St. Jimmy Carter?

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
How very, very interesting:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/016123.php

December 05, 2006
Errors, omissions, inventions and falsehoods

A reader writes that he received the email message below sent by Professor Kenneth Stein of Emory University and the Carter Center. Professor Stein's expertise lies in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Our reader writes that when he was an undergraduate student at Emory in the mid-1990's, Professor Stein was one of the most revered, respected professors on campus, and that Professor Stein had a long-standing association with the Carter Center in his capacity as an expert in Middle East politics and history. Professor Stein was in fact the first director of the Carter Center (1983-1986.)

Professor Stein is apparently terminating his association with the Carter Center, solely as a result of Carter's new book, Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid. The reaction of Professor Stein -- a formerly close associate and collaborator of Carter -- to Carter's new book is, as our reader thought it would be, of great interest to us:

This note is to inform you that yesterday, I sent letters to President Jimmy Carter, Emory University President Jim Wagner, and Dr. John Hardman, Executive Director of the Carter Center resigning my position, effectively immediately, as Middle East Fellow of the Carter Center of Emory University. This ends my 23 year association with an institution that in some small way I helped shape and develop. My joint academic position in Emory College in the History and Political Science Departments, and, as Director of the Emory Institute for the Study of Modern Israel remains unchanged.

Many still believe that I have an active association with the Center and, act as an adviser to President Carter, neither is the case. President Carter has intermittently continued to come to the Arab-Israeli Conflict class I teach in Emory College. He gives undergraduate students a fine first hand recollection of the Begin-Sadat negotiations of the late 1970s. Since I left the Center physically thirteen years ago, the Middle East program of the Center has waned as has my status as a Carter Center Fellow. For the record, I had nothing to do with the research, preparation, writing, or review of President Carter's recent publication. Any material which he used from the book we did together in 1984, The Blood of Abraham, he used unilaterally.

President Carter's book on the Middle East, a title too inflammatory to even print, is not based on unvarnished analyses; it is replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments. Aside from the one-sided nature of the book, meant to provoke, 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. Being a former President does not give one a unique privilege to invent information or to unpack it with cuts, deftly slanted to provide a particular outlook. Having little access to Arabic and Hebrew sources, I believe, clearly handicapped his understanding and analyses of how history has unfolded over the last decade. Falsehoods, if repeated often enough become meta-truths, and they then can become the erroneous baseline for shaping and reinforcing attitudes and for policy-making. The history and interpretation of the Arab-Israeli conflict is already drowning in half-truths, suppositions, and self-serving myths; more are not necessary. In due course, I shall detail these points and reflect on their origins.


The decade I spent at the Carter Center (1983-1993) as the first permanent Executive Director and as the first Fellow were intellectually enriching for Emory as an institution, the general public, the interns who learned with us, and for me professionally. Setting standards for rigorous interchange and careful analyses spilled out to the other programs that shaped the Center's early years. There was mutual respect for all views; we carefully avoided polemics or special pleading. This book does not hold to those standards. My continued association with the Center leaves the impression that I am sanctioning a series of egregious errors and polemical conclusions which appeared in President Carter's book. I can not allow that impression to stand.

Through Emory College, I have continued my professional commitment to inform students and the general public about the history and politics of Israel, the Middle East, and American policies toward the region. I have tried to remain true to a life-time devotion to scholarly excellence based upon unvarnished analyses and intellectual integrity. I hold fast to the notion that academic settings and those in positions of influence must teach and not preach. Through Emory College, in public lectures, and in OPED writings, I have adhered to the strong belief that history must presented in context, and understood the way it was, not the way we wish it to be.

In closing, let me thank you for your friendship, past and continuing support for ISMI, and to Emory College. Let me also wish you and your loved ones a happy holiday season, and a healthy and productive new year.

As ever,
Ken

Dr. Kenneth W. Stein,
Professor of Contemporary Middle Eastern History, Political Science,
and Israeli Studies,
Director, Middle East Research Program and
Emory Institute for the Study of Modern Israel
Atlanta, Georgia​

Posted by Scott at 06:20 PM
 

Bonnie

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2004
Messages
9,476
Reaction score
669
Points
48
Location
Wherever
That is very interesting, im making a copy of this for a friend who has no clear vision when it come to Mr Saint Carter....
 

Adam's Apple

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
4,092
Reaction score
448
Points
48
Bending the facts to support an agenda is just business as usual for lefties like Carter and the MSM.

What astonishes me is that many people are very willing to overlook the deeply flawed Jimmy Carter. I know people—including a few in my extended family—who think Carter is a good guy because of his Christian reputation (teaching a Sunday School class in Plains, helping to build homes for Habitat for Humanity, etc.). Because of that, they think what Carter says and does is always good for the country. (Of course, that's why the voters overwhelming chose to send him back to Plains rather than have his Presidency continue.) ;) They are very content to accept just the Christian image of Carter as the one that truly defines him and are not interested in looking beyond that persona.

These people will agree that Carter was not a good president; but to them that’s all right because he only served one term and, to their way of thinking, he didn’t do any harm to the country. They cannot see that the Iran we have to deal with today can be traced directly to Jimmy Carter and his administration.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
I saw this Professor verify this to be true last night on our local news.
To say he’s totally pissed about this new book that Carter was also signing at a local book store in the segment is an understatement.

Carter was asked about the factual content of the book and statements of the Professor after the signing; he responded with ‘it’s all true’.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
27,325
Reaction score
7,197
Points
280
Location
Arizona
I don't agree with Carter's faith in International Law to fix the middle east problem but what exactly are the ommisions and lies?
 

Adam's Apple

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
4,092
Reaction score
448
Points
48
...but what exactly are the ommisions and lies?
I haven't read Carter's book and don't have any interest in doing so, but here is commentary from someone who apparently has that might give you a few clues as to his omissions and lies.

Brave Jimmy Carter?
By Mona Charen, The Conservative Voice
December 15, 2006

Having scolded the Western world for its "inordinate fear of communism," Jimmy Carter is now, 30 years later, attempting to legitimize the shameful Zionism Equals Racism resolution passed and later repealed by the United Nations. The man has a seemingly unerring instinct for error. Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid is touted (by Carter himself) as an evenhanded analysis of the Israeli/Arab conflict -- but one need go no further than the title to suspect otherwise.

for full article:
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/21141.html
 

Abbey Normal

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
4,825
Reaction score
392
Points
48
Location
Mid-Atlantic region
As things heat up in the Middle East, I can't help but wonder if disagreement over Israel will splinter the Democratic party. I also wonder if we are heading towards abandonment of Isreal.
 
OP
Annie

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
I don't agree with Carter's faith in International Law to fix the middle east problem but what exactly are the ommisions and lies?
http://www.jacksonville.com/apnews/stories/011107/D8MJ64CO5.shtml

Thursday, January 11, 2007
Story last updated at 11:31 a.m. on Thursday, January 11, 2007

14 Carter Center staff members resign in protest over book

By GIOVANNA DELL'ORTO
Associated Press Writer

ATLANTA - Fourteen members of a Carter Center board who worked to build support for the human rights organization started by former President Jimmy Carter and his wife have resigned in protest over Carter's latest book.

The resignations, announced Thursday, are the latest in a backlash against the former president's book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," which has drawn fire from Jewish groups, been attacked by fellow Democrats and led to the resignation last month of Kenneth Stein, a Carter Center fellow and a longtime Carter adviser.

In their letter of resignation, the members of the Center's Board of Councilors wrote of Carter, "you have clearly abandoned your historic role of broker in favor of becoming an advocate for one side."

...
 

UnAmericanYOU

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
389
Reaction score
103
Points
78
He's the talk of the town: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23961_Mass_Resignation_at_Carter_Center&only

Alan Dershowitz REALLY wants to talk to Carter, doubt he'd be interested in applying for one of the new job openings!


Well, Israel's a done deal if Jimmuh gets his way, now he's trying to pick a fight with the Southern Baptist Conference again, which he left years ago because they couldn't see abortion on demand and/or gay marrige when they read the Bible.

ATLANTA Plans are in the works for a major meeting for Baptists distancing themselves from conservatives in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton joined the leaders of about 40 Baptist groups to make the announcement today at the Carter Center in Atlanta. The meeting, scheduled for next year, is aimed at improving the public image of Baptists and broadening their agenda on social issues such as poverty, racial conflict and health care.
I have no idea what Clinton has to do with all this, thought he was a United Methodist, a good choice for any "moderate-to-liberal" Protestant.

http://www.newschannel10.com/global/story.asp?s=5916910

Morris H. Chapman, president of the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee, said that Carter’s concerns about negative perceptions of Baptists ring hollow.

“He has been one of the most vocal critics of Southern Baptists, using ‘fundamentalist’ as a pejorative and drawing a caustic comparison between Ayatollah Khomeini’s rise to power in Iran and the resurgence of conservative leadership being elected in the SBC,” Chapman wrote to Baptist Press.

Chapman also disputed Carter’s and Clinton’s notion about a negative perception of Baptists.
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=24745

I wonder how much interest they'll be in a Baptist sect that wants to drive the Israelies into the sea.
 

William Joyce

Chemotherapy for PC
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
9,758
Reaction score
1,146
Points
190
Location
Caucasiastan
Keep your eyes on the ball:

*Carter is a wet noodle liberal, but he's factually correct that Israel is an apartheid state.

