• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Ex-president Carter heavily critises Bush and Blair

#1
Looks like the acrimony between the Dems and the Republicans is getting even more heated as Jimmy Carter, a former Democrat President and recent Nobel Peace Price winner, slams the current US administration and doesn't spare old Tone either. :D

Former President Carter says President Bush's administration is "the worst in history" in international relations, taking aim at the White House's policy of pre-emptive war and its Middle East diplomacy.
Link
 
#2
Jimmy Carter is insane...he was incompetent as President but now he is insane. I heard his Library or whatever was being funded by Arab money.....but his insanity and obsessional desire to shoot his mouth off at very chosen moments is not helpful, but it is part of his increasingly commercialised Loathing of the West routine that seems to play well with media and publishers
 
#3
Voyager said:
Jimmy Carter is insane...he was incompetent as President but now he is insane. I heard his Library or whatever was being funded by Arab money .....but his insanity and obsessional desire to shoot his mouth off at very chosen moments is not helpful, but it is part of his increasingly commercialised Loathing of the West routine that seems to play well with media and publishers
How much do you know about his and the Carter Center's work?

Go down to the corner shop, buy yourself a clue and then get back to us.

Moron.
 
#4
How much do you know about his and the Carter Center's work?

Go down to the corner shop, buy yourself a clue and then get back to us.
You chose your name wisely....


the Carter Center, the combination research and activist project he founded at Emory University in 1982, has for years prospered from the largesse of assorted Arab financiers.



Especially lucrative have been Carter’s ties to Saudi Arabia. Before his death in 2005, King Fahd was a longtime contributor to the Carter Center and on more than one occasion contributed million-dollar donations. In 1993 alone, the king presented Carter with a gift of $7.6 million. And the king was not the only Saudi royal to commit funds to Carter’s cause. As of 2005, the king’s high-living nephew, Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, has donated at least $5 million to the Carter Center.



Meanwhile the Saudi Fund for Development, the kingdom’s leading loan organization, turns up repeatedly on the center’s list of supporters. Carter has also found moneyed allies in the Bin Laden family, and in 2000 he secured a promise from ten of Osama bin Laden's brothers for a $1 million contribution to his center. To be sure, there is no evidence that the Bin Ladens maintain any contact with their terrorist relation. But applying Carter’s own standard, his extensive contacts with the Saudi elite must make his views on the Middle East suspect.



High praise for Carter’s work -- and not inconsiderable financial support -- also comes from the United Arab Emirates. In 2001, Carter even traveled to the country to accept the Zayed International Prize for the Environment, named for Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan, the late UAE potentate and former president-for-life. Having claimed his $500,000 purse, Carter enthused that the “award has special significance for me because it is named for my personal friend, Sheikh Zayed Bin Sultan al-Nahyan.” Carter also hailed the UAE as an “almost completely open and free society” --


Still other supporters include Sultan Qaboos bin Said, who sits atop Oman’s absolute monarchy. An occasional host to Carter, the sultan has also made generous contributions to his center. Prior to inviting Carter for a “personal visit” in 1998, the sultan pledged $1 million to the Carter Center, promising additional support in the future. Similarly, Morocco’s Prince Moulay Hicham Ben Abdallah, the second in line to the kingdom’s throne, has in the past partnered with Carter on the center’s initiatives.

Carter Center
 
#5
And what does the Carter Center do, Trigger?
 
#6
And if you want to include a list of all the Saudi money that goes to firms with connections to the Bush family too, that'd be wonderful.

Also, give us a run down of all philanthropic donations by the King of Jordan, The Emir of Dubai, Sultan of Oman etc etc. It's funny how the mere implication that brown people are involved leads you to believe that there's impropriety involved.
 
#7
Granted Carter is not my favorite person, you're really not providing a solid argument Voyager. crabtastic is kicking your ass here
 
#8
Since we are implying some sort of bias in Carter, let's look at the symposiums listed on your source's web site.

One Islam?
Apes, Pigs and Anti-Semitism
Confronting Hezbollah
The First Nuclear Terrorist Power
The Problem with Public Education

Since we are implying guilt by association, what blogs are listed at this site:


# PowerLine Blog
# Little Green Footballs
# PolySigh
# The Anti-Chomsky Blog
# Snapshots
# Milt Rosenberg
# The Anti-Chomskyan Redoubt

How about we look into who owns the web site?

