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

Skip to comments.

Carter's Nobel is no prize - Ex-president tends to be a pawn of tyrants
Toronto Sun ^ | 10/12/2002 | Peter Worthington

Posted on 10/12/2002 5:15:54 AM PDT by rickmichaels

By winning the Nobel Peace Prize, Jimmy Carter has confirmed his legacy as arguably America's worst president and most successful ex-president.

The award also confirms that the Peace Prize is as much political as it is humanitarian -- awarded by those who think Yasser Arafat is a man of peace and goodwill.

Carter is often described as a "good" man -- said in the way that people use "nice" to describe someone ineffective and hopelessly bland.

The Nobel committee chose him over hugely brave people of "peace" like Afghanistan's President Karzai, the Tiananmen Mothers, the Salvation Army, even Rudy Giuliani, partly to make a hostile statement about President George W. Bush.

Nobel Committee chairman Gunnar Berge came right out and said the award "should be interpreted as criticism of the line that the current (Bush) administration has taken."

In other words, standing up to terrorism instead of negotiating with terrorists, is what wins Peace awards.

The irony of Carter getting the award -- $1 million and enormous prestige -- is that more than any other U.S. president he contributed to war, insecurity, danger and tyranny.

Under Carter's flaccid foreign policy that stressed human rights, the Soviet Union rampaged through Africa, in Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, using Cuban troops as a proxy. The Soviets invaded Afghanistan, subverted Central America.

Carter abandoned the Shah of Iran, giving encouragement to the homicidal theocrat, the Ayatollah Khomenei, who made hostages of 66 American embassy staff for over a year -- releasing them only when Ronald Reagan replaced Carter as president. Jimmy Carter's rescue attempt of the hostages was calamity -- for the rescuers and America.

Carter sought to unilaterally pull American troops out of South Korea, averted only when a gallant soldier, Maj.-Gen. Jack Singlaub, inadvertently exposed the ploy, saving South Korea and winning the lasting enmity of Carter.

In other words, as a leader for freedom, Carter was a disaster. His achievement of the Camp David accords -- peace between Israel and Egypt -- had less to do with him than the personalities of Egypt's Sadat and Israel's Begin.

Jimmy Carter is a modern version of the peace-at-any-price mentality that has led to great 20th century wars and finds resonance today among those who don't believe in standing up to tyranny on behalf of freedom. Despite Sept. 11, too many still don't realize that peace, like power, comes from the barrel of a gun. Without a functioning military, backed by resolve, peace is elusive.

It may sound harsh, but Carter tends to be a pawn of tyrants. China has invited him to visit Tibet and make recommendations to resolve differences with the Dalai Lama. Can anything be more transparent? Does anyone think the Chinese want any objective scrutineer in Tibet? Returning Tibet to Tibetans would restore harmony with the Dalai Lama.

Castro inviting Carter to address Cubans served only to advertise Castro. Carter's cautious endorsements of free speech were raindrops in a waterfall.

Jimmy Carter these days roves the world for "peace," but achieves little: Bosnia, Nigeria, Taiwan, Ecuador, Jamaica, etc. To what effect? Nigeria still sentences adulterous women to be stoned to death; Bosnia without foreign troops is civil war waiting to happen.

The road to peace isn't easy. It wasn't easy for Churchill, when he opposed disarmament in the 1930s and was vilified. But he was right. The world was grateful in the end. Jimmy Carter's way, when he had power, nearly destroyed freedom in the world. Today, with little influence and no power, Jimmy Carter has chosen to be the world's Jiminy Cricket.

Hopefully, the Peace Prize to Carter won't deter President Bush from promoting "real" peace by a change of leaders in Iraq, and making the world unsafe for terrorists. Persuasion backed by force.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

1 posted on 10/12/2002 5:15:55 AM PDT by rickmichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
In other words, standing up to terrorism instead of negotiating with terrorists, is what wins Peace awards.

He means it exactly in reverse: Negotiating with terrorists, instead of standing up to them, is what wins Peace awards.

2 posted on 10/12/2002 5:21:59 AM PDT by Publius Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dighton; aculeus; general_re
A Canadian hits the bullseye.
3 posted on 10/12/2002 5:23:02 AM PDT by Orual
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
Carter's reaction to receiving the Prize so beautifully tell us all we need to know of why he failed so miserably as a president. His absolute certainty that he is correct, his giant ego, his inability to read situations, his meaness, and his sanctimony. All have been on display in the last day. Any other man would have said they could keep the prize after it was said to be a slap at Bush. But not Jimmy.

regards

4 posted on 10/12/2002 5:33:34 AM PDT by okiedust
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
"Jimmy Carter has confirmed his legacy as arguably America's worst president"

No, not quite the worst.

