Israel's UN ambassador calls Jimmy Carter 'a bigot'

[Shogun]

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.

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.

The ambassador called last weekend's encounter "a very sad episode in American history."

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."

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080425/D908NSUG0.html

 

[Dogger]

Among other things, America and Israel have this in common - an intransigent, conservative block of hardliners that cannot tolerate other points of view or admit there might be a better solution to problems.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Among other things, America and Israel have this in common - an intransigent, conservative block of hardliners that cannot tolerate other points of view or admit there might be a better solution to problems.

Ya, Israel should just surrender and and allow all the Jews to be murdered so people like you can feel good.

 

[jillian]

Among other things, America and Israel have this in common - an intransigent, conservative block of hardliners that cannot tolerate other points of view or admit there might be a better solution to problems.

When you say that, you do realize that the pals elected a terrorist organizaztion to represent it, right? So what's that about hardliners? And what's more significant, a few people in the settlements or a country that elected Hamas?

I don't know if Jimmy Carter's a bigot. But I do know that if you read his book, he HATES Israel. Hates it..... He's not unbiased and he's not trusted by anyone who cares about the country. He just isn't. That may be fair or it may not be, but it's fact.

Let me know when the pals have honest brokers and we can talk.

 

[Dogger]

Jillian's right. I should have included Hamas and Palestine among those with hardliners, but I didn't say that Israel (or anyone else) is nothing but hardliners. Rather, I was reacting to the post about the Israeli hardliners who seem determined to obstruct any attempt to bring peace to the region.

I don't think Carter is perfect by any measure, but he has been willing to listen to both sides (despite any bias), and that's been a better approach that the Bush League has taken in the ME. I'm sympathetic to Israel's position, and I know it's difficult to reason with anyone that would elect Hamas to represent them, but ignoring the Palestinian point of view seems fated to result in nothing but more bloodshed on both sides.

I remember much criticism of Carter before Camp David. Carter didn't solve all problems, of course, but his efforts increased the security of Israel by neutralizing any threat from Egypt. Despite the criticisms, Carter has a better track record in the ME than anyone else, and I just think they should see if he comes up with a workable plan before they jump up his ass.
______

RGS - the fact that you could read something so disturbed, so extreme and so baseless into my post says nothing about me or my beliefs, but speaks volumes about you. Please, and I mean this sincerely, get help.

 

[jillian]

Jillian's right. I should have included Hamas and Palestine among those with hardliners, but I didn't say that Israel (or anyone else) is nothing but hardliners. Rather, I was reacting to the post about the Israeli hardliners who seem determined to obstruct any attempt to bring peace to the region.

I don't think Carter is perfect by any measure, but he has been willing to listen to both sides (despite any bias), and that's been a better approach that the Bush League has taken in the ME. I'm sympathetic to Israel's position, and I know it's difficult to reason with anyone that would elect Hamas to represent them, but ignoring the Palestinian point of view seems fated to result in nothing but more bloodshed on both sides.

I remember much criticism of Carter before Camp David. Carter didn't solve all problems, of course, but his efforts increased the security of Israel by neutralizing any threat from Egypt. Despite the criticisms, Carter has a better track record in the ME than anyone else, and I just think they should see if he comes up with a workable plan before they jump up his ass.
______

RGS - the fact that you could read something so disturbed, so extreme and so baseless into my post says nothing about me or my beliefs, but speaks volumes about you. Please, and I mean this sincerely, get help.

Camp David was certainly a great accomplishment. But he was working with Menachem Began and Anwar Sadat. Plus, Egypt wasn't a terrorist organization. Now there's Hamas. Plus, I think the problem is that Carter should never have written what he did. It caused a lot of distrust, IMO.

I also don't think Carter should be meeting with Hamas when there are two competing groups in the territories. Can't make peace with one without making peace with the other, IMO.

That said, this admin has been fairly ineffective in even trying to make peace. But I suspect the pals would feel about Bush the way I feel about Jimmy Carter trying to broker peace.

 

[Dogger]

As a private actor, Carter cannot force or pressure any solution onto the parties. I have confidence in Israel's ability to protect it's own interests and I am sure they will reject any proposal that fails to insure their security. Since acceptance must be voluntary (or at least unburdened by US presssure), I don't see a downside if Carter tries and fails. I do see an upside if he succeeds.

 

[Shogun]

When you say that, you do realize that the pals elected a terrorist organizaztion to represent it, right? So what's that about hardliners? And what's more significant, a few people in the settlements or a country that elected Hamas?

I don't know if Jimmy Carter's a bigot. But I do know that if you read his book, he HATES Israel. Hates it..... He's not unbiased and he's not trusted by anyone who cares about the country. He just isn't. That may be fair or it may not be, but it's fact.

Let me know when the pals have honest brokers and we can talk.

I don't think he hates israel at all. In fact, I'd say he loves jews pretty goddamn much to take so much shit FOR TRYING TO MAKE PEACE FOR YOU.


fact my ass. I appriciate your other facets, Jillian, but this is the rotton core issue of your apple. You act like israel is the tantrum throwing child that better get every damn candy bar he sees while his mom is hateful for saying no. the FACT is that hamas was elected. The FACT is that they are, like it or not, representative of the people. The FACT is that you shit on the democratic process by picking your own acceptable pal nominee. YOU wouldn't accept a fucking political coup in THIS nation and neither would I. You need to find fucking peace where ever it may be instead of just not even trying to give a fuck in some post-holocaust cultural post tramatic stress disorder.

