, "Breaking spirits" is not the point of any military action. Military action has one simple point, kill or be killed. To destroy their entire foundation and leadership. That may work when fighting a single enemy, lets say a country such as Germany. However, attempting to destroy an entire religion has never and will never work. Do you honestly believe there is a way to "squelch" the entire Islamic religion? I know the argument is, "Well, these arent a representative of the entire Muslim Nation, they are extremists." That may be true to an extent, but I promise you that an attempt at squashing their beliefs and trying to destroy their spirit will only result in more "moderate" Muslims joining their cause. Taking care of the organizations such as Al Queda is imparative, but groups such as the Palestenian's cannot just be "squashed." Don't forget that they were forced out of their homes and off of their land when other countries, namely U.S. and Britain, deided to simply give their land to the new Jewish nation. I am not saying it was right or wrong, I am just pointing out the fact that there is a basis for their uncivil disagreement.
Well unfortunately, you're completely wrong about military action. While the military's job is to kill people and break things, the use of the military by any power is to break the resolve or spirit of the people you're fighting. For instance, our goal was not to kill every Japanese person during WWII. We only needed to break their will to a level where they were willing to surrender and agree to a peaceful resolution. Similar is true of the Germans during WWI and WWII. The same is true of every military conflict. Consider the formation of the United States. During our battle for independence, we only needed to break the resolve of the King of England regarding the control of a New World Colony. At the time, Great Britain was far stronger than us, but the battle would prove to be too costly for England to continue sending ships and soldiers.
Regarding the Muslims, we'll never be successful trying to "kill them all" or "to destroy an entire religion." That's not the point of our actions in Afghanistan or Iraq. Stop buying into that silly Liberal argument. We're trying to break the resolve of the extremists who believe that it's acceptable to strap a bomb to their chest, walk into a crowded shopping center, and blow themselves up to kill as many women and children of the civilian population as they can. We're not going to squelch an entire religion, and we'll likely never completely destroy their spirit. However, continued efforts to break them down will eventually enable us to assist in the evolution of their extremist views to something less extreme or less violent and negotiate a peaceful coexistence. Keep in mind that we have many of these "moderate" Muslims in the United States. I don't see any of them walking into crowded shopping malls with bombs or guns intent on killing Christians, Jews or other non-Muslims.
The Palestinian issue is a mess, but it doesn't warrant or come close to justifying the type of uncivilized behavior that we see from these animals. Attacking military targets is one thing, but shooting missiles into crowded civilian areas is unconscionable. When they commit such actions, they are proving to be unworthy of any negotiations or bargaining. Furthermore, the “Palestinians” were not actually “forced out of their homes” by the US and Britain to create Israel. After Israel was formed, there was a war sparked by the surrounding Arab countries that later resulted in peace agreements giving Israel greater control over the Palestinian region. The United Nations may have been instrumental in that, but the resolve of the new Israeli spirit was far greater than the neighboring Arab nations expected.
Finally, are you really a bleeding-heart pansy-assed Liberal, or are you just fucking with me?
-
:popcorn:
-
Well unfortunately, you're completely wrong about military action. While the military's job is to kill people and break things, the use of the military by any power is to break the resolve or spirit of the people you're fighting. For instance, our goal was not to kill every Japanese person during WWII. We only needed to break their will to a level where they were willing to surrender and agree to a peaceful resolution. Similar is true of the Germans during WWI and WWII. The same is true of every military conflict. Consider the formation of the United States. During our battle for independence, we only needed to break the resolve of the King of England regarding the control of a New World Colony. At the time, Great Britain was far stronger than us, but the battle would prove to be too costly for England to continue sending ships and soldiers.
Regarding the Muslims, we'll never be successful trying to "kill them all" or "to destroy an entire religion." That's not the point of our actions in Afghanistan or Iraq. Stop buying into that silly Liberal argument. We're trying to break the resolve of the extremists who believe that it's acceptable to strap a bomb to their chest, walk into a crowded shopping center, and blow themselves up to kill as many women and children of the civilian population as they can. We're not going to squelch an entire religion, and we'll likely never completely destroy their spirit. However, continued efforts to break them down will eventually enable us to assist in the evolution of their extremist views to something less extreme or less violent and negotiate a peaceful coexistence. Keep in mind that we have many of these "moderate" Muslims in the United States. I don't see any of them walking into crowded shopping malls with bombs or guns intent on killing Christians, Jews or other non-Muslims.