5 posted on 10/12/2002 5:34:25 AM PDT by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okiedust
Certainly if jimma had refused it, Cynthia Mckenney would have called up and asked if SHE could have it.
6 posted on 10/12/2002 5:36:12 AM PDT by tet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tet68
LOL. Bullseye. The only contribution to peace that jimmeh made was paving the way for Reagan. Ironic isn't it that the only prize Reagon won or will win was true peace? And then along came Clinton like a spoiled kid given the keys to the house who throws a wild destructive party. The pax Reagan was what he inherited and now there's much to clean up. Jimmeh got the prize because he was a fool, and they knew they could use him.

regards

7 posted on 10/12/2002 5:49:42 AM PDT by okiedust
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
Despite Sept. 11, too many still don't realize that peace, like power, comes from the barrel of a gun. Without a functioning military, backed by resolve, peace is elusive.

This entire article is right on, but IMHO, the above sentence says it all.

8 posted on 10/12/2002 5:50:57 AM PDT by basil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
Nobel Committee chairman Gunnar Berge came right out and said the award "should be interpreted as criticism of the line that the current (Bush) administration has taken."

Jimmuh's award is pyrrhic..........He'll know it, we'll know it and the Press will know it.

9 posted on 10/12/2002 6:00:12 AM PDT by DoctorMichael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels; Alouette; Lent; knighthawk; a_Turk; JohnHuang2; dennisw; Pokey78; College Repub; ...
Thanks for the post, Rick.
10 posted on 10/12/2002 6:00:34 AM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels; Publius Maximus
> In other words, standing up to terrorism instead of
> negotiating with terrorists, is what wins Peace awards.

Publius is right on this; he probably edited his phrasing and failed to change the original logic.

But what a great piece. I'm hearing a lot of good stuff out of the Canadian press lately, in particular the Sun. Prayers for the beleaguered Canadian Right.
11 posted on 10/12/2002 6:00:40 AM PDT by Paul_B
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius Maximus
I read and reread that paragraph and have had great difficulty in making sense of it in realation to the remainder of the article. I have posted before that I would like some one to list the lasting peace projects for which jimmy boy is responsible.Over the past years the peace prize has become a koke.
12 posted on 10/12/2002 6:02:16 AM PDT by retiredtexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Thanks, TopQuark.

Carter ought to be embarrased for being used in such a way, though I suppose he won't be.

I think it's clear that disposing of Saddam would do more for world peace than probably all the recent Nobel prize winners combined have done. However, I hope Bush knows what he's doing if we go in there.

Excuse me for repeating myself.

What is a topquark?
13 posted on 10/12/2002 6:11:35 AM PDT by Sam Cree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
The Pawn of Tyrants. I like that. Nothing like starting the day with a little Jimmuh bashing. That meddlesome boob....
14 posted on 10/12/2002 6:27:39 AM PDT by cloud8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
Carter, an even more dangerous president and past president than the Clintoon has been on the Opecker Princes and the Islama Thugs payroll for decades: (Carter's buyout by the Opecker Princes and Islamathugs)
15 posted on 10/12/2002 6:56:08 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
Here is an article on how Carter sold out the Shah and the people of Iran to set up the Murdering Mullah Thugs that took ovefr Iran.

This is where and when the current Islamakazi Hatred of America got started. Carter enabled the Islamakazi Terrorists then and has helped them since then. (How Carter Sold out the People of Iran while he was president)

16 posted on 10/12/2002 7:05:58 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okiedust
"Ahm sorry -- Ah can't accept this prize because of divisive , un-American nature of the politics that surround it.

Besahds, if I really wanted to promote peace durin' mah presidency, ah would have busted a piece of fahwood ovah Arahfats hehd at Cahmp Dahviid...."

17 posted on 10/12/2002 7:05:59 AM PDT by Crowcreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sam Cree
What is a topquark?

Until recently, physicists thought of the particles that comprize the atomic nuclei as elementary, that is, without structure. The most recent framework posits a srtucture, comprized of more elementary particles, called quarks.

You know of properties such as mass and charge of particles. With more properties being discovered, the theorists started to run out of mundane words to name them, and they resorted to affectionate, yet simple terms. So we can talk about properties such as charm of the particle.

In the quark model, when naming the constituents, two of them got names "top" and "bottom."

If I recall correctly, it was Murray Gell-Mann that gave them such names (he was quite good at catchy names, as well as the rest of physics; after retiring from CalTech, whereto he had arrived and worked together with Richard Feynman, he settled in Santa Fe).

A number of years ago, for certain reasons, I wanted to register the domain TopQark.com. It was taken. I later learned that it was Murray who had beaten me to it. There is justice in this world after all: his creation belongs to him, as it should.

18 posted on 10/12/2002 7:12:54 AM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
All we have to remember about al this is that Vidkun Quisling was a Norwegian.
19 posted on 10/12/2002 7:19:36 AM PDT by frossca
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius Maximus
Actually Neville Chamberlin should have the peace award for 1938-1939 since he "successively" negotiated peace with Hitler for "peace in our time" for his decision to apease Hitler AFTER HE TOOK Chechslovokia after Hitler ran over them thus delaying WW2 for a few months compared what jimmuh did for Iran,SARCASIM>. If we had not lost Iran the whole Middle Easr may have been a more stable place.
20 posted on 10/12/2002 7:19:39 AM PDT by southland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 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