Apr 15 2008
Jimmuh Goes On Surrender Tour Of Mideast To Remind America Why Not To Vote Dem This Year
Man, is Jimmy Carter really a GOP Mole working undercover all these decades? His one term debacle as President launched much of the Islamo Fascist terrorist movement we see today. But his policies brought us Ronald Reagan and the conservative movement for two decades (minus a small nostalgic dalliance with the Dems from 1992-1994 and 2006-2008). Carter and Clinton did more to make the right look good, by comparison, than most people appreciate.
And here Carter is again out on the road reminding Americans what a Surrendercrat does – he coddles and legitimizes brutal terrorists by giving them audience, with full physical embrace (as well as political embrace through his presence):
Former President Jimmy Carter embraced a leading Hamas figure Tuesday, according to participants in a meeting that infuriated Israeli officials already upset by Carter’s freelance Mideast peace mission.
Carter also laid a wreath at the grave of Yasser Arafat, whom the Bush administration and many Israelis blame for the breakdown of peace talks seven years ago and the violence that followed.At a reception in the West Bank town of Ramallah organized by Carter’s office, the former president hugged Nasser Shaer, a senior Hamas politician, meeting participants said. Embraces between men are a common custom in Arab culture.
“He gave me a hug. We hugged each other, and it was a warm reception,” Shaer told The Associated Press. “Carter asked what he can do to achieve peace between the Palestinians and Israel … and I told him the possibility for peace is high.”
For terrorist peace is one surrender and cut-and-run by America away. Why is Carter giving presidential meetings to terrorists who don’t deserve even entry into this country of ours? Is he the useful idiot of Hamas as some have claimed?
Muhammad Nazzal, an Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) terror group official in Syria, told the Associated Press that Carter had sent an envoy to Damascus requesting a meeting with their exiled leader Mashaal. Hamas “Welcomed the request.â€
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said of Carter’s meeting, “US government policy is that Hamas is a terrorist organization and we don’t believe it is in the interest of our policy or in the interest of peace to have such a meeting.” Assistant secretary of state David Welch spoke with the 82-year-old Carter before his trip and asked him not to meet any representative of Hamas.
No it is not. If you cannot pass a security check to enter this country your not the kind of person we should be negotiating with. In fact, we should be hunting you down. Carter is an old fool but he is providing America an important foil between McCain and the two Surrendercrats opposing him. We can waste time talking to terrorists as they plot to kill thousands of us or we can eliminate them before they can attack. Carter is showing us the foolishness and naiveté of the Surrendercrats which, in the end, leave terrorists alive and well and safe from our justice. And on the other side of we have Crocker, Petraeus and Bush showing us how to destroy the terrorists and bring democracy and hope to the region, leaving terrorist very little to survive off of.
This choice doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out.
Whippet1,
Apparently you don’t realize you are agreeing with my point. I’m not taking issue with our decision to negotiate and reach an agreement with the Sunni Awakening group. I agree it has been instrumental in improving the security situation (although it will only be a temporary improvement without political reconcilation). I’m raising the Sunni Awakening example to point out how stupid it is for conservatives to say that we should never negotiate with our enemy. If conservatives think it was wise for us to negotaite with terrorist in this instance, how can you continue to say that negotiating with terrorist is always naive and cowardly? You people simply can’t have it both ways. So thank you Whippet for supporting my “liberal” position – even though you did so unintentionally.
By the way, when you say that liberals should never conduct a war, I assume you forgot that Roosevelt, probably the most liberal president that we have ever had, was president during WWII and was instrumental in our military strategy? And yet you continue to believe that only conservatives know how to conduct wars even after Bush’s cluster f*ck in Iraq. You need to take off your partisan shades and see the real world.
Conman, you must be so proud today.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/04/carter_lays_wreath_at_baby_kil.html
p.s. Roosevelt was an excellent president during WWII… for the Soviets anyway.
75,
1) I already said that I won’t defend Carter’s trip, my only issue was with AJ’s constant claim that it is naive and treasonous to negotiate with terrorist.
2) Are you suggesting that the Sunni insurgents are not as bad and/or dangerous as Hamas? Are you serious? The Sunni insurgents are former Baathists who were part of the Saddam regime, the same regime that was so dangerous we felt compelled to invade Iraq to take this regime out. Is Hamas so dangerous that we should fell compelled to invade Gaza? The Sunni insurgents attacked and killed our soldiers for 4 years of the occupation until we reached this agreement. How many American soldiers has Hamas killed? Get a clue 75. You would be better off not replying or simplying admitting you were wrong – every reply simply makes you look more clueless.
1. AJ is right.
2. No, that is not what I’m suggesting.
But feel free to continue to misinterpret my clear English as long as need be. We all enjoy a floundering lefty.
Negotiating with our allies and/or our enemies is a function of the current administration waging the war against them as they are the only ones privy to essential information to make those decisions. To assume that the only way to resolve issues with terrorists or any other enemy for that matter is through negotiation is the “liberal way” and the liberal’s only way. Also the term negotiation generally means that each side goes through a give and take. It isn’t a negotiation without it. So why do you assume that a negotiation took place between the Sunni’s and the administration? Simply because of the end result? Now who’s naive?
