How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Impeach Bush   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Impeach Bush

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Jaime Fradera
Senior Member
since 11-25-2000
Posts 582
Where no tyranny is tolerable


0 posted 04-18-2008 07:05 PM       View Profile for Jaime Fradera   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Jaime Fradera


All you people who want to have President Bush impeached and the Bush cabinet prosecuted, by a Sweedish judge in The Hague, for their unspeakable war crimes;
What's taking you so long?

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


1 posted 04-19-2008 04:20 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Mr. Fradera,

                 I don't understand how I can respond to a question like that with honesty and still offer a response that's at the same time generous and open-hearted.  I'm not good at combining these things at this point.  The Mahayana Buddhists would point out that his difficulty in feeling compassion would be punishment enough, though it's unlikely he would ever wake up enough to feel that.  For myself, I hope that his conversion has given him something of deep and lasting value to sustain him.  It's my problem, I believe, that I have not yet been able to sustain compassion for him for any length of time.  He certainly doesn't seem to be affected.

     If I go on much longer, I'm afraid I'll slip into anger, which doesn't help except for the moment.

     The Democrats are proving are hardly a stern bunch at this point in time and they seem to lack the spine to stand up to the Republican minority for fear of the Filibuster.  It seems late in the administration to force the issue over mere high crimes and misdemeanors, potential treason on the part of the vice president and things of that nature, such as the assault on civil liberties and the constitution, not to mention the deaths of a hundred thousand Iraqis and the wounding of an additional unknown number.   These things have moved many of the Democrats, but not to effective action.

     These issues have not moved the Republicans at all, it should be said.  It seems their chief motivation for the impeachment of the last president was that he had the gall to desecrate a tobacco product.  Any Republican will tell you that you can do most anything except mess with big tobacco, and I guess they felt compelled to prove that.

     I doubt it was really lying about an affair, since half the Republicans in congress had done the same thing over the years, and for the same reason.  To preserve a valued marriage.  Democrats too, probably, to be fair.

     But once Clinton messed with that cigar, I do believe his fate was sealed.

     You won't see a Republican in Congress, either branch, get anywhere near as stirred up about a genocide as you will about that slur on Big Tobacco.  No sir.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


2 posted 04-19-2008 07:44 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

True enough, Bob. Of course they may get a little upset about lying to a grand jury but, as Hillary is proving, lying to the Clintons is more of an art form than of an actual no-no. Besides, using your litmus test, since most if not all Senators have lied in their lifetimes, then that should be no big deal, either, I suppose. The cigar was to slick Wille what the income tax evasion charge was to Capone.  

Jaime, in answer to your question, I have it on good authority that is exactly what Jimmy Carter is discussing with Hamas.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


3 posted 04-19-2008 04:33 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

JERUSALEM - Hamas bombers attacked an Israeli-Gaza border crossing under the cover of fog Saturday, detonating two jeeps made to look like Israeli military vehicles and packed with hundreds of pounds of explosives.
The twin blasts, just hours before the Jewish Passover holiday, wounded 13 Israeli soldiers in what Hamas said was an attempt to break the nearly yearlong blockade of the territory. Four Hamas assailants died, Israeli officials said.

Meanwhile, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter met with senior Hamas leaders in Damascus, Syria, for a second day to hear their views, defying U.S. and Israeli warnings that doing so would grant the group legitimacy. The U.S. and Israel have labeled Hamas a terrorist organization.


Well, maybe the peanut picker hasn't gotten around to discussing it yet. Hamas seem to be busy with other things.....
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


4 posted 04-19-2008 05:27 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



It is good to see you back, Balladeer.
Seoulair
Senior Member
since 03-27-2008
Posts 776
Seoul S.Korea


5 posted 04-19-2008 05:49 PM       View Profile for Seoulair   Email Seoulair   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Seoulair

quote:
Meanwhile, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter met with senior Hamas leaders in Damascus, Syria, for a second day to hear their views, defying U.S. and Israeli warnings that doing so would grant the group legitimacy. The U.S. and Israel have labeled Hamas a terrorist organization.


The world top politician has always worked like this. And Jimmy Carter is very brave because he can be kidnapped or killed.( i  guess that his action is passed/approved by US Government)
I consider that it is good intentioned.
nobody likes war.