*Jews like Mona Charen and Alan Dershowitz are neither "conservative" nor "liberal" --- they're JEWS promoting a JEWISH AGENDA no matter what, and if that means using Carter's liberalism to beat him up in front of conservatives, that's exactly what they'll do.

*Christian fundamentalists have some good instincts, but I wish to GOD they'd realize that Jews ARE NOT their friends and that Israel is not worth sacrificing our nation and our people for, and furthermore, the ones falling over themselves to prove how "philosemitic" they are a DISGRACE. Do they not understand which ethnic group has been the hardest driving force behind the de-Christianization of America?

*Jews otherwise consider any criticism of them to be "anti-Semitism," so that pretty much shuts everyone up. But it doesn't mean the criticisms aren't valid.
 

UnAmericanYOU

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
389
Reaction score
103
Points
78
Well, yes the "anti-Semite" card is overplayed and sometimes doesn't even apply, but Israel has been the US only reliable ally over there and the closest thing that approaches a stable republic/democracy in the region.

Anti-Semitism is the same as anti-Zionism to most people.

He's a baptist.
That Clinton, yes, I was thinking of the other Clinton:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_3_118/ai_70368710

But it was his eight-year association with Wogaman's congregation, Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, D.C., that drew public attention on January 7. At the 11 A. M. service, President Clinton gave the sermon after daughter Chelsea read from the Old Testament and Senator Clinton, a life-long Methodist, gave the New Testament reading.
But, true, the Southern Baptists have been bitching about Bill for quite awhile. He'd better watch out, he's either the country's next Jimmuh Carter or our next First Lady:

Nevertheless, the President is and has been for most of his life a Southern Baptist. How he relates his faith (what he professes) to his practice (what he does) ought to raise serious questions in the minds of his fellow Southern Baptists. As hard as it may be to accept, Bill Clinton's religion is symptomatic of a shallow Christianity which has grown to epidemic proportions throughout our convention. His high profile has simply given prominence to serious problems which have existed for the last two generations in the SBC.
http://www.founders.org/FJ17/editorial.html

You know, it sounds like they don't think Clinton's an ideal example as a Southern Baptist, hope I'm not reading too much into that.

WJ, it could be called an apartheid state if you want to go polemetic on it, but there's no way the Israeli government is worse than South Africa circa 1980, as Jimmuh thinks.

He's been bought by the Palestenians:

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=252633226827963

The ex-president's irritating opinions on Mideast matters are one thing. But the funding of his Atlanta think tank by big-money, state-linked Arab sources is quite another — and points to a conflict of interest.

According to the Carter Center Web site's 2004-05 annual report — the most recent available — the center has received "in excess of $1 million" from characters like Prince Al-Walid bin Talal.
That makes Carter look like anything but an impartial observer.
 

Emmett

Active Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2005
Messages
557
Reaction score
101
Points
28
Location
Murrayville, Ga
I believe end humand rites for Americahns! My motha, Lillian, tat me those prin see ples earlee in life. Blah Blah BLah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

William Joyce

Chemotherapy for PC
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
9,758
Reaction score
1,146
Points
190
Location
Caucasiastan
it could be called an apartheid state if you want to go polemetic on it, but there's no way the Israeli government is worse than South Africa circa 1980, as Jimmuh thinks.
Don't have the facts to refute this, but since I personally have no objection to an apartheid state, I'm not worried about this. And I think Israel and SA might have even been playing footsie under the table back in the 70's and 80's.

I actually think Israel's got the right to be as separatist as they want, I just

1) don't want to pay for it

2) don't want my nation imperiled over it

3) would like the same thing for whites and

4) pop my cork over the fact that Jews are constantly doing one of two things: insisting on their right to ethnic separatism, while demonizing whites who so much as make a peep about that for their people.
 
OP
Annie

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
Don't have the facts to refute this, but since I personally have no objection to an apartheid state, I'm not worried about this. And I think Israel and SA might have even been playing footsie under the table back in the 70's and 80's.

I actually think Israel's got the right to be as separatist as they want, I just

1) don't want to pay for it

2) don't want my nation imperiled over it

3) would like the same thing for whites and

4) pop my cork over the fact that Jews are constantly doing one of two things: insisting on their right to ethnic separatism, while demonizing whites who so much as make a peep about that for their people.
You are entitled to your opinion certainly, but as for Carter, he's just in the pocket of the Muslims. Links:

http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/2007/01/say-it-aint-so-jimmy.html


Say It Ain't So, Jimmy

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.
 

UnAmericanYOU

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
389
Reaction score
103
Points
78
Jimmuh just can't stay out of the news. His glorious past is coming back to haunt him, and this time NOT in the form of Ronald Reagan:

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.
http://www.nysun.com/article/46972

Iran agrees 100 percent, the Carter dittoheads that they are.

Carter may be a perfect rose to the anti-American left, but he's been a thorn in Israel's side for some time now!
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Top