The Palestinian issue is a mess, but it doesn't warrant or come close to justifying the type of uncivilized behavior that we see from these animals. Attacking military targets is one thing, but shooting missiles into crowded civilian areas is unconscionable. When they commit such actions, they are proving to be unworthy of any negotiations or bargaining. Furthermore, the “Palestinians” were not actually “forced out of their homes” by the US and Britain to create Israel. After Israel was formed, there was a war sparked by the surrounding Arab countries that later resulted in peace agreements giving Israel greater control over the Palestinian region. The United Nations may have been instrumental in that, but the resolve of the new Israeli spirit was far greater than the neighboring Arab nations expected.
Finally, are you really a bleeding-heart pansy-assed Liberal, or are you just fucking with me?
I am pretty sure that when people walk in with guns and tell you to leave your home, you wouldn't be very happy either. Israel was subjectively able to draw their own borders...You act as if if was their land in the first place and they just took it back...thats not true at all. They forced the Palestininans out of their homes. Look up the British mandate of Palestine.
I was just wondering, Are you really a water-head drool on yourself conservative, or just retarded? :poke:
-
I am pretty sure that when people walk in with guns and tell you to leave your home, you wouldn't be very happy either. Israel was subjectively able to draw their own borders...You act as if if was their land in the first place and they just took it back...thats not true at all. They forced the Palestininans out of their homes. Look up the British mandate of Palestine.
I was just wondering, Are you really a water-head drool on yourself conservative, or just retarded? :poke:
They didn't exactly "draw their own borders" as you put it. The borders were negotiated with the neighboring Arab nations in their respective peace agreements. Furthermore, the last time I checked, a good bit of that land had been renegotiated and given back.
As far as the British Mandate of Palestine goes, British soldiers weren't driving the "Palestininans" out of their homes, and the "Palestininans" weren't exactly a great organized nation. The area was essentially controlled by the British, and a solution had to be found for the post-WWII problem. "They're the Jews! They're going to want more..."
You and I do seem to agree on one thing. Personally, I too don't believe that the current nation of Israel should have ever been created. I think it was a mistake for the UN to take such an action, but at the time, it was strongly supported by England. They had control of the territory, and the "Palestininans" were essentially a collection of disorganized tribes. It was England who made the investments in the territory by building up the infrastructure and organizing a local government. The region also had a large and growing Jewish population that was well organized and educated. In addition, the Jewish refugees from WWII weren't exactly going to be welcomed back to their countries of origin.
Finally, if you and Jimmy actually believe that peaceful coexistence can be negotiated with any person willing to strap a bomb to their chest, walk into a crowded civilian area and blow themselves up, let me know. I'll be more than willing to purchase a ticket for you and just about anyone else who wants to try. :rofl:
-
They didn't exactly "draw their own borders" as you put it. The borders were negotiated with the neighboring Arab nations in their respective peace agreements. Furthermore, the last time I checked, a good bit of that land had been renegotiated and given back.
As far as the British Mandate of Palestine goes, British soldiers weren't driving the "Palestininans" out of their homes, and the "Palestininans" weren't exactly a great organized nation. The area was essentially controlled by the British, and a solution had to be found for the post-WWII problem. "They're the Jews! They're going to want more..."
You and I do seem to agree on one thing. Personally, I too don't believe that the current nation of Israel should have ever been created. I think it was a mistake for the UN to take such an action, but at the time, it was strongly supported by England. They had control of the territory, and the "Palestininans" were essentially a collection of disorganized tribes. It was England who made the investments in the territory by building up the infrastructure and organizing a local government. The region also had a large and growing Jewish population that was well organized and educated. In addition, the Jewish refugees from WWII weren't exactly going to be welcomed back to their countries of origin.
Finally, if you and Jimmy actually believe that peaceful coexistence can be negotiated with any person willing to strap a bomb to their chest, walk into a crowded civilian area and blow themselves up, let me know. I'll be more than willing to purchase a ticket for you and just about anyone else who wants to try. :rofl:
I agree with you that it will never happen unless somethings drastically change, i.e. stop blowing yourself up and killing innocent civilians. I am just hypothetically saying it wouldn't be a bad idea eventually. IF, they change. However, it doesn't seem like that will happen in the next 43,454 years.
-
Can't we all just kill some raghead motherfucka's?
