Posted on 10/25/2004 4:22:30 AM PDT by Witch-king of Angmar
Jimmy Carter says President Bush is exploiting the suffering of Sept. 11 and has turned back decades of efforts to make the world a safer place.
Let me say this: If I had any doubts about Bush's efforts in Iraq, they would be gone the minute Jimmy Carter attacked them.
Jimmy Carter has, to my knowledge, never been right about any foreign policy moves in his long political life – and certainly not as president.
Let me tell you about what Jimmy Carter knows first-hand about political exploitation of suffering and making the world a safer place.
A new documentary, "In the Face of Evil," shows just how Carter himself, as president, tried to exploit the power of his office and the suffering of hundreds of millions living under the iron hand of Soviet oppression to undercut his challenger in 1980 – Ronald Reagan.
Carter, according to the movie's Soviet sources, tried to get Leonid Brezhnev to help him defeat Reagan. He sought the help of this foreign totalitarian – a murderer and a tyrant – because he feared the loss of the White House.
He told Brezhnev that Reagan was a risk to begin a nuclear war if he won the presidency – an irresponsible, treasonous statement that surely brought the world closer to nuclear war.
It's a shocking story – and just one of the explosive revelations of this magnificent movie now playing in select theaters in New York and Washington.
Carter was an appeaser unlike any previous U.S. president.
He signed one agreement after another with the Soviet Union that served only to diminish U.S. power in the world because we lived up to the agreements and the other side didn't.
He had no problem destroying the ability of the U.S. military to fight because he didn't trust American arrogance.
He told us we had to co-exist with what his successor would call "The Evil Empire" and accept that those under its dominion would be slaves for the rest of their lives.
He told Americans they had an unwarranted fear of communism.
And that's why he served one disastrous term.
Carter was bad for the economy. He was bad for the military. He was bad for America. He left the country in a shambles – demoralized, broke, directionless.
Carter must be hoping that the majority of Americans have forgotten what life was like under his presidency. For those of you who don't remember, life was not good by any measure. We waited in gas lines for fuel. America was on the retreat around the world. The Soviet Union was advancing on all fronts.
Even Carter seemed to grasp that something was wrong toward the end of his first term. So he famously blamed Americans rather than himself. He told us we were living in a "malaise." He didn't understand that he was the primary cause of that malaise.
Nor has his understanding of politics improved any in the last 24 years.
Someone once said charitably that Carter was a great "ex-president." But that was a long time ago. That was when he was building homes for the poor through Habitant for Humanity. Lately, he has joined the chorus of the most radical wing of his shameless, treacherous, un-American party.
The truth is, Carter is no better as an "ex-president" than he was as a president.
He's an embarrassment. He's a clown. He's a joke.
It's almost difficult for some of us who survived his presidency to believe we once elected this Georgia peanut farmer to the highest office in the land. I was one of the idiots who voted for him – twice. Believe me, it's not easy to admit it.
But Carter's advice does, perhaps, serve a useful purpose: We should listen carefully to what he says – and always do the opposite.
Have said it before, will say it again: the only compliment due Jimmmy Carter is that, painful as the process was, he prepared the United States for the election of one of our greatest presidents, Ronald Reagan.
I detest Carter. However, I think there is some irony in Carter's discussion with Brezhnev.
The USSR really thought Reagan was crazy enough to fight a nuclear war. When the time came, Gorbachev blinked and backed down, which meant that the US had won the Cold War. Now, where did the Soviets get the idea that Reagan was a scary, crazy guy? Jimmy Carter.
It's almost a Good Cop / Bad Cop scenario -- but Jimmy Carter was more of a criminal than a good cop.
Jimmy Carter Under Fire for Recruiting Soviets Against Reagan
Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com
Wednesday, Oct. 30, 2002
WASHINGTON Former President Jimmy Carter owes an explanation to the American people for his behavior during the Cold War, says the author of a new book.
"Reagans War reveals new information that Carter, as president and later as a private citizen, sought the help of an avowed foreign enemy of this country to undermine Reagans candidacy in 1980 and, even more shocking, tried to cripple President Reagans foreign policy in 1984.
