View Full Version : Mixed shag of bells!


Live Steam
02-02-2006, 06:35 AM
All He's Missing Is The Umbrella

Jimmy Carter made another of his frequent appearances on behalf of thugs and terrorists (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/01/carter.hamas/index.html) yesterday, this time arguing for acceptance of Hamas on the Larry King show. The former President told King that Hamas has a "good chance" of becoming a non-violent organization:

Hamas deserves to be recognized by the international community, and despite the group's militant history, there is a chance the soon-to-be Palestinian leaders could turn away from violence, former President Jimmy Carter said Wednesday. Carter, who monitored last week's Palestinian elections in which Hamas handily toppled the ruling Fatah, added that the United States should not cut off aid to the Palestinian people, but rather funnel it through third parties like the U.N.

"If you sponsor an election or promote democracy and freedom around the world, then when people make their own decision about their leaders, I think that all the governments should recognize that administration and let them form their government," Carter said.

Wrong! If people use democracy to elect hate-filled bigots and murderous terrorists into power, then they should suffer the consequences of that choice, not get a free pass from the world. Hamas explicitly calls for the destruction on Israel in its charter and has refused to change its position, even after its electoral victory. It has conducted attacks on Israeli citizens, both suicide bombings and quasi-military rocket attacks. It gets its funding from Iran due to its Islamofascist goals and activities, and some evidence exists that it partners with al-Qaeda.

None of this matters to Carter, the fool who first allowed Islamofascism into power with his refusal to support the Shah and his subsequent inaction after Iranians sacked our embassy in Teheran. He continues his decades-long effort to follow in the footsteps of Neville Chamberlain, only he refuses to share in Chamberlain's epiphany about appeasement after Munich. Carter also insisted that Yasser Arafat was ready to make peace, and instead we got stiffed at Oslo and at Wye and wound up with two intifadas as a result.

Carter remains America's most embarrassing and dangerous ex-President. With his apologetics for terrorists, one hopes that his credibility will finally dissipate and his advice will be recognized for the foolishness it is.


http://daybydaycartoon.com/Cartoons/02-02-2006.gif


French Publisher Sacks Editor For Publishing Muslim Cartoons

After getting kudos from free-speech activists for its courage, the French magazine Soir reversed itself and sacked its managing editor (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4670370.stm) for publishing Danish caricatures of the prophet Mohammed. The owner fired his editor in order to placate the rage of French Muslims:

France Soir and Germany's Die Welt were among the leading papers to reprint the cartoons, which first appeared in Denmark last September. The caricatures include drawings of Muhammad wearing a headdress shaped like a bomb, while another shows him saying that paradise was running short of virgins for suicide bombers.

France Soir originally said it had published the images in full to show "religious dogma" had no place in a secular society.

But late on Wednesday its owner, Raymond Lakah, said he had removed managing editor Jacques Lefranc "as a powerful sign of respect for the intimate beliefs and convictions of every individual".

Mr Lakah said: "We express our regrets to the Muslim community and all people who were shocked by the publication."

The president of the French Council of the Muslim Faith (CFCM), Dalil Boubakeur, had described France Soir's publication as an act of "real provocation towards the millions of Muslims living in France".

The BBC reports that other publications have stood firm on their decision to reprint the Danish cartoons that have started a firestorm of protest from Europe's Muslim community. The newspapers and magazines remain steadfast in their right to publish satire on any topic of interest -- and certainly the rise of militant Islam makes it an open target for just such treatment. These publishers, sans M. Lakah, have shown more backbone and resolve in facing down the radical Islamists than their governments have shown thus far. Perhaps their courage might finally fire their politicians into showing more backbone.

Some commentators wonder whether the satirical value of these cartoons really outweigh the insult to Muslims that it represents. The religion forbids depictions of humans in art or sculpture (as does Judaism), and even the most sympathetic rendition of the Prophet is considered sinful. A few people have already reminded backers of the cartoonists of Christian outrage over Andres Serrano's "Piss Christ" (http://home.vicnet.net.au/%7Etwt/serrano.html), a picture of a crucifix dunked into a beaker of urine. Other artistic depictions of Christian iconography have also gathered vitriol from religious and conservative circles, such as Chris Ofili's "Holy Virgin Mary" (http://www.mtholyoke.edu/offices/comm/csj/991008/madonna.html).

