Bill's Bites: Abu Jimmy

Tuesday, 22 May 2007

Frog what called W ugly still talk of the town

See previous: Frog what called W ugly backpedals

From FOX News: Jimmy Carter Backtracks on Calling Bush Administration Worst in U.S. History.
Former President Jimmy Carter backed off Monday from harshly critical comments he made of President Bush over the weekend after the White House offered a biting rebuke to the former president by calling him "increasingly irrelevant." ...
UPDATE -- May 22: From IBD Editorials: Look Who's Talking. (hat tip Jeff H.)
Apparently the man whose idea of leadership was to sit in front of a fireplace and blame everything on America's "malaise" does not consider Islamofascists turning passenger jets into manned cruise missiles and flying them into skyscrapers a direct threat.

Nor does he consider himself responsible for the chain of events that gave us not only 9/11, but al-Qaida, the Taliban, Hezbollah and a nuclear Iran and North Korea.

Contributed by Bill Faith on May 22, 2007 at 06:56 PM in Abu Jimmy | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Monday, 21 May 2007

Frog what called W ugly backpedals

See previous: W gets called ugly by a toad, responds

Jimmy Carter Backtracks on Calling Bush Administration Worst in U.S. History

CRAWFORD, Texas — Former President Jimmy Carter backed off Monday from harshly critical comments he made of President Bush over the weekend after the White House offered a biting rebuke to the former president by calling him "increasingly irrelevant."

"My remarks were maybe careless or misinterpreted but I wasn't comparing the overall administration and certainly not talking about anyone personally," Carter said in an interview Monday when asked to explain.. ...

Yeah, sure thing Abu Jimmah. It's not like we can find your original words on the net or anything.

Allahpundit comments here.

Contributed by Bill Faith on May 21, 2007 at 11:03 AM in Abu Jimmy | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Sunday, 20 May 2007

W gets called ugly by a toad, responds

Personal to Jimmy Carter: You had your chance to run things and it didn't work out so we elected someone smarter. Now it's time for you to just STFU and go away. NOW, not later.

Below the fold:

Carter Blasts Bush on His Global Impact
'Carter is irrelevant,' Bush administration shoots back
Jimmy Carter, you want to see the worst president in
history? Look in the mirror
The worst president in US history tries to hand off his crown
Frog calls Bush ugly

*** *** *** Fold (but please don't spindle or mutilate) *** *** ***

Carter Blasts Bush on His Global Impact

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - Former President Carter says President Bush's administration is "the worst in history" in international relations, taking aim at the White House's policy of pre-emptive war and its Middle East diplomacy.

The criticism from Carter, which a biographer says is unprecedented for the 39th president, also took aim at Bush's environmental policies and the administration's "quite disturbing" faith-based initiative funding.

"I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history," Carter told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette in a story that appeared in the newspaper's Saturday editions. "The overt reversal of America's basic values as expressed by previous administrations, including those of George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon and others, has been the most disturbing to me."

Carter spokeswoman Deanna Congileo confirmed his comments to The Associated Press on Saturday and declined to elaborate. ...

***

'Carter is irrelevant,' Bush administration shoots back

CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) -- The nasty words between President Bush and former President Jimmy Carter continued Sunday.

In a biting rebuke to Carter calling the Bush administration the "worst in history," the White House on Sunday dismissed Carter as "increasingly irrelevant."

Carter was quoted Saturday in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette as saying "I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history."

The Georgia Democrat said Bush had overseen an "overt reversal of America's basic values" as expressed by previous administrations, including that of his own father, former President George H.W. Bush.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto shot back Sunday from Crawford, Texas, where Bush spent the weekend.

"I think it's sad that President Carter's reckless personal criticism is out there," said Fratto. "I think it's unfortunate. And I think he is proving to be increasingly irrelevant with these kinds of comments." ...

***

Jimmy Carter, you want to see the worst president in history? Look in the mirror
Kim Priestap

It's unbelievable that Jimmy Carter has the nerve to call President Bush the worst president in history when it's Carter himself who is responsible for the Islamofascism that is now wreaking havoc on the free world today when he and his administration participated in the overthrow of the Shah of Iran. From Iranian Voice:
As if a light were switched off, the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlevi, portrayed for 20 years as a progressive modern ruler by Islamic standards, was suddenly, in 1977-1978, turned into this foaming at the mouth monster by the international left media. Soon after becoming President in 1977, Jimmy Carter launched a deliberate campaign to undermine the Shah. The Soviets and their left-wing apparatchiks would coordinate with Carter by smearing the Shah in a campaign of lies meant to topple his throne. The result would be the establishment of a Marxist/Islamic state in Iran headed by the tyrannical Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The Iranian revolution, besides enthroning one of the world's most oppressive regimes, would greatly contribute to the creation of the Marxist/Islamic terror network challenging the free world today.

At the time, a senior Iranian diplomat in Washington observed, "President Carter betrayed the Shah and helped create the vacuum that will soon be filled by Soviet-trained agents and religious fanatics who hate America." Under the guise of promoting" human rights," Carter made demands on the Shah while blackmailing him with the threat that if the demands weren't fulfilled, vital military aid and training would be withheld. This strange policy, carried out against a staunch, 20 year Middle East ally, was a repeat of similar policies applied in the past by US governments to other allies such as pre Mao China and pre Castro Cuba.

[...]

Khomeini was allowed to seize power in Iran and, as a result, we are now reaping the harvest of anti-American fanaticism and extremism. Khomeini unleashed the hybrid of Islam and Marxism that has spawned suicide bombers and hijackers. President Jimmy Carter, and the extremists in his administration are to blame and should be held accountable.
Indeed. Tragically, though, Jimmy's obfuscation has worked in that he has not faced any consequences for his role in helping to bring Islamofascism to power. Instead of taking any personal responsibility for participating in the overthrow of the Shah of Iran that directly resulted in the rise of Islamofascism in the world, he and his willing allies in the press have so far successfully put the blame for the unrest in the Middle East on President Bush, the man who's doing the most to clean up after Carter's incompetence and defeat Islamofascism.

Sister Toldjah writes about Jimmy Carter's moral bankruptcy: ...

***

The worst president in US history tries to hand off his crown
Posted by: McQ

From an abandoned peanut warehouse in Georgia:
Former President Carter says President Bush’s administration is “the worst in history” in international relations, taking aim at the White House’s policy of pre-emptive war and its Middle East diplomacy.

The criticism from Carter, which a biographer says is unprecedented for the 39th president, also took aim at Bush’s environmental policies and the administration’s “quite disturbing” faith-based initiative funding.

