Carter Strikes Again

Quote :

"Terrorism's favorite and our worst ex-president plans on meeting with the terrorist group Hamas. This is like talking fire prevention with arsonists. But then, Jimmy Carter never met a terrorist he didn't like. The Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat reported Tuesday that Carter, the man from Plains who gave the world the Ayatollah Khomeini, Hezbollah and a soon-to-be nuclear Iran, is planning a trip to Syria later this month. And his press secretary, Deanna Coniglio, did not deny Al-Hayat's report that during the trip Carter would meet with Khalid Meshal, the exiled head of the Palestinian terror group Hamas. We would actually be surprised if Carter, acting like he's lobbying for the secretary of state slot in an Obama administration, didn't visit the head of the group that, having won an election in Gaza, turned the dream of a Palestinian state into just another opportunity to attack Israel. On taking power in Gaza, Hamas decided that rather than building a viable infrastructure with foreign assistance, feeding and educating its people, and picking up the trash, it would rather turn the territory into a launching pad for Kasam rockets targeted on Israeli civilians."

Quote :

"The State Department has properly declared Hamas a 'foreign terrorist organization,' and Syria was still a state sponsor of terror the last time we checked. Hamas is under international sanctions because it will not give up its terrorist activities or accept the existence of Israel. Meshal, who lives in Syria to avoid arrest, or worse, at the hands of Israel, runs Hamas from Damascus as a guest of the brutal Assad regime. Steve Emerson, director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, says: 'I'm not surprised Carter would do this, as he has been supporting Palestinian extremism for many years.' Not just Palestinian extremism. Carter has made a career of supporting terrorists and creating or embracing the world's habitats for inhumanity. On taking office in 1977, he declared that advancing 'human rights' was among his highest priorities. America's ally, the Shah of Iran, was one of his first targets, with Carter chastising him for his human rights record and withdrawing America's support. The mullahs soon took power. In 1994, Carter jetted off to the last Stalinist regime on Earth to broker a deal whereby North Korea would promise to forego a nuclear weapons program in exchange for a basket of goodies that included oil, food and, amazingly, nuclear technology. Along the way, Carter praised North Korea's mass-murdering dictator as a 'vigorous and intelligent man.' And of North Korea itself, Carter said: 'I don't see they are an outlaw nation.' Just exactly where has the 'peace process' and Yasser Arafat's shaking of Jimmy Carter's hand gotten us? The Nobel Peace Prize, with the possible exception of Al Gore's, has never been given to a less deserving individual. After the 2006 election returned them to congressional power, the Congressional Progressive Caucus invited 1972 cut-and-runner George McGovern to provide them advice and counsel. Now we see Jimmy Carter conducting the kind of 'aggressive personal diplomacy' Barack Obama has promised. If Obama wins the White House, will Khaled Meshal be invited to Camp David?"

http://tinyurl.com/44grpk

Why can't Carter just keep hammering nails for Habitat for Humanity and leave other things well enough alone? What an embarrassment.

4/11/2008 9:39:51 AM

wait, wasn't hamas the democratically elected government in palestine?

4/11/2008 9:42:42 AM

^ So if you're "democratically elected," you can't be wrong? I guess Bush is off the hook, huh?

4/11/2008 9:45:36 AM

not at all, but the admin is pushing the need for democratic govs in the middle east, so it's quite hypocritical to throw a hissy fit when one you don't like is elected by that very process, don't you think?

4/11/2008 9:52:18 AM

Godwin's Law anybody?

4/11/2008 9:52:24 AM

^^ Did you happen to catch this part?

Quote :

"Hamas is under international sanctions because it will not give up its terrorist activities or accept the existence of Israel. Meshal, who lives in Syria to avoid arrest, or worse, at the hands of Israel, runs Hamas from Damascus as a guest of the brutal Assad regime."

4/11/2008 10:06:07 AM

I definitely don't agree with any terroist activities, including Israel threatening to arrest (or worse) the democratically elected leader a country.

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 10:11 AM. Reason : .]

4/11/2008 10:09:56 AM

^^ Carter no longer represents the United States in any official capacity... Should he be arrested / prosecuted for fraternizing for the enemy of our friend?

4/11/2008 10:15:20 AM

^^ Um. . .you do realize that Hamas doesn't even recognize Israel's right to exist, yes? It's kind of hard to negotiate with that mentality hanging over the proceedings.