However, the two issues differ in one important aspect. The exhibitions of the two artists mentioned received federal funds for staging these pieces of "art", and the reaction to their poor taste came from the support of the National Endowment for the Arts. No one disputed the right of the artists to create their offensive displays, but what really rankled most was that their money went into funding their exhibitions. Although both artists offended me with their creations and I firmly believe that government should have no part of funding them, I would absolutely fight against any attempt to censor them or to stop them from painting or photographing what they consider art.

These cartoons have been privately drawn and published by privately-owned enterprises. That is the essential nature of free speech. The Danes understand that, and I find the European impulse in supporting them the most hopeful sign from the Continent in a long time, Soir's surrender notwithstanding.

Turtleherder
02-02-2006, 06:46 AM
[QUOTE=Live Steam]All He's Missing Is The Umbrella

Jimmy Carter made another of his frequent appearances on behalf of thugs and terrorists (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/01/carter.hamas/index.html) yesterday, this time arguing for acceptance of Hamas on the Larry King show. The former President told King that Hamas has a "good chance" of becoming a non-violent organization:

Hamas deserves to be recognized by the international community, and despite the group's militant history, there is a chance the soon-to-be Palestinian leaders could turn away from violence, former President Jimmy Carter said Wednesday. Carter, who monitored last week's Palestinian elections in which Hamas handily toppled the ruling Fatah, added that the United States should not cut off aid to the Palestinian people, but rather funnel it through third parties like the U.N.

"If you sponsor an election or promote democracy and freedom around the world, then when people make their own decision about their leaders, I think that all the governments should recognize that administration and let them form their government," Carter said.

Wrong! If people use democracy to elect hate-filled bigots and murderous terrorists into power, then they should suffer the consequences of that choice, not get a free pass from the world. Hamas explicitly calls for the destruction on Israel in its charter and has refused to change its position, even after its electoral victory. It has conducted attacks on Israeli citizens, both suicide bombings and quasi-military rocket attacks. It gets its funding from Iran due to its Islamofascist goals and activities, and some evidence exists that it partners with al-Qaeda.

None of this matters to Carter, the fool who first allowed Islamofascism into power with his refusal to support the Shah and his subsequent inaction after Iranians sacked our embassy in Teheran. He continues his decades-long effort to follow in the footsteps of Neville Chamberlain, only he refuses to share in Chamberlain's epiphany about appeasement after Munich. Carter also insisted that Yasser Arafat was ready to make peace, and instead we got stiffed at Oslo and at Wye and wound up with two intifadas as a result.

Carter remains America's most embarrassing and dangerous ex-President. With his apologetics for terrorists, one hopes that his credibility will finally dissipate and his advice will be recognized for the foolishness it is.


Why do you hate democracy? The people made a choice is right, they picked who they wanted, I thought democracy was all good and the greatest thing since sliced bread. So what happened? A blue finger doesn't mean that it leads to a pro U.S. government so screw 'em? Steam maybe you might want to look at the countries that arrived at a peaceful place in history through violence. Maybe TMB can help with this but I can think of countries like: The United States, France, Great Britian and to a lesser extent India. I bet there are others.

And I salute you in your total disregard for facts, history or logic in stating that it was Carter that let the Islamofascists out of the bag by not supporting the Shah. You are right it was totally his fault for not supporting a greedy little despot like the Shah and the people were totally wrong to try to overthrow his totalitarian regime.

morrison
02-02-2006, 07:04 AM
All He's Missing Is The Umbrella

Wrong! If people use democracy to elect hate-filled bigots and murderous terrorists into power, then they should suffer the consequences of that choice, not get a free pass from the world.