“I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history,” Carter told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette in a story that appeared in the newspaper’s Saturday editions. “The overt reversal of America’s basic values as expressed by previous administrations, including those of George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon and others, has been the most disturbing to me.”
The paucity of credibility Jimmy Carter brings to such criticism should be evident to anyone who lived through his presidency. If there is anyone more responsible for feeding the "paper tiger" meme which has so enabled our enemies, I'd like to know who it is. The 444 days in which Iran kidnapped and exploited our embassy employees while he sat morose and powerless stands right up there as the worst, as far as I'm concerned.

Oh, and his punishment of the USSR for it's invasion of Afghanistan? No Olympics for the US. By gosh, that showed 'em. And that boob is lecturing others on reputation and foreign policy? ...

***

Frog calls Bush ugly
Don Surber

This is not a parody: Jimmy Carter called George W. Bush the worst president ever on foreign policy. From the AP:
“I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history,” Carter told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette in a story that appeared in the newspaper’s Saturday editions. “The overt reversal of America’s basic values as expressed by previous administrations, including those of George H. W. Bush and Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon and others, has been the most disturbing to me.”
Wait, did Carter just praise the foreign policies of Reagan and Nixon?

I seem to recall the Carter administration portraying Reagan as a war-monger who would start World War III.

Maybe Carter thinks the appropriate response to 9/11 would have been to boycott Afghanistan’s Olympics.

And then put together a hastily assembled team in a few helicopters to travel hundreds of miles into the hills to free the hostages.

And then consult his twin daughters for foreign policy advice. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on May 20, 2007 at 11:37 AM in Abu Jimmy | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Saturday, 28 April 2007

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 13

See all of my "Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter" posts in one place here.

Jimmy Carter, Arab Front Man
Ed Morrissey

Alan Dershowitz has often infuriated conservatives with his liberal ideology and sharp-witted speech. He drew insults by the bucketload for defending OJ Simpson in the mid-90s, when it appeared OJ would require a strong team for an appeal-- before a Los Angeles jury proved that celebrities don't need Dershowitz's services. However, Dershowitz has always remained strong in the war against radical Islam and a stalwart defender of Israel, and as such he has come increasingly into conflict with a man he once admired, Jimmy Carter.

Now Dershowitz has discovered that Carter gets his funding for his pro-Palestinian, pro-Arab positions from very suspect sources:

***

The Real Jimmy Carter
By Alan M. Dershowitz

I have known Jimmy Carter for years. I first met him in the spring of 1976 when, as a relatively unknown candidate for president, he sent me a handwritten letter asking for my help in his campaign on issues of crime and justice. I had just published an article in The New York Times Magazine on sentencing reform, and he expressed interest in my ideas and asked me to come up with additional ones for his campaign. Shortly thereafter, my former student, Stuart Eisenstadt, brought Carter to Harvard to meet with some faculty members, me among them. I immediately liked Jimmy Carter and saw him as a man of integrity and principle. I signed on to his campaign and worked very hard for his election.

When Newsweek magazine asked his campaign for the names of people on whom Carter relied for advice, my name was among those given out. I continued to work for Carter over the years, most recently I met him in Jerusalem a year ago, and we briefly discussed the Mid-East. Though I disagreed with some of his points, I continued to believe that he was making them out of a deep commitment to principle and to human rights.

Recent disclosures of Carter's extensive financial connections to Arab oil money, particularly from Saudi Arabia, had deeply shaken my belief in his integrity. When I was first told that he received a monetary reward in the name of Shiekh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahayan, and kept the money, even after Harvard returned money from the same source because of its anti-Semitic history, I simply did not believe it. How could a man of such apparent integrity enrich himself with dirty money from so dirty a source?

And let there be no mistake about how dirty the Zayed Foundation is. I know because I was involved, in a small way, in helping to persuade Harvard University to return more than $2 million that the financially strapped Divinity School received from this source. Initially, I was reluctant to put pressure on Harvard to turn back money for the Divinity School, but then a student at the Divinity School, Rachael Lea Fish showed me the facts.

They were staggering. I was amazed that in the twenty-first century there were still foundations that espoused these views. ...

***

My Problem with Jimmy Carter's Book
by Kenneth W. Stein

Jimmy Carter's engagement in foreign affairs as a former president is unprecedented in U.S. history. Because he regards the Arab-Israeli conflict as among Washington's most important foreign policy topics, he has written more than two dozen articles and commentaries about the conflict, eight in the past year alone. In these publications, Carter uses his credibility as a former president, Nobel laureate, and key player in the September 1978 Camp David accords and the Egypt-Israel peace treaty to unfold his set of truths and often to criticize U.S. policy. He relishes the role of elder statesman and believes that with his accrued wisdom and experience, he can contribute to solutions.

But Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, Carter's twenty-first book and his second to focus on the Arab-Israeli conflict, is deficient. He does what no non-fiction author should ever do: He allows ideology or opinion to get in the way of facts. While Carter says that he wrote the book to educate and provoke debate, the narrative aims its attack toward Israel, Israeli politicians, and Israel's supporters. It contains egregious errors of both commission and omission. To suit his desired ends, he manipulates information, redefines facts, and exaggerates conclusions. Falsehoods, when repeated and backed by the prestige of Carter's credentials, can comprise an erroneous baseline for shaping and reinforcing attitudes and policymaking. Rather than bring peace, they can further fuel hostilities, encourage retrenchment, and hamper peacemaking. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on April 28, 2007 at 12:36 AM in Abu Jimmy, Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Dhimmitude, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Wednesday, 07 February 2007

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 12

See all of my "Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter" posts in one place here.

Carter Attacks:
Accuses Simon Wiesenthal Center of 'Falsehood and Slander'
Daniel Freedman (Hat tip: Scott Johnson)

After the Simon Wiesenthal Center sent 25,000 signed petitions to Jimmy Carter protesting his book, Carter responded, accusing the Center of "falsehood and slander."

The Center's head, Rabbi Hier responded: "Let me say, Mr. President, that I am not one who believes that Israel is infallible ... the only reason there is no peace in the Middle East is because of Islamic extremists who refuse to compromise, not because of the State of Israel.

We post the full exchange below: ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on February 7, 2007 at 05:57 PM in Abu Jimmy, Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Dhimmitude, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Wednesday, 24 January 2007

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 11

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

Video: Jimmy Carter “apologizes” for
being a Palestinian suicide bombing apologist
Ian Schwartz

[video link]

Jimmy Carter apologized — infront of a Jewish audience — for this passage from his new book:

He says it was “worded in a completely improper and stupid way” and adds he has “apologized to many audiences.” Alan Dershowitz isn’t buying it, as you will see at the conclusion of the video.

