by Mick Gregory
I just listened to Jimmy Carter on NPR this morning. The former Democrat president was trying to say that his statement on page 213 of his new hate and blame book, Peace Not Apartheid, was actually just an error.
“It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel.”
(Carter is now saying there was a misplaced word, a mistake that will be fixed in future editions).
Which word is it?
Ladies and gentlemen, here is a test. Let’s see which word or words can change the meaning of Carter’s endorsement of murdering Jews?
…end terrorism when (replace with if)
…end terrorism when (when, if ever)
…end terrorism when (when pigs fly)
As a writer and editor, I can not find any way to read this sentence that does not clearly condone the murder of Jews on busses, in pizza parlors and in shops, until Israel follows former President Carter’s prescription for peace. This book caused 12 of Carter’s staff at his library (paid for by Arab foundations) to quit in disgust.
This is a major event. Imagine if you will, if Ronald Reagan or George Bush had written that?
It sheds light on the disgraced president — Carter is clearly on the side of terrorists and may have been his whole life. There are now stories coming out of Carter giving special leniency to a former Nazi SS soldier’s family in the U.S.
Carter supported the politics of Danny Ortega and Yasser Arafat.
Was that why Carter let the Islamic fascists take over Iran during his presidency?
Why did Jimmy Carter give the Panama Canal away?
What did the Camp David Accords accomplish?
These questions were not asked Carter:
What NPR didn’t ask Carter
Jimmy Carter was interviewed this morning on NPR. The interviewer pressed him on his use of the word ‘apartheid’, an obvious and reasonable question. However, there are a few other questions, also obvious and reasonable that were not asked. For example:
Do you think that you were influenced in any way by the millions of dollars you personally and the Carter Center received from Arab sources?
You said in your book that the Arabs must recognize Israel’s right to exist in peace. Don’t you think that it’s reasonable to expect an end to terrorism before Israeli concessions are made that compromise her security? Wouldn’t it be irresponsible for the Israeli government to give up territory while rockets are falling?
The thrust of your arguments is that Israel is responsible for the conflict as a result of her occupation of ‘Palestinian land’ in 1967. How do you account for the Palestinian terrorism against Israel (and the pre-state Jewish presence) since at least 1920? Don’t you think that the Arabs — both the Palestinians and Israel’s neighbor states — must bear some responsibility for the sustained terrorism and war that they’ve waged against the Jews over the years?
Update (1453 PST): Read Kenneth Stein’s review of Carter’s book. Stein was Executive Director of the Carter Center from 1983 to 1986, and the Center’s Middle East Fellow until 2006, when he resigned in protest of the book.