The former Democrat president, who had been ousted by voters four years earlier, wanted the Soviets to help him put a Democrat back in the White House.
Speaking Tuesday at a seminar at the Institute of World Politics, the books author, Peter Schweizer, said Jimmy Carter owes a full explanation, and then depending on his answer, a decision could be made as to whether the former president "stepped over the line from pure dissent to giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
NewsMax.com CEO Christopher Ruddy has written that Carter "may well have committed treason by enlisting the help of the Soviet Union in the 1980 and 1984 presidential elections.
"Its a fair question for him [Carter] to give his account of what happened, and a response, which he has not done, the author told NewsMax.com. "Then, you know, depending on his reaction and response, there needs to be further discussion. The other thing potentially that perhaps ought to be asked [is] that Moscow release any files it has on the meetings.
"All we have right now, Schweizer added, "is based on these accounts by [former Soviet Ambassador] Dobrynin. And it begs the question: Is there any more material based on his [Carters] dealings with Moscow?
'Carter Won't Forget' Soviet Assistance
Schweizers book, which is going straight to the top of the best-seller list, reveals that during the 1980 campaign when Reagan was gaining in the polls, Carter "dispatched [pro-Soviet industrialist] Armand Hammer to the Soviet Embassy for a secret meeting with Ambassador Dobrynin to ask for Soviet help with Jewish emigration and other potential vote-getting issues for a sitting president. The Soviets were promised that "Carter wont forget that service if he is re-elected.
Schweizer reports that when Reagan was running for re-election in 1984, Carter himself visited Ambassador Dobrynin warning there "would not be a single agreement on arms control, especially on nuclear arms, as long as Reagan was in power.
Carter wanted the Soviet Union to help the Democrats regain the presidency. History shows his prophecy about no hope for a nuclear arms agreement to be wrong. It was a part of Reagan's success in ending the Cold War on Americas terms.
Asking Carter to explain to Americans this part of his stewardship is most "reasonable, in Schweizers view. When he asked the former president about this, all the author got was "No comment.
location: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/10/29/201145.shtml
Peter Schweizer, a Hoover Institution research fellow, has just written a new book, "Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty-Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism."
This book may well force historians to revise the history of the Cold War.
Schweizer, after scouring once-classified KGB, East German Stasi and Soviet Communist Party files, discovered incontrovertible evidence that the Soviets not only played footsie with high-ranking Democrats, they also worked behind the scenes to influence American elections.
In "Reagan's War," Schweizer shows how the Democrats worked with Moscow to try to undermine Reagan before and after he became president.
Jimmy Carter's Dirty Tricks
Soviet diplomatic accounts and material from the archives show that in January 1984, former President Jimmy Carter dropped by Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin's residence for a private meeting.
Carter expressed his concern about and opposition to Reagan's defense buildup. He boldly told Dobrynin that Moscow would be better off with someone else in the White House. If Reagan won, he warned, "There would not be a single agreement on arms control, especially on nuclear arms, as long as Reagan remained in power."
Using the Russians to influence the presidential election was nothing new for Carter.
Schweizer reveals Russian documents that show that in the waning days of the 1980 campaign, the Carter White House dispatched businessman Armand Hammer to the Soviet Embassy.
Hammer was a longtime Soviet-phile, and he explained to the Soviet ambassador that Carter was "clearly alarmed" at the prospect of losing to Reagan.
Hammer pleaded with the Russians for help. He asked if the Kremlin could expand Jewish emigration to bolster Carter's standing in the polls.
'Carter Won't Forget That Service'
"Carter won't forget that service if he is elected," Hammer told Dobrynin.
Carter was not the only Democrat to make clear to the Russians where their loyalty lay. As the election neared in 1984, Dobrynin recalls meetings with Speaker of the House Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill.
O'Neill told Dobrynin that no effort should be spared to prevent "that demagogue Reagan" from being re-elected.
location:
http://www.newsmax.com/showinside.shtml?a=2002/10/16/214040
Jimmy Carter and the 40 Ayatollahs
Diane Alden
Wednesday, Oct. 30, 2002
By Middle East standards the Shah of Iran was a progressive democrat. In the eyes of President Jimmy Carter and certain foreign policy factions in the State Department and various think tanks, the Shah represented the heart of darkness.
In an article in May 2002, NewsMax's Chris Ruddy pointed out:
"Remember Carter's human rights program, where he demanded the Shah of Iran step down and turn over power to the Ayatollah Khomeini? "No matter that Khomeini was a madman. Carter had the U.S. Pentagon tell the Shah's top military commanders about 150 of them to acquiesce to the Ayatollah and not fight him.
"The Shah's military listened to Carter. All of them were murdered in one of the Ayatollah's first acts.
"By allowing the Shah to fall, Carter created one of the most militant anti-American dictatorships ever."
[See: Jimmy Carter's Trail of Disaster.]
As has been reported in NewsMax previously, Carter still receives a great deal of money from the Arab world for his Carter Center in Atlanta.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/10/29/170201.shtml
Carter Sold out Iran 1977-1978
As if a light were switched off, the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlevi, portrayed for 20 years as a progressive modern ruler by Islamic standards, was suddenly, in 1977-1978, turned into this foaming at the mouth monster by the international left media. Soon after becoming President in 1977, Jimmy Carter launched a deliberate campaign to undermine the Shah. The Soviets and their left-wing apparatchiks would coordinate with Carter by smearing the Shah in a campaign of lies meant to topple his throne. The result would be the establishment of a Marxist/Islamic state in Iran headed by the tyrannical Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The Iranian revolution, besides enthroning one of the worlds most oppressive regimes, would greatly contribute to the creation of the Marxist/Islamic terror network challenging the free world today.
At the time, a senior Iranian diplomat in Washington observed, President Carter betrayed the Shah and helped create the vacuum that will soon be filled by Soviet-trained agents and religious fanatics who hate America. Under the guise of promoting human rights, Carter made demands on the Shah while blackmailing him with the threat that if the demands werent fulfilled, vital military aid and training would be withheld. This strange policy, carried out against a staunch, 20 year Middle East ally, was a repeat of similar policies applied in the past by US governments to other allies such as pre Mao China and pre Castro Cuba.
Carter started by pressuring the Shah to release political prisoners including known terrorists and to put an end to military tribunals. The newly released terrorists would be tried under civil jurisdiction with the Marxist/Islamists using these trials as a platform for agitation and propaganda. This is a standard tactic of the left then and now. The free world operates at a distinct dis-advantage to Marxist and Islamic nations in this regard as in those countries, trials are staged to show the political faith of the ruling elite. Fair trials, an independent judiciary, and a search for justice is considered to be a western bourgeois prejudice.
Carter pressured Iran to allow for free assembly which meant that groups would be able to meet and agitate for the overthrow of the government. It goes without saying that such rights didnt exist in any Marxist or Islamic nation. The planned and predictable result of these policies was an escalation of opposition to the Shah, which would be viewed by his enemies as a weakness. A well-situated internal apparatus in Iran receiving its marching orders from the Kremlin egged on this growing opposition.
By the fall of 1977, university students, working in tandem with a Shiite clergy that had long opposed the Shahs modernizing policies, began a well coordinated and financed series of street demonstrations supported by a media campaign reminiscent of the 1947-1948 campaign against Chinas Chiang Ki Shek in favor of the agrarian reformer Mao tse Tung. At this point the Shah was unable to check the demonstrators, who were instigating violence as a means of inflaming the situation and providing their media stooges with atrocity propaganda. Rumors were circulating amongst Iranians that the CIA under the orders of President Carter organized these demonstrations.
In November 1977, the Shah and his Empress, Farah Diba, visited the White House where they were met with hostility. They were greeted by nearly 4,000 Marxist-led Iranian students, many wearing masks, waving clubs, and carrying banners festooned with the names of Iranian terrorist organizations. The rioters were allowed within 100 feet of the White House where they attacked other Iranians and Americans gathered to welcome the Shah. Only 15 were arrested and quickly released. Inside the White House, Carter pressured the Shah to implement even more radical changes. Meanwhile, the Soviets were mobilizing a campaign of propaganda, espionage, sabotage, and terror in Iran. The Shah was being squeezed on two sides.
In April 1978, Moscow would instigate a bloody coup in Afghanistan and install the communist puppet Nur Mohammad Taraki. Taraki would proceed to call for a jihad against the Ikhwanu Shayateen which translates into brothers of devils, a label applied to opponents of the new red regime in Kabul and to the Iranian government. Subversives and Soviet-trained agents swarmed across the long Afghanistan/Iran border to infiltrate Shiite mosques and other Iranian institutions. By November 1978, there was an estimated 500,000 Soviet backed Afghanis in Iran where, among other activities, they set up training camps for terrorists.
Khomeini, a 78-year-old Shiite cleric whose brother had been imprisoned as a result of activities relating to his Iranian Communist party affiliations, and who had spent 15 years in exile in Bath Socialist Iraq, was poised to return. In exile, Khomeini spoke of the creation of a revolutionary Islamic republic, which would be anti-Western, socialist, and with total power in the hands of an ayatollah. In his efforts to violently overthrow the government of Iran, Khomeini received the full support of the Soviets.
Nureddin Klanuri, head of the Iranian Communist Tudeh Party, in exile in East Berlin, stated, The Tudeh Party approves Ayatollah Khomeinis initiative in creating the Islamic Revolutionary Council. The ayatollahs program coincides with that of the Tudeh Party. Khomeinis closest advisor, Sadegh Ghothzadeh, was well known as a revolutionary with close links to communist intelligence. In January 1998, Pravda, the official Soviet organ, officially endorsed the Khomeini revolution.
American leaders were also supporting Khomeini. After the Pravda endorsement, Ramsey Clark, who served as Attorney General under President Lyndon B. Johnson, held a press conference where he reported on a trip to Iran and a Paris visit with Khomeini. He urged the US government to take no action to help the Shah so that Iran could determine its own fate. Clark played a behind the scenes role influencing members of Congress to not get involved in the crisis. Perhaps UN Ambassador Andrew Young best expressed the thinking of the left at the time when he stated that, if successful, Khomeini would eventually be hailed as a saint.
Khomeini was allowed to seize power in Iran and, as a result, we are now reaping the harvest of anti-American fanaticism and extremism. Khomeini unleashed the hybrid of Islam and Marxism that has spawned suicide bombers and hijackers. President Jimmy Carter, and the extremists in his administration are to blame and should be held accountable.
Chuck Morse
Is the author of
Why Im a Right-Wing Extremist
www.chuckmorse.com
http://www.americanewsnet.com/cmntrs/cmntrs04.htm
Lest we forget.
He's an embarrassment. He's a clown. He's a joke."
He's despicable.
(and his smile has always given me the creeps)
hey, you all quit piling on jimma carter. he did some important things- destroyed the economy, destroyed american pride, boycotted the olympics, etc. the most important thing he did was show me what a liberal will do if you give him power. i didn't walk to the voting booth for reagan- i ran! and i have never voted for a demon since. that's 24 years in a row now...
Carter and Kerry are both very dangerous men...
They both have black belts in chickensh_t
jimmy carter professes to know the same God, I know.
Somewhere the equation doesn't work out.
He says he knows Him, and loves Him....................but then VOTES on the side of the devil!!!
This CAN NOT be!!!!!!!
I know what I believe about him, so I will leave it at that...........
The Carter years were so bad, we invented the "Misery Index" -- the Unemployment rate plus the Inflation rate. (Both, of course, are rotten news for the economy.) The Misery Rate kept going up, up, up, to reach a level over 20%. Thanks to a Democratic Congress creating incredible amounts of funny-money, inflation ran out of control. Keep in mind, inflation is a tax -- it taxes the value of existing money. The Carter inflation was draining the economy dry and creating chaos. Fed Chairman Paul Volker finally -- and courageously -- pulled the plug on the whole swindle (October, 1979). That's why Ronald Reagan inherited a recession when he took office. But at least the Carter economic hell was over.