***

Jimmy Carter: Meta-Liar
By: The Hatemongers Quarterly

As Joshua Muravchik reports in Contentions, the dynamite new "weblog" of Commentary magazine, Jimmy Carter made the following statement during his visit to Brandeis University in an attempt to defend his new book: "This is the first time I've ever been called a liar." In making this claim, former President Carter asserted that, until his tome Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid hit the bookshelves, he had never been charged with mendacity.

Naturally, this is itself a boldface lie--as Mr. Muravchik, referring to a 1976 Harper's article called "Jimmy Carter's Pathetic Lies," makes clear. What strikes us, the crack young staff of "The Hatemonger's Quarterly," as so offensive, moreover, is the fact that it is such an obvious fib.

We mean, come on: Who in his right mind believes that any president of the United States has entirely avoided being dubbed a liar? On its face, Jimmy Carter's statement is entirely unbelievable. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 24, 2007 at 10:38 PM in Abu Jimmy, Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Dhimmitude, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tuesday, 23 January 2007

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 10

Carter comes to Brandeis
Scott Johnson

In "Publicity stunt" Seth Gitell comments on Brandeis University providing a venue for Jimmy Carter and his campaign of anti-Israel, anti-Jewish defamation. If Carter fields any questions after his speech tonight, CAMERA's just-released comprehensive compendium of Carter's errors will come in handy. In a message sending us the link, CAMERA senior research analyst Gilead Ini writes:
I thought you might be interested in this itemized list we put together of all -- or rather, "most" is probably a safer bet -- of Jimmy Carter's recent errors. Not surprisingly, it's a long piece.
At the home page of CAMERA, the organization has posted what looks like a mug shot of Carter. The mug shot accompanies links to the compendium of Carter errors as well as CAMERA's round-up of commentary on Carter's book. ...

Read the whole thing and do follow the links.

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

***

The Question of Carter’s Cash
In which our reporter follows the money
Claudia Rosett

Did Jimmy Carter do it for the money? That’s the question making the rounds about Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, an anti-Israeli screed recently written by the ex-president whose Carter Center has accepted millions in Arab funding.

Even in Carter’s long history of post-presidential grandstanding, this book sets fresh standards of irresponsibility. Purporting to give a balanced view of the Palestinian–Israeli conflict, Carter effectively shrugs off such highly germane matters as Palestinian terrorism. The hypocrisies are boundless, and include adoring praise of the deeply oppressive, religiously intolerant Saudi regime side by side with condemnations of democratic Israel. In one section, typical of the book’s entire approach, Carter includes a “Historical Chronology,” from Biblical times to 2006, in which he dwells on events surrounding his 1978 Camp David Accords but omits the Holocaust. Kenneth W. Stein, the founder of the Carter Center’s Middle East program, resigned last month to protest the book, describing it in a letter to Fox News as “replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments.” As this article goes to press, more protest resignations, this time from the Carter Center’s board of councilors, appear to be in the works.

If there is a silver lining to any of this, it is that Carter’s book has drawn much-overdue attention to some of the funding that pours into the Carter Center, whose intriguing donor list includes anti-Israeli tycoons and Middle East states. Founded in 1982 and appended to Carter’s presidential library, the center has served for almost a quarter century as the main base and fund-raising magnet for Carter’s self-proclaimed mission to save the world. ...

Don't miss Bryan Preston's related post here.

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 23, 2007 at 02:15 PM in Abu Jimmy, Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Friday, 19 January 2007

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 9
-- Jimmy Carter Interceded on Behalf of Nazi SS Guard ~~(?)~~
-- Commentary Magazine: Our Worst Ex-President

Chronicles of Mahatma Jimmy
Scott Johnson

In the course of an extraordinarily productive day yesterday, the new York Sun's Daniel Freedman advanced the story of Jimmy Carter's 1987 support for the return of a deported SS concentration camp guard, discussed by former Justice Department attorney Neal Sher in a detailed column last month. Yesterday morning Dan noted the Arutz Sheva story based on an interview with Sher. I cautioned Dan against relyling on Sher's word alone and urged him to obtain and provide the ocular proof.

Then Dan obtained and provided what appears to be the ocular proof. He obtained and posted a copy of the letter with the handwritten note apparently added by Carter here. Finally, he wrote today's Sun story: "President Carter interceded on behalf of former Nazi guard."

The Carter Center did not respond to Dan's call for comment yesterday. Assuming the note is in fact Carter's, I think that it represents something significant beyond Carter's professed humanitarian motives. Recall Carter's unceasing respect and regard for Yasser Arafat. Put it in the context of Carter's hostility to Israel on display in Carter's current book.

Carter seems to me to have something in common with Mahatma Gandhi, an admirer of Hitler who offered Carter-like advice to the Jews of Germany, complete with a South African twist: ...

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

President Carter Interceded on Behalf of Former Nazi Guard
By Daniel Freedman

The scandal surrounding President Carter's attitude toward the Jewish state, sparked by the publication of his book, which blames the Jews for the fate of the Palestinian Arabs, was given a fresh boost yesterday when a document surfaced showing that the former president interceded on behalf of a former Nazi guard.

The document in question shows that Mr. Carter asked the Justice Department's Office of Special Investigation — the unit responsible for the prosecution of Nazis — to show "special consideration" toward a man who murdered Jews at Mauthausen concentration camp.

The New York Sun has obtained a copy of the note that Mr. Carter sent to the OSI in September 1987. It was attached to a letter from the daughter of the Waffen SS guard, Martin Bartesch. The letter accused the OSI of "cruel and un-American activities" by extraditing the Nazi guard from America and barring him from returning. The OSI had taken away Bartesch's citizenship and deported him in May 1987 because of his role in the Holocaust. ...

***

Our Worst Ex-President
Joshua Muravchik

More than a quarter-century after completing his term of office, James Earl Carter is still to be found in the thick of debates about national policies on a range of issues: nuclear arms, Iraq, North Korea, and, especially, the conflict between Israel and the Arabs. A steady stream of books and articles continues to issue forth from his pen, and he travels the world on self-selected diplomatic missions. No other former President has chosen to play a similar role. But then, Carter’s whole political career has been out of the ordinary. In order to understand the man today, it is necessary to see him in the light of his past.

In 1976, when Carter tossed his hat into the ring for the presidential nomination, the Democratic party was still deeply riven by the long, bitter debate over the war in Vietnam. Carter’s response was to soar above these divisions, downplaying both ideology and issues. Instead, he put himself forward as a man of piety and character who would restore a high tone to government in the aftermath of Watergate and related scandals. Before the rise of politically-oriented televangelists, Jimmy Carter made his personal experience as a “born again” Christian into a key tenet of his platform. “I can give you a government that’s honest and that’s filled with love, competence, and compassion,” he pledged. ...

