Bad Jimmy!

Back Off, Jimmy!

April 16th 2008 19:04

Former president Jimmy Carter keeps stepping in it, up to his neck. He attended the Holocaust denial summit in Iran awhile back, to prove that he's still relevant (as an anti-Semite, at least). And now he's gone to kiss some rear ends among Hamas. He managed to get some "face time" with friendly journalists as he placed a wreath on the grave (or tomb) or Yassar Arafat, the self appointed terrorist in chief of the Palestinian terrorists.

When people talk about how our international prestige is failing, you can bet that Jimmy Carter is front and center to make us look bad. Some legacy, Jimmy.

Really Long Link

Vote

subscribe to this blog

follow this blog on Orble

start your own blog

[ Link ]

Posted By: S.L. - Category: No Category

Related Posts:

Relate This Post

[ Previous - Here It Comes...! ]

[ Next - Obama's New Fairytale ]

Comments

18 Comments. [ Add A Comment ]

Comment by tlcorbin

April 16th 2008 22:14

I wonder if there is more to this than meets the eye SL, . . .

Raven

Comment by S.L. Bradish

April 16th 2008 22:50

Anything's possible, Raven. But I heard on the news that he was asked pointedly not to meet with Hamas leaders. He chose to go without permission. If there is more going on than meets the eye, I don't have a good feeling about it...

Comment by RubySoho

April 16th 2008 22:52

Music Zone
Thought Zone

Sorry Bradish, but speaking as an outsider, Carter is one of the Americans we actually respect.

You are aware that Hamas are the elected representatives of the people of Gaza right? The UN has been trying to get Israel to negotiate with Hamas for months. Maybe Carter can succeed where the UN fails.

By the way, Israel killed another five Palestinian children in Gaza last night.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

April 16th 2008 23:09

Jimmy Carter was an atrocious president, Ruby. If you'd lived here while he was in office, you'd know that. If you respect him, then perhaps you stand and salute when a plate of well cooked linguini passes by as well. That's what his spine is made of.

He was a one term president because we couldn't stand the idea of another four years of his "misery index." Habitat for Humanity was a good idea and he should have stuck with it, rather than interfering in international politics when he's not been invited.

After the presidency, the former office holders are "ordinary citizens" again, in case you didn't know. The Logan Act expressly forbids "ordinary (private) citizens" from engaging in any dialog with other heads of state during a time of war. In case you hadn't heard, we are at war. It's called the War on Terror for a reason, Ruby. While Hamas is not (as far as I know) involved with al Qieda, they are engaging in a terror war against one of our allies.

Legally speaking, Carter has no more business talking to them unofficially than Nasty Pelosi had visiting with Ahmadinejad. Negotiating with terrorists or terrorist states is a waste of time. And should any negotiations be called for, we do have ambassadors who are authorized and trained for it.

I'm sorry to hear than five Palestinian children were killed last night. Perhaps if the Palestinians were to stop attacking Israel and actually attempt negotiating, things would be different. As long as they continue to attack, you can't honestly expect Israel to sit quietly by and let them kill Israeli children, can you?

Comment by RubySoho

April 16th 2008 23:25

Music Zone
Thought Zone

I don't think Carter was a total whitewash as a President. It was he who brokered the peace deal between Israel and Egypt. And I think he genuinely wants to find a solution to the crisis in the Gaza strip.

The reason Hamas is antagonistic towards Israel is because Israel refuses to negotiate with them. So it cuts both ways.

Oh, yeah, the Israeli raid was a response to a Palestinian attack on an oil depot. No children in sight Bradish.

This whole "we don't negotiate with terrorists" stance is a farce anyway. Israel was founded on terrorism. Ben Gurion and Begin were blowing up hotels and raiding Arab villages long before any Palestinian strapped on a suicide bomb.

Israel denounces the Palestinians with one breathe but turns around and celebrates the 60th anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel with the next.

Absolute hypocrites.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

April 16th 2008 23:46

Gee, Ruby, you're as qualified as an ambassador as Obama and Hillary are for president. Maybe you should call your PM and ask for the job. Regardless how it came about, Israel is a country, recognized by most of the rest of the world (including the UN) and they have a right to defend themselves. Israel probably is NOT going to agree to giving away half their land. How would Australia feel about cutting theit country in half and giving half of it to terrorists?