-
My initial purpose for this thread was to point out that Carter was meeting with Hamas! Hamas IS a terrorist organization and while they may be the 'elected' leaders of Gaza (after they took over Gaza in what amounts to a military coup supported by Iran and Syria) they are NOT the elected leaders of the Palestinians. If Carter wants to help the Palestinians shouldn't he be meeting with Mahmoud Abbas, the elected President of the Palestinian National Authority in the PNA capitol of Ram-Allah, West Bank?
Which begs the obvious problem; any kind of peace can't be negotiated until the "Palestinians" can elect one representative government...not one government in the West Bank and another renegade, terrorist controlled government in Gaza and/or the Golan Heights. Hamas should not have been enpowered or even recognized by Carter!
"Peace in our time"...indeed.
(Very interesting debate AWK and GarMan...sorry that I missed it...been out of town and away from teh ebays and the intarwebs.)
-
I agree with you that it will never happen unless somethings drastically change, i.e. stop blowing yourself up and killing innocent civilians. I am just hypothetically saying it wouldn't be a bad idea eventually. IF, they change. However, it doesn't seem like that will happen in the next 43,454 years.
Hypothetically speaking, there are a lot of things that wouldn't be bad ideas in the Wunderfool Utopian World of Liberal La-La-Land (aka Crystal Halls of Left-Wing Acedemia).
-
Hypothetically speaking, there are a lot of things that wouldn't be bad ideas in the Wunderfool Utopian World of Liberal La-La-Land (aka Crystal Halls of Left-Wing Acedemia).
The same land of WMD's and Yellow cake?
-
The same land of WMD's and Yellow cake?
Psssst... We did find WMDs in Iraq, but don't expect for the mainstream media to make that a front page story for everyone to read.
"Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."
- Sen. Rick Santorum
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
I suppose that you'll now reply with...
Oh, that's just "faux" news. They're not a credible news source. And, and, and, that's a Republican Senator. Of course, he's going to lie.
But, you still won't be able to dispute the actual facts. :rofl:
-
The same land of WMD's and Yellow cake?
I'm gonna have to disagree with you there Hoss on the Yellow cake reference. Here's a quote from an article by Christopher Hitchens on the subject:
...
Now turn to the front page of the June 28 [2004] Financial Times for a report from the paper's national security correspondent, Mark Huband. He describes a strong consensus among European intelligence services that between 1999 and 2001 Niger was engaged in illicit negotiations over the export of its "yellow cake" uranium ore with North Korea, Libya, Iraq, Iran, and China. The British intelligence report on this matter, once cited by President Bush, has never been disowned or withdrawn by its authors. The bogus document produced by an Italian con man in October 2002, which has caused such embarrassment, was therefore more like a forgery than a fake: It was a fabricated version of a true bill.
...
Here's a link to the full article:
http://www.slate.com/id/2103795/
This article appeared in 2004 but since then no evidence that Iraq had not been negotiating with Niger has been produced despite the fact that the Bush Administration has not confronted the Plame's about their political agenda in this matter...and the Brits have not backed down on their supporting report on this subject. And this article has not been editorialized or corrected by the publishers.
Here's an article that appeared in 2005:
...
British intelligence found out through multiple sources that representatives of the Iraqi government had met with officials from the Niger government.
This fact is not in dispute. The mystery is in what they talked about. A memo obtained by the British — later proven to be a forgery — purported to show the Iraqis were interested in purchasing 500 tons of yellow cake uranium from Niger's mines. Forgery or not, since Niger's exports are extremely limited, consisting largely of uranium ore[/], livestock, cowpeas, and onions, one doesn't have to be an intelligence analyst to figure out in which one of those items the Iraqis might be interested.
...
Here's the link:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/07/about_that_500_tons_of_yellow.html
And here's an interesting Time-Line published on this subject; but what is interesting is this excerpt:
...
On 24 September 2002, the British issued a white paper which stated: "[T]there is intelligence that Iraq has sought the supply of significant quantities of uranium from Africa." (50)
...
The writer of this Time-Line cites the Senate report on this matter entitled "REPORT ON THE US INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY'S PREWAR INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS ON IRAQ"
Here's a link to the Time-Line:
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/wariniraq/a/niger.htm
(This is primarily for the Plame issue but is relevent to your reference.)