But just as he had once reversed himself dramatically on the subject of race, so now, upon his election as President, Carter began at once to lay the groundwork for foreign policies that were the opposite of those he had led the voters to believe he intended to pursue. This was made manifest even before his inauguration as he went about staffing his administration. George McGovern was quoted as saying that most of Carter’s State Department appointees were “quite close to those I would have made myself.” Meanwhile, Carter excluded the Scoop Jackson wing of the party almost entirely from his administration. His surprising tilt away from anti-Communism was made explicit in his first major foreign-policy address when he proclaimed: “we are now free of th[e] inordinate fear of Communism. . . . We’ve fought fire with fire, never thinking that fire is better quenched with water.” ...

Carter’s weakness for dictators and his courtship of America’s enemies not only clouded his human-rights policy, it also contributed to a flaccid approach to security issues, thus adding momentum to America’s strategic decline following defeat in Vietnam. In several corners of Africa, Asia, and the Western hemisphere, Communist or other radical regimes took power, spearheaded by revolutions in Iran and Nicaragua....

One remarkable instance grew out of Carter’s strong opposition to the use of force to reverse the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait in 1990. Not satisfied with issuing a torrent of statements and articles, he dispatched a letter to the heads of state of members of the United Nations Security Council and several other governments urging them to oppose the American request for UN authorization of military action. In this letter, writes Carter’s admiring biographer Douglas Brinkley, he
urged these influential world leaders to abandon U.S. leadership and instead give “unequivocal support to an Arab League effort, without any restraints on their agenda.” If this were allowed to occur, Carter believed, an Arab solution would not only force Iraq to leave Kuwait but at long last also force Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories.
The U.S. government under President George H.W. Bush learned of Carter’s missive only from Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada. Brent Scowcroft, Bush’s National Security Adviser, called it “unbelievable” that Carter would “ask . . . the other members of the Council to vote against his own country. . . . [I]f there was ever a violation of the Logan Act prohibiting diplomacy by private citizens, this was it.” Later, Carter justified his action by noting that he had sent the letter to President Bush, too—as if this disposed of Scowcroft’s point. And even that was only a half-truth. As Brinkley reports, the copy to Bush was dated a day after the letter was sent to the others. ...

Unrepentant, Carter has lately turned his focus anew to the Arab-Israel conflict. Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid ⁴ is his second book on the subject, a reprise in shriller terms of the themes sounded in his earlier The Blood of Abraham (1985). Carter’s interest in the conflict is in one sense natural: the agreement he mediated between Israel and Egypt at Camp David in 1978 stands as one of the few solid achievements of his presidency. Yet the intensity of his rhetoric suggests that his absorption with this issue derives from something deeper than the pleasure of returning to the scene of past triumphs.⁵

For someone who once played and still fancies himself in the role of mediator, Carter’s visceral attitudes to the two sides are strikingly disparate. He finds something to like in every Arab leader he meets. In light of Camp David, his fondness for Sadat is easy to understand. But he also seems to have felt warmly toward Syria’s dictator Hafez al-Assad, who in the late 1970’s led the recriminations against Sadat for allegedly betraying the Arab cause in making peace with Israel. Upon meeting Assad in 1978, Carter noted in his diary that “[t]here was a lot of good humor between us, and I found him to be constructive in attitude.” ...

To make Israel the culprit of his historical narrative, Carter is compelled to turn many things upside down. In the 1970’s, he writes, “rejection of Israel was shared by the leaders of all Arab nations, following four wars in the previous 25 years.” This sentence gives the impression that the “four wars” somehow caused Arab rejectionism, when the inverse is true: rejection of Israel was the reason for the wars. In another inversion, he claims that Israeli plans to divert water from the Jordan and the Sea of Galilee were what prompted the founding of the PLO in 1964. In fact, when the Arab states turned down a U.S. plan for the distribution of water because it would allow “the Zionists to consolidate their existence,” Israel secured American approval to divert a smaller amount on its own, to which the Arabs retaliated by diverting water upstream of Israel and by forming the PLO as an anti-Israel guerrilla movement to continue the war of annihilation by other means. ...

When it comes to Israel, it would take a book to catalogue all of Carter’s false or wildly misleading statements on matters historical, political, military, and diplomatic. Kenneth Stein, a Middle East expert at the Carter Center who had helped write The Blood of Abraham, resigned to protest the latest book. “It is replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments,” Stein wrote. “Aside from the one-sided nature of the book . . . there are recollections cited from meetings where I was the third person in the room, and my notes of those meetings show little similarity to points claimed in the book.”

What is to explain Carter’s passion against Israel? This question is not easy to answer. A recent article in the online journal FrontPage enumerated some of the millions of dollars that the Carter Center receives from Saudi Arabia and other oil-rich Arab states, but it is hard to know whether this is inducement or merely a benefit of Carter’s position. It is also true that opposition to Israel fits seamlessly into the ex-President’s leftist/third-worldist outlook in general. But this too does not explain the blind intensity of his obsession. ...

Read the whole thing. The above excerpts are just the beginning.

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 19, 2007 at 03:49 PM in Abu Jimmy, Dem Dumbness, Dem Perfidy, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Thursday, 18 January 2007

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 8 (Bumped)
-- Jimmy Carter Interceded on Behalf of Nazi SS Guard (?)
-- Dershowitz to rebut Carter's Brandeis speech

Ya gotta give Abu Jimmy credit for one thing, anyway. Once he was bought and paid for he stayed bought and paid for. Nobody's found the pictures of him in bed with Arafat yet but they'll turn up eventually. How different would the world be today if there'd been a man in the Oval Office in '79?

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

Exclusive: Jimmy Carter Interceded on Behalf of Nazi SS Guard
by Ezra HaLevi (H/T: Allahpundit)

A former U.S. Justice Department official disclosed to Arutz-7 that former U.S. President Jimmy Carter’s advocacy extended beyond the Palestinians, when he interceded on behalf of a Nazi SS man.

Neil Sher, a veteran of the U.S. Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigation, described a letter he received from Carter in 1987 in an interview with Israel National Radio’s Tovia Singer. The letter, written and signed by Carter, asked that Sher show “special consideration” for a man proven to have murdered Jews in the Mauthausen death camp in Austria. ...

The family approached several members of Congress. “The congressmen would, very understandably, forward their claims over to our office and when they learned the facts they would invariably drop the case,” Sher recalled.

But there was one politician who accepted the claims without asking for any further information.

“One day, in the fall of ’87, my secretary walks in and gives me a letter with a Georgia return address reading ‘Jimmy Carter.’ I assumed it was a prank from some old college buddies, but it wasn’t. It was the original copy of the letter Bartesch’s daughter sent to Carter, after Bartash had already been deported.

