The Shotgun Blog
Saturday, December 23, 2006
Is Jimmy Carter on the Take? Was He Ever on the Take? Is He on the Saudi Payroll?
From Front Page Magazine:
Carter’s chief complaint seems to be that anyone who identifies with Israel, whether in the form of individual support or in a more organized capacity, is incapable of grappling honestly with the issues in the Arab-Israeli conflict. But Carter is poorly placed to make this claim. If such connections alone are sufficient to discredit his critics, then by his own logic Carter is undeserving of a hearing. After all, the Carter Center, the combination research and activist project he founded at Emory University in 1982, has for years prospered from the largesse of assorted Arab financiers.
Especially lucrative have been Carter’s ties to Saudi Arabia. Before his death in 2005, King Fahd was a longtime contributor to the Carter Center and on more than one occasion contributed million-dollar donations. In 1993 alone, the king presented Carter with a gift of $7.6 million. And the king was not the only Saudi royal to commit funds to Carter’s cause. As of 2005, the king’s high-living nephew, Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, has donated at least $5 million to the Carter Center.
Meanwhile the Saudi Fund for Development, the kingdom’s leading loan organization, turns up repeatedly on the center’s list of supporters. Carter has also found moneyed allies in the Bin Laden family, and in 2000 he secured a promise from ten of Osama bin Laden's brothers for a $1 million contribution to his center. To be sure, there is no evidence that the Bin Ladens maintain any contact with their terrorist relation. But applying Carter’s own standard, his extensive contacts with the Saudi elite must make his views on the Middle East suspect.
And to think this man has the nerve to criticize Israel's supporters! There is much, much more, so rtwt [read the whole thing].
h/t to Melanie Phillips, who raises related questions about James Baker III.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Is Jimmy Carter on the Take? Was He Ever on the Take? Is He on the Saudi Payroll?:
Classic ad hominem. Rather than attack Carter's position on the issues, just attack his integrity and/or sincerity. But even if it is the case that he only says what he does because someone wrote him a cheque, that does not make those beliefs any more right or wrong than they are if they are sincere beliefs. They are right or wrong on their own merits, regardless of the smear attempts.
"Is Jimmy Carter on the Take? Was He Ever on the Take? Is He on the Saudi Payroll?" Just questions, right? Like: "Paul Martin Supports Child Pornography?" Same tactics, different issue.
Posted by: Mark Logan | 2006-12-23 4:44:07 PM
Jummuh Carter has integrity????? to attack??? nothing to see here folks just keep them Saudi checks coming in.
Posted by: bubba brown | 2006-12-23 6:02:57 PM
Not at all the same. It's been clearly established that Carter's beliefs are wrong, that he is dishonest, very biased and often irrational. Now his motivation is being uncovered and, surprise surprise, it's money, big money.
You're a strange poster, Mr Logan, rather perverse in your thinking, you're lucky I have no clout here, I'd ban a nasty little lefty sophist like you in a heartbeat. You do not provide intelligent or rational comments.
Posted by: anon | 2006-12-23 6:04:53 PM
Jimmy Carter was the worst president of USA.
Never under any president were the USA so humiliated by the attack on their ambassy in Tehran.
In a sense Jimmy Carter was the grandfather of the attack on 9/11. By his attitudes, he encouraged terrorists to attack USA.
As a Christian, he was the typical dead again Christian.
Posted by: Rémi Houle | 2006-12-23 6:07:19 PM
Actually Mark Logan ad hominem attacks are fair game in this case, since Mr Carter refuses to openly debate his book, particularly with Alan Dershowitz, ostensibly because Dershowitz is Jewish.
Mr Carter calims you can't honestly debate his book if you're as he calims, under the influence of Israeli lobbyists. In fact he accuses anyone who disagrees with him as being either uninformed, or under the influence of the Israel lobby (whatever the f*** that means!).
So following the fact that he is clearly on the take from Saudi financiers, he has disqualified himself from consideration as anything but an Arab shill.
Actually Mr Carter is a raving anti-semite and although not a Holocaust denier (he's too shrewd for that) he IS a Holocaust ignorer.
Posted by: bcf | 2006-12-23 6:35:35 PM
LOL Here I thought ol' Jimmy was just a poor old fool. Now I know he isn't that poor. He's a Saudi rich old fool !
Posted by: MarkAlta | 2006-12-23 7:11:35 PM
Jimmy Carter is a disgrace and me, as an Iranian, will never forgive him for stabbing our King in the back in 1979. He was/is a complete failure
Posted by: Winston | 2006-12-23 7:31:00 PM
You guys are nuts.