Not A Poet
Member Elite
since 11-03-1999
Posts 4427
Oklahoma, USA


6 posted 04-20-2008 01:08 AM       View Profile for Not A Poet   Email Not A Poet   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Not A Poet's Home Page   View IP for Not A Poet

Carter is grandstanding, trying everything he can to do something to reduce the stench of being the worst president of the 20th century. And no, his visit was not approved by our government. Citizens do have certain rights though and one of those is to travel almost anywhere except those few places where it is forbidden. He needs a straight jacket and a rubber room.
Seoulair
Senior Member
since 03-27-2008
Posts 776
Seoul S.Korea


7 posted 04-20-2008 01:31 PM       View Profile for Seoulair   Email Seoulair   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Seoulair

If not sending by US Government, then I think that Mr. Carter's action is heroic without Government providing security.

How many enemy organization  does US have? How many related offspring are study in US soil? (this sounded scary after 911).

How do we know that Mr.Carter was not saying" If you guys stop attacking Israel, we'll let all your children go to Harvard?"

When GH Bush Was an Ambassador in Red China, GW Bush was rumored dating a Chinese girl..his first love.  Not very long ago, marriage was a  critical way to make peace between anything.  We all know it and Mr.Carter is not going to have a engagement there, why worry?
Wish Peace for the middle east. (if not follow the Bible then follow humanity)
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


8 posted 04-20-2008 06:51 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


     I haven't actually read anything by President Carter, though he has apparently written at length about the middle east.  Have either of you, Mr. Fradera, or Balladeer?  My understanding of President Carter's role in a number of countries across the world over the last 20 years or more is that he has been invited in to help supervise elections in countries which have fear of electoral fraud.  Even in countries where there is little or no trust for anybody, President Carter is widely seen as an honest broker across the globe.  Am I wrong in remembering that our current government made use of his services in the Iraqi elections?  Calling him names and suggesting he be locked up in a rubber room suggests a study of history may be useful, and not simply from a limited basis.  Mr. Carter also suggested that we put a massive amount of american effort into alternative energy research and production, and that we fund it if necessary with a tax on gasoline to increase the gas mileage on cars.

     I don't know if that would have prevented much of our current imbroglio or not, but it may well have had a positive impact, don't you think?

     Those who believe Mr. Carter to be the worst president in American history or even in the 20th century could be given a stiff argument by those who would name President Hoover or President Harding for the honor.  Much to the dismay of some of my Republican friends, I believe the glory should be bestowed elsewhere.  Until we actually have agreed upon criteria for measuring this dubious award, which I doubt we might find, the honor seems only an exercise in pointless venom.

     As for Hamas, I don't like them.

     However, nobody asked me if I liked them.  Liking somebody is not a necessary precondition for talking to somebody, now, is it?  In fact, while talking to your friends may be interesting and fun, there may actually be more useful results that come from talking to people you don't like.  Certainly the United States and Israel consider Hamas a terrorist organization.  They are also the legally elected government of the Palestinians.  That means they are legitimate, in the political sense.  They speak for the people, at least for now.  Are we supposed to say, "No, they don't."  

     Lest the reason for this be entirely lost, they are very good about supplying medical care, housing and education to the population and there is probably less graft involved with them than with the PLO.  They get great local PR.  The Israelis don't help their own cause when they blow up buildings and make retaliatory raids.
There's a fair amount of collateral damage.  Israelis and Palestinians, each uses the damage inflicted by the other to justify the next damage they inflict.  Each feels the other has inflicted a series of long ago outrages that justifies the beginning of the conflict.  Each side sees no way to forgive the other.  This seems to me to be a sort of hell on earth.

     If we are a democratic country, we have an obligation to deal with them.  Are we supposed to say, "No, you don't speak for the people; we'll tell you who speaks for your people."  When the old Soviet Union used to do that, we called those Puppet Governments, and we despised them.  

     Before the current state of Israel was recognized as a legitimate government on its own, many of the elements of the current government were called terrorists by Great Britain.  By current standards, I suppose the definition fit.  Many people were killed.  British, Arabs and Jews.  The rancor of the settlement of that quarrel was so horrible it has still not been settled.

     It was the difficulty in carrying out the conversation to a natural and decent conclusion that has landed us in this part of an ongoing quarrel.  There is enough bad behavior for everybody to gorge on and still to have leftovers to take home from the party.  And I'm talking about their own bad behavior.  Not talking doesn't seem to work terribly well.  If Carter's willing to act as a fair broker between parties willing to talk, I can contain my disappointment over any success he happens to achieve.  How about you?

     If he fails, what have we lost?  The situation is unchanged.

     And you may remember the negotiations between the Reagan election team and the Iranians prior to the 1980 elections, not sanctioned by the government,  that turned out to be the beginning of the "Arms for Hostages" deal. President Reagan first made a speech saying that stories of this deal were absolutely untrue; but in a later speech was forced to admit he knew it was true; had known it at the time he made the first speech, but felt in his heart it couldn't be true, so that was what he went with.

     President Carter's being honest about what he's doing.  Which is pretty much why folks consider him a fair broker and pretty much why a lot of people and governments wouldn't touch the current American government with a ten foot pole.  If the current American government were worthy of trust, folks, there probably wouldn't have to be a Jimmy Carter out there, would there?  We'd have folks coming to Camp David.

    
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


9 posted 04-20-2008 11:20 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Was Carter worse than Harding or Hoover? I honestly can't say. I lived through Carter but, fortunately, am not old enough to have experienced the other two.  I can cite two encyclopedias, however....

Encyclopedia Britannica

in full  James Earl Carter, Jr.   39th president of the United States (1977–81), who served as the nation's chief executive during a time of serious problems at home and abroad. His perceived inability to deal successfully with those problems led to an overwhelming defeat in his bid for reelection. After leaving office he embarked on a career of diplomacy and advocacy, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace in 2002.


Encyclopedia Americana

On assuming office in 1977, President Carter inherited an economy that was slowly emerging from a recession. He had severely criticized former President Ford for his failures to control inflation and relieve unemployment, but after four years of the Carter presidency, both inflation and unemployment were considerably worse than at the time of his inauguration. The annual inflation rate rose from 4.8% in 1976 to 6.8% in 1977, 9% in 1978, 11% in 1979, and hovered around 12% at the time of the 1980 election campaign. Although Carter had pledged to eliminate federal deficits, the deficit for the fiscal year 1979 totaled $27.7 billion, and that for 1980 was nearly $59 billion. With approximately 8 million people out of work, the unemployment rate had leveled off to a nationwide average of about 7.7% by the time of the election campaign, but it was considerably higher in some industrial states.


What are and have been his views on the Middle East?

WND Exclusive TROUBLE IN THE HOLY LAND
Carter to Leno: Treatment
of Palestinians 'horrible'
Jimmy fails to mention onslaught
of terrorist attacks against Israelis
Posted: December 12, 2006
4:20 am Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com

Without mentioning the onslaught of attacks by Palestinian terrorists, former President Jimmy Carter told a national audience watching the "Tonight Show with Jay Leno" there is "horrible persecution" of Palestinians at the hands of Israelis, and he is urging a return to peace talks between the residents of the embattled region.
Carter blames Israel for Mideast conflict
'Domination' over Palestinians 'atrocious,' ex-prez tells 'Good Morning America'
Posted: November 27, 2006
3:25 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com


Former President Carter at 2004 Democratic convention
In some of the harshest and one-sided language he has used to date, former Democratic President Jimmy Carter called Israeli "domination" over Palestinians "atrocious" in an interview today on ABC's "Good Morning America."

Carter said there was "no doubt now that a minority of Israelis are perpetuating apartheid on the people in Palestine, the Palestinian people."

Carter called Israel's occupation the "prime cause" of continuing violence in the Middle East.
Middle East Quarterly

Jimmy Carter's engagement in foreign affairs as a former president is unprecedented in U.S. history. Because he regards the Arab-Israeli conflict as among Washington's most important foreign policy topics, he has written more than two dozen articles and commentaries about the conflict, eight in the past year alone. In these publications, Carter uses his credibility as a former president, Nobel laureate, and key player in the September 1978 Camp David accords and the Egypt-Israel peace treaty to unfold his set of truths and often to criticize U.S. policy. He relishes the role of elder statesman and believes that with his accrued wisdom and experience, he can contribute to solutions.

But Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,[1] Carter's twenty-first book and his second to focus on the Arab-Israeli conflict, is deficient. He does what no non-fiction author should ever do: He allows ideology or opinion to get in the way of facts. While Carter says that he wrote the book to educate and provoke debate, the narrative aims its attack toward Israel, Israeli politicians, and Israel's supporters. It contains egregious errors of both commission and omission. To suit his desired ends, he manipulates information, redefines facts, and exaggerates conclusions. Falsehoods, when repeated and backed by the prestige of Carter's credentials, can comprise an erroneous baseline for shaping and reinforcing attitudes and policymaking. Rather than bring peace, they can further fuel hostilities, encourage retrenchment, and hamper peacemaking.


"Certainly the United States and Israel consider Hamas a terrorist organization. " - BobK

Perhaps that has something to do with their suicide bombers, thousands of missile launches into civilian neighborhoods, and things like that, ya think? Yes, they are elected - so was Hitler, Castro, Milosovich and Hussein.  If you can point out one instance of a Jewish suicide bomber, a suicide children's training camp,  initial missile attacks and bombings not retalitory conducted by Israel, i would be happy to see it. Good luck.

" If Carter's willing to act as a fair broker between parties willing to talk, I can contain my disappointment over any success he happens to achieve" - BobK

If you think Hamas is willing to talk, there is a lot of swampland down here I can let you have for a song. Hamas is interested in having Jimmy come by to give them a little credibility that they are not the terrorist organization they are. Why would they not want to have an ex-president on their side who has publicly proclaimed that Israel is the real bad guy? Let's wait and see what success he has, shall we? I hope it's more than he had with the Iranians during the hostage crisis in his presidency and more than he had when he decide to visit Castro over governmental objections.


Besides, he gave Michael Moore a bearhug and a seat next to him at the DNC....that says enough to me

Seoulair
Senior Member
since 03-27-2008
Posts 776
Seoul S.Korea


10 posted 04-20-2008 11:49 PM       View Profile for Seoulair   Email Seoulair   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Seoulair

From the reading of Truman(biography) and Kissinger( biography) I know that US Government has a very "balanced" policy toward middle east. There are oil, the tortured Jews in WW2, the opinion of Many US Christian (relevant to election) to  consider. (interestingly not the opinion of US Jews)
  
Do you think that Israel is not able to solve all by the support of US? But, it is simply not allowed to "win". Think of the fate of the Third army of Egypt.


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


11 posted 04-20-2008 11:54 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Carter's distrust of the U.S. Jewish community and other supporters of Israel runs deep. According to former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, "Carter's feelings on Israel were always ambivalent. On the one hand, he felt Israel was being intransigent; on the other, he genuinely had an attachment to the country as the ‘land of the Bible.'"[8]

In a 1991 research interview with Carter for my book Heroic Diplomacy: Sadat, Kissinger, Carter, Begin and the Quest for Arab-Israeli Peace,[9] Carter recollected that:

    [Vice president] Fritz Mondale was much more deeply immersed in the Jewish organization leadership than I was. That was an alien world to me. They [American Jews] didn't support me during the presidential campaign [that] had been predicated greatly upon Jewish money ... Almost all of them were supportive of Scoop Jackson—Scoop Jackson was their spokesman … their hero. So I was looked upon as an alien challenger to their own candidate. You know, I don't mean unanimously but ... overwhelmingly. So I didn't feel obligated to them or to labor unions and so forth. Fritz … was committed to Israel … It was an act just like breathing to him—it wasn't like breathing to me. So I was willing to break the shell more than he was.[10]

The gap between many American Jews and Carter grew during his presidency as Carter increased pressure on Jerusalem. In the 1980 general election, Carter received a lower proportion of Jewish votes than any Democratic presidential candidate since 1920.
http://www.meforum.org/article/1633
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


12 posted 04-21-2008 12:21 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Balladeer,

     I'm afraid I'll have to try to deal with your admirable posting over a period of time because it deserves a more thoughtful response than I can muster on the spot here.