“In the letter, she claimed we were un-American, only after vengeance, and persecuting a man for what he did when he was only 17 and 18 years old.

“I couldn’t help thinking of my own father who returned home with shrapnel wounds after he joined the U.S. Army as a teenager to fight the Nazis and hit the beaches at Normandy at that same age on D-day.

“On the upper corner of the letter was a note signed by Jimmy Carter saying that in cases such as this, he wanted ‘special consideration for the family for humanitarian reasons.’ ...

***

Scott Johnson has his doubts about the Sher story. Click here.

***

Dershowitz to rebut Dhimmi Jimmy’s speech on Palestine at Brandeis next week
Allahpundit

Carter won’t debate him because “he knows nothing about the situation in Palestine,” which of course is a shameless lie. So Brandeis has brokered a compromise: Carter will speak, then Dershowitz will take the stage and respond.

And while Carter’s speaking, Dershowitz will be physically barred from the premises.
“I think the inaccuracies of Carter’s points have to be pointed out. Carter said he wrote the book in order to stimulate a debate, but he won’t debate. I’m debating him whether he’s there or not,” Dershowitz told FOXNews.com.

“If his chair is empty, then that’s his decision,” he said…

Dershowitz won’t be allowed in the gymnasium during Carter’s appearance because it is limited to university students, faculty and staff, but he will watch it from somewhere else on campus, said Brandeis spokesman Dennis Nealon.
What are the odds that Carter will stick around to listen? Slim, I’m guessing:
Dershowitz said he also plans to question why the former president and his Atlanta-based Carter Center accepted money from Arab donors. ...

***

Jimmuh terrror not peace, part 3
Scott Johnson

Today's continuing series is brought to you courtesy of the Washington Post and Jimmuh himself: "A new chance for peace." Jimmuh writes:
I am concerned that public discussion of my book "Palestine Peace Not Apartheid" has been diverted from the book's basic proposals: that peace talks be resumed after six years of delay and that the tragic persecution of Palestinians be ended. Although most critics have not seriously disputed or even mentioned the facts and suggestions about these two issues, an apparently concerted campaign has been focused on the book's title, combined with allegations that I am anti-Israel. This is not good for any of us who are committed to Israel's status as a peaceful nation living in harmony with its neighbors.
Is there a truthful sentence in this opening paragraph? Jimmuh seems well on his way to achieving the perfect vacuum that Mary McCarthy credited to Lillian Hellman: "Every word she writes is a lie, including and and the."

Not to mention Jimmuh's omissions. He can't bring himself to call for the cessation of the tragic murder of Israelis by the terrorist groups operating as political parties within the PA, or to recognize the object of those parties as the causal factor in what he describes as "the tragic persecution of the Palestinians." ...

***

Carter to give way to empty chair
Paul Mirengoff

Brandeis University has agreed to have Alan Dershowitz present a rebuttal after Jimmy Carter gives his speech about the "apartheid" Israel allegedly has imposed on the Palestinians. Orignally, Dershowitz had hoped to debate Carter, but the former president, his survival instinct still intact, was having none of that. Instead, Dershowitz, in effect, will debate an empty chair.

As things now stand, Carter will talk for about 15 minutes and then take questions from the audience for 45 minutes. Dershowitz won’t be allowed in the gymnasium during Carter’s appearance, as attendance will be limited to university students, faculty and staff. He will watch from another location on campus.

Dershowitz says he plans to raise the fact that Carter and his Atlanta-based Carter Center have accepted money from Arab donors. The center's 2005 annual report shows that more than $1 million each has been contributed by such benefactors as ...

***

Charles Johnson has an interesting handwrting comparison here. Guilty as charged.

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 18, 2007 at 12:16 PM in Abu Jimmy, Dem Dumbness, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tuesday, 16 January 2007

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 7
-- Updated and bumped, damning quote added
-- Updated and bumped: Steve Berman video added

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

14 Carter Center Advisers Resign
Over Former President Jimmy Carter's Book

WASHINGTON — Fourteen members of a leadership group under former President Carter's think tank resigned Thursday over concerns that Carter's book on the Middle East does not represent "the Jimmy Carter we came to respect and support."

The members of the 200-member Board of Councilors, a leadership advisory group founded in 1987, join a longtime Carter aide, Jewish groups and lawmakers who have publicly criticized the former president's best-selling book "Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid" for inaccuracies and distorting history.

"It comes to the result of deep soul searching and a tremendous amount of angst," said Steve Berman, a member who was appointed six months ago.

Berman, an Atlanta commercial real estate developer, said he was led to resign after becoming deeply troubled after reviewing Carter's book, shocked by factual errors and a message that doesn't serve the cause of peace.

"We're trying to send a message that the issue of the Middle East is very complicated and complex," Berman said. "There are two narratives that need to be heard."

Berman refers to two narratives between the Israelis and Palestinians in contesting one piece of land. "Palestinian leaders have had chances since 1947 to have their own state, including during your own presidency when they snubbed your efforts," the letter reads. ...

James Taranto has more here (3rd item) and links to a copy of the resignation letter here.

*** Update and bump. Original timestamp 2007.01.11.23:18

Say It Ain't So, Jimmy
Wretchard

It's hard to read Alan Dershowitz's denunciation of former President Jimmy Carter without getting a sinking feeling. Dershowitz summarizes the huge sums which investigative journalists now say Jimmy Carter received from Arab and Islamic sources. And they are considerable. The Saudis bailed out his peanut farm in 1976. The infamous BCCI and Saudi billionaire Gaith Pharaon actually helped with the startup funding of the Carter Center. Carter himself is quoted fulsomely thanking Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan, the long time ruler of the UAE, for donating half a million dollars. From what is known Carter has received tens of millions of dollars from Arab and Islamic sources. And that, argues Dershowitz, is behind the former President's tireless campaigning against Israel. He says so in the most brutal and accusatory terms: "Carter ... has been bought and paid for by anti-Israel Arab and Islamic money." But it is one of Dershowitz's sources, Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, who provides the most food for thought: "seems that AIPAC's (American-Israel Political Action Committee) real fault was its failure to outdo the Saudi's purchases of the former president's loyalty". The sinking feeling is the realization that this is what political viewpoints might come down to. ...

***

Jimmy For Terror
N Y Post Editorial

January 15, 2007 -- Has a former president of the United States - a Nobel Peace Prize winner, no less - given his blessing to wanton murder and terrorist assaults against Israel?

Sure looks that way.

How else to read that astonishing statement on page 213 of Jimmy Carter's new anti-Israel screed, "Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid"?

To wit: "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel." (Emphasis added.)

You don't have to read between the lines here.