Is there such a shortage of credible opponents to justify digging up dirt on ex-presidents? A losing gane if there ever was one, as they are all suspect , but to justify your own eistence by proving that Carter is corrupt in some way is a losing battle. Haliburton!
Posted by: ulf | 2006-12-23 7:34:23 PM
What about "Haliburton"? You can't even spell it! Carter is an ex-President who pops up all the time on the international scene. ulf, you probably didn't notice because you're dumb and ignorant, but he recently came out with an attempted best seller on the Middle East and was certainly getting lots of free publicity by media morons. "Proving that Carter is corrupt" (thanks for acknowledging his corruption) has nothing to do with justifying our "eistence". (Unh, did you mean existance?) Where do you idiots come from? Are you a university student?
Posted by: anon | 2006-12-23 7:50:29 PM
Note that he can't even spell Halliburton. That is a crystal clear indication that he is only parroting the most shallow of dogma. He has never ever actually spent any time reading anything significant about Halliburton, actually studying the issue, otherwise he'd spell it correctly.
Posted by: anon | 2006-12-23 7:54:42 PM
Ulf this is how these yahoo's operate, simple distraction from the real issues. Instead of arguing against the merits of what Carter said they will scream, anti semite! Holocaust Denier! Jimmy Carter is part of Al-Queda!!!! These are not analytical people, they support the use of cluster and phospherus bombs on civilian populations by the IDF, their brains are clearly warped by some 'white mans burden' 'just war' bullshit propoganda fed to them by Ezzy and the National Post.
Posted by: Mike | 2006-12-23 8:31:51 PM
TO DEFEND Israel today is to be either callous or wilfully ignorant. Had Julie Burchill bothered during her visit there to cross the few miles from Israel to Gaza or the West Bank, she would have seen such human suffering as to disturb even her frenetic adulation of Israel. She might have seen the daily lot of nearly three million Palestinians as they battle with army checkpoints, curfews, random shootings, arbitrary arrests and air raids. She might have found that the “superJews” she so admires humiliate and oppress Palestinians at a whim: last year, at the Nablus checkpoint, a middle-aged man was made to strip, get down on all fours and bark like a dog before he could enter his city. Women in labour routinely wait at checkpoints until some give birth there and see their babies die.
Those that survive live a blighted childhood. Since September 2000, Israel has killed more than 660 Palestinian children and wounded 9,000 — such as little Iman, sprayed with bullets when walking to school in Rafah last month, even after she died. Thousands of children are traumatised by the daily horrors they witness. For a Palestinian child, life under Israeli occupation means turning 15 and seeing the army come to arrest you if you are male, or seeing your friends bleed to death because no ambulance is allowed to rescue them.
It is difficult to convey the scale and effect of Israel’s abuses of Palestinian lives through statistics alone. But these are horrifying enough: since 2000, nearly 4,000 Palestinians killed, and 30,000 injured; 400 were assas-sinated; and 25,000 homes were demolished. In addition, hundreds of acres of farmland were destroyed. No state on earth, except Israel, could get away with these atrocities, now routinely justified as “defence” against Palestinian “ terrorism”.
The truth is that the West, which created Israel, cannot bear to see what it has done. In trying to solve the problem of Jewish persecution in Europe, which culminated in the Holocaust, Western powers helped to establish the Jewish state as a refuge for the Jews and their own consciences. A compelling argument at the time, it became unassailable when Old Testament stories about the ancient Israelites and their exploits in the Holy Land were thrown in.
But these were European sensitivities arising from European events that had nothing to do with the people who paid the price for Israel’s establishment. Most Palestinians are Muslims who do not accept the Biblical version of events. So why were they sacrificed to assuage European guilt and fulfil Zionist ambitions? And who cares to compute the cost to the Palestinians of creating Israel 56 years ago? Far easier to ignore all that and cling to the romantic illusion of an Israel of fearless pioneers and liberal upholders of civilised, Western values. But the ugly reality behind this myth is showing and people like Julie Burchill will have to take note some day
Posted by: SantaClause | 2006-12-23 8:41:45 PM
Nothing Jimmy Carter says has any merit, no one really believes that it does, it's just a way of attacking people that's all. Jimmy Carter is worse than a very bad man because he pretends otherwise, he has allowed selfishness and ego to rule over him.
Posted by: Philanthropist | 2006-12-23 9:08:12 PM
SantaClause has been reading to many Palestinian school books, he probably believes the lie in their school books about how the jews eat babies for passover. Probably another brianwashed Arab
Posted by: alan | 2006-12-23 10:08:44 PM
SantaClause is a Jew-hating lowlife trying to set up the premise that Israel deserves to be eradicated. Here's some facts:
1. ISRAEL BECAME A STATE IN 1312 B.C., TWO MILLENNIA BEFORE ISLAM;
2. ARAB REFUGEES FROM ISRAEL BEGAN CALLING THEMSELVES "PALESTINIANS" IN 1967, TWO DECADES AFTER (MODERN) ISRAELI STATEHOOD;
3. AFTER CONQUERING THE LAND IN 1272 B.C., JEWS RULED IT FOR A THOUSAND YEARS AND MAINTAINED A CONTINUOUS PRESENCE THERE FOR 3,300 YEARS;
4. THE ONLY ARAB RULE FOLLOWING CONQUEST IN 633 A.D. LASTED JUST 22 YEARS;
5. FOR OVER 3,300 YEARS, JERUSALEM WAS THE JEWISH CAPITAL. IT WAS NEVER THE CAPITAL OF ANY ARAB OR MUSLIM ENTITY. EVEN UNDER JORDANIAN RULE, (EAST) JERUSALEM WAS NOT MADE THE CAPITAL, AND NO ARAB LEADER CAME TO VISIT IT;
6. JERUSALEM IS MENTIONED OVER 700 TIMES IN THE BIBLE, BUT NOT ONCE IS IT MENTIONED IN THE QUR'AN;
7. KING DAVID FOUNDED JERUSALEM; MOHAMMED NEVER SET FOOT IN IT;
8. JEWS PRAY FACING JERUSALEM; MUSLIMS FACE MECCA. IF THEY ARE BETWEEN THE TWO CITIES, MUSLIMS PRAY FACING MECCA, WITH THEIR BACKS TO JERUSALEM;
9. IN 1948, ARAB LEADERS URGED THEIR PEOPLE TO LEAVE, PROMISING TO CLEANSE THE LAND OF JEWISH PRESENCE. 68% OF THEM FLED WITHOUT EVER SETTING EYES ON AN ISRAELI SOLDIER;
10. VIRTUALLY THE ENTIRE JEWISH POPULATION OF MUSLIM COUNTRIES HAD TO FLEE AS THE RESULT OF VIOLENCE AND POGROMS;
11. SOME 630,000 ARABS LEFT ISRAEL IN 1948, WHILE CLOSE TO A MILLION JEWS WERE FORCED TO LEAVE THE MUSLIM COUNTRIES;
12. IN SPITE OF THE VAST TERRITORIES AT THEIR DISPOSAL, ARAB REFUGESS WERE DELIBERATELY PREVENTED FROM ASSIMILATING INTO THEIR HOST COUNTRIES. OF 100 MILLION REFUGEES FOLLOWING WORLD WAR 2, THEY ARE THE ONLY GROUP TO HAVE NEVER INTEGRATED WITH THEIR CORELIGIONISTS. MOST OF THE JEWISH REFUGEES FROM EUROPE AND ARAB LANDS WERE SETTLED IN ISRAEL, A COUNTRY NO LARGER THAN NEW JERSEY;
13. THERE ARE 22 MUSLIM COUNTRIES, NOT COUNTING PALESTINE. THERE IS ONLY ONE JEWISH STATE. ARABS STARTED ALL FIVE WARS AGAINST ISRAEL, AND LOST EVERY ONE OF THEM;
14. FATAH AND HAMAS CONSTITUTIONS STILL CALL FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF ISRAEL. ISRAEL CEDED MOST OF THE WEST BANK AND ALL OF GAZA TO THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY, AND EVEN PROVIDED IT WITH ARMS;
15. DURING THE JORDANIAN OCCUPATION, JEWISH HOLY SITES WERE VANDALIZED AND WERE OFF LIMITS TO JEWS. UNDER ISRAELI RULE, ALL MUSLIM AND CHRISTIAN HOLY SITES ARE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL FAITHS;
16. OUT OF 175 UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS UP TO 1990, 97 WERE AGAINST ISRAEL; OUT OF 690 GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTIONS, 429 WERE AGAINST ISRAEL;
17. THE U.N. WAS SILENT WHEN THE JORDANIANS DESTROYED 58 SYNAGOGUES IN THE OLD CITY OF JERUSALEM. IT REMAINED SILENT WHILE JORDAN SYSTEMATICALLY DESECRATED THE ANCIENT JEWISH CEMETERY ON THE MOUNT OF OLIVES, AND IT REMAINED SILENT WHEN JORDAN ENFORCED APARTHEID LAWS PREVENTING JEWS FROM ACCESSING THE TEMPLE MOUNT AND WESTERN WALL.
Posted by: anon | 2006-12-23 10:16:58 PM
And probably the most important point (IMHO). Israel is the ONLY country in the region that allows democratic elections where candidates of ALL faiths are allowed to be elected and sit in the Knesset.
Posted by: Harry | 2006-12-23 10:28:27 PM
Is Jimmy Carter on the take? The answer is big time and it is well documented down to the amount. Of course so is James Barker and so many others. The problem is that these people are clearly in a conflict of interest (to say the least) and have no credibility whatsoever when it comes to the ME, etc.
Posted by: Alain | 2006-12-23 10:38:59 PM
The original vision was a tiny Israeli colony would integrate into the region. The Jews did not expel the "Palestinians", they hoped to live with them. When one considers the wonderful advances in medicine, technology, agricultural sciences, so much being done and coming out of that tiny country, it's enough to make one weep at the lost vision. The entire arab world could have been blessed with the benefits of sharing the region with such a civilized people, instead they wish them eradicated. "What could have been".
To see so many Canadian trolls posting their revisionist thoughts on the internet is also enough to make one weep, they hate Jews, I guess their parents hated Jews, they love to try and paint Israel as the villains in it all. Seven million Israelis are the agressors, yeah riiight...
Posted by: anon | 2006-12-23 11:18:54 PM
Merry christmas to one and all. Mr. Logan you are a Paul Martin fan, sad, he was the worst excuse of a prime minister this demented dominion ever had. we are blessed with the best Prime Minister in my memory. I am 58 years old. I am seeing that little weasel faced git P.E.T. ressurected through his spawn and the Lieberanos are wetting their collective pants,weird the next year or so is going to be very weird. the best the lieberanos can do is Dion?????? HOOOOWAAAA
Posted by: bubba brown | 2006-12-24 12:33:17 AM
For those of you who said that Carter was the worst president the US ever had, you are so right. I lived there during his regieme and what a hell hole he made it. Long gas lines, angry people and numerous lies from Jimmie himself. While we spent hours sitting in line at the pumps, he was saying that there was a shortage of oil, while tankers were docked in the Gulf waiting to unload, but were not allowed to do so. He was aiding his Saudi friends who wanted to up the price of gas, so they could buy more weapons to attack us and Israel. Keep up your attacks anon, you too are so right. These pro Arab and anti Jewish idiots make me sick.
Posted by: Freedom of speech | 2006-12-24 9:16:45 AM
Palestinians are a perfect example of what you get by koran teachings. Koran and mullahs teach that they must hate and kill Jews and Christians. And they try to do it there in Palestine. But they rightly harvest what they deserve.
It would be so simple if the muslim arab states, who have tons of money, care enough to say: OK, Palestinians, leave Israel alone, they are the true owners of this land since 3 000 years.
Come in our countries and we will help you to settle in our countries. It would solve the problem once and for all. No more suffering, no more terrorism, no more children dying.
But no. Even if so-called Palestinians are more or less the remnant of muslim attackers on Israel at the time of the beginning of islam, they prefer to die, suffer, hate and murder.
That is their own choice. If I would be Israel, I would wage a ruthless war on them until they leave and go to another arab muslim country where they will be with the same irk.
It is the same problem in any place where there is a muslim group living with other religions and civilizations.
In Afghanistan, the Talibans destroyed Buddhas statues that were considered historic and a marvel and supported international terrorism. In Lebanon, they maimed and killed Christians and now try to topple the government. They also murdered in cold blood many leaders: Pierre Gemayel, Rafik Hariri, a journalist, a TV reporter.
In India they bombed a train not long ago. In Somalia, they are trying to overthrow the legal government and declared war on Ethiopia. In Sudan they killed at least 100 000 people and are still at it. In Russia, they killed hundreds of children in a school.
In Spain, they killed thousands of people. Sadly Spain government cowardly withdrew their troops and surrendered to terrorism. Where is Spain heading? Invasion by Islam?
In England, France, Netherlands, USA, Koweit, Canada, Indonesia, Nigeria, Australia, Algeria, Lybia, Yugoslavia, Jordan, Irak, Iran, Bali, Philippines, Germany, Turkey, Egypt, there are problems with Islamists.
I certainly forget some places.
Is there a place where they don't cause trouble?
That is why we must take arms and wage war on Islamofacists. It will be called WWIII maybe. But like Winston Churchill said, let's wage war with all our might until victory. We shall not stop until Islam is eradicated.
Posted by: Rémi Houle | 2006-12-24 11:58:22 AM
Carpet bombing of some of those get-togethers where there are 250,000 of 'em in a square burning flags would be a nice start.
Posted by: DCM | 2006-12-24 5:37:05 PM
MOST OF THOSE ISSUING COMMENTS ON JIMMY CARTER, HAVE NOT YET REMARKED HOW MUCH OF A LIAR HE IS. AMONG HIS MANY OTHER LIES, BESIDES THAT HE IS FUNDED BY SAUDI ARABIA, (WHO GET THEIR MONEY FROM US BY ILLEGAL MONOPOLISTIC METHODS, VIA OPEC) CARTER IN HIS RECENT DISHONEST BOOK, (THAT ISRAEL, NOT THE ARABS, ARE AN APARTHEID STATE?) HE CLAIMS THAT ISRAEL HAS NOT KEPT ITS WORD TO TURN OVER JUDEA AND SAMARIA (WHICH JIMMY LIKE OTHER JEW-BAITERS, CALLS 'THE WEST BANK") WHEN THE TRUTH IS,
A. THAT IT WAS MENACHEM BEGIN PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL AT THE TIME, WHO VOLUNTEERED, RPT VOLUNTEERED TO EXCHANGE THE SINAI DESERT AND ITS PRECIOUS OIL FIELDS, IN EXCHANGE FOR AN EGYPTIAN SIGNATURE ON A PIECE OF PAPER, CALLED 'PEACE TREATY." IT WAS JIMMY CARTER WHO DISHONESTLY CLAIMED THE PEACE DEAL WAS HIS IDEA, WHEN IT WAS ABSOLUTELY NOT CARTER'S TO GIVE. BUT BEING A MAN OF NO PRINCIPLES, CARTER CLAIMS THE IDEA AS HIS OWN. JIMMY ALSO LIES WHEN HE WRITES THAT ISRAEL HAD PROMISED TO TURN OVER MORE OF THEIR TINY COUNTRY TO THE ARABS, ER, 'PALESTINIANS.' ALSO A LIE! READING THE HISTORY AT THE TIME, MENACHEM BEGIN ADAMANTLY RESISTED PRESSURE FROM JIMMY TO MOVE OUT. SEE, E. G., THE BOOK BY JIMMY'S EQUALLY HOSTILE SECRETARY OF STATE, CYRUS VANCE, WHO REPORTS THAT MENACHEM BEGIN 'ADAMANTLY' RESISTED THE CONTINUOUS PRESSURE FROM JIMMY, TO TURN OVER THE LAND OF JUDEA AND SAMARIA, WHERE THE JEWS, NOT THE ARABS, HAVE LIVED FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. BUT THE ARABS CLAIM THEY OWN THE WHOLE WORLD ANYWAY, SO WHAT ELSE IS NEW? AND AS HAS BEEN CLEARLY DOCUMENTED, JIMMY, LIKE JAMES BAKER ALONGSIDE, HAVE BEEN PURCHASED CHEAPLY BY THE SAUDIS WHO STEAL THEIR MONEY FROM THE AMERICAN AND WORLD CONSUMER, WITH THEIR CRIMINAL MONOPOLY, OPEC, AND USE IT TO BUY LOYALTY. REMEMBER, BECAUSE OPEC IS A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE, THE MEMBERS CANNOT MEET EVER, RPT, EVER ON AMERICAN SOIL BECAUSE THEY WOULD ALL BE ARRESTED AND THROWN INTO JAIL. SO THEY HAVE ALL THEIR MEETINGS OUTSIDE USA TERRITORY.
JERRY BORIS PHILA
Posted by: JERRY BORIS | 2006-12-24 10:36:27 PM
Thanks for the info. At first I thought Carter was just giving his own opinion, but its pretty clear now that he's just a paid spokesman for Saudi interests - not the "patriotic American" he claims to be. Its doubly ironic, of course, since he smears all his critics as being members of the "Israeli Lobby" when he himself is on the Saudi payroll. That shouldn't be too surprising though. Anyone who remembers the mid-70s recalls that Carter's brother, Billy, was a lobbyist for Libya while Jimmy was actually in office.
Bottom line - the Carters were and are bought and paid for with Arabian petrodollars.
Posted by: APS | 2006-12-28 11:14:25 AM
You do know that by raising this issue, you are opening the door for an attack on the Bush family's strong connection with the Saudis, don't you?
Posted by: Howard Roark | 2006-12-28 1:59:54 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.