 

[jillian]

As a private actor, Carter cannot force or pressure any solution onto the parties. I have confidence in Israel's ability to protect it's own interests and I am sure they will reject any proposal that fails to insure their security. Since acceptance must be voluntary (or at least unburdened by US presssure), I don't see a downside if Carter tries and fails. I do see an upside if he succeeds.

The downside if Carter tries and fails is that because of his bias, he blames Israel and continues the anti-Israel progaganda war which is being used to try to destroy its legitimacy.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I don't think he hates israel at all. In fact, I'd say he loves jews pretty goddamn much to take so much shit FOR TRYING TO MAKE PEACE FOR YOU.


fact my ass. I appriciate your other facets, Jillian, but this is the rotton core issue of your apple. You act like israel is the tantrum throwing child that better get every damn candy bar he sees while his mom is hateful for saying no. the FACT is that hamas was elected. The FACT is that they are, like it or not, representative of the people. The FACT is that you shit on the democratic process by picking your own acceptable pal nominee. YOU wouldn't accept a fucking political coup in THIS nation and neither would I. You need to find fucking peace where ever it may be instead of just not even trying to give a fuck in some post-holocaust cultural post tramatic stress disorder.

The coup was by Hamas, THEY illegally seized Pal Authority property and territory, they illegally murdered and detained Pal Authority police and officials. They refused to return that property and territory to the proper Government. That you then think that Government should continue to allow their representatives to be IN the Government is hilarious.

I guess what the South should have done in the Civil War was leave all their Senators, Congressman, soldiers and Government employees in the North to simply vote down any attempt by the North to act against the South?

 

[Dogger]

The downside if Carter tries and fails is that because of his bias, he blames Israel and continues the anti-Israel progaganda war which is being used to try to destroy its legitimacy.

But if Israel, or the hardliners in Israel, prevent him from even trying, won't the same thing occur? Wouldn't he have a stronger argument against Israel, in that he could say the Israelis won't even try to broker a peaceful solution?

It seems that if they let him try, Israel has a better argument that any failure is his alone. And they could object to specific terms or problems, rather than just the abstract idea of making an effort.

 

[jillian]

But if Israel, or the hardliners in Israel, prevent him from even trying, won't the same thing occur? Wouldn't he have a stronger argument against Israel, in that he could say the Israelis won't even try to broker a peaceful solution?

It seems that if they let him try, Israel has a better argument that any failure is his alone. And they could object to specific terms or problems, rather than just the abstract idea of making an effort.

It's not just the hardliners that don't want him involved. I'm far from a hardliner (I've always thought Israel should be out of the settlements) and I don't want him anywhere near it either.

It's the same type of thing as the U.N. trying to send someone who called Israel "nazis" to make an assessment of the human rights situation in the country and in the territories.

I think Israel is entitled to fair brokers. And I think until Hamas and Fatah duke it out, there's no one to make a deal with.

 

[Shogun]

but would you accept the victor if they did duke it out? by our DEMOCRATIC STANDARDS.....

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

Ya, Israel should just surrender and and allow all the Jews to be murdered so people like you can feel good.

Actually, I have a better solution: I think we should relocate them all to Idaho, compensate the current residents and give them foreclosed properties in other locations, and end the whole mess. That way we and they would be safe.

 

[jillian]

Actually, I have a better solution: I think we should relocate them all to Idaho, compensate the current residents and give them foreclosed properties in other locations, and end the whole mess. That way we and they would be safe.

I have an even better idea... tell us where *you* are, we'll relocate *you* to Idaho.

 

[Shogun]

Actually, I have a better solution: I think we should relocate them all to Idaho, compensate the current residents and give them foreclosed properties in other locations, and end the whole mess. That way we and they would be safe.

I tried this kind of logic too. Watch, they will call you stupid now for illustrating what it would take to make an entire state of Westerners as willing to kill a zionist jewish state as pals.

 

[Shogun]

I have an even better idea... tell us where *you* are, we'll relocate *you* to Idaho.

SHE didn't require the formation of a brand new carved from muslim land nation in order to see why pals, like those from Idaho, would reject an imposed jewish state.


Your dual citizenship attitude exactly why the US should cease providing cover for your pet zionist nation.

 

[Gungnir]

I guess what the South should have done in the Civil War was leave all their Senators, Congressman, soldiers and Government employees in the North to simply vote down any attempt by the North to act against the South?

You know something... that might actually have worked. RetiredGySgt, fire up the time machine, we're going to rewrite history!

Actually, I have a better solution: I think we should relocate them all to Idaho, compensate the current residents and give them foreclosed properties in other locations, and end the whole mess. That way we and they would be safe.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

We paid for that land in money, sweat, and blood; we aren't giving any of it up. We already have 301 million people, we don't need another few million. Besides they will leave Idaho for the the coastal metropolitan areas a few months after relocation.

Do you really want to hear all the gnashing of teeth when jackbooted ICE SWAT teams start hunting down illegal immigrant Jews, putting them into detention centers, and then trucking them to the Reservation?

Think it through.

 

[William Joyce]

You'd think smearing a buck-toothed peanut farmer one-term Democrat president as a "bigot" would make the Jews look desperate to deflect attention from the extreme imbalance of their/our Israel situation.

Alas, no.

The Bob-and-Betty scenario around the kitchen table in Iowa goes, Well, honey, do you think it's true? Is Jimmy Carter... a bigot?

Concept: What if Americans controlled American foreign policy?

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

I have an even better idea... tell us where *you* are, we'll relocate *you* to Idaho.

Rather than be safer and assimilated you PREFER playing the eternal victim? Well, I guess it does get you the attention you obsess over, needy!

The thing with being "self-chosen" just seems to take so much energy that could better be put into something more productive.