     A few off the cuff things, though.  The point is not whether the Israelis initiated a bomb blast or a rocket attack.  What I see or you see doesn't matter here.  What matters is what the Israelis and the Palestinians see.  (The Christian Science Monitor has generally good coverage of the conflict and is worth looking at sometimes, by the way.)  Each of them sees the other as having started each particular incident or as having provoked it in some fashion.  I made that point in my previous pasting.  You aren't obligated to agree to it, but I suspect that you might imagine if you think about it that it makes more sense than one party simply thinking that they're evil and for no reason wants to commit atrocities upon the nice folks across the street.  

     I mentioned in my posting that I didn't like Hamas particularly.  I don't know if I said that they were a terrorist organization.  I did say that many elements of the current government of Israel were terrorists, having belonged to the Stern gang and some of the other far out branches of the Jewish independence movement of the 1940s.  I would say that many of the Hamas people are the same sort of terrorists.  How they would work out after a peace settlement would be interesting to see.
So, yes Hamas is an organization that supports terrorism.
Did you also look at some of the other activities Hamas supports?

     They're helping directly in ways that nobody else seems to be.  As the old commercial used to say, "Stop! Certs is a candy mint AND a breath mint!"  And so it may be with Hamas.  They didn't get elected on fear.

     Also many people believe that being a Jew and being a Zionist are the same thing.  This is not always the case.  Many Jews are not Zionists and some of them live in Israel.
Carter probably did more for the resolution of Arab Israeli hostilities than any American President before or since.  The concords between Egypt and Israel are still holding thanks to the 1978 Camp David Accords.

     Why would I see an incident of a Jewish suicide bomber.  Muslims have a long tradition of martyrdom and seeking it out and Jews do not.  Martyrdom seems to look for them, doesn't it?  I do remember A Jewish Major attacking a group of muslims in prayer at the tomb of Abraham a few years back and killing upwards of 30 folks.  Perhaps I have things switched around.

     Best for Now,  BobK.


Seoulair
Senior Member
since 03-27-2008
Posts 776
Seoul S.Korea


13 posted 04-21-2008 12:38 AM       View Profile for Seoulair   Email Seoulair   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Seoulair

Mr.Carter may have different opinion on The issue on Israel. But I indeed had read some very manipulated data of middle east injured and death in Time magazine.
War is not allowed in there. So, the only thing one can do is to make peace. This is two sides work.
If there is not Hamas. there will be kamas. only when all are wiped out but wait a minute,  we don't want the whole middles east Arab to unit to fight.
So, It is good to have some one who have hope for peace.
And If God allows.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


14 posted 04-21-2008 09:04 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Seoulair, from the understanding I get from the devoutly religious, God does not allow or disallow. He grants free will and lets us silly humans sleep (or die) in the beds of our own making. I doubt that a God would be "allowing" millions to die in Darfur and other places of hunger and planned extermination...and yet they do, don't they?

Bob, I'm off to work but I'll respond later. With a little research I believe I can show time lines where attacks by Hamas were initiated, not as retaliation, but by their own initiative. I believe I can also show that an organization that sets up suicide bomber training camps for women and children and then sends them out to bomb civilians can be labeled a terrorist organization without much imagination and without going back to the 1940's to try to paint Israel with the same brush.

Have a good Monday
Seoulair
Senior Member
since 03-27-2008
Posts 776
Seoul S.Korea


15 posted 04-21-2008 10:50 AM       View Profile for Seoulair   Email Seoulair   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Seoulair

quote:
Seoulair, from the understanding I get from the devoutly religious, God does not allow or disallow. He grants free will and lets us silly humans sleep (or die) in the beds of our own making. I doubt that a God would be "allowing" millions to die in Darfur and other places of hunger and planned extermination...and yet they do, don't they?

I absolutely agree. But many times people do it in god's/God's names. And many believe it.

[This message has been edited by Seoulair (04-21-2008 12:06 PM).]

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


16 posted 04-21-2008 12:40 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

True enough...but doing something in God's name has little to do with the statement "and if God allows", I believe.
Seoulair
Senior Member
since 03-27-2008
Posts 776
Seoul S.Korea


17 posted 04-21-2008 12:53 PM       View Profile for Seoulair   Email Seoulair   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Seoulair

It is my belief. Peace is esp related to God.
Seoulair
Senior Member
since 03-27-2008
Posts 776
Seoul S.Korea


18 posted 04-21-2008 03:00 PM       View Profile for Seoulair   Email Seoulair   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Seoulair

And middle east problem does have a history...

