| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
An entry in Webster's Fourth International Dictionary, which became available on-line in 2022:
Carterism.An extreme form of holier-than-thou self-righteousness, prompted by a manic desire for self-aggrandizement, and expressed most notably in appeasement of those who, in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, actively engaged in the “Jihad of pen and speech." A term derived from the name of the 39th President of the United States, James Earl Carter.
Initially some used the term neutrally, but it became a term of abuse after the surprise Muslim attack of December 25, 2016. That attack followed by a few weeks the coup d'etat of the French army, led by a female commander known only by her nom de guerre of "Anna Marly," and thus began that eleven-month conflict known variously to historians as the Christmas War, the December War, the Great Jihad, and, as it was called by the non-Muslims of Europe who with American, Israeli, and Russian help destroyed or drove out the invaders and all their local collaborators, the Great Dhimmi Revolt.
The oilfields of Arabia were seized and the revenues from them used to compensate Infidels mostly but not exclusively in Europe, for years of humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity caused by Muslim threats and demands. In addition, war reparations were paid for out of the oil revenues, especially for the extensive damage done to residences, government office buildings, churches, schools, and in some cases, works of art following the attacks on many museums. The reparations will continue until 2050, by which time it is expected that both the need for, and the continued supply of, Saudi oil, will have come to an end.The term "Carterism" has now become obsolete, though it remains of historical interest. Its first recorded use was at a posting on May 8, 2006, at the website Jihad Watch.
The only surprise in Jimmy Carter’s new book is that some seem to be surprised. There is nothing Carter did at Camp David that would make this book surprising, as he pushed Begin to make concession after concession, and even surprised Sadat in his willingness to demand for the Arab side what Sadat himself saw only as an opening bargaining position. Ably assisted by that other classic case, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who exhibited the same symptoms of the same mental pathology, Carter not only was fixated on squeezing Israel back in 1978-79, but he was so very concentrated on this that he had no time to see what was happening in Iran. He had no time to note the rise of the Muslim fanatics who wanted to overthrow the most tolerant and most hopeful regime in the Muslim Middle East, that of the Shah of Iran.
The Shah's regime was corrupt, but hardly more corrupt than any among the Muslim states in the area; it simply had more money than most of them to spread around. It was unlike Saudi Arabia, where it is not so much corruption at court as direct diversion of the oil income in that All-in-the-Family Plan by which Al-Saud members get to take many tens of billions a year, because you see they are Al-Saud members and no other explanation is needed.
And so nothing was done to help the Shah, and the Khomeini regime came to power, and from that all kinds of trouble has flowed -- trouble which, at this point, can now be turned, at long last, to our Infidel advantage if things are done right. But that is no reason not to deplore the thirty years of trouble that our worst President, Jimmy Carter, who "remade the Middle East," caused.
Jimmy "I'm sick and tired of hearing about the Holocaust" Carter never found out, never wanted to find out, what the Mandate for Palestine was all about. He never wanted to find out what the legal, historic, and moral claims of the Jews to that small sliver were. Strange, considering he had been and continued to be a Bible-reader, but his antisemitism trumped that. He never wanted to find out, either, when the "Palestinian people" were invented, or why -- even though he was an adult when that phrase suddenly appeared, and knew perfectly well it was a made up for political reasons.
Pat Buchanan and Jimmy Carter intersect at one point. That one point is their shared lack of sympathy, hostility even, for Israel. Each suffers from a pathological mental condition that presents differently. But that condition is detectable. It can be properly identified. See Gavin Langmuir, see Malcolm Hay, see Leon Poliakoff.
Jimmy Carter deserves to be painted by Dickens: holier-than-thou, wearing his Carterism, his holier-than-thouness on his sleeve, and essentially evil. Some punishment appropriate -- a condign punishment -- needs to be found. But start with simple emotions. Contempt. Disgust.
Posted by Hugh at December 14, 2006 1:52 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Never knew Webster's had a 1st International Dictionary...............then again only Americans know much about Jimmy Carter - so long ago..........but if he can be immortalised in a dictionary, well, why not ?
Posted by: Voyager![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 14, 2006 3:01 AM
Some punishment appropriate -- a condign punishment -- needs to be found. But start with simple emotions. Contempt. Disgust.I could swear there was a 3rd emotion mentioned yesterday.
