Posted by Curt on 16 December, 2006 at 12:00 pm. 1 comment.


We all know the real reason why the bigot we know as Jimmy Carter backed out of a debate with
Alan Dershowitz:

Former President Jimmy Carter turned down a request to debate Alan Dershowitz about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying the outspoken Harvard law professor "knows nothing about the situation."

Carter, author of a new book advocating "peace not apartheid" in the region, said he will not visit Brandeis University to discuss the book because the university requested he debate Dershowitz.

"I don’t want to have a conversation even indirectly with Dershowitz," Carter said in Friday’s Boston Globe. "There is no need … to debate somebody who, in my opinion, knows nothing about the situation in Palestine."

It’s because Dershowitz would have taken his lunch money….big time.  This book of his is so full of lies and inaccuracies that it’s hard to believe it was actually printed.  Hell, even one of his fellow supporters has left his "human rights" organization due to the inaccuracies inside this book:

One of Carter’s former colleagues, Kenneth Stein, has resigned as a fellow of the Carter Center, a human rights organization, citing errors in the book, and former US Middle East envoy Dennis Ross has accused the former president of copying maps from one of his books without proper attribution.

Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, meanwhile, charged in an editorial published in several US newspapers that Carter’s book was "indecent" and peppered with errors.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center has launched a petition against the book and says it has received more than 20,000 letters of complaint against Carter.

His life has been one big failure after another.  Take for example his miscalculation regarding the Camp David Accords:

Carter’s presidency, widely renowned for its crowning achievement, The Camp David Accords, which established a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel, was not however, a Carter initiative.

Carter’s intentions and policy commitments were geared towards arranging a Geneva Peace Conference with all the parties to the Arab-Israeli dispute present, in addition to the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.

Carter dispatched Cyrus Vance, his Secretary of State, to Moscow to get the Soviets to co-sponsor the conference. On May 21, 1977, Secretary Vance and Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko issued a joint statement that the “elimination of the continued source of tension in the Middle East constitutes one of the primary tasks in ensuring peace and international security.” The statement specified moreover the conviction of the U.S. and U.S.S.R. that in order to achieve the goal, “an important role belonged to the Geneva Conference on the Middle East.”

Carter decided to coordinate his Middle East efforts with the Soviets on the premise that keeping them out of the picture could provoke them to undermine any American sponsored moves. This typical Carteresque strategy of appeasing dictatorships and dictators (Carter never met a dictator he did not like) backfired time and again.

In the case of the Geneva Conference, Anwar Sadat, Egypt’s President, who five years earlier expelled the Soviets from Egypt, did not want the Soviets involved in negotiations, much less in a multilateral negotiations. Sadat understood that the Soviets would press the Arabs to be uncompromising (he also knew that Carter would press Israel for concessions) and was turned off by the thought that radical voices in Syria and Iraq would undermine Egypt’s position as the leader of the Arab world.

Sadat was dead-set against going to Geneva. And, in order to scuttle the idea he had to get Israel to reject it.

On November 7, 1977, Anwar Sadat made an historic trip to Jerusalem providing Israelis with one of the most euphoric days in their collective memory. Sadat’s dramatic move and Israel’s Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s personal opposition to Geneva and Soviet participation scuttled the idea of the conference. Carter quickly jumped on the Begin-Sadat bandwagon and the rest is history. It is important to acknowledge that the Camp David Accords — Carter’s premier presidential achievement — happened in spite of his misjudgment.

Miscalculations and mistakes, anti-semitism and ignorance….thy name is Jimmy Carter.  Now we shall add the term coward after that name for refusing to debate this man.  For an example of what Alan would take him to task on take a look at his latest post on the dummy:

Carter has tried hard to turn the mideast conflict into a religious one. He constantly refers to Israel as the "Holy Land," which he defines as follows:

"It became increasingly clear that there were two Israel’s. One encompassed the ancient culture and moral values of the Jewish people, defined by the Hebrew Scriptures with which I had been familiar since childhood and representing the young nation that most American envisioned."

Carter condemns Israel for its administration of Christian and Muslim religious sites, when in fact Israel is scrupulous about ensuring those of every religion the right to worship as they please consistent, of course, with security needs. He fails to mention that between 1948 and 1967, when Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the Hashemites destroyed and desecrated Jewish religious sites and prevented Jews from praying at the Western Wall. He also never mentions Egypt’s brutal occupation of Gaza between 1949 and 1967.

Carter goes out of his way to point out that some Christians are separated from their churches by the "Apartheid Wall," without mentioning that it was Muslim terrorists who used Christian churches as terrorist sanctuaries.

Carter even blames Israel for the "exodus of Christians from the Holy Land,"; totally ignoring the Islamization of the area by Hamas and the comparable exodus of Christian Arabs from Lebanon as a result of the increasing influence of Hezbollah and the repeated assassination of Christian leaders by Syria

His bias against Israel is no where else more mistaken then his belief that Palestinians have agreed to a two-state solution all along while Israel has refused.  That my friends is called delusion.  Israel accepted the Peel Commission recommendation that they receive only a sliver of land in 1938 while the Palestinians rejected it.  It accepted the Partition Plan of 1947, while the Palestinians rejected it.  The Palestinians rejected all the concessions made by Israel in 2000. 

You see a pattern here? 

The Arab states will not accept anything but the total annihilation of Israel, that’s it in a nutshell (pun intended).  Jimmy Carter can’t or won’t see it.  No where does his bias shine through more deeply then when he makes excuses for the Palestinian terrorist acts against Israel:

The security barrier is a desperate, deeply imperfect and, God willing, temporary attempt to stop Palestinian suicide bombers from detonating themselves amid crowds of Israeli civilians. And it works; many recent attempts to infiltrate bombers into Israel have failed, thanks to the barrier.

The murder of Israelis, however, plays little role in Carter’s understanding of the conflict. He writes of one Hamas bombing campaign: “Unfortunately for the peace process, Palestinian terrorists carried out two lethal suicide bombings in March 1996.” That spree of bombings — four, actually — was unfortunate for the peace process, to be sure. It was also unfortunate for the several dozen civilians killed in these attacks. But Israeli deaths seem to be an abstraction for Carter; only the peace process is real, and the peace process would succeed, he claims, if not for Israeli intransigence.

Jimmy Carter has hugged and kissed all the worst of the worst throughout the world over the decades.  He shared a Nobel Peace Prize with a terrorist for god’s sake.  But the left and the MSM have applauded his every move.  Has the love affair started to recede?

Other’s Blogging:

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x