And if Hamas would stop shooting fucking rockets into Israel, many things on the peace front might be possible. Can you imagine if someone were shooting rockets into the United States on a regular basis? Americans would demand that they be pounded into dust.

And WTF is this?

Quote :

"it's quite hypocritical to throw a hissy fit when one you don't like is elected by that very process, don't you think?"

Who threw a "hissy fit"? The State Department counseled and the White House urged Carter not to meet with a terrorist leader. Where's the fit?

^ Carter shouldn't be meeting with a terrorist leader, that's for sure. I'll take a stab in the dark and say arresting ex-presidents is not a popular move.[/sarcasm]

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 10:25 AM. Reason : .]

4/11/2008 10:23:10 AM

"Jimmy Carter to Meet with Bush/Rice-Installed Leader of Palestine"

What? It's true.

4/11/2008 10:24:01 AM

BUSH DID IT!!!1

4/11/2008 10:26:02 AM

Quote :

"^ Um. . .you do realize that Hamas doesn't even recognize Israel's right to exist, yes? It's kind of hard to negotiate with that mentality hanging over the proceedings. And if Hamas would stop shooting fucking rockets into Israel, many things on the peace front might be possible. Can you imagine if someone were shooting rockets into the United States on a regular basis? Americans would demand that they be pounded into dust."

I do realize that Hamas doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist. I'm not a fan of Hamas to say the least, but that's not my point. My point is who gives a crap what Jimmy Carter is doing on his free time? Unless he's aiding or giving comfort to our enemy (and I mean this literally) what can we do? I don't plan on electing him to any kind of office any time soon, so unless he announces his candidacy or is appointed to a cabinet position of some sort... what does it matter?

And no, I can't imagine if someone were shooting rockets into the United States on a regular basis. It's a nightmarish thought, and I don't think it'd stand for very long at all.

4/11/2008 10:29:29 AM

Quote :

"And if Hamas would stop shooting fucking rockets into Israel, many things on the peace front might be possible."

yep, its usually hard to come to an agreement when neither side admits to doing anything wrong, when in fact, both are pretty shady. Kind of like how you always think repubs are the saving grace of humanity and defend everything they do, while tring to portray dems as satan incarnate and chastise them at every oppotunity. In reality both do some good things and some bone headed things, but the bickering back and forth overshadows everything.

Quote :

"Who threw a "hissy fit"? The State Department counseled and the White House urged Carter not to meet with a terrorist leader. Where's the fit?"

the bush admin has been whining ever since they were elected...they need to be exploring the reason so many people saw fit to cast a ballot for hamas in the first place. The voice of the people....You know, that democracy thing we hold so dear?

4/11/2008 10:36:14 AM

so who here thinks we'll go no more than 10 years without a major war in the middle east again b4 we can fix all this diplomatically? (specifically a war with groups like hamas) (i'm not saying the US vs. Hamas, i'm saying a war between anybody in that region that deals with groups like hamas, or fatwa groups)

4/11/2008 10:48:40 AM

My vote is that we'll continue to have perpetual war. Bush opened the doors with the "War on Terror" vocabulary, and I don't think anybody (Republican or Democrat) will actually go through a whole term without continued engagements and conflict.

I'm curious as to your definition of "major war" though. What are we talking about here? A dozen participants? Two or Three major fronts at one time?

If that's what you mean... I doubt it. Not without a major attack on a western democracy by a government supported group.

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 10:53 AM. Reason : .]

4/11/2008 10:53:09 AM

As long as we're getting oil, there will be no major war.

Hamas seriously can't do anything to this country outside of some kind of minor terrorist attack that kills 2000 people. Being bluntly honest, that's really not that big in the grand scheme of things in a country of 310 million. It's like getting a paper cut for this country.

And if that did occur, we'd just go in and level Gaza and the West Bank. We'd be privately supported by most of the Arab states cause none of them like the Palestinians to start with. Notice Egypt's reaction when their fortified border got blown up.

Hamas and associated militias are little more than annoying mosquitos that take potshots occasionally and we swat them in return. They're not a major entity.

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 10:58 AM. Reason : ?]