Registrant:
Horowitz Freedom Center
4401 Wilshire Blvd
4th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010
US

Domain Name: FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

Who is Horowitz, one might ask?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Horowitz_(conservative_writer)

Chip Berlet, writing for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), identified Horowitz's Center for the Study of Popular Culture as one of 17 "right-wing foundations and think tanks support[ing] efforts to make bigoted and discredited ideas respectable." Berlet accused Horowitz of blaming slavery on "'black Africans ... abetted by dark-skinned Arabs'" and of "attack[ing] minority 'demands for special treatment' as 'only necessary because some blacks can't seem to locate the ladder of opportunity within reach of others,' rejecting the idea that they could be the victims of lingering racism."
So your evidence that Carter is insane and his criticism of Bush and Blair is dictated by islamofascists is from a racist's web site?
 
#9
Carter was a lousy president (could be said his biggest weakness was being too nice of a guy) but that has been our norm since Ike left office. While I seriously doubt he's insane by any stretch of the imagination, the man is certainly a bit senile and easily led along. He needs to be quietly retired and occupying a rocking chair on his farm rather than being manipulated as a political mouthpiece repeating a script. Of course, the irony is that the people using him are the same ones he wouldn't have associated with in the past as he had a fairly high ethical standard. Ah well... I guess it's better he's earning his family some dinero via the antics than getting bamboozled by Oral Roberts and company as many of our elderly are (religious mosquitos...)
 
#10
He may have been lousy to you but at least he had the balls to authorize Op Eagle Claw despite the risks. Now please tell me what Raegan did in Lebanon during th hostage crisis again? Cheesy poofters
 
#11
He authorized a low impact version of the plan RS. Far as I'm concerned, failing to respond with overt force then is why we are playing reactionary to Iran's lead now.

Lebanon was a totally differant situation than Iran. When American citizens stay despite being told to get out because the money was too good, it's their own darned fault that tangos snatched 'em. Assaulting an embassy and holding it's staff hostage is an overt act of aggression that required... hell, demanded, an over the top reaction. A heavy hand then would have most certainly resulted in less problems since.
 
#12
Voyager said:
Jimmy Carter is insane...he was incompetent as President but now he is insane. I heard his Library or whatever was being funded by Arab money.....but his insanity and obsessional desire to shoot his mouth off at very chosen moments is not helpful, but it is part of his increasingly commercialised Loathing of the West routine that seems to play well with media and publishers
Insane? Incompetent? Funded by Oil money? Wow, that rings some big bells with another President.

Too young to remember Carter from the time but know something of his work since and tend to agree he was/is a better man than Bush, and the neo-con attempts to attack, discredit and sideline him does there cause no favours. Predictable and transparent spin. He has worked hard towards advancing the peace process in the Middle East and is entitled to an opion i think.
 
#13
Being a nicer person does not equate to being a better national leader Jockass. Carter's presidency was a total failure as both his foreign and domestic policies imploded with disasterous results.
 
#14
Random_Task said:
Khyros said:
Being a nicer person does not equate to being a better national leader Jockass. Carter's presidency was a total failure as both his foreign and domestic policies imploded with disasterous results.
Pay peanuts,get monkeys? :D
LMAO!!! Excellent analogy...

Sad part is that we really never get a good choice of candidates to vote for as the two parties pretty much call those shots. Usually I end up voting for the lesser of two evils... although that has been a rather difficult distinction to make the last couple presidential cycles.
 
#15
Khyros said:
Carter was a lousy president (could be said his biggest weakness was being too nice of a guy) but that has been our norm since Ike left office. While I seriously doubt he's insane by any stretch of the imagination, the man is certainly a bit senile and easily led along. He needs to be quietly retired and occupying a rocking chair on his farm rather than being manipulated as a political mouthpiece repeating a script. Of course, the irony is that the people using him are the same ones he wouldn't have associated with in the past as he had a fairly high ethical standard. Ah well... I guess it's better he's earning his family some dinero via the antics than getting bamboozled by Oral Roberts and company as many of our elderly are (religious mosquitos...)
Too nice a guy?

As I recall the Peanut farmer talked a good game on human rights but the only thing I recall him actually doing about it was cutting off aide to the savage Somoza dictatorship in Nicaragua. He actively supported the Torrijos dictatorship in Panama which was near as bad. He maintained relationships with all the usual cattleprod weilding suspects and was far less prone to bang on about human rights in China and the USSR than that old softie Reagan. Unlike Reagan Jimmy was never blinded by moral clarity, took Ronnie one and a half terms to get real drop the bluster and effectively deal with the USSR.