Jimmy Carter, the only president whose popularity rate fell below the prime rate (this is NOT hyperbole!).
I was in grad school at the time. What a disaster.
What was amazing was the COMPLETE turnaround that happened about 2 years into the presidency of Reagan. It took two years of Paul Volker's (the only good thing Carter ever did, imo) brutal interest rates to wring the rampant inflation out, but it has been a 22 year joyride since then. The last recession was child's play compared to that one.
Carter was not only inept, he was weak, small minded, bitter, and spiteful. Also, even though he was arguably the most intelligent prez we have had (he routinely explained abstruse technical matters to his staff, and had a Ph.D. in nuclear physics), he was STUPID in his dealings with the people, preferring to blame us for the morass he caused. Oh, and by the way, he pronounced it nukular, as well.
Man, was I ever glad to get rid of that clown! And then I sent my daughter to Emory, and he gave regular speeches to the polysci folks there! Sometimes you just can't win.
Jimmy Carter is a fool.
BTTT
The British Foreign & Commonwealth Office had enough doubts in this respect, even to the extent of questioning whether Carter was a Russian mole, that they sent around 200 observers to monitor Carters 1980 presidential campaign against Ronald Reagan to see if the Soviets would try to buy the presidency for Carter.
And that is a very good question.
This is the MOST RIGHT-ON article I've read in a long time!
I'm old enough to have LIVED Jimmy Carter firsthand. I
know I've said this before on FR, but I voted for Carter
the first time (my one and only Democrat vote) and watched
in horror as unemployment and interest rates went double
digit, as our military fell into a shambles in just four
years, as Iran held our hostages and Carter lay impotent
before them, as the economy really did sink and the gas
lines grew, and then when I sat watching him on one of
his fireside chats, wearing a sweater (we had to set the
thermostat lower then) and telling me it was ALL my fault,
that America was in a "malaise"! - - - When Ronald Reagan
(Ronaldus Magnus to me) came along and said no one was in
a "malaise" but Jimmy Carter, I voted for Reagan and I HAVE
NEVER LOOKED BACK at the Democrat Party for one second
with anything but disdain.
I know it must be hard for Joseph Farah to confess to the world that he TWICE voted for GA Jimmy electors. He is very courageous to admit such a terrible thing.
Jesus said, "Let the dead bury the dead". The children of light should not waste, ONE MORE THREAD, on Mr. Carter.
Carter was not only inept, he was weak, small minded, bitter, and spiteful
One person who tried to warn the USA about GA Jimmy was his lieutenant governor and fellow Democrat, Lester Garfield Maddox. Maddox went into NH early in 1976 to warn those guillible folk, and they practically ran Lester out of town on a rail.
"Let the dead bury the dead".
I think it's "let the dead bury their dead." Can you explain this verse? Does it mean to shun superfluity?
I grew up believing that Jimmie Carter was a good (as in Godly) man, just a not a very good president. This is what my catholic liberal republican parents always told me. And, since I wasn't into politics or even old enough to vote until 1982, I just accepted that as true. I still held that view (having not spent much time researching it) up until this year's election.
This last year Jimmie Carter has proven himself to be an absolutely despicable patisan hack. From sitting with Micheal Moore at the DNC convetion, to the accusations thrown at Bush, the blinders are off my eyes and I see him for what he is. And, if I ever hear my parents praise him again, I will respectfully correct them. Though, at this point, I would imagine even they are surprised by his partisanship.
I will definately do more studying of this man and the devastation his policies have wreaked upon this earth. Based on what little I have read, I couldn't have been more wrong about him. Fortunately I can declare I never voted for the guy.
If that is how you feel after having voted for him twice, think how those of us, who had the good sense to never have voted for him at all, must feel and think!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.