I think that if one day, when American Indian wants every non-Indian out of their land, I shall beg Mr.Carter kind by millions.

In his biography, he helped a country to avoid a civil-war. (while Reagen wanted to overthrow  the old government (it was voted out later peacefully)

[This message has been edited by Seoulair (04-21-2008 05:57 PM).]

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


19 posted 04-21-2008 03:12 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

Dear balladeer,

     I'll see if I can't find you some Christian Science Monitor coverage on the subject.  It really is special.  They don't pretend that either side is populated with saints and the catch the particular circular nuttiness of the murderous conflict wonderfully well.  And they've done it for years.

     I'll start with this one and dig further.  If you check them out yourself, they're about the most objective coverage I've found.  Maybe you'll agree, maybe not.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0327/p09s02-coop.html

     By the way, I asked if either you or Mr. Fradera had read anything by President Carter himself, not secondary sources about him.  It always feels to me a little bit more dignified to say that somebody belongs in a rubber room  if you're not simply going on the word of people who don't like him.  A thirty year commitment to peace, and a willingness to put himself in harm's way to achieve it with a well thought out method of how to achieve it that's supported by enough of the world to get the man the Nobel peace prize in 2002 (not 1978, when the camp David accords were signed)would seem to suggest the rubber room bit would not be
useful.

     This link is to a book review that gives a thumbnail sketch of the history of Hamas:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0626/p15s02-bogn.html?page=1

     Here are some recent thoughts from Israel that reflect on Carter's mission there now.  As a nod to the C.S.M.s objectivity, you'll notice that some of the concerns mentioned there are a reflection of your own, some are a little broader.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0422/p07s01-wome.html

     And here is one last reference, more editorial, asking whether the world should talk with Hamas.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0325/p01s05-usfp.html?page=1

     None of them are very long.  The first probably has the most meat to it.  

     You don't have to do research point out to me that the Palestinians always do something to start stuff.  You miss the point.  A couple, actually.  1) The Palestinians don't agree with you.
2)  News sources in other countries print information we don't get here.  Folks in France and Germany and the U.K. frequently disagree with us not simply because they aren't American and they don't appreciate our splendor, but because they get different video feeds than we do and their print stories say different things.  3)  We tend to assume we have the most unfettered press in the world and they can and do report everything.  I will be kind and say I do not believe this to be the case, and most especially in the case of middle eastern affairs.   BobK.

[This message has been edited by Bob K (04-21-2008 05:10 PM).]

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


20 posted 04-21-2008 05:58 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

No, Bob, I haven't read any of Carter's books, nor do I plan to spend money on them to do so. What I stated above were direct quotes from him.

[Vice president] Fritz Mondale was much more deeply immersed in the Jewish organization leadership than I was. That was an alien world to me. They [American Jews] didn't support me during the presidential campaign [that] had been predicated greatly upon Jewish money ... Almost all of them were supportive of Scoop Jackson Scoop Jackson was their spokesman   their hero. So I was looked upon as an alien challenger to their own candidate. You know, I don't mean unanimously but ... overwhelmingly. So I didn't feel obligated to them or to labor unions and so forth. Fritz   was committed to Israel   It was an act just like breathing to him it wasn't like breathing to me. So I was willing to break the shell more than he was.[10]

Former Democratic President Jimmy Carter called Israeli "domination" over Palestinians "atrocious" in an interview today on ABC's "Good Morning America."

Carter said there was "no doubt now that a minority of Israelis are perpetuating apartheid on the people in Palestine, the Palestinian people."


If those quotes represent his feelings and writings, I'll stick with my Superman comics.  

As far as the Nobel Prize is concerned, Gore has one, too....so much for the importance of the award.
Seoulair
Senior Member
since 03-27-2008
Posts 776
Seoul S.Korea


21 posted 04-21-2008 06:32 PM       View Profile for Seoulair   Email Seoulair   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Seoulair

I looked up the link you provided, Sir Balladeer. and I don't think that is a fair article titled  with "my problems with "

The whole thing can be talked in the way of politics, religion, personal opinion, or personal character.  