Kohelet 3:8.
Posted by: Shy Guy at December 14, 2006 3:31 AM
From Hugh's post:
Carter not only was fixated on squeezing Israel back in 1978-79, but he was so very concentrated on this that he had no time to see what was happening in Iran. He had no time to note the rise of the Muslim fanatics who wanted to overthrow the most tolerant and most hopeful regime in the Muslim Middle East, that of the Shah of Iran.
at December 14, 2006 3:32 AM
Did Jimmy recently call Rwanda 'ancient history' almost as if any diversion from the real 'source' of the problem in the middle east which would be those stiff necked, Jews. Sorry, Jimmy means zionists.
Seriously, what is the difference b/w Carter and Duke and Byrd. One's out of the closet(Duke), one 'changed' Byrd and one's still in the closet. Just how did Jimmy win his first election in Georgia? He wasn't the 'save the world' liberal then, didn't he whore after the racist vote in the late 60's/early 70's Georgia? Ancient history as well. A detail of history. Jimmy, you are such a small, little man. If only you were now President, wouldn't it give you pleasure to shaft the Jews? you must be displeased as W distances him from the Baker Boys.
Jimmy, you describe a hero of mine M Begin as the most truculant leader you have met. How so? Did that proud Jew annoy the hell out of you? You are a disgrace, a moral failure, with much to repent for. I see nothing of Christianity or goodness within you. The only answer is to blame to Jews. He, Carter, should be called on this issues, at each media interview. Nail the bastard with his own words. What's this stuff about colleges with large Jewish enrollment not welcoming you? of such universities silencing 'debate' about your 'provocative' thesis? Just an old bigot. The American people soured on him rather quickly if I remember. Mr. malaise hates the jooz. Rawanda: ancient history because it deflects attention away from the Hitler like Jooz. Sure, hacking a million Africans apart with the machete is bad, but what's worse is when this diverts the myopic world away from the crimes of Israel and the Jooz; now that's a real tragedy.
Posted by: biorabbi at December 14, 2006 3:57 AM
Ah! The picture gets clearer. No wonder, some of those xenophobically "swadeshi" hindutvavadis (gandhi sycophants) on their sojourns to America hobnob with organizations like Carter foundations and deliver Godknowswhat "discourses".
Tilting at windmills like Nariz, maligning Judeo Christianity by joining hands with "muslim brothers" citing their "hindu ancestry". Dravidian atheists are busy right now targeting Temples and Brahmins in South. And certain columnists conveniently detect "Christian hand" behind it;)
A jingoistic hindu blogger ensconced in America pontificates that White British (he used a pejorative term) have no right to make a film on the Mathematician Ramanujan as the latter belongs to Hindus;) betraying his shoddy grasp of facts. Ramanujan was denied admission into a college in India by a Hindu. The rest is history. Finders always keepers.
Indian IITians and IT professionals, faced with some identity crisis and/or thirsting to settle some personal scores or gain more brownie points have been lately very busy, dusting and thumbing through Bhagavad Geetha, Discourses by Vivekananda etc.Lol...
When Swami Vivekananda went to America, none of the hindus/indians there ever bothered to even look at Him. He spent the night in a park when a Stranger, an American lady (White, White yes WHITE) took Him to Chicago and the rest is history. No, She did not charge Him money or con in anyway as Indians are notorious for.
My respect for Pope Ratzinger shot up the day He pointed out the mendacity of Indian Keralite converts regarding St.Thomas etc. Whenever the indian converts unleash hooliganism which they very often do why blame Christianity?
Are some hindus imperceptibly, unwittingly turning islamic? Indian newspapers reported India is willing to pay double the normal price for Iranian gas/oil. Indians and ethics??!!
Posted by: Crows&Cows at December 14, 2006 4:28 AM
Recommended read: Is Jimmy Carter Just An Old-Fashioned Christian Fundamentalist, Anti-Semitic Bigot?
Posted by: Shy Guy at December 14, 2006 4:35 AM
2022, one day after the new edition comes out: "#*\! It! My Legacy is stolen again!" Clinton grumbled.
Posted by: Gary at December 14, 2006 5:35 AM
Creative as hell Hugh. Nice job.