4/11/2008 10:55:31 AM

yeh i'm talking about a major engagement that involves powers like...

russia, china, even lots of region locals like turkey, all of palestine, iran, or heck even europe or the US gets involved.

the world has honestly lived pretty mildly since wwii... and this 'war on terror' or whatever you feel like calling it... hasn't been quite the nightmare that it could have evolved into.

but sadly i'm guessing it will one day.. given our human patterns

4/11/2008 10:59:22 AM

Look, I love that Jimmy cured River Blindness and he does preach the gospel


But this is borderline grounds to charge him with treason, which is a capital offense

4/11/2008 11:06:34 AM

Shooting them is working.

We're on the verge of solving this Middle East business forever.

Talking's just gonna muck things up.

4/11/2008 11:12:57 AM

what we need to do is order mass evacuations before we invade

tell civilians where they can show up in camps where they are screened for being terrorists

then we can prosecute war with abandon


its similar to how leaflets are now dropped before we go in, but if we give the civilians shelter from the fighting, they would take the opportunity

4/11/2008 11:14:41 AM

^ Refresh my memory... How effective were those leaflets in WWII before we dropped the bombs on Japan?

Incidentally... Look up the definition for treason.

4/11/2008 11:16:52 AM

treason is siding with the enemy, Jimmy's been looking really pink to me lately...

4/11/2008 11:17:57 AM

Quote :

"what we need to do is order mass evacuations before we invade tell civilians where they can show up in camps where they are screened for being terrorists then we can prosecute war with abandon"

and have to balls to go in and perform rapage of the cities where we make these threats.

4/11/2008 11:18:45 AM

Quote :

"tell civilians where they can show up in camps where they are screened for being terrorists "

hell yeah, we've done so much already, creating a huge refugee/humanitarian crisis is logically the next item to cross off.....

and how does one 'screen' another for being a terrorist?

4/11/2008 11:28:19 AM

you send them to Disneyland Cuba

4/11/2008 11:29:29 AM

^^^^ " a citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the parent nation." (Oran's Dictionary of the Law)

Unless he's an Israeli citizen, you're stretching.

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 11:32 AM. Reason : .]

4/11/2008 11:31:47 AM

Quote :

"hell yeah, we've done so much already, creating a huge refugee/humanitarian crisis is logically the next item to cross off....."

It worked in Iraq!

MISSION ACCOMPLISHEDLOLZORZZZZ

4/11/2008 11:32:35 AM

Like i said before


Rome wasnt built in a day, and neither will democracy in the arab lands


but it will be done, soon the arabs will realize we really mean business, its starting to sink in


and a lot of the so called civilians are really insurgent sympathizers, if it wasnt for the liberal media's shenanigans at times we could really clean up

4/11/2008 11:34:23 AM

like I said, the romans built rome.

Quote :

"soon the arabs will realize we really mean business, its starting to sink in"

we mean business how so? Destroying milions of people's lives in pursuit of a fallacy? I think we've already made that clear.

4/11/2008 11:39:28 AM

Democracy is no fallacy and may God have mercy on their souls

4/11/2008 11:42:29 AM

fuck diplomacy we just need to pick up our guns and bomb everyone we don't like

4/11/2008 11:43:27 AM

why doesnt jimmy just hand them the nuclear codes then, right eyerolls?

4/11/2008 11:46:11 AM

^lol, equating a peace effort with nuclear war....the admin would be proud my friend.

4/11/2008 11:49:04 AM

I'd personally enjoy seeing the 846th "Samson's Foxes" Special troops Battalion go against the entire Hamas terrorist organization without any rules of engagement.

Drop your socks and grab your cocks, that would be one hell of a show. Get the popcorn ready and get the video cameras out.

4/11/2008 11:51:34 AM

Hamas is a terrorist organization, Jimmy hanging out with them is not unlike Mullah Mohammed Omar hanging out with Al Qaeda. So we had to teach Omar a lesson. What the hell does Jimmy think he's doing?

4/11/2008 11:53:19 AM

Quote :

"yeh i'm talking about a major engagement that involves powers like... russia, china, even lots of region locals like turkey, all of palestine, iran, or heck even europe or the US gets involved. the world has honestly lived pretty mildly since wwii... and this 'war on terror' or whatever you feel like calling it... hasn't been quite the nightmare that it could have evolved into. but sadly i'm guessing it will one day.. given our human patterns"

The next big world war can't be "The War on Terror". If China attacks us for example, that's not terrorism, that's war between two sovereign states. My definition of terrorism requires non-state actors.

As far as major engagements, there was a war from 1998-2003 that killed 5.4 million people and involved 8 countries. No one cares cause it's Africa and it didn't involve a first-world country, but "5.4 million dead" qualifies as huge conflict to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War

Quote :

"Hamas is a terrorist organization..."

That the United States helped into power. Great move there guys!


[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 11:56 AM. Reason : /]

4/11/2008 11:53:25 AM

Quote :

"^^ Um. . .you do realize that Hamas doesn't even recognize Israel's right to exist, yes? It's kind of hard to negotiate with that mentality hanging over the proceedings."

So? The united states has its fair share of nations it 'doesn't recognize' mostly because the democratically elected leaders aren't US puppets.

and not to mention American soldiers have killed more innocent civilians than Hamas ever will.

4/11/2008 11:53:36 AM

Not to mention Israel is a major ally of the United States and fights a whole lot of the terrorists over there so we don't have to here


Its so fun to try and talk about how the United States is evil or something. Go live in a country that doesnt give you as many rights


to back hamas is sick and treasonous, are you some kind of anti semite?

4/11/2008 11:57:47 AM

yeh, The Judge is pretty much owning this bitch right now

sorry to all the other players in this thread. he wins

4/11/2008 11:58:39 AM

Israel isn't exactly Captain Innocent in the middle east.

4/11/2008 12:00:46 PM

Oh you're right, the suicide bomber brigades it faces are, try imagining what its like to live in Israel. You can't. We live in beautiful America. If Mexico was firing rockets into our country and canada was issuing fatwahs and financially backing suicide bombers your complacent left wing pinko outlook would become more realistic

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 12:03 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2008 12:01:46 PM

The moral equivalence and tu quoque fallacies happening in this thread are sickening.

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 12:04 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2008 12:03:20 PM

For the record Hamas and any who would sympathize with them can suck my quoque

4/11/2008 12:04:28 PM

Jimmy Carter is a bumbling doofus. Buddying up with terrorists who wantonly target civilians and encourage violence isn't going to win him another peace prize...but then again it might.

It'll be another circle jerk where lots of stuff gets said and the killings will continue like always, but hey, we gave diplomacy a try, and trying is all that matters111!!! Results are for pussies...

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 12:08 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2008 12:04:53 PM

Quote :

"So? The united states has its fair share of nations it 'doesn't recognize' mostly because the democratically elected leaders aren't US puppets."

Au contraire.

We by law don't recognize Taiwan because China won't have diplomatic relations with any country that does (although by fact we do).

We don't recognize Abkhazia (Georgian breakoff), Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijani breakoff), Transnistria (Moldovan breakoff), Somaliland (Somalian breakoff), and South Ossetia (Georgian breakoff). All of which no one recognizes.

We don't recognize Turkish Cyprus, which is only recognized by Turkey.

We don't recognize Palestine, which is recognized by 95 states.

We don't recognize the Sahrawi Arab Republic (Moroccan breakoff), which is only recognized by African countries.

So the only main states that have some type of mainstream legitimacy we don't recognize are Taiwan (who are as pro-American as you can get) and Palestine (who we don't recognize but have relations with and give tons of aid).

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 12:08 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2008 12:06:21 PM

Results would be the blood of jihadists washing the streets of the holy lands

4/11/2008 12:06:30 PM

^^^^ Ha!

^^^ Yep.

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 12:07 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2008 12:06:52 PM

We live in beautiful America. If Mexico was firing rockets into our country and canada was issuing fatwahs and financially backing suicide bombers your complacent left wing pinko outlook would become more realistic


this is exactly why the democrats have only been able to put a president in the whitehouse 2 out the past 7 presidential terms

4/11/2008 12:23:13 PM

^

4/11/2008 12:25:01 PM

Quote :

"this is exactly why the democrats have only been able to put a president in the whitehouse 2 out the past 7 presidential terms"

If this country voted for president based on foreign policy, Pat Buchanan would be president. Remember that when George W. Bush ran for president in 2000, he was a featherweight on how the outside world functioned.

4/11/2008 1:09:41 PM