***
Carter remains America's most embarrassing and dangerous ex-President. With his apologetics for terrorists, one hopes that his credibility will finally dissipate and his advice will be recognized for the foolishness it is.

***

These cartoons have been privately drawn and published by privately-owned enterprises. That is the essential nature of free speech. The Danes understand that, and I find the European impulse in supporting them the most hopeful sign from the Continent in a long time, Soir's surrender notwithstanding.

Four points:

1. The first quoted passage above is absolutely correct; we Americans have got what we deserve.

2. Carter was not a great president, but he is the best ex-president we've ever had.

3. The flap over those cartoons amuses me insofar as the commentary comes from YOU; sort of like a privately printed t shirt, no?

4. Your prose has improved; I am impressed.

pgrice
02-02-2006, 07:13 AM
Carter's point hit the bullseye. If you promote democracy who have to live with the choice that is made (especially when you do not really have a saw in the outcome) or are you actually in favor of democracy. That is the funny thing about it. Winston Churchill one said that democracy is the worst form of government besides all of the others. I agree - it is no perfect system. It is also why I am one of the ones that the president was talking about when he said ...'some say it is misplaced idealism'

To your last point turtlehearder, it was no means clear cut that the right-wing shias were going to come to power in Iran. The revolution was a mixed bag different politics all with the common goal of overthrowing the Shah. I suppose that Carter could have supported him in the same way that Reagan supported Hussein in Iraq.

morrison
02-02-2006, 07:16 AM
I suppose that Carter could have supported him in the same way that Reagan supported Hussein in Iraq.

Yes, neocons seem comveniently to have forgotten how the United States reflagged the Kuwaiti oil tankers in the 1980s in order to shore up Iraq's ability to continue to export oil during the Iran Iraq war.

mohair_chair
02-02-2006, 07:19 AM
Hamas is the <i>elected</i> government. The people spoke (72% of registered voters voted), and just like in the USA, we don't have to like what they say and what they stand for, but we do have to acknowledge that they won in a fair election. Not only that, but Hamas won 76 seats in the 132 seat parliament, which far exceeds the new US standard of slightly more than 50% qualifying as a mandate.

Duane Gran
02-02-2006, 08:01 AM
I don't think anyone is happy to see Hamas elected, but Carter is right. By all accounts they won the election, which means they deserve diplomatic recognition. Whether they deserve foreign aid is another matter, but I would prefer that our aid continues just as before, but cut off immediately if Hamas resorts to violence. In this way they will suffer political repercussions at home if they don't behave like a legitimate government.

Someone more wise than myself may have a better suggestion, but siphoning off aid and cutting off diplomatic ties will undercut democracy in Palestine.

There is actually another issue at stake here, which is that we should use our aid money to benefit the *people* of a region, not as a carrot stick to dictate terms to nations.

Bocephus Jones II
02-02-2006, 08:47 AM
I'm not gonna bother reading your daily cut-and-paste right-wing-a-torial today Steam, but while Carter may not have been the best president he is still a great man in my book. If you want to talk about a president with real moral fiber I think Carter is one of the tops in that category.

atpjunkie
02-02-2006, 08:48 AM
was right on. and he was a great President, we were a lame country. besides the fact that his re-election was screwed by Big W working the hostage for guns deal which got him and Ronnie elected, if we had followed his lead we'd be 20 years ahead of where we are today as far as energy, automobiles, etc... we'd be #1 in the world at whatever the next fuel would be, 100,000's would be employed by the industry, we'd be exporting the stuff and/or the technology. wow, thats trade in our favor and jobs. nevermind, he sucked, we're better off with where the Cons have lead us, deeper and deeper in debt and deeper and deeper dependent on foreigners.

filtersweep
02-02-2006, 08:59 AM
I'm not gonna bother reading your daily cut-and-paste right-wing-a-torial today Steam, but while Carter may not have been the best president he is still a great man in my book. If you want to talk about a president with real moral fiber I think Carter is one of the tops in that category.


Funny how Reagan orchestrated the DELAY of the hostages' release until well after the election... teflon, man....