And here is the link to the Senate intelligence report:
http://uspolitics.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=uspolitics&cdn=newsissues&tm=15&gps=120_229_1436_747&f=20&tt=2&bt=1&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.fas.org/irp/congress/2004_rpt/ssci_iraq.pdf
-
between 1999 and 2001 Niger was engaged in illicit negotiations over the export of its "yellow cake" uranium ore with North Korea, Libya, Iraq, Iran, and China
To paraphrase Dave Chappelle (as Rick James)
"They should have never given those Niger-s uranium!!"
-
Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.
Using reading comprehension, they still haven't found them. And buddy, I don't care if you give me the greatest source in to world, the hoopla made up about WMD's never even came close to being realized.
And the Uranium, Did they actually find Uranium in Iraq? No. I could say you have bought Uranium, then point to the fact that a counttry has been exporting it. That logic makes no sense and lacks as much credibility as Michael Moore's crapshoot propaganda films. Unless they actually find the Uranium, you can't honestly say that we went to war on credible intel.
-
Using reading comprehension, they still haven't found them. And buddy, I don't care if you give me the greatest source in to world, the hoopla made up about WMD's never even came close to being realized.
Let's try this again... Let's follow your "lead" regarding reading comprehension this time.
"Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."
- Sen. Rick Santorum
Note the first sentence...
Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent.
Call it "hoopla" or whatever other term you want to use to downplay the facts, these devices are in fact WMDs. They were recovered, and they're still being recovered. Even in their "degraded" state, these devices were quite deadly and violated every single one of the UN resolutions regarding Iraq since the first Gulf War.
And buddy, I don't care if you give me the greatest source in to world...
Essentially, you're saying that no matter what facts or truths exist, it doesn't matter to you. I guess those facts didn't really matter to these folks either, or at least, the facts don't matter for them anymore, huh?
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/13/iraq.graves/
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/27000.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/05/world/middleeast/05grave.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3738368.stm
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-04/20/content_8017637.htm
And, that's just from the first Google results page from my search...
U.S. and Iraqi security forces regularly discover mass graves in different parts of Iraq for people killed in chaos and sectarian violence since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
The UN seems to have a great track record dealing with murderous dictators and violent regimes. By the way, are the victim's rotting corpses and skeletal remains "credible" enough for you?
-
The problem i see is one of definition....
I define WMD's as items that will kill lots of mutha fuckas. Clearly chemical weapons fall into that category.
The media and most sheeple just assumed that WMD's meant there were nuclear warheads ready to be loaded on to the local scud and blindly launched toward someone.
Anyway the fucker needed to die.
-
The problem i see is one of definition....
There's no doubt that definition and/or ignorance plays into this, but I thought that Colon Powell was pretty clear. At least, I didn't have any doubts. The article at the link below pretty much explains it.
The first reaction from Washington was to calm speculation that the find would provide the trigger for war, and to deny that the warheads were "a smoking gun".
"A smoking gun would be if you found a big stockpile with chemicals," an official said.
I had no doubt that these warheads were the "smoking gun" we needed to initiate military action. Of course, the "world community" and the American Left wouldn't see it. They seemed to be waiting for a nuke, fueled and targeted at Washington DC.
The other part of this is the "peace at all costs" movement. It's sort of like that arrogant "UN Diplomacy" that was used in Rwanda, Haiti, Serbia and Bosnia. You could have firing squads lining up civilians outside the gates of a UN base, and the UN wouldn't do a thing.
-
My source comment was a sorta mock reference to the Fox News Article. Needless to say, no Uranium was found and no active chemical weapons plants...
-
The other part of this is the "peace at all costs" movement. It's sort of like that arrogant "UN Diplomacy" that was used in Rwanda, Haiti, Serbia and Bosnia. You could have firing squads lining up civilians outside the gates of a UN base, and the UN wouldn't do a thing.
Wow... It looks like the UN is doing another one of their bang-up jobs in Darfur too.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/04/22/darfur.holmes/index.html
I lost count at over 350,000 bodies found in mass graves throughout Iraq. It seems that Darfur isn't too far behind with 200,000 dead. I see that the UN is living up to it's responsibilities... again.
-
My source comment was a sorta mock reference to the Fox News Article. Needless to say, no Uranium was found and no active chemical weapons plants...
So, let's try your logic here... If someone planned to purchase 30 pounds of drugs, do you think it's still a crime if that person is unsuccessful? What if that person had bongs, pipes, measuring scales and other paraphernalia typically utilized to facilitate use and distribution with trace residue of illegal narcotics? I mean, the bongs, pipes, measuring scales and other items wouldn’t necessarily be “active” at the time... unless the drugs were obtained, that is.
Liberal logic is so weak. :rofl:
-
...
Needless to say, no Uranium was found
...
AWK I respectfully refer you back to one of the articles that I posted yesterday on this subject...in fact Uranium WAS found in Baghdad...this article appeared in the "American Thinker" in 2005; the editors of this rag are not exactly friendly to the Bush Administration or the War in Iraq yet they pointedly report that uranium was there.
We interrupt this scandal to ask a question that, due to it's 'explosive' nature was never asked when the story broke almost exactly a year ago...
What were 500 tons of yellow cake uranium still doing at the nuclear research center of Al—Tuwaitha in Iraq when American tanks rolled into Bagdhad?
...
The article does go on to say that the uranium was supposedly under the IAEA supervision and seal (another reason that would explain why Saddam might have been seeking more fissile material from Niger).
Here, again, is the link:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/07/about_that_500_tons_of_yellow.html
-
So, let's try your logic here... If someone planned to purchase 30 pounds of drugs, do you think it's still a crime if that person is unsuccessful? What if that person had bongs, pipes, measuring scales and other paraphernalia typically utilized to facilitate use and distribution with trace residue of illegal narcotics? I mean, the bongs, pipes, measuring scales and other items wouldn’t necessarily be “active” at the time... unless the drugs were obtained, that is.
Liberal logic is so weak. :rofl:
Yeah, my logic is weak. First, there is absolutely no positive proof that he tried to buy Uranium from Africa. Second, we have found no enriched Uranium for weapons manufacturing, nothing even close a dirty bomb, or even anything found to link Iraq pre-war to attempt to be making any type of weapon with Uranium. Using your hypo, there are no "bongs, pipes, measuring scales, and other items."
Tarhell mentions the Uranium below, but that wasn't even under the control of Saddam.
-
...
Tarhell mentions the Uranium below, but that wasn't even under the control of Saddam.
Ah, yes, that could be said to be true but possession is 9/10ths of ownership as it were...
The IAEA placed a seal on the nuclear materials in November of 1992. From then until the fall of Saddam, the agency attempted to make sure that Iraq did not use the yellow cake to reconstitute its nuclear program, something the IAEA acknowledged could be done if the Iraqis were able to rebuild its centrifuges and gain access to additional fissile material. Keeping track of the material was made extraordinarily difficult by the Iraqis who regularly impeded IAEA officials from carrying out even the most routine inspections.
As I recall Iraq finally told the IAEA inspectors to "fuck off"...which was one of the main reasons we went back to war with them. The fact remains that uranium was found in Iraq and that they did negotiate with Niger for 'something'...probably onions I suppose...the Brits have never rescended their report that Iraq was negotiating with Niger for uranium. And, in fact, the Senate intelligence report that I cited earlier agrees (regardless of what the US Main Stream Media reports...they also reported that Hillary won by double digits in PA last night...she won by 9.4 percent...that is not a double digit win.)
-
Yeah, my logic is weak. First, there is absolutely no positive proof that he tried to buy Uranium from Africa. Second, we have found no enriched Uranium for weapons manufacturing, nothing even close a dirty bomb, or even anything found to link Iraq pre-war to attempt to be making any type of weapon with Uranium. Using your hypo, there are no "bongs, pipes, measuring scales, and other items."
Well, according to Santorum's speech, "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent." I would suspect that any reasonable person would recognize these devices as overwhelming evidence that Saddam failed to comply with the 14 UN Resolutions that were passed since the first Gulf War. But, I suppose that's bunch o' "hoopla" in your book. Facts don't have to matter if you set the rules for ignoring them. :clap:
Just a quick point... You don't need enriched Uranium to make a dirty bomb.
-
Well, according to Santorum's speech, "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent." I would suspect that any reasonable person would recognize these devices as overwhelming evidence that Saddam failed to comply with the 14 UN Resolutions that were passed since the first Gulf War. But, I suppose that's bunch o' "hoopla" in your book. Facts don't have to matter if you set the rules for ignoring them. :clap:
Just a quick point... You don't need enriched Uranium to make a dirty bomb.
I don't know how to exactly make one, but for the sake of my future career I'm not going to google it. EIther way, I assumed a bomb that killed many via radiation needed some sort of Uranium, or plutonium.
-
You guys are going to love this shit...