Posted by: Cornelius at December 14, 2006 6:45 AM
Brilliant -again- Mr. Fitzgerald -particularly the scenario of the "Great Dhimmi Revolt" (except it should start much sooner - like now)!
Rush Limbaugh did a "sound-bite" comparison of Dhimmi Jimmi Carter and KKK-nazi David Duke... They say the same things - almost verbatim.
Interesting that Carter's new book was released just before Eichmandinijhad's Holocaust denial hate fest (from which Rush Limbaugh derived the Duke sound-bites)...
Posted by: TINBH at December 14, 2006 7:41 AM
From above:
"I seem to recall, through the haze of memory loss and the passage of time, that as part of the squeeze on Israel Carter actively undermined the Shah by stopping the flow of oil to Israel from Iran, which at that time was the largest supplier to Israel. Not only did Carter not comprehend the nature of islamofanatacism arising in Iran, but wanted Khomeini to return from exile in France (where else?) to lead Iran. Carter ostensibly referred to Khomeini as "a fellow man of faith I could trust."
As I recall:
There were massive demonstrations by the oil industry workers striking for higher wages. They went on strike, crippling Iran for months. On September 8, 1978, BLACK FRIDAY,the Iranian government massacred thousands who had gathered in Teheran to protest for higher wages.
However, in order to understand what happened in 1979-80, it is not sufficient merely to refer to the class balance of forces. In Russia in 1917 the proletariat was infinitely weaker than the Iranian working class in 1979. Yet under the leadership of the Bolshevik Party (which, let us not forget, only had 8,000 members out of a population of 150 million in February 1917), the workers and peasants were won over to the programme of socialist revolution. The reason why this did not take place in Iran was not the objective situation but the false policies and the cowardly conduct of the leaders of the Tudeh Party. Due to the absence of the vanguard party of the working class, the movement was hijacked by the mullahs. All the so-called lefts were either behind the mullahs or else supported the National Front. Not one of them followed an independent class policy, explaining to the workers the need to take power into their own hands, as Lenin and Trotsky did in 1917.
This was the tragedy of the Iranian revolution of 1979. In reality, only the active participation of the proletariat led to victory in 1979. The supposedly invincible Shah was defeated and forced into exile
.... Power was really in the hands of the Iranian working class, but, in the absence of a real revolutionary party and leadership, they did not know it, and nobody explained this to them.....
Thus, power slipped through their fingers and was immediately seized by Khomeini and the mullahs. They did not lead the revolution, but merely exploited it for their own ends. They did everything in their power to stifle and crush the independent movement of the working class, leaning on the most backward and ignorant layers of society to install themselves in power. And as soon as the lava of revolution had cooled, they set about ruthlessly to crush the movement of the masses.
In todays Iran, we see the embryo of dissention again, Iranians students are protesting, Iranians are cursing their nutjob president, their have been antigovernment protests,and dissention is growing.
The Iranian government is trying hard to stifle the anti-government movement. It is imprisoning teachers, students, journalists, lawyers, and anyone else who speaks too loudly.
I think Iran is ripe for a new leader to emerge who can lead Iran back into the 21st century. This individual could well come from somewhere within the oil industry.
at December 14, 2006 7:44 AM
Hugh, you really need to write some books. Your ideas need to reach the widest possible audience.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at December 14, 2006 8:53 AM
There are a lot of people who think that Europeans tend to sympathize with the Palestinians and demonize the Israelis to lessen any feelings of guilt over the Holocaust. So perhaps it's possible that Carter's views are informed by latent guilt over the segregationist past of the US south that he was born to. (I understand that Carter describes calls Israel's policies to protect its citizens from acts of terror as segregationist, failing entirely to note the murderous activities of the supposedly anti-segregationist Palestinains.)
Then again, it could be no more complicated than Carter being Mel Gibson's Protestant counterpart.
Or possibly some of both.
Anyway, it looks like his book is badly written enough to have attracted some serious critques that will seriously damage his credibility. So, in the end, he may have done a service he never intended to do.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at December 14, 2006 9:57 AM
For those who want to find out why the nom de guerre of the female French general was "Anna Marly" and a bit more about the real Anna Marly, go to www.newenglishreview.org, click on "The Iconoclast" and look for her photograph.