Carter and Brzezinski also started the covert war in support of Islamo-Fascism in Afghanistan a shrewd but ruthless move against the Soviets. Less important than Nixon's recognition of China but just about the only millitary move made by the US in the Cold War that can accurately be said to have inflicted economic pain on the USSR. On balance it was obviously worth it, you can't really compare the USSR as a threat to the resultiing tiff we are having with the same troublesome Camel Jockies he backed.

Carter deserves credit for having the steel to confront the USA's dependency on Arab Oil and deal with Israel like an adult. This was not at all popular domestically and every President since has wimped out on those causes.

His was a truly terrible Presidency, he came to office at a dark time over a house divided by the crucifiction of Dick Nixon, but he was not without political courage; a virtue entirely lacking in the current encumbant. What stabilty existed in the ME was to large part down to Carter.

I don't see any sign of senilty in his Today interview. He was razor sharp for once and left claret on the floor. It's not surprising he's so bitter over the neocons casually pissing away 70 years of careful US diplomacy. It was about time a senior Yank politician dragged pious Tony over the coals for his toadying disregard of real American interests.

 
#16
By too nice I meant that he was one to preserve the status quo and not cause waves. Confrontation was not Carter's strong suit by any means.
 
#17
Khyros said:
He authorized a low impact version of the plan RS. Far as I'm concerned, failing to respond with overt force then is why we are playing reactionary to Iran's lead now.

Lebanon was a totally differant situation than Iran. When American citizens stay despite being told to get out because the money was too good, it's their own darned fault that tangos snatched 'em. Assaulting an embassy and holding it's staff hostage is an overt act of aggression that required... hell, demanded, an over the top reaction. A heavy hand then would have most certainly resulted in less problems since.
Because, of course, toppling a fairly democratic regime in favour of an autocratic butcher and his secret police for a few decades does not count as aggression(*). I mean, how dare the Iranians bear a grudge for that.

I have to be honest here, had I just overthrown a despotic regime here in dear Old Blighty - one that had been installed and supported by a foreign country - I would not consider it overly heavy handed to have mounted the heads of the representatives of said country on pikes on the Tower of London as a hint to anyone else that such action was not welcome. But that's just me. I'm not liberal or PC at all in that regard.

To me the only surprise is that the Iranians hate the US as little as they do - given the post revolution support given to Saddam to prod him to invade, the sales to Iraq of nerve agent ingredients, the provision of int to best deploy them ... Again my decidedly non-PC brain would wish to see a country who sponsored that sort of thing in my country bleed. A lot.

(*) Mossadegh, the Shah, SAVAK in case you missed the references.
 
#18
Khyros said:
Carter was a lousy president (could be said his biggest weakness was being too nice of a guy) but that has been our norm since Ike left office. While I seriously doubt he's insane by any stretch of the imagination, the man is certainly a bit senile and easily led along.
Carter was a fine president. He was just before his time. Or I should say he was ripe for the time but the rest of us were still catching up. He understood better than any president after him, even Clinton, that blindly bombing and invading countries to fight an ideological war is futile, even counter-productive. He also had to deal with a congress rife with neo-cons and conservatives catering to the religious right for votes.

He is not senile either. He is one of the few former politicians who says it likes it is. He was not afraid of speaking out against the war early on and he is not afraid to criticize Israels faults. He knows these are clashes of ideas and you can't nuke an idea any more than you can car bomb it. Our missiles are not going to win the war against Al Qaeda and Israels rockets are not going to win the war for them. It's people like Bush, Blair and Olmert who are senile.
 
#19
Carter time as president suffered being in that period oftime when the new world orders was much less ordered than now i believe!

Then america was still recovering from the loss of face in both Vietnam and the scandel of nixon even though Ford worked to bring america together, there was still much division.

Carter therefore took the over a country that was in great flux, also the econemic and political issues of both the oil crisis began by OPEC squeeze and the begining of Detente did make his presidency at all easy.

let us look back to when the word detente was a word throw around with much venom and accusations of commie lover was used! Did not also some say that we should take the Gulf and there oil by force also.

So perhaps not the most charamatic of people but well he could have been much worse!
 
#20
With regard to any National leader you’re very likely to find opinions of the residents differing from non residents. e.g. Septics apparently think phoney Blair is wonderful, while we the inflicted say different. Ergo, I’ve little to no idea what it was like for a septic under Carter, but from the view here, my view, together with the work he continued and continues to do post Presidency, he’s one of the greatest statesmen the US to date. :salut:

No.9
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top