I was at my favorite bar in Decatur last night. It's called Twain's Billiards & Tap. I go there frequently to drink their microbrews and play that addictive sand shuffleboard game.
We were minding our own business when we overhear some people talking about how Jimmy Carter is eating in the restaurant area. I go over to look, and sure enough, there he is, in attendance for a birthday party as it appeared that there was lots of family there (about 16 at the table).
He looks old, and very, very tired. You couldn't go close to him as there were 3 secret service guys in the restaurant, with 2 more out front. They were very obvious and imposing.
About 30 minutes after I made this discovery, I had to break the seal. I walk in the bathroom, and was a little too buzzed to realize the secret service guy was standing by the entrance door. As I pull up to my urinal, I realize that I'm about to take a piss next to a former president.
Thrilla: "Well hi there, sir! Never thought I'd meet you in this fashion".
Carter: "Well, everybody has to use the bathroom sooner or later" (or something to that effect, again, I was buzzed and it was a little surreal)
Thrilla: "Glad to see you're back safe from your trip. A lot of folks I know didn't think it would go off as easy as it did".
Carter: "Well, we accomplished what we set out for. <ZZZIP> Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go back to this birthday party I'm here for."
Thrilla: "Have a good night, sir."
Carter: "You too, son. You're a fine American" (No shit, he said that)
L-M-F-A-O! I know some of you will rip me for being so cordial to him, but I couldn't really find the time to get into World Politics while having my dick in my hand. He left about 30 minutes after that through the kitchen door, which (I assume) leads to the super-secret back exit.
I then proceeded to get shitfaced. :vn:
-
Told you fuckers Thrilla can't leave "his people".
-
Told you fuckers Thrilla can't leave "his people".
Cyclical-fucking-nature.
Touche.
-
Told you fuckers Thrilla can't leave "his people".
What a PUSSY!!! I would have made him look like a fucking fool, and I probably would have been thrown out of there. I definitely would have gotten half the bar to start the "ASS... HOLE..." chant and then migrate to a "CARTER IS A FOOL!" chant.
You didn't even think to send over a round of Irish Car Bombs or Red Headed Sluts, did you??? Now, that would have been funny!
-
What a PUSSY!!! I would have made him look like a fucking fool, and I probably would have been thrown out of there. I definitely would have gotten half the bar to start the "ASS... HOLE..." chant and then migrate to a "CARTER IS A FOOL!" chant.
You didn't even think to send over a round of Irish Car Bombs or Red Headed Sluts, did you??? Now, that would have been funny!
Hmm Garman...I never thought YOU out of all people would've disapproved how I handled the situation. :taunt:
Truth is, I have a problem of getting starstruck around famous people. I normally can't say what I want and don't function well. Especially if I've been drinking.
-
Hmm Garman...I never thought YOU out of all people would've disapproved how I handled the situation. :taunt:
Truth is, I have a problem of getting starstruck around famous people. I normally can't say what I want and don't function well. Especially if I've been drinking.
Well, don't take it the wrong way. It was a great story and all, I just would have handled it differently. A bathroom encounter with me would have resulted in a more direct discussion about why he finds terrorists and murderous dictators so pleasant. I definitely would have challenged him on his patriotism as he goes off around the world to seemingly undermine the efforts of our country's past, current and future leadership.
Now, if I was approaching a good drunken stupor, I probably would have just called him an asshole and pissed on his shoe, but that's just me.
-
Well, don't take it the wrong way. It was a great story and all, I just would have handled it differently. A bathroom encounter with me would have resulted in a more direct discussion about why he finds terrorists and murderous dictators so pleasant. I definitely would have challenged him on his patriotism as he goes off around the world to seemingly undermine the efforts of our country's past, current and future leadership.
Now, if I was approaching a good drunken stupor, I probably would have just called him an asshole and pissed on his shoe, but that's just me.
You're such a bad ass. I bet you're the coolest kid in the neighborhood.
-
Now, if I was approaching a good drunken stupor, I probably would have just called him an asshole and pissed on his shoe, but that's just me.
I didn't know you could aim that well squatting.
-
You guys are going to love this shit...
...
I then proceeded to get shitfaced. :vn:
So there you were... Great story Thrilla!
The fact that he said "Your a fine American." is hilarious!...not because he said it to you but because that's almost the exact same thing that Sean Hannity says to his callers (usually with the same response)...you think Carter's a fan?
I know some of you will rip me for being so cordial to him, but I couldn't really find the time to get into World Politics while having my dick in my hand.
Somehow the thought of discussing world politics in such a position and state of inebriation would be difficult for me too. I'll leave you alone on that one.
But the fact that Carter has been seen in the Dick-hater is another reason why I'll stick with my gun-totin' friends in Cobb County.
-
I didn't know you could aim that well squatting.
Well typically, I just end up pissing on my own shoe, but if a lean back far enough, I find that I can get some distance sometimes.
-
Well typically, I just end up pissing on my own shoe, but if a lean back far enough, I find that I can get some distance sometimes.
Got to have those kegel muscles really in shape!
-
You're such a bad ass. I bet you're the coolest kid in the neighborhood.
It seems that the reach-around king has been a little moody this week. It's alright. We understand that "your friend" only comes around once a month.
-
But the fact that Carter has been seen in the Dick-hater is another reason why I'll stick with my gun-totin' friends in Cobb County.
Damn you! You forgot that we're all "bitter" too!!! Don't you pay attention to what future Emporer Obama says?
You should be ashamed.
-
Damn you! You forgot that we're all "bitter" too!!! Don't you pay attention to what future Emporer Obama says?
You should be ashamed.
Damn, I did forget that I was bitter too!
"We got the kitchen sink, the china, coming at us; she's throwing the buffet..."
"Can I just eat my waffle?"
-
Back on topic, somewhat, this story appeared today on the Drudge Report. In addition to Thrilla's encounter with Carter in Dick-hater this makes for an interesting post script.
All highlights and subscripts are my own...
Israel's UN ambassador calls Jimmy Carter 'a bigot'
Apr 25, 2:44 AM (ET)
By VERENA DOBNIK
NEW YORK (AP) - Israel's ambassador to the United Nations on Thursday called former President Jimmy Carter "a bigot" for meeting with the leader of the militant Hamas movement in Syria.
Carter, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, "went to the region with soiled hands and came back with bloody hands after shaking the hand of Khaled Mashaal, the leader of Hamas," Ambassador Dan Gillerman told a luncheon briefing for reporters.
As I recall the terrorist Yassir Arafat (may he burn in hell) was also a Peace Prize winner
The Ambassador could not have used a better analogy for the meeting...obviously the Israeli's are using him as their spokesman on this whole, sorry trip.
The diplomat was questioned about problems facing his country during a wide-ranging discussion with reporters lasting more than an hour. The briefing was sponsored by The Israel Project, a Washington-based, media-oriented advocacy group.
The ambassador's harsh words for Carter came days after the ex-president met with Mashaal for seven hours in Damascus to negotiate a cease-fire with Gaza's Hamas rulers. Carter then called Mashaal on Monday to try to get him to agree to a one-month truce without conditions, but the Hamas leader rejected the idea.
Real successful trip there Jimmy...great work!
The ambassador called last weekend's encounter "a very sad episode in American history."
Well...it was a sad episode in Carter's history...it was damned embarrasing for America.
He said it was "a shame" to see Carter, who had done "good things" as a former president, "turn into what I believe to be a bigot."
Someone should have said this publicly about Carter a long, long, time ago...perhaps after he met with Fidel...or Chavez...or Evo Morales...or Robert Mugabe...
Telephone calls by The Associated Press to two Atlanta numbers for Carter were not immediately returned Thursday.
That's because he was in Dick-hater having a piss beside Thrilla...
...
Here's the link to the full story:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080425/D908NSUG0.html
-
Just one more...this is really worth reading if you don't read anything else on Carter's latest terrorist escapade...Former President Reagan's conservative son weighs in on this subject with a commentary that would make his father very proud...this is from Townhall.com.
Jimmy Carter: A National Embarrassment
By Michael Reagan
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Talk about bad pennies always turning up; Jimmy Carter’s at it again.
It would be easy to blame the 83-year-old former one-term president’s frequent excursions into irrational behavior on senility were it not for the fact that he appears to have been senile most of his public life.
Any recitation of his frequent excursions into his personal Land of Oz where the good guys are bad and the bad guys are good sounds like a litany of Carter-esque fantasies. His onetime White House Chief of Staff, Hamilton Jordan, once spoke about what he called Carter’s “weirdness factor.”
If he hadn’t just happened to be the leader of the most powerful nation on the face of the earth and the sole bulwark against the expansion of Soviet tyranny, his weirdness wouldn’t matter in the scheme of things, but he was, and much of what he did -- and continues to do today --brought disastrous results for his nation and the world.
No one should be surprised at his recent hobnobbing with the terrorist leaders of Hamas. During his four years in the White House he showed a unique ability to reward the enemies of human freedom while punishing some of America’s strongest supporters.
Anyone shocked by Iran’s troublemaking, including training and arming the terrorists killing American troops in Iraq, can thank Brother Carter for conspiring to drive out the Shah, a fervent supporter of the United States, and seeing him replaced by the mullahs who repaid his kindness by taking nearly 70 Americans hostage and holding most of them for an astounding 444 days.
He withdrew U.S. support and the Shah was toppled, more than 20,000 pro-Western Iranians were killed, women were sent back into servitude and citizens were arrested merely for owning satellite dishes that could tune to Western programs. And, of course, American diplomats were taken hostage.
This is the same James Earl Carter whose feeble attempt to rescue the hostages turned into a deadly farce in the Iranian wastelands. The same Jimmy Carter whose presidency saw long lines at the gas pump, the same Jimmy Carter who gave away the Panama Canal thus enabling China’s Hutchison Whampoa to eventually control both ends of Theodore Roosevelt’s “big ditch.”
One of his legacies is one Robert Mugabe, the homicidal dictator of Zimbabwe now brutally suppressing his rivals who apparently won in an election to replace him. Under Mugabe the formerly prosperous Rhodesia now suffers famine, the white farmers whose abundant crops once fed the nation have been were killed or driven from their land, and so-called enemies of the regime butchered in waves of mass murder.
This is the Robert Mugabe who Jimmy Carter hosted at the White House in 1980, proclaiming that he had watched happily as Mugabe emerged victorious in his election campaign for the presidency. He pledged to use similar tactics in his own reelection campaign.
On his own, Carter went to North Korea and struck a deal on nuclear arms with dictator Kim Jung Il to which the Clinton administration acquiesced. North Korea then secretly violated the deal and went on to build the nuclear weapons that threaten world peace.
Since leaving the White House, Carter has embraced the likes of Fidel Castro and Venezuela’s communist dictator, the virulently anti-American Hugo Chavez, putting his stamp of approval on the rigged election that kept him in power.
Carter’s obvious antipathy toward Israel and his chumminess with Palestinian militants puts him squarely on the side of the Palestinian militants. In his book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,” Carter claims Israel has been the principal obstacle to peace, charging that Arab leaders have long sought peace while Israel insists on keeping what he calls "Palestinian land" over achieving peace. He says that there would be peace if only Israel would "[withdraw] to the 1967 border as specified in the U.N. Resolution 242..."
Senile, or just incurably weird? It makes no difference. In any sense, James Earl Carter is an embarrassment to the United States and a danger to global stability.
Just for legalities, the link:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichaelReagan/2008/04/24/jimmy_carter_a_national_embarrassment?page=full&comments=true
-
It seems that the reach-around king has been a little moody this week. It's alright. We understand that "your friend" only comes around once a month.
Gay reference 123,322,232.
-
Gay reference 123,322,232.
Wrong again... That meant that you were really a woman. With all of your moodiness late last week, it seemed to be the likely conclusion.
I do think it's pretty funny how quickly you jump at throwing around terms like child molester and pedophile and get all pissy when someone throws it in your direction. Perhaps, there's something there.
-
Wrong again... That meant that you were really a woman. With all of your moodiness late last week, it seemed to be the likely conclusion.
I do think it's pretty funny how quickly you jump at throwing around terms like child molester and pedophile and get all pissy when someone throws it in your direction. Perhaps, there's something there.
Being gay and being a child molester are two different things buddy. However, I guess thats not the case in your household. Perhaps, there is something there.
-
Being gay and being a child molester are two different things buddy. However, I guess thats not the case in your household. Perhaps, there is something there.
There is something there. Both disgust me equally. :puke:
-
There is something there. Both disgust me equally. :puke:
If you feel like being disgusted check out the video Chad posted.
-
If you feel like being disgusted check out the video Chad posted.
VERY SICK... The oh-so-superior Europeans strike again. :rofl:
-
Being gay and being a child molester are two different things buddy.
Based on this weeks' posts, it's like the difference between you and Chad :poke:
-
Based on this weeks' posts, it's like the difference between you and Chad :poke:
When in Rome...