Posted by: Hugh at December 14, 2006 10:34 AM
It is simply astounding how a one term president, who is arguably one of the worst ever, has managed to have a whole new career as the author of books and as a "diplomat". I must be totally clueless here because I don't get it. Carter was inept as a president-why would anyone in their right mind want to read or listen to his drivel? The man must have been ahead of his time- such a mediocrity is in perfect tune with today's dreadful world leaders.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at December 14, 2006 10:37 AM
"It is simply astounding how a one term president, who is arguably one of the worst ever, has managed to have a whole new career as the author of books and as a "diplomat". I must be totally clueless here because I don't get it. Carter was inept as a president-why would anyone in their right mind want to read or listen to his drivel? The man must have been ahead of his time- such a mediocrity is in perfect tune with today's dreadful world leaders."
ISLAMSFORLOSERS, you nailed it. It's beyond me how such a failure and imbecile of a man has gained such an exalted reputation as a diplomat. The man reminds so much of Neville Chamberlain, except that Chamberlain eventually wised up and realized how foolish he was for trusting Hitler. Carter has never wised up to his foolishness and continues to undermine his country, Israel and the West with his ignorance and idiocy. He contributes to the Islamic threat we face with every idiotic word he utters and writes.
at December 14, 2006 10:58 AM
Proud Infidel-
Carter has gotten worse with age. Somebody should check him out for senility or Alzheimer's. Seriously.
As for those who follow Carter-well, I guess we have a modern day view of how Mr. Perfect got started 1400 years ago. A bunch of idiots following a delusional kook-history is repeating itself. Maybe one day Carter will also be hailed as a prophet of some new cult, er, religion.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at December 14, 2006 11:20 AM
Here's hoping the antisemite Jimmy Carter does a Judge Crater
Posted by: dennisw at December 14, 2006 12:14 PM
Hugh,
Thank you for the link.
at December 14, 2006 12:23 PM
Hugh.. and what happens to Israel in this futurist scenario? I say they take over at least the Sinai and get control of the Suez Canal for good measure. West Bank and Gaza at least and better yet they get control of the Jordan River.
After all, they'd be first in line when it comes to reparations.
I only hope the outcome of this eventually unavoidable conflict is as positive as you outline above.
I traveled in the Western United States in summer of 79 and the country was certainly depressed and in a deep "malaise".
Not easy driving long distances with four guys in a bug and only being able to gas up on an odd day.
Jimmy Carter has done so much damage. He needs to be retired. He's standing on a very slippery soap box indeed..
Posted by: germaninamerica at December 14, 2006 12:27 PM
Check this out; scroll to the letter that says "Follow the Money"
:http://www.jewishpress.com/page.do/20074/Letters_To_The_Editor.html
It is not inacurate to say that Jimmy the Dhimmi Carter is financially supported by bin Laden.
If Jim the Dim can take money from these sources; and if Michael Moore can make such a big deal over George Bush Sr. being related to the Carlyle Group; and then Mikey and Jimmuh can sit together at the 2004 Dhimmocrat Convention swooning over Barak Hussein Obama; then we can truly say we have wittnessed a new world record for hypocracy (Not to mention, useful idiocy, dim witted dhimmitude, spineless selfishness and viscous venality).
Posted by: Papa Bear at December 14, 2006 12:57 PM
There are a lot of people who think that Europeans tend to sympathize with the Palestinians and demonize the Israelis to lessen any feelings of guilt over the Holocaust.
[From above]
That is exactly what I think. These "guilty Europeans" are turning on their former victims once again - this time with an air of moral superiority.
They say: "See those Jooz are just as bad as we once were." If that makes them feel better. It sure makes me feel worse. it shows that most of us haven't absorbed our lesson from WW2 and the Holocaust.
Trying instead to get out of "guilt" the fast and easy way.
Just look at the "moral conscience" of postwar Germany - the intolerable Gunther Grass who recently was exposed as a former Hitler Youth. Whoever appointed him anyway? Yes, our media of course. A friend of the "Palestinians" of course. And a strident leftist. What else is new? Parallels to Dhimmy Carter perhaps?
