Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Carter aside, Israel deserves total support
Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | January 12, 2007 | Jim Wooten

Posted on 01/13/2007 6:11:16 PM PST by West Coast Conservative

At some point, the names matter. And so, too, do their words.

Whenever another person long invested in the passions of Jimmy Carter feels so betrayed by the assertions in his latest book that they divorce themselves from his legacy work, the rest of us should surely take notice.

When they, loyalists such as former Ambassador William B. Schwartz Jr., scholars such as Kenneth Stein and Melvin Konner, public people never given to impetuousness, such as former state Rep. Cathey Steinberg and former DeKalb CEO Liane Levetan, when they — and others whose contributions to the betterment of this state and nation are renown — walk away from the most important figure most of them will ever know, the world should take notice. And ask why.

In their farewell, the language is of a pained, bewildered soul forced to consider that they had misread, misjudged or been betrayed by a beloved and trusted friend. “I love Jimmy Carter and I’ve always loved Jimmy Carter,” said Barbara Babbit Kaufman, one of the 14 who resigned last week as members of the Carter Center’s board of councilors, along with Schwartz, Steinberg, Levetan and others. “But this is not the Jimmy Carter that I’ve always known and loved.” she said.

Konner, the Samuel Dobbs Professor of Anthropology at Emory and the author of “Unsettled: An Anthropology of the Jews,” wrote as much in a powerful AJC op-ed just before Christmas. “Carter has changed,” wrote Konner. “Something has happened to his judgment. I don’t understand what it is, but I know it is very dangerous.” He wrote too:

“[Carter] has become a spokesman for the enemies of my people. He has become an apologist for terrorists.”

Stein, a Middle East expert and the first executive director of the Carter Center, parted company expressing similar views and distress.

In each case, their actions are minimized or discounted: The 14 are among a 200-member advisory board; the 21-member board of trustees is the important one. But the names and the language chosen by careful and precise scholars and people whose lives reflect soundness, judgment and balance reflect a concern the rest of us should share that Carter’s book “Palestine: Peace not Apartheid” chooses sides with harmful and lasting consequence.

It’s a legitimate worry. This is not a tempest-in-a-teapot, a spat or a quarrel among friends.

The matter of Israel’s survival and this country’s relationship with it is much too consequential to discuss in the normal language of political debate. But I do sense a growing willingness, on the left especially, to regard Israel as the villain and America as the enabler.

As the war in Iraq has grown more unpopular in this country, there’s an eagerness to make peace, or at least the illusion of peace, so that we can get out. If we leave in defeat, the entire world knows we won’t go back, even in defense of Israel, for at least the time it took to recover from Vietnam.

For me this is not a time to be equivocal, either about Iraq, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas or our commitments to friends who believe in our word.

Israel’s right to exist has never been affirmed by its enemies. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vows to see it destroyed. Palestinians chose a terrorist organization, Hamas, in parliamentary elections a year ago. Syria arms Hezbollah, which seeks to destroy Israel, as Syria would directly if it could.

For my part, there can be no “balance” in U.S. policy in the region. Retreating from Gaza in the summer of 2005, Israel did something this country would never have done, sending 25,000 soldiers to haul 8,500 of its citizens from their abodes, sacrificing their homes and land to the prospect of peace. What did they get in return? A rain of missiles.

With that example, with Hezbollah and Hamas, and a frighteningly dangerous leader in Iran who is no more than five years away from nuclear weaponry — sworn enemies all — you’ll not find a word here that undermines support in this country for Israel. That was surely not Carter’s intentions, but I fear it will be a consequence.

We have one permanent friend in the region and that is Israel.

When longtime Carter supporters speak out, as Stein and Konner and board members who resigned last week did, the rest of us should listen.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Israel; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: antisemitism; carter; israel; worstexpresident; worstpresidentever
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

1 posted on 01/13/2007 6:11:19 PM PST by West Coast Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Isn't that truth!


2 posted on 01/13/2007 6:14:36 PM PST by AmericanMade1776 (Democrats don't have a plan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
Jim Wooten: the token conservative on the Al Jazeera Constitution.

He's just window dressing. They give him house room to write a column once in awhile, but nobody listens to anything he says.

The AJC will go on attacking Bush, denigrating Israel, and supporting America's enemies.

3 posted on 01/13/2007 6:17:36 PM PST by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
This is rich. Seldom have I enjoyed a public whipping more.

“Carter has changed,” wrote Konner. “Something has happened to his judgment. I don’t understand what it is, but I know it is very dangerous.” He wrote too: “[Carter] has become a spokesman for the enemies of my people. He has become an apologist for terrorists.”

But, as I said on another thread, Carter has not changed. He is just as he always has been. He has always stood up for tyrants and terrorists, and he has always been an antisemite.

The only difference is that he just went an eensie-weensie tiny bit too far, and crossed some invisible line in the sand. So, now all his allies have suddenly turned their backs on him and denied him. It's a spectacle of hypocrisy of the first water. But I can't help enjoying it.

When his book came out, it was well enough received at first. It was just another instance of Jimmy-speak. But then he crossed the line. I think it was when he expressed admiration for the Holocaust Denial Conference in Teheran. All of a sudden, all his old buddies dissociated themselves from him, turned a cold shoulder, ostracized him. Schadenfreude of the first water.

4 posted on 01/13/2007 6:23:07 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanMade1776

Jimahs peanut brain done gone around da bend on dis one.


5 posted on 01/13/2007 6:26:54 PM PST by sgtbono2002 (Peace through strength.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
When the board members talk of how he has changed I cannot help but think of a similar situation.

There is gentleman that holds a prestigious position within an academic setting. He had heart surgery and he did have some complications that left him oxygen deprived. He still maintains his position but his judgment and reasoning power is questionable. Many people feel he is a puppet to others that have only their intentions in mind and not the good of the academic institution.
I really think Carter has had something similar happen to him like multiple TIA's that have effected his brain.
6 posted on 01/13/2007 6:32:16 PM PST by Kimmers (It's not what you take when you leave this world behind, it's what you leave behind when you go)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

I wonder how Carter changed. He sold out Isreal when he was president, so I fail to see the difference.


7 posted on 01/13/2007 6:39:30 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

The Carter Center was built with Arab money and has been supported throughout by Arab money. Where have all these people been?


8 posted on 01/13/2007 6:42:29 PM PST by Malesherbes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
I agree with you that Carter has always been a nasty little hater . . .

. . . but in the past he has disguised himself very well. He seems to be unable to disguise his hatred in platitudes now.

I think the poster up thread is right . . . he's had some medical event that has affected his judgment and discretion.

9 posted on 01/13/2007 6:58:47 PM PST by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
“[Carter] has become a spokesman for the enemies of my people. He has become an apologist for terrorists.”

Konner, the Samuel Dobbs Professor of Anthropology at Emory and the author of “Unsettled: An Anthropology of the Jews,” wrote as much in a powerful AJC op-ed just before Christmas. “Carter has changed,” wrote Konner. “Something has happened to his judgment. I don’t understand what it is, but I know it is very dangerous.”

Are these from 1977?

10 posted on 01/13/2007 7:00:37 PM PST by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother

Liberals are very much like lemmings. They copy what they hear all the other liberals around them saying. So, Carter was good as long as everyone who was anyone said he was good. Then, suddenly, there were murmurings of doubt, and the next thing you know, everyone who was anyone was saying that Carter was evil.

It happened very recently, and it has only snowballed over the last week or so.

When his book came out, it was generally well received. He was still Jimmy Carter the liberal hero, patron of the peace process. That was about ten days ago. Now he is a villain to everyone. I think the only thing that changed is the perception. With liberals, it's all perception and going with the flow. That is what has changed.


11 posted on 01/13/2007 7:06:21 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Well, some of us around here had noticed an increase in overt meanness well before that.

I think over the last 5 years or so he has gotten noticeably nastier. The liberals are late to the party (as usual), but I think there really is something that has changed over that time. It just finally got too bad for them to ignore.

One of the first signs of senile dementia is a decrease in inhibitions, and it's progressive. So some of us were noticing a few years ago, others have only noticed now, when he's gotten really bad.

12 posted on 01/13/2007 7:18:26 PM PST by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother

Yes, that's certainly true of conservatives. I used to think he was just stupid, before I decided he was basically evil. What's interesting is the way the liberals have now turned on him, like a pack of dogs, all within about a week or two.

It was OK when he said I'manutjob was within his rights to threaten to nuke the evil Israelis, but for some reason it was not OK when he gave his seal of approval to I'manutjob's Holocaust Denial Party. That crossed some sort of line in the liberal sand. Maybe it was the Hitler connection.


13 posted on 01/13/2007 7:27:55 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Maybe Holocaust Denial is the Third Rail of liberal politics.

Both our theories may be true. IOW, in the past he had sense enough not to touch that Third Rail . . .

14 posted on 01/13/2007 7:30:50 PM PST by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother

I must admit, my first reaction was, how can people get so angry about Holocaust denial but completely ignore the threat to annihilate Israel. That was then, and this is now. Hitler is dead.

But that seems to be the way the liberal mind works, and who am I to question it? I agree that Holocaust denial is ugly. It's just that, to me, the idea of annihilating all the Jews in Israel as soon as they can get a few bombs put together, a present threat, is even uglier.


15 posted on 01/13/2007 7:58:24 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
I think liberals are so busy looking backwards that they lose touch with present reality.

There's a strong strain of anti-Semitism in modern American liberalism, though. I think they use their emphasis on the Shoah to provide cover for their current attacks on Israel and on Jews who do not toe the party liberal line.

16 posted on 01/13/2007 8:15:42 PM PST by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative; fallujah-nuker

"We have one permanent friend in the region and that is Israel."

I think we'd be a better friend just letting nature take it's course in the Middle East, with Israel getting pushed into a corner and unleashing it's nuclear arsenal to the long-term benefit of itself and the United States. Right now all our policies do is restrain Israel until the exploding Muzzie population surrounding them gets so large they won't have enough conventional/nuclear weapons to stop them.


17 posted on 01/13/2007 8:23:43 PM PST by neutronsgalore (Nature, getting rid of Muslims one tsunami at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Israeli Moon Purchases Denounced
Jan. 12, 2007

Last December over one thousand Israelis purchased land on the moon. The price of each one-eighth-acre plot of land is about $60. Each buyer gets an ownership certificate and a photographed map of the purchased area. So far some 55.5 million acres of land on the moon have been sold to people all over the world.

Daniel Yaron, CEO of Crazyshop, the company which markets moon property in Israel, said that the typical rationale for such a purchase is as a “gag gift.” “It makes for an unusual gift for those ‘hard-to-buy-for’ friends and relatives,” Yaron explained.

Yaron’s explanation was denounced as “Zionist lies” by Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. “People laughed when I tried to warn of the Jews’ plan for world domination,” Ahmadinejad said. “I hope this news awakens them to the encroaching dangers Jews present to our world. Not only are they plotting to dominate the Earth, but they’ve set their eyes on other planets, as well. They must be wiped off the face of the Earth before they succeed in their evil plan.”

In Pakistan, rioting and looting broke out in Lahore, as angry mobs shouted “death to the Jews.” Ameer ul-Azeem, spokesman for the Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal, an Islamist movement the country declared the purchases “offensive to Muslims.” “Jews know very well that the moon has great significance to Muslims,” ul-Azeem complained. “The moon is on our flag and the flags of many brother Muslim lands. Land on the moon is Muslim land. The Jews are deliberately insulting us—it’s like they are rubbing pork in our wounds.”

Former president Jimmy Carter declared that this latest revelation validates everything he said in his book (“Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid”) about the Jewish quest for world hegemony. “The Jewish lust for land is greater than I thought,” Carter claimed. “When I wrote about the Israeli apartheid regime I thought it applied only in Palestine, but apparently, the Jews intend to extend their hegemony to the moon.”

Carter insisted that more personal diplomacy is needed to calm the region. “I’ve seen photos of President Bush holding hands with Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Abdullah,” Carter said. “This is a good start, but he must go further. I kissed Arafat. Bush needs to do at least as much. In today’s more intense relationship he may need to be even more receptive to input from the heads of state in the region and be ready to go all the way for the sake of peace. I know that’s what I would do if I were the president.”

In related news, 14 more academics resigned from the “Carter Center” in response to his book, calling it the “malicious babblings of a senile nincompoop.” Carter shrugged off the criticism. “Every one of them is a Jew,” Carter asserted. “Need I say more? The evidence of a Zionist conspiracy couldn’t be clearer. Ahmadinejad doesn’t sound so crazy now, I bet?”

read more...

http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens1.htm


18 posted on 01/13/2007 9:22:46 PM PST by John Semmens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson; Alouette

Ping


19 posted on 01/13/2007 9:25:43 PM PST by elhombrelibre (Saddam was against Iraq's liberation before the Democrats and MSM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers

I really think Carter has had something similar happen to him like multiple TIA's that have effected his brain.
__________________________________________________________

Like maybe when he was in High School?


20 posted on 01/13/2007 10:17:06 PM PST by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson