posted August 02, 2006 04:34 PM            

Jimmy Carter has a lot to answer for. One would think he would confine himself to building houses for the poor and keep his mouth..which is disconnected from any intellect...firmly shut about foreign affairs.

Jimmy Carter: A Terrorist's Best Friend
By FrontPage Magazine
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 2, 2006

The anti-Israeli bias in Jimmy Carter’s op-ed in yesterday’s Washington Post could not have been more evident if he had concluded, “Allahu akhbar!” Unlike Mel Gibson, Carter presumably wrote while sober, but his analysis and demonology barely differed for it.

The moral equivalence that led the worst president of the 20th century to decry our “inordinate fear of Communism” was on display from his first sentence, in which he took aim at “key players on all sides waiting for every opportunity to destroy their enemies.” The genocidal intent of Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran is well known; he failed to indicate their opposite number in the Jewish State of Israel.

Carter indicates the cause of the most recent “cycle” of terrorism: the fact that Israel jails terrorists. “One of the special vulnerabilities of Israel, and a repetitive cause of violence, is the holding of prisoners,” he writes. Noting Hezbollah generously “offered to exchange the soldier” – the one they didn’t kill – “for the release of 95 women and 313 children…in Israeli prisons,” he huffs, “this time Israel rejected a swap and attacked Gaza in an attempt to free the soldier and stop rocket fire into Israel.”

He overlooks the fact that, in addition to women and children, Hezbollah demanded the release of a number of terrorists, including a monster named Samir Kuntar, a Palestine Liberation Front terrorist from Lebanon who smashed a four-year-old girl’s skull against a rock with his rifle butt after forcing her to witness her father’s execution. In the process, the girl’s mother, who watched helplessly from a crawlspace, suffocated her two-year-old daughter while covering her mouth to muffle her wails. Nasrallah has indicated Kuntar’s release is a prerequisite. It was to secure Kuntar’s release that the Front hijacked the Achille Lauro in 1985, pushing the wheelchair-bound American Leon Klinghoffer into the ocean for kicks.

Israel long rewarded such behavior by releasing convicted terrorists in exchange for a handful of Israeli soldiers…or their remains. Israel learned the lesson Carter never did: negotiating with terrorists breeds more terrorism.

Carter continues that while Israel has the “inarguable” right to defend itself, “it is inhumane and counterproductive to punish civilian populations in the illogical hope that somehow they will blame Hamas and Hezbollah for provoking the devastating response.” Israel has taken pains to avoid civilian casualties. Its opening response was to bomb an empty building, and it has warned civilians to flee from areas of attack – including Qana – losing tactical surprise in the process.

Although the 39th president believes it is “illogical” for the victims to properly identify their persecutors, this is exactly what is occurring.

The New York Times had to admit most Christians in southern Lebanon blamed Hezbollah for their devastation and accused the terrorists of killing villagers attempting to leave the war zone.
Saad Al-Hariri, chairman of the Lebanese Tayyar Al-Mustaqbal (“Current for the Future”) Party and son of murdered Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, said: “These adventurers [i.e. Hezbollah] have placed us in a difficult situation because of their irresponsibility, and in fact, the Saudi position [presented] the present situation as it really is...We demand a reckoning with these adventurers who embroiled Lebanon in a crisis it does not need."
Other Lebanese blame Hezbollah’s benefactor, Syria. Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt told reporters: “The Syrian regime is bearing a grudge [and saying to the Lebanese]: ‘You dared to rebel against [being] a [Syrian] protectorate, [so] this is our reaction. Our answer will be destruction.’”
Former Lebanese President Amine Gemayel stated, “Lebanon…is not willing to be the spearhead of the Arab-Israeli conflict.”
Lebanese Communications Minister Marwan Hamada told Al-Mustaqbal newspaper, “Syrian Vice President Faruq al-Shara gives the commands, Hezbollah carries them out, and Lebanon is the hostage.”
A Beirut-based poster on the Lebanese Forces bulletin board wrote that the Israelis were justified in their undertaking: “We had 1 year to disarm Hizbollah. The Lebanese people couldn't do it…So now the free world is going to do it for us, backed by the UN and the Arab world. The cost will be heavy on Lebanon for sure, but there's no other way.”
Carter lies on. “The result instead has been that broad Arab and worldwide support has been rallied for these groups, while condemnation of both Israel and the United States has intensified.”

On the contrary:

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan’s King Abdullah together condemned Hezbollah’s “adventurism that does not serve Arab interests.” and called on Lebanon "to establish its authority over all of Lebanese territory."
Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal blasted the terrorists’ “unexpected, inappropriate and irresponsible acts” before a meeting of the Arab League, adding, “we cannot simply accept them.”
Saudi Sheikh Al-Muhsin Al-‘Obikan wrote in the London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat: “The capturing of the two Jewish soldiers - which [Hezbollah] thought of as gain - has [actually] led to disaster and to obvious loss. What [we] got in exchange [for the capture] of the Jews [was this]: One of our countries has been entirely destroyed; there have been severe damage to [its] infrastructure, expulsion and starvation of its inhabitants, the killing of many of [its inhabitants], the weakening of the strength of the Muslims, the breaking of their unified position, and division in their ranks.”
Wahhabist Abdullah bin Jabreen, who helped the Saudi government determine when to issue fatwas, announced “The Shari’a position on what is going on” as follows: it is sinful to help, aid, or pray for Hezbollah. “Our advice to the Sunnis is to denounce them and shun those who join them to show their hostility to Islam and to the Muslims.”
Ahmed Al-Jarallah, editor-in-chief of Kuwait's Arab Times wrote, “The operations of Israel in Gaza and Lebanon are in the interest of people of Arab countries and the international community.”
The former president’s blood libel rolls on: “Israel belatedly announced, but did not carry out, a two-day cessation in bombing Lebanon, responding to the global condemnation of an air attack on the Lebanese village of Qana, where 57 civilians were killed this past weekend and where 106 died from the same cause 10 years ago.” It appears, through the work of Robert Spencer in today’s lead story, that the Qana “massacre” was stage managed by Hezbollah; at a minimum, it is open to reasonable doubt.

Finally, Jimmy Carter proposes his solution:

The urgent need in Lebanon is that Israeli attacks stop, the nation's [Lebanon’s] regular military forces control the southern region, Hezbollah cease as a separate fighting force, and future attacks against Israel be prevented. Israel should withdraw from all Lebanese territory, including Shebaa Farms, and release the Lebanese prisoners.

The sentence bears as much resemblance to reality as its slurred run-on sentences do to English (another similarity to Gibson’s drunken tirade). The United Nations considers Shebaa Farms not Lebanese territory but Syrian; thus, the UN certified Israeli withdrawal from all of occupied Lebanon. The number of Lebanese nationals remaining in Israeli jails is between two and four, all terrorists in the mold of Samir Kuntar. Why should they be released instead of, perhaps, executed?

His ceasefire plan would allow Hezbollah to survive infinitely. Lebanon’s army, deeply infiltrated by the terrorists’ Syrian confederates, is weaker than Hezbollah and cannot independently assert control over the south, a necessary condition if future attacks are to “be prevented.”

The champion of Kim il-Sung’s interests warns this ceasefire would be but a “band-aid” to the real problem in the Middle East: Israel and the United States.

“Palestinians,” he whimpers, are “surrounded by a provocative ‘security barrier’ that…fails to bring safety or stability.” Since construction of the security fence, terrorist attacks are down sharply, declining by 90 percent according to some estimates.

“There will be no substantive and permanent peace for any peoples in this troubled region as long as Israel is violating key UN resolutions…by occupying Arab lands and oppressing the Palestinians.” Somehow in Jimmy’s schema, Israeli “oppression” of innocent Arabs – by allowing them suffrage and representation in Knesset – displaced the Palestinian penchant for strapping munitions to preteen shahids and telling them to hug Jewish children as a threat to lasting peace.

He resolves, “Except for mutually agreeable negotiated modifications, Israel's official pre-1967 borders must be honored.” This has long been Israel’s goal: to negotiate for defensible borders approximating those of pre-1967 in return for elusive peace treaties. The Arab Street has shown no interest in the talks, and the Muslim nations would never grant the al-Naqbah defensible boundaries. Ceding the Golan Heights to Syria would mean the resumption of daily bombardments from the north, Haifa everyday. One of Carter’s (many) superior Democratic predecessors, LBJ, acknowledged, “a return to the situation of June 4, 1967, will not bring peace.” The settlements cannot be the cause of war, if the Arab nations attacked before they existed.

In any event, UN Resolution 242 requires no such thing: international law recognizes Israel’s right to keep any land gained in a defensive war, including all of Sinai had it so chosen.

Carter then adds the final villain: he has met the enemy, and it is us. He writes, “A major impediment to progress is Washington's strange policy that dialogue on controversial issues will be extended only as a reward for subservient behavior and will be withheld from those who reject U.S. assertions.” In his view, and that of the Left he represents, Americans are imperialists imposing their will upon innocent brown people who would otherwise frolic amid their liberated olive groves contemplating the beauties of Islamic doctrine. The sooner we (and the Little Satan, Israel) begin rewarding terrorists, the sooner this event can come to be.

How long until Jimmy Carter’s plan produces peace? At least 444 days.

posted August 08, 2006 11:24 AM            

Earlier this month in a Washington Post Op-Ed article Jimmy Carter blamed the current violence in Lebanon and Gaza on Israel, which had purportedly violated “key U.N. resolutions…by occupying Arab lands and oppressing Palestinians.” He got through an entire article without ever mentioning that Lebanon had failed to comply with the 2004 United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559, which called on Lebanon to disarm the terrorist group Hezbollah whose members now sit in its legislature and cabinet.

Last February 20 in another Washington Post piece Mr. Carter attacked Israel for withholding tax revenues from the new Palestinian Authority government following its takeover by the terrorist group Hamas. Mr. Carter described rocket-throwing Hamas as “militants” who might be provoked to cause “devastating consequences” as a result of American “collusion” with Israel.

Days ago President Carter wrote again that Israel should “withdraw from all Lebanese territory, including Shebaa Farms” (a region regarded by the U.N. as Syrian, not Lebanese land).

Too much of a bad thing, these editorials remind us that Mr. Carter has described Hamas murderers as “so-called terrorists. That in a 1996 New York Times Op-Ed piece he called for cutting off all U.S. financial aid to Israel until it gave in to Islamist demands to surrender territory. That the Carter Center in Atlanta, heavily funded by the Saudis and other Muslims, rushed to give its imprimatur to the Hamas victory in the latest Palestinian election, even though nine elected Hamas lawmakers are outlaws imprisoned for terrorism.

It is worth remembering, given Carter’s senescent leftism and the unremitting onslaught of criticism of Israel verging on anti-Semitism, that this man personally destroyed the structure of international security and peace that earlier Presidents of both parties had carefully built.

In the Middle East during the 1960s and 70s the cornerstone of American security was our ally the Shah of Iran. The Shah was heavy-handed, but his government was establishing equal rights for women, modernity, and a friendly open door between America’s culture and the Muslim world. The Shah also provided the oil that kept Israel afloat during Arab oil embargoes of the 1970s.

And under the Shah, Iran was America’s pillar of strength in the oil-rich Persian Gulf region during the Cold War. As such, the Shah was a prime target for subversion by Iran’s neighbor the Soviet Union. And the Shah resisted this by arresting and torturing up to 3,000 Soviet agents in his country because this was a deadly game played for keeps.

Carter, persuaded by leftist advisors that the Shah was therefore an intolerable violator of human rights, withdrew U.S. support from his government. Carter even ordered the Central Intelligence Agency to end bribes paid to the Mullahs to cool their criticism of the Shah in Iran’s mosques. The Shah was toppled and replaced by the theocratic dictatorship the rules today. Among the Ayatollah Khomeini’s first acts was to execute more than 20,000 people, including most of the 3,000 Marxists Carter had been willing to destroy an American ally to help.

Without the Shah to prevent it, war then started between Iran and neighboring Iraq, a war that cost at least 500,000 lives and turned Saddam Hussein’s regime into the planet’s fourth biggest military power, one that used poison gas on both Iranians and its own people.

On Iran’s eastern border, the Soviet Union exploited the chaotic situation to invade Afghanistan, killing many more people and creating highly skilled terrorist Muslim “holy warriors,” some of whom had been mobilized into a group called Al Qaeda led by a radicalized millionaire Saudi playboy named Osama bin Laden.

The new theocratic regime in Iran inspired and still inspires bin Laden and other fanatics to seek the overthrow of all Muslim nations that are friendly towards the West. The defeat the Soviets suffered in Afghanistan (thanks largely to U.S.-supplied Stinger anti-aircraft missiles) convinced bin Laden and others that the U.S. was a paper tiger that could be defeated too.

Jimmy Carter, in other words, is responsible for the end of a modernizing pro-American government in Iran. In fact, as Michael Ledeen has noted, a pledge Carter made to the Ayatollah Khomeini not to intervene in Iran’s internal affairs continues to hamstring U.S. policy towards Iran today.

Because Iran’s fanatical rulers spawned, armed and funded the terrorist group Hezbollah, Jimmy Carter is responsible for the fighting and deaths today in Lebanon. Because Iran has funded and armed Hamas, Carter is largely responsible for the situation today in Gaza.

Jimmy Carter, more than any other single politician alive today, is therefore responsible for global Islamo-fascist terrorism. No wonder he is frantic to take attention away from his own culpability for all this bloodshed and horror by pointing fingers of blame, instead, at others such as Israel. .

But is Mr. Carter merely an idealist, a utopian who made mistakes because he stood for human rights, values and peace? Two things weigh against such exoneration. The first is that Jimmy Carter has never shown remorse, taken responsibility or even acknowledged that his shortsighted simple-minded policies led to these horrors — which are human rights violations many magnitudes greater than anything the Shah of Iran ever came close to committing. The second is that Carter has trekked to Havana to kiss Marxist dictator Fidel Castro on the lips and give propaganda aid and comfort to this mass murderer who had far, far more than 3,000 political prisoners at the time of Carter’s visit.

In his world travels since being removal from office by the voters in 1980, as even the liberal Washington Post has editorialized, Carter’s “willingness to engage with any dictator, no matter how odious, has at times been discomfiting.” What the Post failed to mention is that Jimmy Carter embraces only Marxist, anti-Semitic and anti-American dictators. If only the Shah had instead been a Marxist friend of the Soviet Union and renamed his nation the Peoples Socialist Republic of Iran, Jimmy Carter probably would have ceased all criticism of the Shah’s political prisoners and other human rights violations and the Ayatollah might never have come to power.

The Nobel Peace Prize committee credited Mr. Carter with one major accomplishment — brokering the 1978 Middle East Peace agreements between Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Jimmy Carter, wrote Associated Press reporter Doug Mellgren, “was left out due to a technicality — he was not nominated in time.” But is this true, thereby making Carter’s 2002 Peace Prize the mere correction of a past oversight? Both Sadat and Begin were courageous statesmen who risked much to make this peace agreement. Begin angered his own political base by returning the battle-won Sinai to Egypt. Sadat, as he knew likely, would be assassinated for making peace with Israel. By comparison Jimmy Carter risked nothing and did almost nothing, except serve beverages and snacks to two statesmen who had come to Camp David already carrying the outline of their peace agreement.

And apparently the five members of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee weren’t even sure that Carter deserved it in 2002. Honoring Carter, said Committee chairman Gunnar Berge, “should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current [Bush] administration has taken. It’s a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the United States.”

“A ‘kick in the leg,’” reported Reuters journalist Alister Doyle, “is a Norwegian phrase meaning ‘a slap in the face.’” So the prize was intended not to honor Jimmy Carter so much as to insult and slap in the face the current American President George W. Bush for not following Carter’s policies of weakness, vacillation, and appeasement towards anti-American forces in the world.

Concerning the Carter Peace Prize and word that it was given to denigrate President George W. Bush’s pro-Israel, anti-Iraq policies, editorialized the otherwise-liberal New York Daily News, “Excuse us if we detect a whiff of anti-Semitism wafting from Oslo. It wouldn’t be the first time, Norwegian Nazis having happily collaborated with Hitler.”

“Jimmy Carter’s post-presidential career,” observed Slate Magazine’s Chris Suellentrop, “has been characterized by a seemingly irresistible impulse to continue the presidency that American voters ended in 1980. Nowhere is this tendency more evident that in Carter’s free-lance diplomatic efforts, which have been governed by an anti-democratic attitude.”

In November 1990, for example, the first Bush Administration was lobbying fellow United Nations Security Council members for a declaration empowering U.S. action to push invading Iraqi troops out of newly-occupied Kuwait in what would become the Gulf War.

As then-National Security Advisor General Brent Scowcroft recounted in the 1998 memoir A World Transformed co-authored with President George H.W. Bush, the Canadian Prime Minister sent them a letter just received from Jimmy Carter. The ex-President had written to all Security Council members asking them to reject the U.S. request for an ultimatum to Iraq and instead to support the perpetual delay proposed by the Arab League.

“It was an unbelievable letter, asking the other members of the council to vote against his own country,” wrote Scowcroft. “We found out about it only when one of the recipients sent us a copy…. It seemed to me that if there was ever a violation of the Logan Act prohibiting diplomacy by private citizens, this was it.”

In 1994 President Clinton “dispatched Carter to defuse an impending war with North Korea over that country’s nuclear program.” In violation of his directions and diplomatic protocol, wrote Suellentrop, Carter “conducted some free-lance diplomacy, this time on CNN. After meeting with Kim Il Sung, Carter went live on CNN International without telling the administration. His motive: Undermine the Clinton administration’s efforts to impose U.N. sanctions on North Korea.”

Of this incident, which opened the way for this Marxist dictatorship to acquire nuclear weapons, notes Douglas Brinkley in his history of Carter since 1980 called The Unfinished Presidency, a Clinton Cabinet member referred to Jimmy Carter as a “treasonous prick.”

posted August 08, 2006 01:44 PM            

I have been contemplating this question since Hezbollah kidnapped the Israeli Soldiers. Why is it the Liberals seem to come out against Israel when they KNOW what the Muslim terrorists are doing? Why does it seem that the Liberals, especially here, seem to hold Israel responsible for the conflict when it was Hezbollah that pushed the conflict forward?

I wonder if it is because Israel is an ally to the US and it seems that most Lefties HATE the US or do they just hate Jewish people? How many times have we read here people crying over Muslim civilians that were killed and they blame it on Israel, but they fail to see that Hezbollah CAUSED the innocents to be killed? How is it they have no tears for the Israeli civilians that die but instead blame it on Israel for fighting back?

They post doctored photos and call them real and when faced with the real truth that the terrorists are using propaganda to sway public thinking, they go silent and pretend they didn't see it. When they do speak it is the same old Mantra "Blame Bush for all the problems, if it wasn't for him we wouldn't have terrorism. Blame Bush for Hezbollah and Hamas and 9-11... it is all his fault".

Seriously, I would love for one of them to answer what makes the life of a Lebanese person worth more than an Israeli? They should both be equal.

------------------
The democratic world believes that it is not the terrorists that are to blame, but us. Us, the westerners.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And the sooner you eliminate this misconception from your minds, the better.
We are NOT to blame. It is the freaking terrorists and the freaking terrorists only!!!! They are the bad guys. They do not understand concepts like peace, democracy, and respect for human life. They are, pure and simPle, EVIL!!!!! Behind all their political manipulations, if you carefully look at the actions of these MONSTERS, they are EVIL!!

http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000489.htm

posted August 08, 2006 03:00 PM            

This is the same brain dead crowd who ignored Saddam's slaughter of up to 2 million Muslims over the years and attempted to keep Saddam in power.

Their compassion...which they attempt to wear on their sleeves is phony as a 3 dollar bill.

For instance, they have and had no compassion for the women and children Saddam and his thugs butchered...but claim to have infinite compassion for those killed since the US and coalition forces removed Saddam and his thugs. It never seems to occur to the brain dead that the terrorists whom they would protect...by having the US withdraw from Iraq are the VERY SAME scum who are deliberately targeting civilians and causing most of those deaths among Iraqi civilians.

Of course, they also ignore the Israeli civilian deaths and play up the Lebanese deaths...even when it's been proven now that those casualty figures are bogus and much of the reporting is staged. For instance, leftists would have everyone believe all those deaths are civilians...when it's clear they include many Hezbollah thug terrorists.

The main goal of leftists is to oppose America which leftists despise. These accidental Americans will denigrate any friend of America to get at their main enemy. In this case, it's Israel...playing the "Little Satan" role to America's "Big Satan". To leftists, we're both evil.

Leftists couldn't wait to announce and cheer the deaths of American military personnel...at the 500, 1000, 1500, 2000 and 2500 marks. These are some really sick puppies. In some cases and on some of the malignant troll leftist websites, it was said our military personnel got what they deserved....said not by our enemies but by American leftists...accidental Americans.

To these brain dead leftist morons, it doesn't matter who started what, doesn't matter who is doing what. To leftists, their enemy is whoever happens to be an ally of the United States in any conflict or disagreement.

In this case, it just happens to be Israel.

That these leftists take their cue from the writings of Karl Marx...who was a racist, was a promoter of genocide and totally insane by any civilized standards, matters not.

Leftists are racists, they're anti-Semitic at their core and they're now showing their true colors.

There is no compassion there; there's merely a political agenda which should be clear for all to see by now....and that agenda is "get America". Get America because America rejects their Marxist political agenda, rejects their gutter values, rejects their traitorous political candidates and is moving to the right.

As America has moved right, leftists have gone into full screech mode.

Someone here said it didn't matter if the pictures coming out of Lebanon were doctored and/or staged. So, it's clear we aren't dealing with reasonable people. There seems to be no intelligent life on the left. The lights are on but no one is home

posted August 08, 2006 04:01 PM            

I am appalled at the words I read concerning people stating it doesn't matter of the photo's are doctored to reflect death where death does not exist, and if it does, it is on a much smaller scale.

I have long felt that many of the leftest twits here that count every Soldiers death, does so in order to wave it in the face of America. Instead of every death causing a tear, every death makes them salivate at the chance to post how evil America is for sending our babies to die. It never occurs to them that it is a 100% volunteer military.

It never occurs to them that Saddam killed millions of people and like you stated, many women and children included. They only cry now, when women and children are being killed by insurgents - once again, blaming it on America.

They can't wait for us to post, so that they can cut and paste what they feel is inflammatory and concentrate on the inane rather than the truth that is right in front of them. What is it I once read from a poster "Why should I post facts, I don't even believe them". LMAO...

I sometimes feel like I am hitting a brick wall when talking to some of these black-hole for brains leftests. How can they not see the big picture? How do they not realize that THEY are just as much an infidel and a conservative as far as the extremists are concerned?

Must be nice living in such a wacked out dream world. Thank God for reasonable people like us.

Oh man.. I can just see the posts coming at us now after they read this thread LMAO....

Bring it on - I have enough arrows in my quiver and I KNOW jhwops claws and teeth are sharp enough to tear any one a new... well... rear entry

------------------
The democratic world believes that it is not the terrorists that are to blame, but us. Us, the westerners.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And the sooner you eliminate this misconception from your minds, the better.
We are NOT to blame. It is the freaking terrorists and the freaking terrorists only!!!! They are the bad guys. They do not understand concepts like peace, democracy, and respect for human life. They are, pure and simPle, EVIL!!!!! Behind all their political manipulations, if you carefully look at the actions of these MONSTERS, they are EVIL!!

http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000489.htm

posted August 09, 2006 12:16 PM            

In my book, you and your radical leftist friends, including Jimmy Carter, John Murtha, the traitor John Kerry, Russ Feingold and others in the I hate America club are the terrorists best friends.

When you supported the Ramsey Clark petition..(you remember Ramsey Clark don't you Mirandee? Ramsey Clark is the spokesman and guru of International ANSWER, the communist front organization for the Workers World Party...who sponsored those protest marches...and whose petition you swooned over), to impeach Bush...before the Iraq war you were supporting terrorists and communists allied with the terrorists...and they and you still are allied with terrorists, still supporting terrorists by attempting to hand them a victory they can't win on the battlefield by withdrawing US forces from Iraq.

You and your radical leftist friends are giving aid and comfort to terrorists just as you gave aid and comfort to Saddam before he was removed from power.

You and your leftist friends are contributing to the continuation of the war by giving terrorists the hope that if they can just hold on, your propaganda campaign against Bush will finally pay off and US forces will be withdrawn from Iraq.

You and your leftist friends are causing the deaths of US military forces AND those Iraqi civilians you SAY you have so much compassion for...by giving hope to the terrorists that if they kill enough Americans and Iraqis they can win the propaganda war you and your radical leftist friends started.

You and your radical leftist friends gave Saddam the idea he could skate one more time, ignore the UN Resolutions and continue to thumb his nose at the Sanctions, the Resolutions and the coalition Bush, Blair and Howard put together to take him down.

You and your radical leftist friends are as much responsible for the Iraq War as Saddam...because you gave him the false impression he could weather the storm, continue in his murder, torture, rape and abuse of Iraqi citizens...protected by the so called anti-war crowd with their petitions, marches and protests and that Bush would be forced by public opinion to abandon the plan to remove him.

You and your radical leftist friends were supporters of Saddam and you're supporters of al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and all the others who share a common enemy with you, the United States.

Contained within this article is a comment by the leader of International Answer. It will answer a lot of questions about the true nature and intent of those who say they oppose the Iraq War..that's you Mirandee, Rainbow and all the other America haters from CE.

The Anti-War Warriors
By Christopher Orlet
Published 8/9/2006 12:06:50 AM

Three years ago the head of Amnesty International warned the anti-war left that it must confront terror with the same zeal that it battles the Bush Administration -- or risk becoming irrelevant. Three years later and the anti-war groups have not only refused to "confront terror," but they are increasingly and enthusiastically giving their support to terrorist groups.

The more radical elements of the anti-war movement have never been -- strictly speaking -- about opposing the war in Lebanon or Iraq or Vietnam for that matter. Indeed the real issue has never been war at all, but in opposing U.S. and its ally Israel's power at every turn. Yet even that villainy isn't enough for today's anti-war warriors. Today's peacenik must actively support the enemies of America, including terrorist organizations.

Of course, the anti-war movement has itself long been allied with terrorist groups. It was leaders and members of the Students for a Democratic Society that splintered and became the Weathermen (a radical group of communists whose stated purpose was to carry out terrorist attacks to achieve the revolutionary overthrow of the U.S. government, and capitalism as a whole). But even in the darkest days of the Vietnam War there were no public rallies in support of the North Vietnamese or the Viet Cong. Indeed, supporting the communists -- as did Hanoi Jane Fonda -- was certain to lead to universal castigation and denouncement. My, how times have changed. Rather than existing on the underground fringe, today's supporters of terrorist groups are happily rallying before the TV news cameras.

This brings us to the events of this past week in central Londonistan where tens of thousands of Britains -- many British Muslims -- paraded through the streets, waving Hezbollah flags and chanting, "We are all Hezbollah!" And "Bush: World's #1 Terrorist." The powwow was organized by the Stop the War Coalition, a group formed to oppose the U.S.-led war on terror, and which seems intent on importing the tensions and conflict of the Middle East to Europe and Main Street USA -- not least by inviting Jew-hating rabblerousers as guest speakers. Such rallies are taking place all over the free world. A July 18 event in suburban Detroit eerily resembled a Nazi rally circa 1938. One noted speaker, Osama Siblani of the Congress of Arab-American Organizations, whooped, "We know that the president is being bought by the Zionist lobby! We know that the Congress is being bought by the Zionist lobby!" When a Muslim speaker unveiled a portrait of Hezbollah's Terrorist-in-chief Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, the crowd erupted into extravagent hoots and hollars.

Refresh my memory: isn't Hezbollah a terrorist organanization whose stated primary goal is to "destroy Israel?"

I haven't the space to document all of Hezbollah's atrocities -- there are simply too many -- but here are a few Golden Oldies: Between 1982 and 1992, Hezbollah kidnapped about 30 westerners, including the Archbishop of Canterbury's special envoy Terry Waite. At the same time Hezbollah kidnapped and tortured to death U.S. Marine Colonel William R. Higgins and CIA station chief in Beirut William Francis Buckley, and was responsible for the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut (63 killed); the 1983 suicide truck bombing in Beirut (241 U.S. Marines killed); the 1984 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in East Beirut (20 Lebanese and two U.S. soldiers dead); the 1985 hijacking of TWA Flight 847; the 1992 Israeli Embassy bombing in Buenos Aires, (29 dead), and the attack two years later on a Buenos Aires Jewish community center (85 dead).

***This is the comment from International Answer...the group who floated the petition you and Rainbow supported Mirandee

But enough. The pattern is clear. A year ago, a prominent anti-war organizer wrote a piece urging "solidarity" with the thugs killing American troops and murdering their neighbors in Iraq. John Catalinotto of Act Now to Stop War and Racism (ANSWER) and the Workers World Party, wrote that "the U.S. anti-war movement, especially the serious opponents of imperialism, think of the Iraqi resistance as an important ally. The duty of the movement here is to join the struggle to make the continued U.S. occupation of Iraq impossible and to do this in solidarity with the Iraq sisters and brothers who have stopped the empire in its tracks." Simply being against the war in Iraq or in Lebanon is not enough. One must actively come out in support of the "resistance," the codename for terrorists. Considering the Sunni insurgency is led by Saddam Hussein's former fascist Baathists and Al Qaeda in Iraq, the anti-war gang doesn't seem too picky about who it crawls into bed with: terrorists, fascists, communists, it hardly matters. All that matters is that the U.S. is defeated.

One can object to Israel's military action in Lebanon without supporting the terrorist organization Hezbollah. That's the anti-Israel defense. We're not pro-Hezbollah. We simply oppose Israel's disproportionate response to Hezbollah's attacks and the killing of Lebanese civilians. But when one parades down the streets of London identifying with a terrorist group, when one invites anti-Semitic loudmouths to spew their vile propoganda at your "anti-war" rally, that, my friend, is taking sides. That's being "pro-war." And that's being pro-terror. More and more, that's what the anti-war movement has become.
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10199

posted August 09, 2006 01:06 PM              

quote:

---

If you mean Bush is the terrorists best friend because he's sent so many of them to paradise...and their 72 virgins...then perhaps you're right.

---

A predictable response from a person who sees violence, death and destruction as the only answer to all the world's problems.

Bush cannot hold a candle to man like Jimmy Carter. Carter is still working all over the world to help others and bring equality and peace to all. He will to his dying day. He goes to Africa which the neo-cons would rather not think about because they don't have any resources we want in Africa. If Bush did, as you claim, oust Hussein because he murdered his own people and was an evil dictator, why are we not doing the same thing in Africa where millions of innocent people have been killed by the government and are starving and dying?

What has Bush contributed to the world except for war after war, death and destruction? Just because Bush places noble causes on what he does, do not make his acts any less evil.

Tell me, Jwhop, why do you find it necessary to cut down Jimmy Carter? Bet I know the answer to that because it is a typical and predictable Republican Neo-Con practice. Is it because he is the only former president to have the guts to recently chastise Bush for what he is doing in the Middle East? With good reason. All the efforts and all his work in negotiating and working towards a peaceful resolution to the problems between Israel and Palestine and the Middle East in general have all been undone by Bush and his cowboy, gung ho, strong arming style of world diplomacy.

Jimmy Carter = the good (morality, peace and equality for all people)

George W. Bush = the evil ( killing, violence and destruction and unequality in favor of the aristocracy.) The real incompetent boob.

posted August 09, 2006 06:43 PM            

From that single act, Carter is responsible for more death and destruction than most ruthless tyrants could manage in a lifetime.

Take Jimmy and stuff him where the sun don't shine. Carter can build all the homes for the poor, make all the peace speeches he wants but he couldn't get even for all the death and destruction he caused if he lived a thousand years.

Carter should be censured by Congress for all his anti America statements he's made and is making...when out of the Untied States talking to our enemies.