So happy to hear that you have been privy to the kind of information that allows you to judge “Bush’s current cluster f*ck in Iraq.” or “Simply assuming that the problem will go away if we cut Gaza off from the world and try and strave them out is naive. We will not resolve that situation without engaging in some diplomacy.”
You libs are so sure that diplomacy is the only answer…why don’t you go over there and give it a shot yourself? They’re all open to a little honest discussion about their plight, right? Value that pretty little head of yours too much? I thought so.
And what are the Sunni’s? Terrorists or insurgents? Or just whatever you feel like labeling them to fit into your tidy little world view?
conman, norm and truthie are all irreversibly stupid liberal leftists. Irreversibly stupid because any facts or history that don’t support thier skewed world view simply ‘bounce off’ and therefor ‘don’t exist’. They are unable to learn due to this, therefore remaining stupid for the rest of their lives. Big pictures escape them. For example: from the late 80s up until 2002 most of the middle east region hated the West, organized ‘gangs’ of thugs, built training camps, plotted and planned death and destruction for the West, especially the United Statues. 9/11/2001 was just one of the results of some of that ‘growing threat but there were many more attacks prior. Currently, there are at least 2 democratic Countries that are now our allies against these same thugs occupying a strategic position in the area close to even more dangerous ‘Western culture’ haters, as well as no further attacks on U.S. interests. I’ll take our current position to the prior every time.
No doubt now. Carter is definately, officially, undeniably nuts.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/04/15/quote-of-the-day-248/
Whippet…definitely my favorite quote so far this year!
Conman must be so proud.
Whippet,
What is your point?
Is your first point that the Bush administration’s position on who/when we should negotiate must be right because they are the only ones privy to essential information to make those decisions? That’s just plain stupid. That would mean that every president’s decision on who/when to negotiate is correct since they are the only one’s privy to essential information. does that mean that you think Clinton was right on all of his diplomacy decisions? That is a circular argument that makes no sense.
I’m assuming that we negotiated with the Sunni Awakening groups because that is what Petraus and the US miltiary leadership told us they did. It is common knowledge that has been all over the news. Do a google search and read up about it before you go spouting off like you know what you are talking about.
I don’t have to be privy to secret information to know that Bush screwed up Iraq. All you have to do is go back and look at Bush and Company’s public statements before the war and how things turned out to figure that out. We were told before the war that we would be greeted as liberators, we had enough troops and they were sufficiently equiped, the war would last 6 to 12 months, it would cost us $50 to 60 billion and Iraq would be a beaken of democracy in the Middle East. As a general rule of thumb, when virtually everything turns out the opposite of what you predicted and planned for – that means you screwed up!
Liberals do not believe that diplomacy is the only way to deal with enemies, they simply believe that it is one of the tools that needs to be used. My only beef is with conservatives who claim that diplomacy should never be used with our enemies.
As for what to call the Sunnis Awakening groups, I don’t care much about labels. My reference to them as terrorist is simply using the conservatives label for terrorist – anyone that is our enemy. I have always found it odd that Bush and Republicans use this term universally to describe all of our enemies even though there are differences among these groups. Terrorism is a miltiary tactic, not an ideological group. But it made for a good propaganda slogan and now all you conservative parrots use it the same way.
Conman,
“That would mean that every president’s decision on who/when to negotiate is correct since they are the only one’s privy to essential information. does that mean that you think Clinton was right on all of his diplomacy decisions?” No, it wouldn’t mean that every presidents decision is correct and I didn’t say it did. It means that they have the most accurate information to make that decision. And no clinton wasn’t right. He had the information and chose diplomacy or inaction which is what got us here in the first place.
‘I don’t have to be privy to secret information to know that Bush screwed up Iraq.” Of course you don’t.
“the war would last 6 to 12 months” Now who’s parrotting leftist talking points?
“As a general rule of thumb, when virtually everything turns out the opposite of what you predicted and planned for – that means you screwed up!” That depends on whose thumb you’re sucking and of course the liberals believe that wars, if they are to occur at all, are neat and clean little events.
“Terrorism is a miltiary tactic, not an ideological group. But it made for a good propaganda slogan and now all you conservative parrots use it the same way. ” And what nation does Al-qaeda’s military belong to? Terrorism is the use of fear to achieve your ends…you know like blowing up innocent children while they’re playing in the streets, or holding children and teachers hostage and then blowing them up, or using them as human shields because as a terrorist you’re really a gutless monster. Or walking into a nightclub and blowing yourself up because all of those people in there having drinks were such a threat to you. Blowing up hospitals, mosques…you know all those military bases where only your opponents soldiers are housed. Or flying airplanes into buildings in New York City. Military tactics, huh? That’s why liberals will never be able to protect this country…they all think like you.
So…lets see…according to Soothie….if Obama widens his gap over Hillary…..somehow…that’s relevant or equivilant to J Carter embracing hamas????
Jimmy Carter appears to be in violation of the law by
attempting to conduct foreign diplomacy as a private citizen.
He should be arrested and charged upon his return to the US.
