ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

[thesightless]

dave you will like this if ya havent seen it.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/JimmyCarter.htm

[davetlv]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

?At least they aren't corrupt,? Carter says of Hamas. Well no, so far they?re just ordinary mass murderers who haven?t had a chance at the sort of cash that Fatah chose to line their own pockets with.

[thesightless]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

http://www.iranpressnews.com/english/source/008084.html

[Balanc3]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

He had his chance in 1979...

[miketpoto]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

“At least they aren't corrupt”

Dont misuse this quote people, he is referring to the fact that they make no excuses for their actions in an effort to sugarcoat....

[Jenks]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

Anyone read Carter's book? Doesn't paint the Jews in a good light. Gotta check that out.

[davetlv]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

Anyone read Carter's book? Doesn't paint the Jews in a good light. Gotta check that out.

Jenks, this so called book does nothing but a dis-service to your ex-president. Filled with outright lies, semi-truths and distortions of actual events Carter shows that the $12 million plus of Arab money he has received in recent years was money well spent.

[Shpira]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

^^^thats your oppinion...and jimmy has a right to his...

[davetlv]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

^^^thats your oppinion...and jimmy has a right to his...

If Carter was offering us his opinion that would be fine, but he's not. He's laying out his book as fact, which it is not.

Alan Dershowitz had this to say about Carters book:

• Carter emphasizes that ?Christian and Muslim Arabs had continued to live in this same land since Roman times,? but he ignores the fact that Jews have lived in Hebron, Tzfat, Jerusalem, and other cities for even longer. Nor does he discuss the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Jews from Arab countries since 1948.
• Carter repeatedly claims that the Palestinians have long supported a two-state solution and the Israelis have always opposed it. Yet he makes no mention of the fact that in 1938 the Peel Commission proposed a two-state solution with Israel receiving a mere sliver of its ancient homeland and the Palestinians receiving the bulk of the land. The Jews accepted and the Palestinians rejected this proposal, because Arab leaders cared more about there being no Jewish state on Muslim holy land than about having a Palestinian state of their own.
  
• He barely mentions Israel?s acceptance, and the Palestinian rejection, of the U.N.?s division of the mandate in 1948.
  
• He claims that in 1967 Israel launched a preemptive attack against Jordan. The fact is that Jordan attacked Israel first, Israel tried desperately to persuade Jordan to remain out of the war, and Israel counterattacked after the Jordanian army surrounded Jerusalem, firing missiles into the center of the city. Only then did Israel capture the West Bank, which it was willing to return in exchange for peace and recognition from Jordan.
• Carter repeatedly mentions Security Council Resolution 242, which called for return of captured territories in exchange for peace, recognition and secure boundaries, but he ignores the fact that Israel accepted and all the Arab nations and the Palestinians rejected this resolution. The Arabs met in Khartum and issued their three famous ?no?s?: ?No peace, no recognition, no negotiation? but you wouldn?t know that from reading the history according to Carter.
• Carter faults Israel for its ?air strike that destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor? without mentioning that Iraq had threatened to attack Israel with nuclear weapons if they succeeded in building a bomb.
• Carter faults Israel for its administration of Christian and Muslim religious sites, when in fact Israel is scrupulous about ensuring every religion the right to worship as they please?consistant, of course, with security needs. He fails to mention that between 1948 and 1967, when Jordan occupied the West Bank 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 blames Israel, and exonerates Arafat, for the Palestinian refusal to accept statehood on 95% of the West Bank and all of Gaza pursuant to the Clinton-Barak offers of Camp David and Taba in 2000-2001. He accepts the Palestinian revisionist history, rejects the eye-witness accounts of President Clinton and Dennis Ross and ignores Saudi Prince Bandar?s accusation that Arafat?s rejection of the proposal was ?a crime? and that Arafat?s account ?was not truthful??except, apparently, to Carter. The fact that Carter chooses to believe Yasir Arafat over Bill Clinton speaks volumes.
• Carter?s description of the recent Lebanon war is misleading. He begins by asserting that Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers. ?Captured? suggest a military apprehension subject to the usual prisoner of war status. The soldiers were kidnapped, and have not been heard from?not even a sign of life. The rocket attacks that preceded Israel?s invasion are largely ignored, as is the fact that Hezbollah fired its rockets from civilian population centers.
• Carter gives virtually no credit to Israel?s superb legal system, falsely asserting (without any citation) that ?confessions extracted through torture are admissible in Israeli courts,? that prisoners are ?executed? and that the ?accusers? act ?as judges.? Even Israel?s most severe critics acknowledge the fairness of the Israeli Supreme Court, but not Carter.
• 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.
• Carter also blames every American administration but his own for the Mideast stalemate with particular emphasis on ?a submissive White House and U.S. Congress in recent years.? He employs hyperbole and overstatement when he says that ?dialogue on controversial issues is a privilege to be extended only as a reward for subservient behavior and withheld from those who reject U.S. demands.? He confuses terrorist states, such as Iran and Syria to which we do not extend dialogue, with states with whom we strongly disagree, such as France and China, with whom we have constant dialogue.

And then to cap it off, Carter claims that he wrote the book to generate debate about the plight of the Palestinians, and yet when challenged to that debate by Dershowitz, refused to face him calling Dershowitz biased whilst keeping schtum about his own financial reasons to be biased.

[Shpira]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

Yeah...ok, I have not read carters book but I only want to say...So what, it seems to be that most people world wide take Israel's side when debating this issue...I for one think that its not that simple. From what I know on the subject (and that is not much admittedly) Its understood that Dershowitz should be called biased after all he is Jewish. Anyone who I have met from Israel (Guy or Girl) fucking hated Arabs whereas I have met Arabs that are ok...might be due to the fact that there are more Arabs than Israelis but nevertheless. I think that the Jews are equally wrong as the Arabs...there are several arguably wrong things with what you wrote above. I won't get into it now as I'm tired. But you similarly to carter only present facts that support your argument which is ok...its your opinion, maybe not a balanced one but its yours and that is my point. You have your opinion which you argue using facts that support it while omitting those that don't same as carter.

[Jenks]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

Thanks for the info Dave, but i'd still like to read it.

[davetlv]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

I agree with you, as i have stated here to many time, both sides of this conflict need to take responsibility for their actions.

But Carter does not try to look at solutions to the conflict, he has re-written history in many instances which lead him to totally false conclusions, but I guess $12 million plus will buy even an ex-president now-a-days.

[Jenks]

Re: ahobut jimmy carter. (DAVETLV)

I can be bought for half that.