It was many European countries where Jews got prosecuted but why middles east has to be the place to pay? because there has God promised land.  But who exactly got God calling? when Britain did not even want to give up the Arab  oil interest?  And why there is no peace for the last 60 years?  Mr.Carter went there with hope of peace which is good for both side. Why he has to get criticized? We, human really can't wait to the end of the world if those blood from  many years killing and war were not enough to fill our heart.
Seriously.

[This message has been edited by Seoulair (04-21-2008 08:26 PM).]

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


22 posted 04-21-2008 07:46 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

Dear Seoulair,

          What did you think unfair?  I can't get my connection going with CSM right now so I'm not sure what you mean.BobK.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


23 posted 04-21-2008 08:06 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

Dear Balladeer,

          I can quote people out of context as well.  The reason I asked the question was to see if either of us had gotten enough of a first person context to make an informed judgement.  If you haven't read those unexcerpted, the answer for you is "No."  You have read those portions of Carter that somebody with a point to prove wanted you to read.  Those would be what he or she felt would prove his point and show Carter in a poor light.

     Neither you nor I know enough about Carter firsthand to be able to make a judgement on such a basis.

     I told you when I asked that I hadn't read him either.  This doesn't mean I haven't read nice things people have said about him.  They don't substitute very well for a direct assessment, either.

     As for the Nobel, I felt the same way about it for a while after they gave it to Kissinger.  Both Gore and Carter earned it, too.  You don't have to like the politician or the person who earned it, Balladeer, it's not a beauty pageant, or you would have gotten it years ago.  I mourn that oversight as much as France and Great Britain do, not to mention your many fans here, in the united States.

     Nor did I imagine anything could ever lure you away from the Superman comics.  I ask only that you consider a couple of the articles from the Christian Science Monitor, some of which you will find in at least partial agreement with you.  Other of which will provide you with information you may not have.

     Habitat for Humanity, another of the Carter supported organizations is an extraordinary organization that spends much of its time and money here in the U.S.  They get low cost loans from banks.  They have a list of people who want homes who are willing to contribute labor to building the homes of others.  There are also volunteers who pitch in as well with money and labor.  They build the homes in marginal neighborhood, bring the quality of the neighborhood up, give people the pride of home ownership, have a very high mortgage repayment rate and are an all around terrific idea.  Carter and his wife are out there swinging hammers with everybody else.

     I do want Israel is make it as a country.  A single state solution will not work because the Jews will be outnumbered in very short order.  If the Palestinians are to have their own State, they must have  trust in their neighbors not to steal their land.  Israel has been sending settlers in to settle land on the west bank for many years now and they are not good about bringing these people back into the area where they agreed Israeli boundaries ended.

     Do the Israelis see this as reasonable?  Many of them do, yes.  They think, some of them, that the land was given to them by God and the discussion ought to end there.  Others think that the land is needed as a buffer zone to keep other Arab states and some Palestinians out of easy rocket and mortar range of the cities of the Israeli heartland.  This probably made more sense twenty years ago than it does today, if not because of geopolitical changes, then because of advances in military hardware make such a buffer zone
insufficient protection.

     The only plausible solution is serious negotiations, and serious negotiations mean each side listening to the other seriously.

     Frankly, I believe each side needs to be asked to imagine living together in peace in, say, five years time with all the major issues settled.  Then they need to answer this difficult question. What will you be doing differently?  No answers contingent on what the other guy does first permitted.  Just, What will YOU be doing differently?

     I think Carter's got as good a chance as anybody of asking that question.  Frankly I don't give a hoot who does.  I'm more interested in listening to the answers, should anybody care to give some.

[This message has been edited by Bob K (04-21-2008 10:53 PM).]

Seoulair
Senior Member
since 03-27-2008
Posts 776
Seoul S.Korea


24 posted 04-21-2008 08:29 PM       View Profile for Seoulair   Email Seoulair   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Seoulair

Dear Bob K, I was talk to Balladeer. I should add a comma. sorry for the confusion....Sir Balladeer will pick up a laugh .
Jaime Fradera will be notified of replies
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Impeach Bush   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors