Get out the jacket.

Well, Carter is a disgraceful idiot

Sigh.

Man that rabbit must have really gotten to him all those years ago.

What is it with Dems and lying anyway? I know he reads the NY Times, and it was printed in there also IIRC.

“President Carter has the greatest respect for ... Rice and believes her to be a truthful person. However, perhaps inadvertently, she is continuing to make a statement that is not true,” a statement issued by the Carter center in Atlanta said on Wednesday.

That's a pretty mild version of calling her 'a liar.'

But then again, I believe Carter to be a "well-intentioned person. However, perhaps inadvertently, he is continuing to take actions that are bad-intentioned."

Which is the mild version of calling him 'a moron.'

I'll have to sit out this thread.

Who is lying?

re: #6 Cognito

You know thats diplospeak for liar.

We need to find a public statement made by the State Dapartment asking him not to go. I'll bet there was one.

Someone is lying, Jimmy...

It is so embarrassing that this man was ever President of the US. Can't we deport him to Gaza or something?

Will someone bring a net down over this guy already?

Hmmm, both deaf and senile. His old lady must feel fortunate to have him out from under foot.

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull."

W. C Fields

C. Rice has sunk very low in my opinion the last 3 or so years.

I'll look for official statements from the State Department.

re: #3 winston06

Well, Carter is a disgraceful idiot

So is Rice. Not as bad as Jimmah but still not good. It's tough to decide which one to believe.

Maybe jimmah critter didn't read news papers or listen to news programs prior to this little sorie of his. Seems like I remember several people of note saying he shouldn't meet with hamas. Did I dream that?

That boy just ain't right.

I wonder when they can have him forcibly medicated. Do they have to wait until he publicly announces his hatred for Jews?
/oh wait.

Jimmy Carter: Jew-Hater, Genocide-Enabler, Liar

[Link: www.frontpagemag.com...]

It's not a matter of deciding which one to believe, but which one to like.

And the likelihood that Rice is telling the truth is pretty high. After all, she runs the department that issued the warnings, and I seem to remember reading about someone at State saying publicly that it would be a Bad Thing for Jimmah to go to Hamas.

re: #25 Onibroc

Do I have to like either? I dislike Rice less and tend to believe her on this one but it's still a tough call.

Argggh! When is this long national nightmare of Jhimma Carter going to end?

re: #18 song_and_dance_man

The killer rabbit incident has obviously left some serious psychological scars.

Yuppers, the bunny's family is paying through the nose for Prozac and counseling for the little fella.

Let me eat my waffle. [btw it was a Belgian waffle.]

[Link: www.state.gov...]

QUESTION: Well, here it is. Carter plans to go with the elders.

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah.

QUESTION: The elders cancel their trip, and then he – and then after being specifically advised that this particular meeting with Hamas, if it should happen, is a bad idea, he’s going to go ahead and do it anyway. What does that say?

MR. MCCORMACK: That says that he is the former president of the United States and he will take his – take his own decisions. And if he decides to travel to Syria, we will provide full support befitting a former president of the United States while he is in Syria. One thing we will not do, however, is in – have the Department of State, in any way, engage in any sort of planning related to a meeting with Hamas.

They both suck

re: #13 dr.mister

It is so embarrassing that this man was ever President of the US. Can't we deport him to Gaza or something?

A man on the street stopped me the other day to tell me that Jimmy Carter is the best president America ever had.

All I could do was keep on strolling.

re: #34 buzzsawmonkey

I have no use for Condi Rice, but she could plummet to the bottom of the Marianas Trench and still be miles above Jimmy Carter.

She could also fit in a Coke bottle. Which would be pretty weird.

re: #33 Cognito

A man on the street stopped me the other day to tell me that Jimmy Carter is the best president America ever had.

All I could do was keep on strolling.

What are you doing in Gaza?

re: #6 Cognito

That's a pretty mild version of calling her 'a liar.'

But then again, I believe Carter to be a "well-intentioned person. However, perhaps inadvertently, he is continuing to take actions that are bad-intentioned."

Which is the mild version of calling him 'a moron.'

But in Politic-speak it's equivalent to throwing down the gauntlet and demanding satisfaction.

re: #35 Cognito

She could also fit in a Coke bottle. Which would be pretty weird.

And she thinks she's under a lot of pressure now...

re: #36 EC Marm

What are you doing in Gaza?

Ha. You'd laugh if you knew.

Also, no, not in Gaza.

re: #34 buzzsawmonkey

I have no use for Condi Rice, but she could plummet to the bottom of the Marianas Trench and still be miles above Jimmy Carter.

Jimmy does have a 30 year head start on her and she is working hard to catch up.

re: #40 Cognito

Ha. You'd laugh if you knew.

So spill it, I like to laugh.

I'm guessing Jimmah must have missed all the press release and comments from the State Dept saying "DONT TALK WITH HAMAS!"

Fucking moron.

re: #36 EC Marm

What are you doing in Gaza?

ROFL !

Again, as a reminder I post this about that POS, Carter. Rice is no bargain, either. They deserve each other. I wish they would have a live on TV boxing match on Pay TV, with the money going to Israel..

As for the killer rabbit?

Difference here for me is, when dementia struck President Regan I felt sorry for him.

Seems like Jimmah the Dhimmah is trying to engage in a little Obamboozling of his own.

I think a protest march to the "Carter Center" by a large number of anti-idiotarians could be a good thing.

I'm certain they have some kind of communication back-up if they officially told him not to go. I'd love to see it if they do.

But really, besides the entertainment value, what does it matter if they did or they didn't? He'd have gone anyway.

He's a walking turd so it's really a mystery as to why anyone bothers with him at all.

re: #44 EC Marm

So spill it, I like to laugh.

Just working.

"Workin' in a coal mine
Goin' down down down"

re: #52 Cognito

Just working.

"Workin' in a coal mine
Goin' down down down"

Oh, working on the tunnels.

re: #53 Kragar (proud to be kafir)

Oh, working on the tunnels.

Ha

re: #31 zmdavid

Thanks for the transcript.

re: #49 guzziguy

Difference here for me is, when dementia struck President Regan I felt sorry for him.

Well, sure, because it was a part of aging and Alzheimers.
In Jimmy's case we're talking about a demented world view that has been evident since 1976......at the latest.

It would seem to me that if Rice or the state Dept. had issued a warning to Carter, then they should be able to produce it in printed form or by verifying an email...or something.

I did read in the news before Carter's visit that he had been asked not to go by the State Dept....Perhaps they thought that by issuing the statement via the media, that Carter would understand that they did not want him to go?

Someone is not telling the truth.

I'm no fan of Condi's, but I like to see her whip Carter on this one.
Seems to me he's trying to cover his traitorous tracks.

I cried with this fool was elected. I was right to cry. 28 years since he was president and I can still remember how upset my parents were when he was elected. My dad was pissed.

Of course my dad didn't much care for democrats. He said they were always trying to change every tradition and pick his pocket.

BBL

Gotta work :)

Susan

Kinda ironic that Welch was just in Lebanon to commemorate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the bombing of the American embassy by Hezbollah, another Iranian proxy force like Jimmahs friend Hamas. Gotta go with rice on this one.

He's a disgrace and a laughing stock. And that's about the least horrible thing I can say about him.

Lest I be smited with the Banning Stick.

re: #58 wolfie

I'm no fan of Condi's, but I like to see her whip Carter on this one.
Seems to me he's trying to cover his traitorous tracks.

I'm just unclear what he's aiming for, here. That he didn't know the State Department disapproved? Really?

re: #48 NY Nana

Again, as a reminder I post this about that POS, Carter. Rice is no bargain, either. They deserve each other. I wish they would have a live on TV boxing match on Pay TV, with the money going to Israel..

As for the killer rabbit?

Ha,ha, ha! I gotta watch that rabbit video after dinner! Looks like a hoot!

Is Carter saying that he had no idea the State Department was against his trip, or is he saying Condi got a few details wrong?

I think he is saying the latter while trying to get everyone to think he means the former. If called on it, he will nitpick some tiny detail that is impossible to prove.

He's been taking lessons from Bill Clinton.

re: #63 song_and_dance_man

A former president shouldn't need a warning from the State Dept. about meeting with a terrorist organization. But then, we are talking about Carter.

If obama is elected POTUS he will be worse than carter, can you even get your mind around that?

Carter has failed in doing anything over there besides being a postman for Hamas. In failing with Israel and the Palestinians he'll now resort to attacking Rice who predicted he would have no success.

"How dare she predict my failure!" -Jimmy C.

Hamas, which controls Gaza, is viewed as a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union and Israel.

Noooooooo. Surely not.

Mar 4, 2001 - Naftali Dean, 85, of Tel Mond; his niece, Shlomit Ziv, 58, of Netanya; and Yevgenya Malchin, 70, of Netanya were killed in a suicide bombing in downtown Netanya; 60 people were injured. The Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Mar 28, 2001 - Eliran Rosenberg-Zayat, 15, of Givat Shmuel and Naftali Lanzkorn, 13, of Petah Tikva were killed in a suicide bombing at the Mifgash Hashalom ("peace stop") gas station several hundred meters from an IDF roadblock near the entrance to Kalkilya, east of Kfar Saba. Four people were injured. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Apr 22, 2001 - Dr. Mario Goldin, 53, of Kfar Sava, was killed when a terrorist detonated a powerful bomb he was carrying near a group of people waiting at a bus stop on the corner of Weizman and Tchernichovsky streets. About 60 people were injured in the blast. Hamas claimed responsibility.

May 18, 2001 - Tirza Polonsky, 66, of Moshav Kfar Haim; Miriam Waxman, 51, of Hadera; David Yarkoni, 53, of Netanya; Yulia Tratiakova, 21, of Netanya; and Vladislav Sorokin, 34, of Netanya were killed in a suicide bombing at Hasharon Mall in the seaside city of Netanya, in which over 100 were wounded. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Aug 9, 2001 - Giora Balash, 60, of Brazil; Zvika Golombek, 26, of Carmiel; Shoshana Yehudit Greenbaum, 31, of the U.S.; Tehila Maoz, 18, of Jerusalem; Frieda Mendelsohn, 62, of Jerusalem; Michal Raziel, 16, of Jerusalem; Malka Roth, 15, of Jerusalem; Mordechai Schijveschuurder, 43, of Neria; Tzira Schijveschuurder, 41, of Neria; Ra'aya Schijveschuurder, 14, of Neria; Avraham Yitzhak Schijveschuurder, 4, of Neria; Hemda Schijveschuurder, 2, of Neria; Lily Shimashvili, 33, of Jerusalem; Tamara Shimashvili, 8, of Jerusalem; and Yocheved Shoshan, 10, of Jerusalem were killed and about 130 injured in a suicide bombing at the Sbarro pizzeria on the corner of King George Street and Jaffa Road in the center of Jerusalem. Hamas and the Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.

Nov 27, 2001 - Etty Fahima, 45, of Netzer Hazani was killed three others were injured when a Palestinian terrorist threw grenades and opened fire at a convoy on the road between the Kissufim crossing and Gush Katif in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday evening. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Dec 1, 2001 - Assaf Avitan, 15, of Jerusalem; Michael Moshe Dahan, 21, of Jerusalem; Israel Ya'akov Danino, 17, of Jerusalem; Yosef El-Ezra, 18, of Jerusalem; Sgt. Nir Haftzadi, 19, of Jerusalem; Yuri (Yoni) Korganov, 20, of Ma'alei Adumim; Golan Turgeman, 15, of Jerusalem; Guy Vaknin, 19, of Jerusalem; Adam Weinstein, 14, of Givon Hahadasha, and Moshe Yedid-Levy, 19, of Jerusalem were killed and about 180 injured - 17 seriously - when explosive devices were detonated by two suicide bombers close to 11:30 P.M. Saturday night on Ben Yehuda Street, the pedestrian mall in the center of Jerusalem. A car bomb exploded nearby 20 minutes later. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.
Ido Cohen, 17, of Jerusalem, fatally injured in the attack, died of his wounds on December 8.

Dec 2, 2001 - Prof. Baruch Singer, 51, of Gedera was killed when Palestinian gunmen opened fire on his car near the northern Gaza settlement of Elei Sinai. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

And it goes on ... Idjit.

If a Conservative said that a black women lied he/she would face hate crime charges.
If a republican was negotiating with terrorist he would be jailed.
The criminal crap they get away with is insane !

re: #57 Ringo the Gringo

This is a Clintonesque point on the part of Dumbo. Somebody in the state department did not come up to him and address him with the proper degree of reverence and ask that he pretty please not talk to Hamas. In that his statement is probably true. However, it is certainly true that short of that, the communication that he shouldn't was loud enough for anyone to hear.

re: #62 Cognito

I'm just unclear what he's aiming for, here. That he didn't know the State Department disapproved? Really?

I'm am going to guess that he has been getting flack from Dem operatives about making this trip in an election year, especially when he was asked not to do it by a (Rep) administration. My guess is that his immediate concern is to be an honored guest at the Dem convention and he is getting some bad vibes from the party.
Obama has enough trouble w/ his own Hamas connections. He and the Dems don't need Carter hanging around.
Unfortunately, Carter is an attention whore.
That's my take.

I lived through those 'peanut years,' and suffered with the inflation and high energy prices. Quite similar to our current times, except the interest rates haven't gone into double digits yet. I didn't know at the time that his talk on 'human rights' only applied to those followers of Mohammad the pedophile and similar idiocy. I still like Condi Rice in spite of what her loyalty to the current disaster that lives in the White House. She would make a good Vice President, except that she is too damaged by her association with 'W' to ever get elected.

re: #62 Cognito

Ooops! Forgot to add that I think he is Clintonizing....basically lying.

re: #69 LeftJustAintRight

Blame the Justice Department. They've given a pass to State, NSA, and CIA leaks and voter fraud too. How do you go after Carter when you let Pelosi get away with her visit to Assad?

The truth as Dhimmi Carter imagines it and the truth are two quite different things.

Go pound some nails, Mr ex-President.

re: #64 wolfie

Wolfie,

I have only watched 3/4 of it, but will watch it all tonight. My sides hurt! And it is the first laugh in about 24 hours.

Could a citizen have him deemed incompetent and have him put away?

re: #77 LeftJustAintRight

He is endangering our lives

[Link: blogs.usatoday.com...]

re: #11 zmdavid

Like this one?

Let's see...Carter says Hamas is ready for peace and later the same day Hamas says "what was that guy smoking?", but Condi is the liar?

Bush is getting close to Carter territory on the disastrous Presidency scale, but still has a little way to go.

Winner by TKO for the worst President in our lifetime by unanimous decision...Jimmy Carter.

Jimmy's short term memory is gone.
He thinks he's still president.
Can't remember conversations from a few days ago.
You make the diagnosis.

Great, now the man tries to dis his own country. I think it has to be Alzheimer creeping in.

re: #79 Libs are Mental

[Link: blogs.usatoday.com...]

Like this one?

Yup. Looks like a press briefing to me.

Hmmmm. Carter's memory or Condi's?
/that was hard

re: #79 Libs are Mental

Yes. I had a link from state.gov earlier in the thread, like yours from USA Today that is from April 10th saying he shouldn't go.

Somehow Carter didn't get the message? That strains credulity a bit too far.

Jimmy Carter wants to be the keynote speaker at the Dem convention. First he sabotages the Bush policy of isolating Hamas, by giving effusive praise to Hamas and going to meet the leader of the Hamas genocide machine. Then he wants to blame the Bush administration for this sabotage that he carried out.

Carter is an enemy of Israel, an enemy of the Bush administration, and a foe of any rational policy of the US.

re: #82 HelloDare

re: #83 Naso Tang

Ih dear! I think there are a lot of folks too young here to remeber Carter's presidency. His problem is not Alzheimers......unless he contracted it 40 years ago. He's always been a sanctimonious little twerp.

I'll thank you young whipper-snappers to quit associating his dementia with nice ladies like me.....who can't remember where their car keys are! :D

re: #87 song_and_dance_man

Carter taxes sound reason.

Obama wants to tax it 15% more!

re: #20 Neo Con since 9/11

So is Rice. Not as bad as Jimmah but still not good. It's tough to decide which one to believe.

For me it's a no-brainer. The person who doesn't takes Hamas at their word.

re: #87 song_and_dance_man

Carter taxes sound reason.

No wonder the Democrats won't disown him!

re: #88 EE

Yes....Or at least he's afraid the Dems will try to hide him in a closet.
He was to be honored.
And they're afraid to do it....in public.

re: #94 savage_nation

hi kids

Dad? When did you figure out how to work the internet?

You gotta understand, Jimmah has sort of an "alternative" approach to the whole reality versus fantasy thing.

Shortly after he released his big apartheid turd, I saw Jimmah being interviewed on CNN. The interviewer mentioned that Bill Clinton had blamed Yasir Arafat, not Israel, for the failure of Clinton's attempts to broker peace at Camp David. According to Clinton's account, Arafat called him on the phone three days before the end of Clinton's presidency, and told Clinton "you are a great man." Clinton says his reply was "I'm a colossal failure, and you made me one."

Jimmah, on CNN, denied that this ever happened. "That's not correct," he kept saying. "President Clinton didn't say that. His memory is incorrect." I was as stunned as the CNN interviewer was.

Lizards, if at some point I start swearing on national TV that I know every word that was spoken in someone else's private telephone conversation five years ago, please have me committed for psychiatric treatment.

GAZE.

PIMF was= wantsre: #97 Last Mohican

I remember that now ! Great point!

re: #102 savage_nation

I do.
/ Call ME paranoid too..

Me three... from within and without.

re: #100 savage_nation

July 22, 1994. Thats the day I went into the Charlotte Public Library and saw the internet for the first time. I thought to myself, "This is going to change the world."

Little did I know...

Ha. The first time I saw the internet, I thought, "This isn't as good as Nintendo."

Computers are a fad.

re: #103 savage_nation
How about chilling out a little?

Obama/Ayers '08!

re: #99 ploome hineni

does anyone else ave the feeling our economy is under deliberate attack?

/call me paranoid

Yes and I don't think you are paranoid.

re: #99 ploome hineni

does anyone else ave the feeling our economy is under deliberate attack?

/call me paranoid

The economy is getting rocked, for sure. But who would be the attackers?

Big fat liar! I remember hearing on the news that State was in convulsions over this.

re: #112 Cognito

The economy is getting rocked, for sure. But who would be the attackers?

Lefty. They just want free stuff!

re: #112 Cognito

The economy is getting rocked, for sure. But who would be the attackers?

The left?

re: #99 ploome hineni

does anyone else ave the feeling our economy is under deliberate attack?

/call me paranoid

I wish I knew more about hedge funds, commodity futures, etc.
I just wonder sometimes.
And I wonder about George Soros....because he's pulled a lot of screwy & illegal stuff before w/ currency deals.

re: #99 ploome hineni

does anyone else ave the feeling our economy is under deliberate attack?

/call me paranoid

Paranoid! There....

You are exhibiting a classic case of unrealized expectations. Age sometimes is part of the cause here.

Recessions come and go... that's what they do.

We have had several years of weak growth and poorly managed personal wealth and public wealth. Use this time now to optimize (i.e., get rid of the poor processes and replace them with better ones.)

re: #87 song_and_dance_man

Carter taxes sound reason.

Well the Dems have figured out how to tax air(carbon offsets). Why not reason?

Personally I just think that we -- through a confluence of ugly circumstances -- have found ourselves over a barrel, so to speak. No attack needed, really.

re: #112 Cognito

The economy is getting rocked, for sure. But who would be the attackers?

It is happening under our noses
The oil suppliers and Soros and China
If our dollar are devalued then they have control
If we would not pay $12o dollars for oil they would have to drink it
If we did not rely on cheap Chinese products they would have no market
Blame the dems for all of it

re: #112 Cognito

The economy is getting rocked, for sure. But who would be the attackers?

You ever play sports for a first place team? Everybody wants a piece of you. This country is no different. But it requires a first rate defense against the attacks, and a first rate offense to keep us ahead. Wish I could say I saw it differently but I'm just bitter, clinging to my guns and Bible, and antipathy here in PencilVainYa.

re: #87 song_and_dance_man

Carter taxes sound reason.

Like all good Dummycrats.

re: #99 ploome hineni

does anyone else ave the feeling our economy is under deliberate attack?

/call me paranoid

I'd say it's more like complete and utter ineptitude by the entire Bush administration, how's that? With the mortgage mess, $120 oil, American food stores encouraging rationing of rice for crying out loud, no control of our borders, the folly of trying to convert 7th century primitives into modernity, the worthless dollar, etc; I'd say Bush is competing quite well with Carter for the worst President in living memory.

Oh how I wish we'd form OFEC (Organization of Food Exporting Countries) and shove some of the same tactics employed by OPEC down their fucking throats to their soon to be very hungry stomachs.

Unfortunately, we have no leadership on almost any level these days.

re: #122 LeftJustAintRight

It is happening under our noses
The oil suppliers and Soros and China
If our dollar are devalued then they have control
If we would not pay $12o dollars for oil they would have to drink it
If we did not rely on cheap Chinese products they would have no market
Blame the dems for all of it

There's some truth there, I think, but not totally right. I think the rise in demand in China and India -- which has kept oil prices up, regardless of American cutbacks in demand, etc -- has a lot to do with the global fuel/food problem.

The problem is is that if we don't pay for the oil, someone else will.

re: #123 EC Marm

You folks really came through for us last night in rejecting the Obamassiah!
(Too bad you had to do it by voting for the broom-jockey...............
......but that's not your fault.)

re: #119 freetoken
How come your avatar is in the flags of Algeria, Azerbaijani Republic, Malaysia, Maldives, Republic of Singapore, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Comoros, Islamic Republic of Mauritania, and Uzbekistan?

re: #102 savage_nation

I do.
/ Call ME paranoid too..

+ 1 here. Under attack using the playbook we developed for the USSR.

re: #89 wolfie

re: #83 Naso Tang

Ih dear! I think there are a lot of folks too young here to remeber Carter's presidency. His problem is not Alzheimers......unless he contracted it 40 years ago. He's always been a sanctimonious little twerp.

I'll thank you young whipper-snappers to quit associating his dementia with nice ladies like me.....who can't remember where their car keys are! :D

I stand corrected, and I always thought you were a guy. I suspect however that we are similar ages per the keys stuff.

re: #125 mfarmer1

I'm no Bush fan, but you're stretching things. The economy is not anywhere near as bad at it was under Carter.
In any case, if I were to blame government, it would be Congress. That means Reps until 2007. But I see the Dems being even stupider.

Not that it really matters if Rice did or didn't explicitly ask Carter not to go, he knew damn well not to go.

But yeah, Carter is FOS.

Here is an article from April 11th from Fox News. Note the article came out some time BEFORE Carter left for this trip:

FOX News confirmed on Thursday that Carter will travel to Syria next week for an unprecedented meeting with the senior leadership of Hamas. The State Department has designated Hamas a "foreign terrorist organization," a stance McCormack reiterated.

The State Department had "counseled the former president about having such a meeting," he said. "U.S. policy is that Hamas is a terrorist organization; we don't believe its in the interest of our policy or in the interest of peace to have such a meeting."

Yes, State isn't explicity saying they didn't ask him not to go, but they "counseled him" on the meeting. That's about as polite diplospeak as you're going to get on this. Think about it. . .what other "counsel" on the meeting were they going to give him?

If Carter wants to pretend that State didn't come up with this public statement BEFORE he left, he can do so, but its bogus. Even if State did NOT come to him and ask him not to go, he HAD to know about this statement in advance of leaving, especially considering others on his trip cancelled.

I was 21 years old when Carter took office. It sucked, the whole thing sucked, every bit of it. It all sucked, exponentially on the scale of suckage.

re: #130 savage_nation

What I think we ought to do is seize the Saudi oil fields. Don't even talk to the sand ticks, just go in and take it. If the KSA leadership starts whining, just start flattening cities in the Magic Kingdom.

And I think that's an unworthy comment, of the sort that gives the site a bad name.

re: #103 savage_nation

SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Thats all you say when I get here....

You're not the only one on this thread.

re: #131 Naso Tang

I stand corrected, and I always thought you were a guy. I suspect however that we are similar ages per the keys stuff.

Can find yours either, eh? :)

re: #127 wolfie

You folks really came through for us last night in rejecting the Obamassiah!
(Too bad you had to do it by voting for the broom-jockey...............
......but that's not your fault.)

My crazy county, which is one of the wealthiest in the entire country (not braggin' - you should see my balance sheet) went 55% Obama, 45% Hillary. It's either Project Chaos or somethings happening and I don't know what it is Mr. Jones.

re: #126 Cognito

re: #126 Cognito

The problem is is that if we don't pay for the oil, someone else will.

And items are priced on the margin... so given the inability to make increases in oil production (world crude and condensate production has remained essentially unchanged for over 3 years)... and a thirstier world for the black goo... we get everyone bidding up that last barrel of oil...

We don't have to go around and try to externalize our problems onto some boogeyman... We just need to live within our means.

Tony Zirkle supports Carter's meeting with Hamas
[Link: www.kokomotribune.com...]

Asked if he was worried that some might be offended by his appearance at a neo-Nazi event, Zirkle compared his appearance to former President Jimmy Carter going to speak to the Palestinian group Hamas.

re: #99 ploome hineni

does anyone else ave the feeling our economy is under deliberate attack?

/call me paranoid

Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean that our economy is not under attack.

re: #138 EC Marm

My crazy county, which is one of the wealthiest in the entire country (not braggin' - you should see my balance sheet) went 55% Obama, 45% Hillary. It's either Project Chaos or somethings happening and I don't know what it is Mr. Jones.

The Democrats are the party of the poor, right?! Gag.
Maybe a lot of the rich people in your county share Obama's elitism, or at elast weren't offended by it.
(Thanks for the Dylan! :) )

re: #137 wolfie

Can find yours either, eh? :)

I'm told that not being able to find your keys is not indicative of a problem. Not remembering what keys are is a problem.

I think the following little discussion explains what we're experiencing.

------------------

Age Activated Attention Deficit Disorder...

This is how it develops:

I decide to water my garden.

As I turn on the hose in the driveway, I look over at my car and decide my car needs washing.

As I start toward the garage, I notice that there is mail on the porch table that I brought up from the mailbox earlier.

I decide to go through the mail before I wash the car.

I lay my car keys down on the table, put the junk mail in the garbage can under the table, and notice that the can is full. So, I decide to put the bills back on the table and take out the garbage first.

But then I think, since I'm going to be near the mailbox, when I take out the garbage anyway, I may as well pay the bills first. I take my checkbook off the table, and see that there is only 1 check left. My extra checks are in my desk in the study, so I go inside the house to my desk where I find the can of Coke that I had been drinking.

I'm going to look for my checks, but first I need to push the Coke aside so that I don't accidentally knock it over. I see that the Coke is getting warm, and I decide I should put it in the refrigerator to keep it cold. As I head toward the kitchen with the Coke, a vase of flowers on the counter catches my eye--they need to be watered.

I set the Coke down on the counter, and I discover my reading glasses that I've been searching for all morning. I decide I better put them back on my desk, but first I'm going to water the flowers.

I set the glasses back down on the counter, fill a container with water and suddenly I spot the TV remote Someone left it on the kitchen table. I realize that tonight when we go to watch TV, I will be looking for the remote, but I won't remember that it's on the kitchen table, so I decide to put it back in the den where it belongs, but first I'll water the flowers. I pour some water in the flowers, but quite a bit of it spills on the floor. So, I set the remote back down on the table, get some towels and wipe up the spill. Then, I head down the hall trying to remember what I was planning to do. At the end of the day:

----the car isn't washed,
----the bills aren't paid,
----there is a warm can of Coke sitting on the counter,
----the flowers don't have enough water,
----there is still only 1 check in my check book,
----I can't find the remote,
----I can't find my glasses,
----and I don't remember what I did with the car keys.

Then, when I try to figure out why nothing got done today, I'm really baffled because I know I was busy all day long, and I'm really tired.

I realize this is a serious problem, and I'll try to get some help for it, but first I'll check my e-mail.

The root of most of our economic problems is a simple four letter word: debt. Government is deep in debt, the citizens are deep in debt, many companies are overextended. Europe has too much debt as well. We are to blame for most of our problems... no one could touch us if we weren't deep in debt.

re: #140 savage_nation

I'm not referring to nukes. We can pour enough conventional explosives on assigned strategic targets in the KSA to bend the Saudis to our will.

So we should go to war and "flatten cities" because we want what they have?

That's some of the lowest trash I've read here. Really.

re: #141 zmdavid

Tony Zirkle supports Carter's meeting with Hamas
[Link: www.kokomotribune.com...]

Peas in a pod. spit

re: #135 Cognito

And I think that's an unworthy comment, of the sort that gives the site a bad name.

Well the idea of simply seizing the Saudi oil by force, simultaneously castrating the Salafists does have a certain appeal. . .but I agree, we shouldn't do that.

Ironically, this is EXACTLY what the leftoid morons think the USA *has* been doing in "no blood for oil" Iraq (even though its an utter fantasy).

If we *did* want to seize oilfields by force and hold them, that would be trivial compared to what we actually have been doing.

re: #133 looking closely

Yes, State isn't explicity saying they didn't ask him not to go, but they "counseled him" on the meeting. That's about as polite diplospeak as you're going to get on this. Think about it. . .what other "counsel" on the meeting were they going to give him?

Well that could be a problem. At least in hopes of getting him with the Logan Act which states:

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both....

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that highlighted bit is the key to the paragraph. I understood the State Dept didn't want him to go, but did they TELL him. They certainly should have in no uncertain terms. Personally, I think it's worth looking into. Anything to try to ground this guy.

re: #144 guzziguy

That's my whole life these days! ROFL !

re: #145 stevieray

The root of most of our economic problems is a simple four letter word: debt. Government is deep in debt, the citizens are deep in debt, many companies are overextended. Europe has too much debt as well. We are to blame for most of our problems... no one could touch us if we weren't deep in debt.

Remember the Donald Trump principle:
If I owe you $100,000 I've got a big problem.
If I owe you $100,000,000 *you've* got a big problem.

re: #133 looking closely

I think this article makes it pretty clear.

CNN- White House Urges Carter Not to Visit

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Thursday the department would provide Carter with assistance on his trip, as is customary for a former president.

But he added the department "would not participate in the planning or scheduling" or in any meetings with Hamas officials, and he counseled Carter against such talks.

"U.S. policy is that Hamas is a terrorist organization," McCormack said. "We don't believe it is in the interest of our policy or in the interest of peace to have such a meeting."

McCormack said that Assistant Secretary David Welch urged Carter in a phone call not to take part in the meeting, arguing doing so would be a detriment to U.S. policy in the Middle East.

So, an Assistant Sec. of State calls Carter and tells him not to participate because it would be a detriment to US policy in the ME. Carter, in his 'infinite' wisdom, and likely dislike / disagreement with the current US policy in the ME, does the opposite and does several meetings with a recognized terrorist organization.

I'm no fan of the State Dept, but this is a pretty clear example of Carter's hubris and arrogance.

re: #125 mfarmer1

With the mad rush to bio-fuels eating up all the farming resources they will feel the pinch soon enough. Every farmer with a free acre will plant corn for the subsidized ethanol producers, taking food off everyones plate and putting it in some liberals limo. How many people have to starve before the left learns this.

re: #152 Athos

Well then, let Jimmy Carter be the first American to be convicted under the Logan Act. He can hang that title next to his peace prize.

re: #149 marjoriemoon

I think there is a case and one that should be pursued. Being an ex-President is no excuse to ignore the law.

There is nothing wrong with Carter, in disagreement to current US policy, to reference / write / speak about the reasons for his disagreement inside the US and try to influence a change in policy. That's legitimate dissent. However, to go and meet with terrorist leaders for any reason after being asked not to, or speaking out outside the US, that crosses the line.

re: #149 marjoriemoon

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that highlighted bit is the key to the paragraph. I understood the State Dept didn't want him to go, but did they TELL him. They certainly should have in no uncertain terms. Personally, I think it's worth looking into. Anything to try to ground this guy.

I have no doubt whatever that behind closed doors State explicitly asked him not to go, or at least made it quite clear that they wanted him not to go, and they believed doing so would be harmful to American interests, which is tantamount to the same thing.

But that's irrelevant.

Carter stated explicitly that he was representing nobody but himself on that trip, before, during, and after. State made it clear that he was representing only himself, before, during, and after.

So by both Carter's words and the State dept's words, Carter was not negotiating as part of the US gov't or portraying himself as representing the gov't.

So I simply don't see how the Logan act applies here.

More important, nobody is claiming that Hizb'Allah or Hamas represent any "gov't", so again, how does Carter talking to them fit under the Logan act?

influence American policy, nor was he neBy his own conception then, Carter wasn't trying to influence American policy, nor was he

Good evening all, Hope everyone is well! First off, About our Esteemed/ ex pres.. Charles had it right in the first words he put up about this... Absolutely disgraceful.
As for the rest of my post, a freind juse sent this to me, and what better palce for it, than here.

An interesting parable:
I bought a bird feeder. I hung
it on my back porch and filled
it with seed. What a beauty of
a bird feeder it is, as I filled it
lovingly with seed. Within a
week we had hundreds of birds
taking advantage of the
continuous flow of free and
easily accessible food.
But then the birds started
building nests in the boards
of the patio, above the table,
and next to the barbecue.
Then came the poop. It was
everywhere: on the patio tile,
the chairs, the table .
everywhere!
Then some of the birds
turned mean. They would
dive bomb me and try to
peck me even though I had
fed them out of my own
pocket.
And others birds were
boisterous and loud. They
sat on the feeder and
squawked and screame d at
all hours of the day and night
and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.
After a while, I couldn't even
sit on my own back porch
anymore. So I took down the
bird feeder and in three days
the birds were gone. I cleaned
up their mess and took down
the many nests they had built
all over the patio.
Soon, the back yard was like
it used to be ... quiet, serene
and no one demanding their
rights to a free meal.
Now let's see .
Our government gives out
free food, subsidized housing,
free medical care, and free
education and allows anyone
born here to be an automatic
citizen
Then the illegals came by the
tens of thousands. Suddenly
our taxes went up to pay for
free services; small apartments
are housing 5 families; you
have to wait 6 hours to be seen
by an emergency room doctor;
your child's 2nd grade class is
behind other schools because
over half the class doesn't speak
English.
Corn Flakes now come in a
bilingual box; I have to
'press one' to hear my bank
talk to me in English, and
people waving flags other
than 'Old Glory' are
squawking and screaming
in the streets, demanding
more rights and free liberties.
Just my opinion, but maybe
it's time for the government
to take down the bird feeder.

re: #157 Athos

I think there is a case and one that should be pursued. Being an ex-President is no excuse to ignore the law.

There is nothing wrong with Carter, in disagreement to current US policy, to reference / write / speak about the reasons for his disagreement inside the US and try to influence a change in policy. That's legitimate dissent. However, to go and meet with terrorist leaders for any reason after being asked not to, or speaking out outside the US, that crosses the line.

Absolutely. For him or any American. That was the intent of the Logan Act in the first place. Why doesn't the State Dept use it?

re: #156 savage_nation

That's what scares me.
For us a marginal increase in the price of grain is a minor glitch. For people already living on the margins, it may mean death.

Long time lurker, ....hope this is not too presumptuous.

My reaction was huh? He should have felt, at the very least, an obligation to check with State. Not think "fine and dandy" unless formally dragged kicking and screaming back home. What specifically about 'Hamas is officially a terrorist organization' does Carter not understand? How could anyone in their right mind think that meeting with Hamas was OK/correct/constructive/sane? I thought presidents (present and ex) were to respect the laws/rules/regs - not assume that they don't apply to them unless specifically requested/ordered to respect them.

re: #158 looking closely

Doesn't matter who he was representing. Me, you or his dog. The Logan Act makes no distinction except "any citizen", and that he is.

Now, I'm getting this from the Wiki, but the rest of the Act says this:

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

That doesn't seem to apply to him. I don't know if there's more to the Logan Act than this, but I'll look.

re: #161 savage_nation

Why doesn't the State Dept use it?

The Arabists run State. It's in their interest to keep Jimmah busy on his little trips.

hehe... it would appear.

re: #152 Athos

I think this article makes it pretty clear.

CNN- White House Urges Carter Not to Visit

So, an Assistant Sec. of State calls Carter and tells him not to participate because it would be a detriment to US policy in the ME. Carter, in his 'infinite' wisdom, and likely dislike / disagreement with the current US policy in the ME, does the opposite and does several meetings with a recognized terrorist organization.

I'm no fan of the State Dept, but this is a pretty clear example of Carter's hubris and arrogance.

Not to mention his bald-faced dishonesty, in claiming afterwards that the State dept never contacted him about this.

Maybe he's just demented, and can't remember his earlier conversation with State, though I don't really accept that benign interpretation.

The ONLY discussion worth having that contains the name Jimmy Carter, is what we thought about his funeral!

re: #144 guzziguy

OMG! Someone followed me around one day and took notes!

re: #154 savage_nation

It's in our national interest, like it or not.

Well believe it or not, our "national interests" have limits.

It was in Germany's "national interest" to gobble up most of Europe.

re: #160 marjoriemoon

looking closely touches on one of the main reasons and the main difficulty in prosecuting these types of cases. If I were in the jury, I would find the denials unconvincing but others, including those sympathetic to Carter....

I would look at this as similar to the US policy and law which can forbid American citizens from traveling to certain countries - and if any citizen, up to and including an ex-President did so, it fits with a violation of the Logan Act. After all, if Joe Q. Citizen (non-journalist( wanted to meet with Hamas or Hizbollah, they would not take the meeting as it would have nothing in it for them....but an ex-President.......

Clearly, the State Department would be within its rights to invalidate Carter's passport....although the nutroots would scream political persecution if this was done. (The PR hit from prosecuting under Logan would clearly be more than what this Admin would want to take on.)

re: #158 looking closely

More important, nobody is claiming that Hizb'Allah or Hamas represent any "gov't", so again, how does Carter talking to them fit under the Logan act?

I'm sorry. I missed that part of your response.

"any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof." They had elections, which we (btw, thanks George) endorsed, so yea, they do have a government.

And also, this is why we have lawyers to argue the point :) Like I say, it's worth a shot.

re: #164 marjoriemoon

Doesn't matter who he was representing. Me, you or his dog. The Logan Act makes no distinction except "any citizen", and that he is.

Now, I'm getting this from the Wiki, but the rest of the Act says this:

That doesn't seem to apply to him. I don't know if there's more to the Logan Act than this, but I'll look.

The Logan act prohibits individuals from negotiating with foreign gov'ts on behalf of the USA without approval, or trying to obstruct US policy with governments.

Forgetting for the moment the question of whether Carter negotiated *anything* on his trip at all or tried to undermine US policy, neither Khalid Meshall (HAMAS) or Hassan Nasrallah (Hizb'Allah) are members of any government.

It simply doesn't apply.

As a not trivial political matter, I believe NOBODY has EVER been prosecuted under the Logan act, and pursuing it with Carter as the first "victim" isn probably not politically tenable in a Dem majority Congress.
Right or wrong, it would be perceived as a partisan witch-hunt.

re: #167 savage_nation

Anything to promote the revolution and chaos that it needs. Even if its the el cubo policies that create the chaos, you know who will get the blame.

re: #171 Cognito

And? I understand the point you're trying to make, but you're trying to insert morals into courses of action that are rationally beneficial. Germany gaining control over most of Mainland Europe during World War 2 was of benefit to them. You need to provide the moral framework to back up your point ie. the suffering and destruction that resulted, in order to show why it was an unacceptable course of action.

re: #175 looking closely

It's clear that our domestic law, and very likely international law, is woefully inadequate to deal with these non-state entities like Hamas, Hizbollah, al Qaeda, and the like.

re: #174 marjoriemoon

I'm sorry. I missed that part of your response.

"any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof." They had elections, which we (btw, thanks George) endorsed, so yea, they do have a government.

No.

Which gov't does Hassan Nasrallah of Hizb'Allah represent?
Which gov't does Khalid Masshal of HAMAS represent?

As far as I know, neither one of them hold elected office, and neither one of them has any appointment with any recognized gov't.

Again, I just don't see how the Logan act applies here.

re: #173 Athos

looking closely touches on one of the main reasons and the main difficulty in prosecuting these types of cases. If I were in the jury, I would find the denials unconvincing but others, including those sympathetic to Carter....

I would look at this as similar to the US policy and law which can forbid American citizens from traveling to certain countries - and if any citizen, up to and including an ex-President did so, it fits with a violation of the Logan Act. After all, if Joe Q. Citizen (non-journalist( wanted to meet with Hamas or Hizbollah, they would not take the meeting as it would have nothing in it for them....but an ex-President.......

Clearly, the State Department would be within its rights to invalidate Carter's passport....although the nutroots would scream political persecution if this was done. (The PR hit from prosecuting under Logan would clearly be more than what this Admin would want to take on.)

There is "some" decision to leave the man alone. Politics/compassion? I don't know. I would have no problem revoking his passport either. The title of ex-Pres, plus the fact that he holds a Peace Prize and has an overinflated ego because of it, makes him that much more dangerous than Joe Q and all the more reason to not just ground him. The penalty says it's a felony with up to 3 years in prison. I can't see them putting him away, but a pinch to his pocketbook may help.

Again, I'm not a lawyer. I just play one on LGF.

re: #179 Athos

It's clear that our domestic law, and very likely international law, is woefully inadequate to deal with these non-state entities like Hamas, Hizbollah, al Qaeda, and the like.

Our laws on dealing with terrorists are reasonably clear, I think.

What *might* use improvement are laws on Americans associating with terrorists, or members of terrorist organizations.

But even THEN I don't see how what could be done, considering that US jurisdiction only stretches so far.

If an American citizen simply wants to meet privately with a terrorist within another country, I don't see how you can stop that.

re: #33 Cognito

I would have laughed my ass off at the guy and tell him straight up that he was full of shit...

...and then strolled on!

re: #175 looking closely

The Logan act prohibits individuals from negotiating with foreign gov'ts on behalf of the USA without approval, or trying to obstruct US policy with governments.

Forgetting for the moment the question of whether Carter negotiated *anything* on his trip at all or tried to undermine US policy, neither Khalid Meshall (HAMAS) or Hassan Nasrallah (Hizb'Allah) are members of any government.

It simply doesn't apply.

As a not trivial political matter, I believe NOBODY has EVER been prosecuted under the Logan act, and pursuing it with Carter as the first "victim" isn probably not politically tenable in a Dem majority Congress.
Right or wrong, it would be perceived as a partisan witch-hunt.

It would probably be considered a witch hunt, but so what? If the State can prove it. I would argue that at least Meshall if not Nasrallah (and I think Nasrallah, too) would be considered agents. And yes, Jimmy would be the first. Will it happen? Probably not. Should it happen? Absolutely.

Hey, they got OJ off. Anything can happen.

re: #132 wolfie

I'm no Bush fan, but you're stretching things. The economy is not anywhere near as bad at it was under Carter.
In any case, if I were to blame government, it would be Congress. That means Reps until 2007. But I see the Dems being even stupider.

I was 20 when the Carter Presidency ended, so although I was an adult, I wasn't as aware of such things as I am now. Given that, Bush is making a run for the title. I do remember 20% inflation, 8% unemployment, and "balloon mortgages", etc. Current inflation is obviously far less, even with the spike in energy and food prices, unemployment is 25% less, but the current mortgage meltdown is far far worse than in Carter's time and has much much greater long term implications.

Look, it's unfair to compare Presidents even just three decades apart item by item obviously. But, this current version has completely dropped the ball on our sovereignty and economy. When oil quadruples in price under your watch, the dollar sinks to historic lows, the unchecked flow of illegals over the border is considered good for the nation, the military is spread thin playing world policeman, when you kowtow to 7th century nomads, and when you go on a spending spree courtesy of the American taxpayer that would even make FDR blush...you're a fuck-up.

I do remember waiting in line for gas, odd/even days and all of that. But I don't EVER recall supermarket chains rationing rice for instance. Considering that this nation is the food basket of the planet, that is simply inexcusable.

Bush is not a leader. Whatever we thought we had leading this nation after his speech to Congress and the nation 9-20-01 vanished long ago, or maybe was never really there.

re: #180 looking closely

No.

Which gov't does Hassan Nasrallah of Hizb'Allah represent?
Which gov't does Khalid Masshal of HAMAS represent?

As far as I know, neither one of them hold elected office, and neither one of them has any appointment with any recognized gov't.

Again, I just don't see how the Logan act applies here.

They would be considered agents.

re: #144 guzziguy

Then, when I try to figure out why nothing got done today, I'm really baffled because I know I was busy all day long, and I'm really tired.

I realize this is a serious problem, and I'll try to get some help for it, but first I'll check my e-mail.

Oh, dear gods, does that sound all too familiar!

-- Ann

Somehow I doubt that Carter has anything resembling respect for Condi.

Not that he could get away with saying what he really felt about her (or anything, for that matter), it would be awesome it he actually did.

re: #182 looking closely

When it is not clear within this country that captured enemy illegal combatant aliens are not entitled to the protections of the US Constitution, I believe that there are some real deficiencies in our legal approach to terrorists, terrorism, and non-state terrorist groups.

Add to this the inability, as you evidence in the technical reading of the Logan Act, to prevent unauthorized dealings on any level with non-state organizations classified by the Executive Branch as terrorist / banned organizations to deal with, and there is a problem with the way the laws address the current conflict that we are engaged in.

As I stated, the Executive Branch (and the Legislative Branch via legislation) can ban American passport holders from visiting certain nations and make it a crime to do so. That is a nation which earns that status on the basis of their government. But, it does not specifically reference the conditions if one wants to visit / meet / talk with a non-state terrorist organization. The closest might be a prosecution on the basis of conspiracy with a terrorist organization to commit a terror act - but that would fundamentally impossible in the vast majority of cases to prove.

As for the organizations....Hamas is the 'legally' elected government of Gaza. It's still a stretch since Gaza is not really a defacto nation or state - but given its limbo status, that would be a lot closer to the intent of the Logan Act than Hizbollah which does not have any official capacity in Lebanon or Syria.

Of course, the inverse of the argument can also be true. If we are dealing with a non-state terrorist or terror organization, we can deal with them however we want since they are not a state and most international laws and treaties do not apply to them as they are not signatories to them.

re: #182 looking closely

If an American citizen simply wants to meet privately with a terrorist within another country, I don't see how you can stop that.

So, what would happen to you if you decided to go tomorrow to Cuba using a US passport to meet with Fidel and Raul without the permission of the State Department?

re: #184 marjoriemoon

It would probably be considered a witch hunt, but so what? If the State can prove it. I would argue that at least Meshall if not Nasrallah (and I think Nasrallah, too) would be considered agents. And yes, Jimmy would be the first. Will it happen? Probably not. Should it happen? Absolutely.

Hey, they got OJ off. Anything can happen.

Not "anything" can happen. Some things are possible, and some things are not. OJ got off mainly because of the weakness of the prosecution, vs the strength of the defense, and because assuming it was a "slam dunk" significant errors were made early in the case.

Apart from that, the Bush administration simply doesn't have the political capital to waste on this (in an election year, no less).

Assuming it did, before you are going to engage in what is certain to be viewed as a test case AND as a partisan witchhunt, you better be damn sure you have the goods, and they are 100% cut and dry.

You simply don't have them here.

Which gov'ts do you THINK Nasrallah and Meshall represent? I guarantee you that both the Syrian and Gazan/Palestinian gov'ts will explicitly and loudly disavow any formal connection with the above two. Game over right there.

Assuming you could prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt (which you can't, and won't), then you're going to have to prove that Carter actually acted to undermine gov't policy with these two.

Do you have transcripts of their private conversations in Syria? Then how are you going to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the two chatted about anything OTHER than baseball for two hours?

Again, you got nothing, and you're going to look real bad attacking a old man with a Nobel prize if you can't make it stick.

re: #190 Athos

So, what would happen to you if you decided to go tomorrow to Cuba using a US passport to meet with Fidel and Raul without the permission of the State Department?

If your name was Reverend Jeremiah Wright? Nothing.

Somehow I find it easier to believe Condi than Jummah al-Cahtuh.

Hmm..."Condi Rice a liar", that sounds about right.

re: #190 Athos

So, what would happen to you if you decided to go tomorrow to Cuba using a US passport to meet with Fidel and Raul without the permission of the State Department?

Assuming I could go, neither one of them would see me, that's what would happen in any realistic case.

Assuming your hypothetical case, if they did agree to give me "face time", I think it would be pretty damn clear to them, me, and anyone else watching, that I wasn't there as a representative of the US gov't and had no power whatever to influence US-Cuban policy.

Plus I wouldn't even try, which would make the Logan act moot.

The point isn't that I can't meet with Castro (or Khaddafi, or Chavez, etc), its that I am not allowed to muck with US foreign policy by such a meeting.

If I went, and told Castro that I had some plan to weasel around the embargo, or that I had influence with a the President, etc, and/or tried anything else to circumvent or alter Cuban-American policy, well, then the Logan act *would* apply, and I could be charged.

They're both lying.

State made public statement to allow them to have plausible deniability. But they also briefed Carter. And likely have or will debrief him.

From State's view nothing was lost by the meeting.

Who here doesn't believe that State talks to Hamas through third parties (unofficially) and would gladly deal with them in the open if it was politically feasible.

re: #185 mfarmer1

Allowing the US Dollar to become so devalued will come to haunt the economy long after Bush is gone.

re: #61 Whiterasta

He's a disgrace and a laughing stock. And that's about the least horrible thing I can say about him.

Lest I be smited with the Banning Stick.

i agree. he's a laughing stock. even hamas is laughing at him. and jimmy just keeps trudging on like he's going to turn these killers into human beings. he's a farce and an inconsequential old man. he will not be remembered fondly.

(quickly googling)

So the State Dept. spokesman, Sean McCormack, is also a liar?

FOX News confirmed on Thursday that Carter will travel to Syria next week for an unprecedented meeting with the senior leadership of Hamas. The State Department has designated Hamas a "foreign terrorist organization," a stance McCormack reiterated.

The State Department had "counseled the former president about having such a meeting," he said. "U.S. policy is that Hamas is a terrorist organization; we don't believe its in the interest of our policy or in the interest of peace to have such a meeting."

It's possible too that Carter doesn't remember, due to brain illness.

OK, link again: State Department: Carter Meeting With Terrorists Not 'in the Interest of Peace'

re: #182 looking closely

Our laws on dealing with terrorists are reasonably clear, I think.

Are they, really.

If you sent funds to the Al A qsa Martyrs Brigade, you would be prosecuted.

When Bush/Rice send them your tax dollars addressed to their Abbas/Fatah address, that's kosher.

re: #190 Athos

So, what would happen to you if you decided to go tomorrow to Cuba using a US passport to meet with Fidel and Raul without the permission of the State Department?

Sean Penn? Cindy Sheehan? Carter has great company.

Last time Carter was in the news so much he was President and I was taking it up the wazoo on gas prices, waiting in line to buy the shit, and then on even days. Coincidence?

re: #189 Athos

Add to this the inability, as you evidence in the technical reading of the Logan Act, to prevent unauthorized dealings on any level with non-state organizations classified by the Executive Branch as terrorist / banned organizations to deal with, and there is a problem with the way the laws address the current conflict that we are engaged in.

Without being too flip, there are limits to ANY laws.

The biggest one is jurisdiction. American law only applies in some places and at certain times.

If you want to create a law that says no American can ever meet anywhere with any representative of any organization the Executive branch classifies as a terrorist organization, I think you'd find that such a law was unconstitutional.

As for the organizations....Hamas is the 'legally' elected government of Gaza. It's still a stretch since Gaza is not really a defacto nation or state - but given its limbo status, that would be a lot closer to the intent of the Logan Act than Hizbollah which does not have any official capacity in Lebanon or Syria.

The US doesn't recognize the gov't of Gaza as such, and in fact, attempting to prosecute Carter under the Logan act for meeting with Hamas actually would de facto grant Hamas that sort of recognition!

But that's still inappropriate.

Oversimplifying considerably, Hamas is a political party and so is Hizb'Allah. Hizb'Allah controls seats in the Syrian gov't, just like (via inexact analogy) Hamas controls "seats" in the Palestinian gov't.

But just because SOME members of Hizballah and Hamas are agents of certain gov'ts, that doesn't mean that by default ANY member of Hamas or Hizb'Allah is an agent of a gov't. That's simply not true. Clearly there are members of both organizations (in fact MOST members of both) who have no influence whatever on any gov't action.

Well Carter, we call YOU a TRAITOR!
You should be ashamed- but psychotics don't feel shame, do they.

Thanks Jimmy! Quit Drinking the Bubba Beer!
Dear Jimmy:
You were a disgrace back then and you just continue to sink to new lows! If the State Dept. didn't tell you directly you would think that you or an aide could read the press releases condemning your trip and meetings.

jimmy carter is the perfect example of what happens to libs when they get old and don't learn anything. imagine being in the carter household. crazy jimmy, still desperate to be relevant, begins to badger rosalyn abt. "what happened, why, just the one term?"
yes go, she says . meet w/ the terrorists. and off he goes. and think how important he feels. stupid old bastard. he is respected by no one. he has accomplished nothing except put another nail in his already failed legacy.
and w/ all, these fools, jimmy carter, osama, john cary, and all the rest. it's never abt. reality, it's always abt. THEM.

re: #196 opinionated

They're both lying.

Well, either State told Carter not to meet with terrorists or they did not tell him that. One or the other has to be true.

Meanwhile, Carter claims State had NO prior contact whatever with him on the meeting.

I think its pretty clear who is lying.

State made public statement to allow them to have plausible deniability. But they also briefed Carter. And likely have or will debrief him.

From State's view nothing was lost by the meeting.

So you think the whole thing was a secret op and Carter was a clever agent of the State dept, eh?

Oddly enough, I find that hard to swallow.

I could certainly see why State would brief Carter and also (try to) debrief him, but that's not the same as sanctioning the trip.

What was lost by the meeting was the credibility of the State dept. If Nobel-winning ex Presidents hang out with State personae-non grata that undermines the authority of the State dept and makes State look petty and ridiculous. (OK, maybe that's not hard to do, but I don't think the State dept is going to deliberately sanction it!).

Who here doesn't believe that State talks to Hamas through third parties (unofficially) and would gladly deal with them in the open if it was politically feasible.

That's just it. If State can (and does) talk to Hamas through back channels, then why would it sanction a very visible undermining of its own "isolation" policy using Carter as a proxy? That doesn't make sense.

If State needs to talk to Hamas, it doesn't need Carter, nor does Hamas need Carter to talk to State.

re: #209 looking closely

That's just it. If State can (and does) talk to Hamas through back channels, then why would it sanction a very visible undermining of its own "isolation" policy using Carter as a proxy? That doesn't make sense.

.

Because it is not on State's volition not to talk to Hamas. State would talk to Hamas gladly.

But for now, particularly in an election year, it is politically not feasible.

Where Carter softens the idea, where he makes it palatable, ordinary, it serves State's long term interests.

re: #209 looking closely

Remember something about State - and Rice. Hamas won an election because State/Rice insisted- against Israel's will- the Hamas be allowed to participate.

Do you really believe State/Rice she Hamas as a legitimate political party to be accorded election rights, but that talking to them is beyond the pale?

Rice is a liar and a hypocrite. As is Carter. They make a perfect team.

Time to post this again

Carter is violating the

Logan Act

He's bustable IMHO

Well, many of you know that I've been following this story with a great deal of interest. I try and keep track of what State is up to.
Here's the story:

Carter believes that David Welch, who is Assistant Sec. of State, and the man in charge of Mid East diplomacy for the US, did not explicitly tell him not to go. Welch has denied that. He has said that he explicitly told Carter not to go. In addition, State made it clear in various avenues including it's Daily Press Briefings and in the media that it did not want Carter to go.

Carter believed State was just putting out that story because that what State does...it publicly says one thing and does another.
Now why would Carter get that idea?
Well, first off, Cater played that game with Andrew Young during his own administration. He pretended that Young didn't have permission to talk to the PLO when in reality Carter was all for those "secret" talks. When the talks became public, Carter hung Young out to dry. Of course, rather than taking responsibility for that, Carter, being the Jew-hating antisemitic bastard that he is, blamed the Jewish lobby for Young's resignation. He hasn't stopped blaming Jews since. Of course, he was Jew-hater long before that point.

Second, David Welch isn't exactly Mr. Clean when it comes to Hamas. Welch is our go-between to Hamas via the Egyptians. We "talk" to Hamas using the Egyptians and have been for several months. That is why Welch is in and out of Egypt. It is also why this meeting undercut not only Israel and not only the US, but also Egypt as well. Mubarak is livid with Carter. After all, that is the role Egypt has for itself in the Middle East.

Third, the White House also called Carter a liar today via Perino. Here's the Question & Answer:

Q Thank you, Dana. Two questions. The AP in Kuwait quotes Secretary of State Rice as saying, "The United States is not going to deal with Hamas. And we had certainly told President Carter that we did not think meeting with Hamas was going to help." And my question: Since the result of this telling was that Mr. Carter proceeded directly to violate this U.S. policy and meet with these terrorists, what is President Bush prepared to do to put an end to this one-man defiance of our policy which so gratified the terrorists?

MS. PERINO: Well, former President Carter is a private citizen, and he made a decision to not comply with what the State Department asked him to do. What I think the President would focus on is, if you go back to what reportedly Hamas said to former President Carter, that they were willing to take these steps for peace, that the very next day, that they went ahead and murdered many people at the Gaza crossing. And I think actions speak louder than words, and we remain very concerned about the situation. That's why Secretary Rice was in the region.

Q If the President, as our nation's chief law enforcer, fails to order Mr. Carter's passport revoked, how many more people like Carter may want to plot U.S. policy in this regard, do you imagine?

MS. PERINO: I don't know, you'll have to take a national survey.
[Link: www.whitehouse.gov...]

There's more which I might write about later.

Carter's trip accomplished nothing. Zero. He is trying to spin attention away from that fact.

A failed President and a failed Secretary of State disputing the facts basically. In this case I call it for the failed SS.
For being such a deep-thinking heavy-hitter Condi Rice has asserted Israeli roadblocks (to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from entering Israel) are the human rights equivalent to the '60s Civil Rights struggles(?).
Additionally we have all seen Putin effectively crap all over the USA, while this Russia expert was at State running the show. Rice has been all hat no cattle when it has come to accomplishment and gravitas in her position.

Also, I should add, that Carer was briefed by the State Dept. for over an hour prior to his leaving on this trip. The one who did the briefing was...David Welch. According to State, Welch told Carter during this briefing that it was a bad idea to go. So why the briefing?
According to State, they brief any President who asks as a courtesy.
Perhaps that is true.

The fact is, State didn't need Carter to act as a go-between since the Egyptians and Welch have already worked out an arrangement.
By this meeting, Carter, not only undercut Egypt, Israel, and the US, but also Abu Abbas who the US is trying to prop-up. By giving legitimacy to Hamas, Carter undercuts Abbas in the eyes to the Palestinians. Who needs Abbas, when the real power is with Hamas? That's was the validation Hamas needs.

So, actually, I think State had more to loose with Carter's trip and they knew it.
Carter also lied about what he "accomplished" during this meeting.

Carter busted Abbas' negotiating position relative to Hamas. Now Abbas is a shadow of a man, whose grasp on power, if he ever had any, is slipping away. He is just a passing shadow anyhow, but Carter has drastically shortened Abbas' political life. Abbas is nothing now, and should be ignored by Israel. Any concession that Israel makes to Abbas will be pocketed by Hamas. Israel would be not only foolish, but downright stupid and reckless to make any concession to Abbas, since Abbas will soon be gone from the scene, and Hamas will be taking over the West Bank. Carter has helped assure that.

"Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter on Wednesday accused Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice of not telling the truth about warnings..."

Umm, Jimmy, she shouldn't have to tell you anything.

re: #82 HelloDare

Jimmy's short term memory is gone.
He thinks he's still president.
Can't remember conversations from a few days ago.
You make the diagnosis.

Indeed. I watched my parents in law go into Alzheimers. They still thought they were doing fine, but they so weren't. Even if he wasn't awful already he's obviously too far gone to be out alone and G-d forbid, meddling in foreign affairs.

re: #213 MJ

Carter believes that David Welch, who is Assistant Sec. of State, and the man in charge of Mid East diplomacy for the US, did not explicitly tell him not to go.

Its worse than that. From the article quoted in this thread title:

"President Carter has the greatest respect for ... Rice and believes her to be a truthful person. However, perhaps inadvertently, she is continuing to make a statement that is not true," a statement issued by the Carter center in Atlanta said on Wednesday.

"No one in the State Department or any other department of the U.S. government ever asked him (Carter) to refrain from his recent visit to the Middle East or even suggested that he not meet with Syrian President (Bashar) Assad or leaders of Hamas," it said.

So per Carter, nobody from State even **suggested** to him that meeting with Hamas was a bad idea.

Yet, per CNN, a week BEFORE the trip:

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Thursday the department would provide Carter with assistance on his trip, as is customary for a former president.

But he added the department "would not participate in the planning or scheduling" or in any meetings with Hamas officials, and he counseled Carter against such talks.

"U.S. policy is that Hamas is a terrorist organization," McCormack said. "We don't believe it is in the interest of our policy or in the interest of peace to have such a meeting."

McCormack said that Assistant Secretary David Welch urged Carter in a phone call not to take part in the meeting, arguing doing so would be a detriment to U.S. policy in the Middle East.

These statements were on national news long before Carter left for the Middle East. There were national news headlines on every TV station, and in the press quoting the White House (ie State) as advising Carter not to meet with Hamas and Assad.

But even though the White House request of Carter not to make this trip was covered on national new, Carter didn't perceive a "suggestion" that he not go.

I think what's happened here is that pretty much NOBODY supported this trip, and Carter got a lot more crap for it than even he expected. So now he's doing what leftists do best (or at least most often), blaming the Bush administration.

Funny I read in the news that the State Department had asked him not to go before he left. If I heard about it, how is it that he didn't?

Just wondering Jhimma, since you just called US Secretary of State Rice a lier, just what you'd call your good pals at Hamas who called you out as a fraud, "peace my ass dude", and fired rockets into Israel the same day to put emphasis on it - what do you call them?

Would it be Terrorist, as you implied in Egypt? Hunh, or is it all just "our fault" again, as in " Malaise 78"?

Gosh, we're sooo dumb, right Dhimmi? Cause the US voters and the Juuues voted against you (actually in favor of the Guy In The White Hat) in the unforgettable year of 1980?

(How much mula you collect on this Peace trip?) Well, there's all those folks that left you after your recent anti-Semitic rant pub at the Carter Center to replace, right"

Anyone, ditto, ditto, Spicule! ( a negative response in Sociology merits an "F".)

Carter went native long ago.

I say it's the hashish.

Aristogiton :
0Carter went native long ago.
I say it's the hashish.

Ah, were it as simple as that.

My previous post says it all: Jimmy and Ros were douchebags from the git-go at Annapolis, line hogers, and this is first hand from my USN family who suffered these fools then.

Now he's the " Habititat for Hummanity' King. Wish he'd been w/ me as a FEMA house inspector in NOLA post Katrina crawling through over 200 houses making my reports to DC, & making the low grade pay I collected, along with the dreaded "four month cough of death", insults from the "entitled, but can't evacuate and can't swim" recipients, etc.

Interment awaits this walking corpse.

Why does that cat murdering wimp need the State Department to tell him not to consort with terrorists?

Having said that, I'm certain they did tell him - in strong terms - not to go. And now he's using the liberal version of accountability: blame someone else - preferably a female. What a complete jerk Carter really is.

re: #225 Picayune

Your remarks only help to fill in the grim details in Jimmy Carter's dossier.

It's way past time to pull that senile old bastard's passport.

Let him sit on his porch and try to redefine "peace" as allowing terrorist groups to attack Israel without any reprisal.

re: #153 Libs are Mental

With the mad rush to bio-fuels eating up all the farming resources they will feel the pinch soon enough. Every farmer with a free acre will plant corn for the subsidized ethanol producers, taking food off everyones plate and putting it in some liberals limo. How many people have to starve before the left learns this.

I am hoping that what this will REALLY means is that the &^%$# corn syrup (especially the "high fructose" variety) will be taken OUT of everything (because corn will be directed at fuel) & SUGAR will be put back in!

Okay, call me an optimist....

A thought:

Perhaps the White House didn't forcibly keep Carter from going because they want the American public to get a good, long look at a Democratic president...?

Not thinking of conspiracy theories, but of politics...

I once worked with a man who was the sargeant in the white house communications office during the Carter and Reagan years (part of his 1st term) and he told me that Carter genuinely believes his own BS. He also said he and his little wifey can both be terribly vindictive and nasty as hell. I guess when he lost his re-election bid it was both pins and needles for the staff and counting the minutes till he was gone. They didn't think much of the guy then and I would guess they think less now. I think that speaks volumes.

re: #229 Flavia

I am hoping that what this will REALLY means is that the &^%$# corn syrup (especially the "high fructose" variety) will be taken OUT of everything (because corn will be directed at fuel) & SUGAR will be put back in!

Okay, call me an optimist....

I winced when they began talking about bio-fuels. Taking garbage corn is one thing, but taking perfectly good corn and turning it into ethanol so you can burn it as a fuel, just seemed so wrong. Now the law of unintended consequences rears it's ugly head and demands attention.

The libs won't admit that taking food stocks out of the market place to turn those foods into fuel was wrong. The funny thing is that farmers are reducing acreage in corn and planting soy beans instead. A shortage of soy beans had soy beans making more money per acre than corn did. The issue with rice is that folks are creating an artificial shortage of rice by hording it. Thank the libs again for screwing up a system that worked, pretty much without any problems for decades.

Carter is trying to outdo the Clintons in mendacity and sheer chutzpah and he has succeeded. You could not pick up a newspaper or website from the time Djimmah Car(bombersuppor)ter announced his Habitat for Hamass visit, that didn't have one US State Department Official or another tell this POS NOT TO VISIT HAMASS AS IT IS AGAINST US POLICY and HAMASS IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION. See [Link: www.ynetnews.com...] from April 10, 2008 when David Welch explicitly said DJIMMAH was warned in a SERIES OF MEETINGS, not just One, not to meet with HAMASS. Is Djimmah saying that RICE herself didn't meet with him and tell him point blank not to meet? That is the only possibility, but I think she met with this POS too and told him NOT TO GO. So who do I believe in this situation Djimmah ('every enemy of the US is my friend') Car(bombersuppor)ter or Sec Rice. I put my money on Secy Rice in this one.
Perhaps Djimmah finally crossed the line on this one and although a not so super delegate at the Dem Convention will finally become the persona non grata in the dhimmocrat party.

Carter is an aeging gasbag who wants to stay relevent. He should go back to Georgia and plant a few peanuts.

Take Jimmuh's passport away, and don't give it back. It won't be the same as prosecuting him under the Logan Act, but it will help.

Carter needs someone to tell him not to meet with terrorists?

OK, please, nobody tell Jimmy not to hit himself in the head with a hammer.

This is a problem that could just solve itself.

Charles write, "Jimmy Carter continues to plumb new depths of disgraceful behavior: Carter says Secretary Rice ‘not telling truth’."

For sure. At point in time has an elected official or cabinet member ever not told the truth.

So the State Dept. and a former President discuss the prospect of the former President meeting with a terror group and NO ONE DOCUMENTED WHAT WAS SAID AND NO ONE PUT IT IN WRITING? What a cluster...