Carter isn't calling on the Palestinians to give up terror and murder now as a way to convince Israel they are serious about peace. Rather, he says they can wait until they've achieved their goals at the bargaining table. No need, says Carter, to give up terrorism until then.

Certainly, that's how 14 members of the Carter Center's advisory board read that paragraph. Indeed, it's why they angrily submitted their resignations last week.

That's also how Melvin Konner read it. He's a respected anthropology professor at Emory University and had been asked to be part of an academic group meant to advise the former president and the Carter Center on how to respond to criticism of the book.

As Konner wrote to John Hardman, the center's executive director, in declining the invitation: "I cannot find any way to read this sentence that does not condone the murder of Jews until such time as Israel unilaterally follows President Carter's prescription for peace. The sentence, simply put, makes President Carter an apologist for terrorists and places my children, along with all Jews everywhere, in greater danger." ...

*** Update and bump. Previous timestamp 09:11

Jimmy Carter's irresistible urge
Paul Mirengoff

Kenneth Stein is the Emory University professor who resigned from the Carter Center in protest against the "gross inventions, intentional falsehoods and irresponsible remarks" contained in Jimmy Carter's latest book. He has now elaborated on what some of the falsehoods are. One involves Carter's misquotation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242. Stein says that Carter inserted the word "the," which did not appear in the original, and thus made the resolution appear more specific than it was in requiring Israel's withdrawal from occupied territories.

But Stein's main complaint is that Carter reports falsely about a meeting he had with Syrian dictator Hafez Assad in 1990, which Stein also attended. In Carter's version, Assad said he was willing to negotiate with Israel on the status of the Golan Heights. But according to Stein, Assad was not willing to accept a demilitarized Golan. Stein also disputes Carter's claim that Assad expressed willingness to move Syria's troops farther from the border than Israel would be required to do. According to Stein, Carter's falsehoods are intended to make Syria look more reasonable, and Israel more intransigent, than was actually the case. So, as one might have guessed, Carter's irresitible urge to cast anti-American dictators in a favorable light (coupled, of course, with his hatred of Israel) has landed him in this latest spot of bother.

Finally, Stein takes issue with Carter's claim that ...

***

Jimmy Carter’s heart of dorkiness
Allahpundit

The latest provocative, three-quarters-baked missive from Spengler at the Asia Times. Dedicated with love to all our southern readers:
After Iran let the diplomats go, the provincial peanut farmer who stumbled into the presidency flew to the US air force base in Germany to meet them. He asked the Central Intelligence Agency psychiatrists who were debriefing the hostages, “Didn’t the Iranians know what they were doing was wrong?” Call it the heart of dorkiness: Carter was so horrified by the Iranians’ capacity for evil that he could not absorb the information, even when it grabbed him by the scruff of his neck and threw him out of the White House…

The former president is hard to read without taking into account the southern US context. A partial explanation for his see-and-hear-no-evil view of the world can be found in southern guilt over the maltreatment of blacks. Carter’s chief of staff, Hamilton Jordan, heard his first briefing on the Middle East in 1977 and offered, “I get it: the Palestinians are the niggers.” ...

*** Update and bump. Previous timestamp 2007.01.15.21:44

Video: Fmr. Carter center member
says Carter condones Palestinian terrorism
Ian Schwartz

[video link]

Steve Berman, one of the fifteen members who have left the Carter Center in recent weeks, appeared on Hannity & Colmes Monday evening to explain why he left and why he thinks Former President Jimmy Carter condones Palestinian terrorism.

Berman’s angst comes from the following passage in Jimmy Carter’s new book: ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on January 16, 2007 at 04:06 PM in Abu Jimmy, Books, Dem Dumbness, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tuesday, 26 December 2006

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 6

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

I'm not really in a position to discuss the religious aspects of this, but it does provide an interesting perspective on things. Well worth reading all of:

A Religious Problem
Jimmy Carter's book: An Israeli view.
Michael B. Oren

Several prominent scholars have taken issue with Jimmy Carter's book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," cataloguing its historical inaccuracies and lamenting its lack of balance. The journalist Jeffrey Goldberg also critiqued the book's theological purpose, which, he asserted, was to "convince American Evangelicals to reconsider their support for Israel."

Mr. Carter indeed seems to have a religious problem with the Jewish state. His book bewails the fact that Israel is not the reincarnation of ancient Judea but a modern, largely temporal democracy. "I had long taught lessons from the Hebrew Scriptures," he recalls telling Prime Minister Golda Meir during his first tour through the country. "A common historical pattern was that Israel was punished whenever the leaders turned away from devout worship of God. I asked if she was concerned about the secular nature of the Labor government."

He complains about the fact that the kibbutz synagogue he enters is nearly empty on the Sabbath and that the Bibles presented to Israeli soldiers "was one of the few indications of a religious commitment that I observed during our visit." But he also reproves contemporary Israelis for allegedly mistreating the Samaritans--"the same complaint heard by Jesus almost two thousand years earlier"--and for pilfering water from the Jordan River, "where . . . Jesus had been baptized by John the Baptist."

Disturbed by secular Laborites, he is further unnerved by religiously minded Israelis who seek to fulfill the biblical injunction to settle the entire Land of Israel. ...

I'm not qualified to get into the religious angles here but it is obvious to this old dog that Abu Carter is letting his own religious prejudices interfere with his ability to see what's right, or what's best for this country. I stand with Israel.

***

Don't miss Paul Mirengoff's excellent related post here.

Contributed by Bill Faith on December 26, 2006 at 02:09 AM in Abu Jimmy, Books, Dem Dumbness, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Thursday, 21 December 2006

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 5

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

And Speaking of Free Speech...
John Hinderaker

One of its most principled defenders and most effective practitioners is Alan Dershowitz. Over the years, I have disagreed with Dershowitz about most things, but his unwavering commitment to free speech--even in an academic environment--and his tireless unraveling of the endlies calumnies thrown at the state of Israel are far more important than those disagreements. Currently, he is taking on the execrable Jimmy Carter, and it is, as you would expect, a mismatch. Dershowitz writes in the Boston Globe:
[...]

Jimmy Carter isn't brave for beating up on Israel. He's a bully. And like all school-yard bullies, underneath the tough talk and bravado, there's a nagging insecurity and a fear that one day he'll have to answer for himself in a fair fight.

When Jimmy Carter's ready to speak at Brandeis, or anywhere else, I'll be there. If he refuses to debate, I will still be there -- ready and willing to answer falsity with truth in the court of public opinion.
No doubt it will never happen, but if it does, I want a front-row seat.

***

Why won't Carter debate his book?
By Alan Dershowitz

YOU CAN ALWAYS tell when a public figure has written an indefensible book: when he refuses to debate it in the court of public opinion. And you can always tell when he's a hypocrite to boot: when he says he wrote a book in order to stimulate a debate, and then he refuses to participate in any such debate. I'm talking about former president Jimmy Carter and his new book "Palestine Peace Not Apartheid."

Carter's book has been condemned as "moronic" (Slate), "anti-historical" (The Washington Post), "laughable" (San Francisco Chronicle), and riddled with errors and bias in reviews across the country. Many of the reviews have been written by non-Jewish as well as Jewish critics, and not by "representatives of Jewish organizations" as Carter has claimed. Carter has gone even beyond the errors of his book in interviews, in which he has said that the situation in Israel is worse than the crimes committed in Apartheid South Africa. When asked whether he believed that Israel's "persecution" of Palestinians was "[e]ven worse . . . than a place like Rwanda," Carter answered, "Yes. I think -- yes."

When Larry King referred to my review several times to challenge Carter, Carter first said I hadn't read the book and then blustered, "You know, I think it's a waste of my time and yours to quote professor Dershowitz. He's so obviously biased, Larry, and it's not worth my time to waste it on commenting on him." (He never did answer King's questions.)

The next week Carter wrote a series of op-eds bemoaning the reception his book had received. He wrote that his "most troubling experience" had been "the rejection of [his] offers to speak" at "university campuses with high Jewish enrollment." The fact is that Brandeis President Jehuda Reinharz had invited Carter to come to Brandeis to debate me, and Carter refused. The reason Carter gave was this: "There is no need to for me to debate somebody who, in my opinion, knows nothing about the situation in Palestine."

As Carter knows, I've been to Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza, many times -- certainly more times than Carter has been there -- and I've written three books dealing with the subject of Middle Eastern history, politics, and the peace process. The real reason Carter won't debate me is that I would correct his factual errors. It's not that I know too little; it's that I know too much. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on December 21, 2006 at 05:37 PM in Abu Jimmy, Books, Dem Dumbness, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 4

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

Carter's Arab financiers
Rachel Ehrenfeld

To understand what feeds former president Jimmy Carter's anti-Israeli frenzy, look at his early links to Arab business.

Between 1976-1977, the Carter family peanut business received a bailout in the form of a $4.6 million, "poorly managed" and highly irregular loan from the National Bank of Georgia (NBG). According to a July 29, 1980 Jack Anderson expose in The Washington Post, the bank's biggest borrower was Mr. Carter, and its chairman at that time was Mr. Carter's confidant, and later his director of the Office of Management and Budget, Bert Lance.

At that time, Mr. Lance's mismanagement of the NBG got him and the bank into trouble. Agha Hasan Abedi, the Pakistani founder of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), known as the bank "which would bribe God," came to Mr. Lance's rescue making him a $100,000-a-year consultant. Abedi then declared: "we would never talk about exploiting his relationship with the president." Next, he introduced Mr. Lance to Saudi billionaire Gaith Pharaon, who fronted for BCCI and the Saudi royal family. In January 1978, Abedi paid off Mr. Lance's $3.5 million debt to the NBG, and Pharaon secretly gained control over the bank.

Mr. Anderson wrote: "Of course, the Saudis remained discretely silent... kept quiet about Carter's irregularities... [and] renegotiated the loan to Carter's advantage."

There is no evidence that the former president received direct payment from the Saudis. But "according to... the bank files, [it] renegotiated the repayment terms... savings... $60,000 for the Carter family... The President owned 62% of the business and therefore was the largest beneficiary." Pharaon later contributed generously to the former president's library and center.

When Mr. Lance introduced Mr. Carter to Abedi, the latter gave $500,000 to help the former president establish his center at Emory University. Later, Abedi contributed more than $10 million to Mr. Carter's different projects. Even after BCCI was indicted — and convicted -— for drug money laundering, Mr. Carter accepted $1.5 million from Abedi, his "good friend."

A quick survey of the major contributors to the Carter Center reveals hundreds of millions of dollars from Saudi and Gulf contributors. But it was BCCI that helped Mr. Carter [establish] his center. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on December 21, 2006 at 01:20 AM in Abu Jimmy, Dem Dumbness, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Friday, 15 December 2006

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 3

See previous: Jimmy Carter in La-La Land, Speaking frankly about Abu "Holier than das Juden" Carter, Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update, Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 2

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

Speaking frankly? It's past time to have the dumb ass committed to a home for aged idiots.

Carter: Dershowitz is too ignorant for me to debate
Allahpundit

Cut and run:
Carter, author of a new book advocating “peace not apartheid” in the region, said he will not visit Brandeis University to discuss the book because the university requested he debate Dershowitz.

“I don’t want to have a conversation even indirectly with Dershowitz,” Carter said in Friday’s Boston Globe. “There is no need … to debate somebody who, in my opinion, knows nothing about the situation in Palestine.”…

“President Carter said he wrote the book because he wanted to encourage more debate; then why won’t he debate?” said Dershowitz, a vocal First Amendment advocate who has worked for O.J. Simpson and other high-profile clients. ...

***

Jimmy Carter Plays the "God Card"
Alan Dershowitz

In his unrelenting attack against Israel - beginning with his screed Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, and continuing in his media blitz - Jimmy Carter frequently invokes religion, in an apparent effort to turn religious Christians against the Jewish State. He started by recounting a bizarre conversation he once had, before he became president, with then Prime Minister Golda Meir in which he warned her that there was "a common historical pattern... that Israel was punished whenever the leaders turned way from devout worship of God." What Chutzpah!

An American private citizen lecturing the Prime Minister of Israel to make her country more religious. Imagine if Meir had listened? Imagine how much more difficult peace would be if Israel were a religious state whose claims were based on God's words in the Bible?

Carter has tried hard to turn the mideast conflict into a religious one. He constantly refers to Israel as the "Holy Land," which he defines as follows:
"It became increasingly clear that there were two Israels. One encompassed the ancient culture and moral values of the Jewish people, defined by the Hebrew Scriptures with which I had been familiar since childhood and representing the young nation that most American envisioned."
Carter condemns Israel for its administration of Christian and Muslim religious sites, when in fact Israel is scrupulous about ensuring those of every religion the right to worship as they please consistent, of course, with security needs. He fails to mention that between 1948 and 1967, when Jordan occupied the West ank and East Jerusalem, the Hashemites destroyed and desecrated Jewish religious sites and prevented Jews from praying at the Western Wall. He also never mentions Egypt's brutal occupation of Gaza between 1949 and 1967.

Carter goes out of his way to point out that some Christians are separated from their churches by the "Apartheid Wall," without mentioning that it was Muslim terrorists who used Christian churches as terrorist sanctuaries.