Posted by: germaninamerica at December 14, 2006 1:06 PM
Papa Bear,
Thanks for the link to the "Follow the Money" letter. It's curious that the MSM, in all the fawning interviews of Carter, have not seen fit to point out this obvious conflict of interest. I hope that conflict of interest will now get a bit of attention in the blogosphere.
Posted by: Howard, Fine & Howard at December 14, 2006 1:08 PM
this sounds almost like a good theme science-fiction future history novel and would make an interesting one and Carter in my opinion is a old-fashioned Southern redneck bigot but he was able to hide his bigotry quite well
Posted by: islamakapigeaters at December 14, 2006 1:15 PM
"Carterism" brings to mind the saying "...nothing succeeds like failure..."
So true in these crazy times we live in.
Posted by: never_submit at December 14, 2006 1:23 PM
Carter....what a wanker.
I remember watching the arrival of the US hostages and thinking in my innocent little naive high school mind.
"why don't they bomb their oil facilities with B52's, they have their people back, no agreement reached by blackmail is valid, just bomb them"
Ah sweet innocense, I hadn't even started shaving then !
How things change. If those facilities had been wiped out, just think of the message that would have sent to those that follow this most bestial and vile religion.
The message would have been "Mess with us, blackmail us, threaten us, destabalise us, subvert us, and we have the capacity to destroy you"
Anyway that is nearly the end of my spleen venting.
How many of us are spending 1/3 of our weekly shopping bill on Israeli made goods.
Be honest, if not I suggest you change your shopping habits.
Israeli wine is actually very good
available from Tesco
http://www.winefoodacademy.com/Pages-wine-articles/israeli-wines.htm
http://www.judaicawebstore.com/category.aspx?categoryID=10&gclid=CMH9o_XWkokCFR1FEgod-0kuBw
remember folks practically all those little off licenses in the UK and quite a few wholesalers are of Indian descent, and their is no love lost between us and the beasties.
SO DRINK ISRAELI WINE AND HELP SAVE ISRAEL.
And I am sure the Israeli's will love Cobra Indian lager.
Israel is saved and we are all merry.
By the way "Serbian" Christmas trees are being in B & Q
Regards
AI
Posted by: apostate_islam at December 14, 2006 2:27 PM
shy guy: great link (mere rhetoric on Carter)
for those of you who are curious enough about Carter's paymasters, but not patient enough to scroll through the various letters to the editor, here are the goods:
Follow The Money
[...]
Wondering why Carter spends so much time manipulating the narrative of Israel’s history, I went to the website of the Carter Center and looked at its financial supporters. The list of donors of lifetime contributions – more than one million dollars – includes (in addition to various corporations, Western governments and left-wing foundations) Prince Alaweed bin Talal, the Sultanate of Oman, Sultan Quboos bin Said al Said, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Bakir M. binLadin for the Saudi BinLadin Group, the Saudi Fund for Development, and the Government of the United Arab Emirates.
Barry Tigay, Ph.D.
(Via E-Mail)
Posted by: waterdragon52 at December 14, 2006 3:08 PM
Thanks for the pleasant daydream material, Hugh. Hopefully, we won't have to wait until 2016 to destroy the umma.
Posted by: US_infidel at December 14, 2006 3:17 PM
Follow The Golden Rule-ers:
Saudi's give British justice a public dhimmifying, as justice gets compromised over a 10-billion-pound weapons contract.
"Attorney General Lord Peter Goldsmith said the decision had been made "in the wider public-interest," which had to be balanced against the rule of law."
Which Saudi leverage might help explain Western governments ignoring Wahabist advocated sedition throughout the West?
Greedy pigs selling out your civilization.
Read more on www.democast.tv
Posted by: DemoCast at December 14, 2006 4:03 PM
Carterism; cf "Franctimony"
Posted by: mountainecho at December 14, 2006 4:24 PM
Why is it that paranoid schizophrenics so frequently manifest that mad-dog-with-mange variety of anti-semitism? It crops up all the time when you read about criminal schizoids (and even drunk drivers). But I've never heard of a single case where such people have blamed muslims or buddhists or hindus for the feedback loop that is their own weltschmerz.