I don’t know how much everybody is following breaking events,
but Jimmy is an irrelevance.
Syria is moving more armored battalions up to the border with Israel.
Hamas in Gaza are putting in place imminent plans to smash through
both borders (Egypt and Israel) and “retake their homeland”
Israel has just been connected to the US ballistic missile early
warning system – that happened only twice before and each
connection was followed by a major middle east war.
The US State Department has issued a travel warning urging
people not to go to Syria.
We are sending a third carrier battle group to the Persian Gulf
and it will arrive in a fortnight.
General Petraeus warned last week that Iran is now the biggest
threat to the stability of the region – no longer Al Qaeda.
Israel’s 60th anniversary of it’s birth is on the 14th of May.
Figure it out.
I love how these Leftists think that just because things have not gone to plan that somehow in the real world if we just leave there is no consequence.
What’s the point of pointing out mistakes in the past if you dont give a damn about the mistake of just leaving Iraq?
Isn’t the trick to continue to LEARN from the past mistakes and ensure that in the future we take into account what we have learned?
What have we learned about previous withdrawels of American forces due to the fact that many people at home felt that the conflict or situation just wasn’t worth the fight? (Referring to Vietname, Lebanon in the early 80s, Somalia in the 90s)
We learned that the Jihadis were greatly impacted by our weakness and came to the conclusion that we’d be an easier foe to defeat than even the Soviet Union (The Jihadis believe that they won the Cold War.. that through Jihad, they destroyed one of the two evil Superpowers).
Do Leftists consider this? Nope.. they want to add another surrender to that this… only this time they want to surrender a fight that the Jihadis themselves have declared to be their most critical and important front in their fight against us.
Morons you Leftsts you are… damn ignorant seditious fools.
I love how these Leftists think that just because things have not gone to plan that somehow in the real world if we just leave there is no consequence.
What’s the point of pointing out mistakes in the past if you dont give a damn about the mistake of just leaving Iraq?
Isn’t the trick to continue to LEARN from the past mistakes and ensure that in the future we take into account what we have learned?
What have we learned about previous withdrawels of American forces due to the fact that many people at home felt that the conflict or situation just wasn’t worth the fight? (Referring to Vietname, Lebanon in the early 80s, Somalia in the 90s)
[See part 2]
test
I love how these Leftists think that just because things have not gone to plan that somehow in the real world if we just leave there is no consequence.
What’s the point of pointing out mistakes in the past if you dont give a damn about the mistake of just leaving Iraq?
Isn’t the trick to continue to LEARN from the past mistakes and ensure that in the future we take into account what we have learned?
What have we learned about previous withdrawels of American forces due to the fact that many people at home felt that the conflict or situation just wasn’t worth the fight? (Referring to Vietname, Lebanon in the early 80s, Somalia in the 90s)
We learned that the Jihadis were greatly impacted by our weakness and came to the conclusion that we’d be an easier foe to defeat than even the Soviet Union (The Jihadis believe that they won the Cold War.. that through Jihad, they destroyed one of the two evil Superpowers).
[See part 2]
I love how these Leftists think that just because things have not gone to plan that somehow in the real world if we just leave there is no consequence.
What’s the point of pointing out mistakes in the past if you dont give a damn about the mistake of just leaving Iraq?
Isn’t the trick to continue to LEARN from the past mistakes and ensure that in the future we take into account what we have learned?
What have we learned about previous withdrawels of American forces due to the fact that many people at home felt that the conflict or situation just wasn’t worth the fight? (Referring to Vietname, Lebanon in the early 80s, Somalia in the 90s)
[more..]
I love how these Leftists think that just because things have not gone to plan that somehow in the real world if we just leave there is no consequence.
What’s the point of pointing out mistakes in the past if you dont give a damn about the mistake of just leaving Iraq?
Isn’t the trick to continue to LEARN from the past mistakes and ensure that in the future we take into account what we have learned?
[more..]
What have we learned about previous surrenders of American forces due to the fact that many people at home felt that the conflict or situation just wasn’t worth the fight? (Referring to Vietnam, Lebanon in the early 80s, Somalia in the 90s)
We learned that the Jihadis were greatly impacted by our weakness and came to the conclusion that we’d be an easier foe to defeat than even the Soviet Union (The Jihadis believe that they won the Cold War.. that through Jihad, they destroyed one of the two evil Superpowers).
Do Leftists consider this? Nope.. they want to add another surrender to that this… only this time they want to surrender a fight that the Jihadis themselves have declared to be their most critical and important front in their fight against us.
Morons you Leftsts you are… damn ignorant seditious fools.
We learned that the Jihadis were greatly impacted by the weakness they saw when we left Vietnam, Lebanon, Somalia and came to the conclusion that we’d be an easier foe to defeat than even the Soviet Union (The Jihadis believe that they won the Cold War.. that through Jihad, they destroyed one of the two evil Superpowers).
Do Leftists consider this? Nope.. they want to add another surrender to that this… only this time they want to surrender a fight that the Jihadis themselves have declared to be their most critical and important front in their fight against us.
Morons you Leftsts you are… damn ignorant seditious fools.