Carter even blames Israel for the "exodus of Christians from the Holy Land,"; totally ignoring the Islamization of the area by Hamas and the comparable exodus of Christian Arabs from Lebanon as a result of the increasing influence of Hezbollah and the repeated assassination of Christian leaders by Syria. ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on December 15, 2006 at 04:30 PM in Abu Jimmy, Books, Dem Dumbness, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tuesday, 12 December 2006

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update 2

See previous: Jimmy Carter in La-La Land, Speaking frankly about Abu "Holier than das Juden" Carter, Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update

See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

This has moved well beyond simple "differences of opinion." Either Abu Carter is deliberately lying in his efforts to see the Jews get what he thinks they deserve or he's totally lost touch with reality.

Video: Jay Leno, neocon
Allahpundit

Poor Jimmy. Even the comedians know he’s wrong.

Never mind Leno, though. You’re watching here for four separate lies in the span of two minutes.

[video link]

Count ‘em:

1. Hamas wants to trade Gilad Shalit for 300 Palestinian women and children? Alas, the truth is more nuanced:
The deal is intended to take place in three stages: In the first, Israel is expected to release about 400 prisoners, among them women, minors and prisoners suffering from health problems. A short while later, or parallel to the initial release, Shalit would be released to Israel.

In the second stage, following the release of Shalit, another large group of Palestinian prisoner would be released. In the third stage, another group of prisoners, considered “heavy duty” figures, would be freed. These include senior members of terrorist organizations, including individuals with “blood on their hands.”
At the top of Hamas’s list: Abbas Sayed, mastermind of the 2002 suicide bombing in Netanya that killed 29 people.

2. ...

3. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a “key issue” throughout the region, including in Iraq? This one isn’t a lie so much as a myth, but close enough. Lisa Beyer, writing today in Time, explodes it:
To promote the canard that the troubles of the Arab world are rooted in the Palestinians’ misfortune does great harm. It encourages the Arabs to continue to avoid addressing their colossal societal and political ills by hiding behind their Great Excuse: it’s all Israel’s fault. Certainly, Israel has at times been an obnoxious neighbor, but God help the Arab leaders, propagandists and apologists if a day ever comes when the Arab-Israeli mess is unraveled. One wonders how they would then explain why ...
4. There’s no debate in America about Israeli “persecution” of Palestinians? Kind of hard to make that argument while sitting on the set of the Tonight Show plugging a book about “apartheid” in the territories, but he does ...

In fact, there’s plenty of debate. Carter’s side just happens to be losing, for reasons concisely explained in Michael Kinsley’s brief treatment of Jimbo’s “moronic new book.” You can’t scream about “apartheid” in Palestine when the rest of the region is Judenrein — or, rather, you can, but don’t wonder then when people end up questioning your priorities. And like Kinsley says: “If Israel is white South Africa and the Palestinians are supposed to be the blacks, where is their Mandela?”

***

Charges detailed against Carter book
Ed Lasky

The Emory Wheel, student-run newspaper at Emory University, details serious accusations against Jimmy Carter's controversial new book made by Emory Professor Kenneth Stein, who resigned last week from his post at The Carter Center to protest its inaccuracies.

Rachel Zelkowitz writes of Stein's views:
...the former president's first error concerns United Nations Security Council Resolution 242. Signed in November 1967, the agreement has been used as the basis for all subsequent Arab-Israeli negotiations.

In his book, Carter writes that the resolution says, "Israel must withdraw from occupied territories" it acquired by force during the Six-Day War in 1967 between Israel and Egypt, Jordan and Syria.

But the word "must" never appears in the actual U.N. resolution text.

Stein argued that each word in the resolution was carefully chosen and by inserting the word "must," Carter changed the implications of this key resolution.

Stein said Carter makes a second "inexcusable" error ...

Contributed by Bill Faith on December 12, 2006 at 06:11 PM in Abu Jimmy, Books, Dem Dumbness, Dhimmitude, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Moonbat Madness | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Monday, 11 December 2006

Speaking frankly about Abu Carter -- Update

See previous: Speaking frankly about Abu "Holier than das Juden" Carter. See all of my Speaking Frankly About Abu Carter posts in one place here.

Jimmy Carter: "worse than plagiarism"
Thomas Lifson

Jimmy Carter's recent book, Palestine: Peace, not Apartheid, has taken a lot of serious criticism, not least in these pages (see Rick Richman's devastating review). In recent days, apparent plagiarism on the part of the former president has come to light, as maps published by Dennis Ross in an earlier book appear to have been copied without attribution. Ross stated on Fox News Chanel (where he works as a commentator) Sunday that he believes he is the victim of plagiarism.

Today, Rick Richman goes far deeper into the matter, questioning the ethics involved in something "worse" than plagiarism: omitting and distorting data, turning the plagiarism into virtual lying. Writing on his own site, Jewish Current Issues, Rick states:
Carter not only appears to have copied maps from Ross but -- more importantly -- to have re-titled them to make them appear to be something they are not. Moreover, his maps omit the descriptive notes that Ross included on his maps, which would have contradicted the point Carter was trying to make. Finally, the point he was trying to make with the borrowed and altered maps is central to his entire book.
Rick's analysis and discussion are detailed and devastating to Carter. The maps themselves are examined and the meaning of the relabeling and ommissions explained. No simple summary will suffice to explain how Carter seemingly twisted data and misled his readers. In conclusion, Rick writes: ...

***

Carter's Maps: Worse Than Plagiarism
Rick Richman

David Gerstman may have been the first person in the blogosphere to note that, buried in the middle of Professor Kenneth Stein’s stinging criticism of Jimmy Carter’s book, was a veiled accusation of plagiarism. Stein called the book “replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments.” David noted that “copied materials not cited” was a genteel reference to one of the worst sins a writer can commit.

In a subsequent interview with the Los Angeles Times, Stein said two maps in Carter’s book were “very closely similar, or unusually similar, to maps that were produced and published in Dennis Ross' book.” The next day Dennis Ross said it “sure looks” like Carter ripped him off. The apparent plagiarism was covered by The Political Pit Bull, Gateway Pundit, Bill’s Bites, Hot Air, LGF and others. A video of Stein, Ross and Carter discussing the issue is here.

Paul Mirengoff of Power Line placed the issue in perspective, noting that plagiarism was “probably the least of the problems Carter faces with respect to his book” -- given Stein’s other, even more serious, criticisms of it. Mirengoff quipped that “at least [Carter’s book] has good maps.”

Actually -- it doesn’t. And therein lies a problem much more serious than plagiarism.

(Both maps are reductions of maps in Richman's piece)

The truth is a little more

	An Old War Dogs Satellite Site