That seems to be a point you're missing, Ruby. Israel, like Australia, the US, the UK and Canada is a free country that practices democracy. The Palestinians want their own country and I don't blame them. But suicide/homicide bombers and lobbing missiles is NOT the way to get it done. If they, indeed, have elected officials (unlike Arafat who simply took over) then they need to enter into serious negotiations and stop the fighting. That'll get them more points, worldwide, than killing.

And just FYI, Ruby, the land that Israel got was bare, empty dessert when they took over. It's now a garden spot and very productive. What, exactly have the terrorists (Hamas) ever done to compare with that?

Comment by RubySoho

April 17th 2008 00:03

Music Zone
Thought Zone

Ah, you had to go and get nasty didn't you?

But since you mentioned the UN, are you aware that the UN has issued more condemnations of Israel than it has of any other country? Yes, Israel violates more human rights than Sudan, Myanmar, the Congo and rounding out the top five the USA!!

What you call barren, empty desert, millions of Arabs called home. There were actually people living there, you do realise that?.

And as, for Israel being a democracy, well that's debatable.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

April 17th 2008 01:23

I didn't get nastty with you Ruby, tempting though it was. Are you aware that several countries and the UN have declared Hamas to be a terrorist organization? To be perfectly honest, the UN doesn't impress me very much. Not much more than any other little debating society. However, they still seem to carry weight with lots of folks. They impose their meaningless sanctions and then act surprised when someone follows through with their empty threats. (Saddam Hussein and Ahmadinejad leap to mind).

You missed the point again, as usual, Ruby. When the Israelis got the land that's what it was. The Arabs who lived there had never made an effort to improve it. If the Palestinians took half of Israel, it would probably be returned to the dry and barren state quite soon. Then the rest of us could be guilted, taxed and made to feel sorry for the "poor" Arabs who do nothing but complain and make war. When they had the land they did nothing with it. Now that's it has value, they want it back. Buy a house sometime, Ruby, fix it up, plant a garden, increase it's value and then deal with the previous owner who wants it back. It's the same thing, only on a larger scale. The Israelis basically got a dead zone and brought it to life. Now the previous "owners" of that land want it back. I don't think so.

Comment by RubySoho

April 17th 2008 07:35

Music Zone
Thought Zone

You don't think so? Since when is it up to you?

Comment by S.L. Bradish

April 17th 2008 10:45

O.K. Ruby, just for you, I'll spell it out slowly. By "I don't think so" I didn't mean that it was up to me. I meant that I didn't think the Israelis would go for it. Is there anything else you need explained? Like which way is up, perhaps?

Comment by RubySoho

April 17th 2008 13:24

Music Zone
Thought Zone

Okay, let me explain. Irony: sarcasm, satire, indicating mockery of someone else.

Bradish, when it comes to the issue of Israel and Palestine it is painfully obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about.

.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

April 17th 2008 14:24

Oddly enough, Ruby, I could say the same of you on many subjects. Oh wait, I have.

Comment by RubySoho

April 17th 2008 14:41

Music Zone
Thought Zone

I know you have. But Bradish, there seems to be a huge discrepancy between what you say and what the truth actually is.

I don't get my information from Fox news. Fox news is not news. I advise you to look elsewhere. Even if only for a second opinion. They don't call it "faux" news for nothing.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

April 17th 2008 16:05

Fox News is only called Faux by a bunch of morons who don't want people to know the truth, Ruby. If they're not good at what they do, why are their shows much higher rated than the other networks? The liberal spin that ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc. put on the news is not working among most of the people anymore. Smart people want to know the facts and both sides of the issues. Only Fox provides this. If you paid attention, you'd know this.

Comment by RubySoho

April 17th 2008 19:06

Music Zone
Thought Zone

Oh man, now I've heard it all. A liberal spin? That's the funny thing about reality Bradish-it seems to have a liberal bias.

Fox does not present both sides. It is nothing more than a cheerleader for the Bush administration.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

April 17th 2008 20:31

Since Fox News was growing like crazy during the Clinton administration, long before Bush ever ran for the presidency, your argument sounds quite silly. That's not surprising, of course. Their newscasts generally present both sides of an argument. The O'Reilly Factors is the most watched cable news program, because his guests come from both sides. Hannity and Colmes don't spin in either direction, rather they and their guests debate everything. You should watch a program (or network), Ruby before spouting off about it. It could make you seem a little brighter and a little less arrogant.