Generally, I incline to the view that people are plenty evil enough on their own to account for their malfeasance without any recourse to devils or "illness." (The great Thomas Szasz attributed schizophrenia to runaway vanity: "Why are they always Jesus Christ in their delusions and not a 17th century butcher-baker") But this alignment of the insane and the anti-semite has always caused me to wonder.
A little demon toeing into the soft turf on Jimmy's shoulder?
Posted by: mountainecho at December 14, 2006 4:40 PM
From crows:
Are some hindus imperceptibly, unwittingly turning islamic? Indian newspapers reported India is willing to pay double the normal price for Iranian gas/oil. Indians and ethics??!!
Sounds like protection money. You know, pay us and we will let you keep your knees and necks.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at December 14, 2006 4:40 PM
"But this alignment of the insane and the anti-semite has always caused me to wonder."
-- from a posting above
Think of antisemitism not as "aligning" with insanity but rather asbeing a subset or type of it, a pathological condition that can be identified and studied, and is, as merely one variety of mental illness, the product of confusion and dismay and desarroi felt by those confronting events with which they cannot cope --revolutions, wars, changes in economic and social structures -- that are hard to accept or to deal with, and for which a simple explanation always helps. The Jews as a ready, even pre-fabricated off-the-shelf victim, needing no special mental preparation, so often fit the bill.
at December 14, 2006 10:11 PM
May I cynically suggest a more realistic ending. Europe decayed. Muslim majorities cause the former European Union to adopt Sharia Law. Freedom of speech and expression grind to a halt. Immigration to North America from Europe jumps by 500%. Cathedrals and Castles, seen as relics of crusades and imperialism, are destroyed or turned into Mosques. Hugh - sorry, it's more realistic from where I'm looking. Maybe you see something I dont.
Posted by: computernerd at December 14, 2006 10:17 PM
On the Carter Center donors -- I did a little digging. The list of lifetime $Million donors is on page 35 of the pdf file here http://www.cartercenter.org/documents/2339.pdf
Looks like not quite 10% of the donors at that level are from the oil-rich ME countries (individuals and governments).
What is interesting is the stated mission of the Carter Center, from page 2 of the same brochure: "The Carter Center, in partnership with Emory University, is guided by a fundamental commitment to human rights and the alleviation of human suffering; it seeks to prevent and resolve conflicts, enhance freedom and democracy, and improve health."
Enhance freedom and democracy??? Commitment to human rights??? I guess those Saudi princes et al. aren't familiar with the old adage "Charity begins at home."
Posted by: CJ at December 14, 2006 11:11 PM
"The Carter Center, in partnership with Emory University, is guided by a fundamental commitment to human rights and the alleviation of human suffering; it seeks to prevent and resolve conflicts, enhance freedom and democracy, and improve health."
Boilerplate stuff that the Law requires as statement of aims so the American taxpayer grants relief to former Presidents getting a huge tax break for transferring government papers to some university.
Posted by: Voyager at December 15, 2006 2:43 AM
germaninamerica:
that was the point I was trying to make about Carter... ...that as the scion of southern US farmers, Carter make be trying to balm his soul by accusing the Israelis of practicing "racial segregation" by building a barrier that controls access to Israel from the West Bank and Gaza.
Of course, what the dhimmiwitted former President fails to mention is that the construction of the barrier commenced after a period of heightened violence that resulted in the terrorist murders of 500 Israeli citizens in 2002 alone. And such violence against Israelis has been dramatically reduced since. Instead, border towns like Sderot have been the target of Qassam missile attacks for the stated purpose [by a Hamas spokesperson] of ethnically cleansing the area of Jews by making it too risky to live and work there.
However, Carter attempts distance himself from outright accusations of Israel practicing genuine apartheid or segregation policies by saying the Israel/Palestine dispute, unlike South Africa, was about the ownership of land. Now tease this argument out a bit and it's pretty hollow too. South Africa's apartheid laws were most definitely about who could buy land where. The difference was that the white colonists really did colonize the region and keep the non-whites in abject poverty. By contrast, until quite recently, Palestinian Arabs enjoyed a far higher standard of living as measured by the UN's benchmarks than their Muslim brethren in oil-rich nations like Saudi Arabia and Iran. Intifada II has been a disaster for the lower class Palestinians without political connections. But that's also a point that totally evades Carter and people who share his POV.
But the most egregious argument is the core accusation Carter makes is that the Israelis are the refusniks who won't accept a two-state solution. Israel accepted Partition and a fraction of the land base they were originally offered at the fall of the Ottoman Empire. It was the Arabs who didn't, and the Palestinians, Fatah and Hamas alike, who continue to refuse a two-state solution, although the former are more coy about their long-term plans than the latter.
There have been lots of articles written slagging Carter's book, but here's one from today's frontpagemag.com that blows up one of the biggest myths about Carter as the one who brokered the agreement Begin and Sadat signed:
Palestine: Peace, Not Prejudice
By Joseph Puder
FrontPageMagazine.com | December 15, 2006
Jimmy Carter, it appears, needed a scapegoat for his failed presidency and Israel served as a convenient target. His new book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid is a shameful tract filled with factual inaccuracies, and blatant one-sidededness. His pent up frustration with his inability to influence U.S. policy on behalf of his Arab friends prompted the publication of this libelous book.
Lest the readers forget, in March 1977, just months after his inauguration, Carter made his first foreign policy speech in which he called for a “Palestinian Homeland.”
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.
Posted by: waterdragon52
at December 15, 2006 7:54 AM
at December 15, 2006 8:17 AM
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.
Posted by: waterdragon52
It was Sadats action that set in motion the plans for his assasination that was carried out in 1981.
Goes to show Muslims will never settle for peace and will kill all who attempt it.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at December 15, 2006 8:22 AM
"It is important to acknowledge that the Camp David Accords – Carter’s premier presidential achievement – happened in spite of his misjudgment."
-- from a posting above
Whether Sadat managed to obtain two-way talks, as he did, with Israel, rather than an all-in Geneva meeting, hardly matters. The Camp David Accords were a disaster for Israel. Begin was not allowed to make his case, not that he was ever very good at articulating Israel's rights. Sadat was beatified the minute he stepped off the tarmac in Tel Aviv -- from then on he was Saint Sadat, and of course Carter and Brzezinski did all they could to keep that up, and ruthlessly the smiling Carter kept beating back the Israelis and beating them down so that everyhting was given away -- the entire Sinia, over a mere three years (at the very least, the Israelis should have presented to the world the real history of the Sinai, and have insisted that it be given up over 20-30 years, and conditional on the observable behavior of the Egyptian government), together with those oilfields, three major airbases, and the rest of the infrastructure built by the Israelis at a cost, in 1978 dollars, of $16 billion. All in exchange for -- nothing.
What "premier presidential achievement" is that? It's an "achievement" if you wish to weaken Israel and feed Arab Muslim triumphalism. It's an "achievement" if you look forward to others making similar demands on Israel as if the treaty with Egypt set a precedent, instead of a one-off deal. It's an "achievement" if you think the Lesser Jihad against Israel really has an end, and surrender of land by Israel, land to whcih it has legal (the Leage of Nations' Mandate for Palestine), historic (a very long story) and moral (all the rules by which the European wars have been settled -- the same rules by which, for example, the Austrian Sudtirol, 97% ethnic German, became the Italian Alto Adige after World War I).
Carter now, with his sinister book that for some has revealed a "new" Carter, was always the same Carter: never more so than when, in the 1970s, he was offering advice as a "friend" about public relations to Yassir Arafat (see Doublas Brinkley's biography), or out-doing the Egyptian demands at Camp David.
An "achievement" for the Camp of Islam, but not for the Camp of the Infidels.
Posted by: Hugh at December 15, 2006 8:31 AM
Hugh:
I posted Puder's piece because Carter's apologists cite his role in the Camp David treaty as a positive achievement, but the truth is that Carter had little to do with Sadat's overture. As for whether Israel benefited from signing, it would seem that such benefits have been marginal as instead of being attacked by uniformed Egpytian soldiers, Israel has to endure the lower-level attacks perpetrated by un-uniformed combatants who receive money and weapons smuggled in through Egypt.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at December 15, 2006 9:50 AM
Carters been dead at least ten years. Someone ought to tell him it's ok to lay down...
Posted by: duh_swami at December 15, 2006 9:59 AM
carterism: the obsessive flogging of underdog issues based on the feel good belief that the underdog is always right
Posted by: god at December 16, 2006 3:59 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)