<p>I heard on the news today that President Carter announced how many nukes Israel has! (150) After meeting with Hamas, if I was Israel I would be questioning why this guy is doing what he is doing, and surely would request that he no longer has a security clearance. What gave him the right to discuss their nuclear program? I am just shocked that he was so arrogant to believe he should release through the media security issues of another country. I guess we all can realize which side he is on, and it’s not Israel</p>
<p>Carter is 84 years old. I’m sorry to say that I think his faculties have faded, and he has become a loose cannon. I would be sorry to see his prior achievements tarnished by statements he makes now in extreme old age. I don’t think it’s fair to assume that what he says or does now reflects his views over the course of his career. His friends and family need to get him off the world stage.</p>
<p>I agree that his handlers need to get him to knock it off, but this is just one more sign of how he feels about Israel. 18 mos. ago he published a book that showed his feelings and created an uproar. If we assume that it took him 1 yr from start to finish, we must assume that it was @ 3 yrs ago when he began showing his opinions.</p>
<p>Here is a snippet from the Washington Post (which is a left leaning paper)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Apartheid by definition is:
</p>
<p>When that book came out, that was the first time I thought he was losing it. He was pretty old even then.</p>
<p>He’s a courageuos guy pointing out what many Americans
don’t want to hear - we support a country that has a long
record of hatred and oppression and with their nuclear capacity
is a threat to their neighbors and others across the world -
in fact someday maybe even us. It’s important information for
Americans to know. Good for him!</p>
<p>Carter was reknown for his ability to create peace where no one ever could, now it seems he is creating a larger divide and egging on the situation.</p>
<p>I just can’t imagine how angered the US Jewish community is feeling today. my MIL is jewish and had family who were survivors of WWII that now live in Israel. I am sure she is seething at him right now. </p>
<p>I am anxious to see what the candidates will state if they are asked about this.</p>
<p>Add into the mix that this weekend it was reported on Drudge that he was meeting with super delegates to get Hillary out. This seems to imply he still has power within the dems world</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is true we supported Hussein against Iran in the 80’s, but he is not only pointing it out, he is also saying lets understand homicide bombers and giving them a platform. Israel has killed innocent victims, but Hamas uses innocent people to strap bombs to themselves and kill innocent people on a bus, shopping in the street, etc. They are not hitting military structures, just killing Israelis. I am not saying Israel is right, but neither is the PLO and Hamas. Israel is defending themselves…when did you last here of an Israeli who went into Palestine and detonated a bomb on a bus? </p>
<p>Even Bill Clinton stated the failed talks occurred because of Palestine, not Israel</p>
<p>My H attended a seminar last night with Alan Dershowitz as speaker. According to him, Carter can be prosecuted for revealing the information he did (besides the fact that he is meeting with Hamas)…</p>
<p>Add to this, (and this is according to Dershowitz), if Carter ends up throwing his support behind Obama, the Democratic Party is going to have problems in the fall,…</p>
<p>Finally, (and this is not pretty so don’t shoot the messenger)…He believes that if it is a well-known fact that Israel is stockpiling these nuclear weapons, Iran and other Middle Eastern countries have every right to protect and defend themselves…</p>
<p>Yes, I agree that Carter needs to be made aware of the consequences of his actions…</p>
<p>What Dershowitz said is consist with what I first heard <em>mumble</em> years (20?) ago – that conducting your own personal foreign policy discussions without the approval of the President is a federal crime. Carter has been doing this for a LONG time, and it is only his status as Mr. President Carter that has saved him from a stay at Leavenworth. His actions in Haiti come to mind as a particular example.</p>
<p>This isn’t to say he’s wrong or right, but he does seem to be breaking federal laws pretty regularly. At least that’s how I’ve heard it. IANAL. YMMV.</p>
<p>I am sure he is aware, let’s remember he got hit on the book released in 06. </p>
<p>I also agree he now has given Iran the right to say I need to have nukes to defend my country. He officially has created a problem, by releasing this info, how will the world be able to say to Iran you can’t have nukes, but Israel can? Won’t this create a global problem of if you are not with me you are against me?</p>
<p>Carter has been off the charts for a long time. I do remember the Haiti incident and thought he was nuts then (he was 70 then). Add in his remarks in 04 that 3rd world countries where he was an election inspection had less voter fraud than our country sealed the deal that he was now speaking his own personal opinions and the US be d*mned!</p>
<p>I admit his work with Habitat for Humanity is amazing, but that doesn’t excuse him from wielding his political power for his personal agenda/beliefs</p>
<p>Carter has a long history of being counter-productive in international relations. People on both sides of the aisle give George H W Bush credit for the coalition that he and Jim Baker put together to show a unified world against Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait. However, Carter did his best to unravel this coalition by calling foreign leaders and trying to get them to not join. He was not only the worst president of the 20th Century, he is also its worst ex-president.</p>
<p>This would be the same Dershowitz that helped OJ Simpson walk, right? And, we are supposed to respect HIS opinion on ethicial issues?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The New Democratic Party isn’t worried about national security. They will just hope for the best.</p>
<p>It seems to me that while Carter has previously taken positions that many people disagree with, in his old age he has lost his discretion in terms of how to express those positions. It’s one thing to criticize Israel, for example, but another to refer to “apartheid.” It’s one thing to sympathize with the plight of the Palestinians, and another to physically embrace a Hamas leader.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Either Dershowitz is right as a matter of law, or he isn’t. His representation of Simpson is irrelevant. It’s not a matter of ethics.</p>
<p>Since IANAL, he might very well be wrong, but his is not the only legally-knowledgeable opinion saying that Carter is in violation of the Logan Act.</p>
<p>Story on Carter and the Logan Act from the famously Republican NPR: [Jimmy</a> Carter Gives Logan Act a Boost : NPR](<a href=“http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89922213]Jimmy”>Jimmy Carter Gives Logan Act a Boost : NPR)</p>
<p>and</p>
<p>[Logan</a> Act legal definition of Logan Act. Logan Act synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.](<a href=“Logan Act]Logan legal definition of Logan Act]Logan”>Logan Act legal definition of Logan Act)</p>
<p>Of course, in the 209 years since the passage of the Logan Act it has never been enforced, so I suspect that Jimmy is safe for now.</p>
<p>I think Dershowitz knows in his heart that any decent defense attorney could get Carter off by arguing that the Logan Act is unconstitutional, both for being overbroad and for curtailing free speech. Indeed, by the terms of the law, Dershowitz has violated himself in some of his visits to Israel.</p>
<p>Quote:
Originally Posted by interesteddad
This would be the same Dershowitz that helped OJ Simpson walk, right? And, we are supposed to respect HIS opinion on ethicial issues? </p>
<p>Didn’t I say not to shoot the messenger??? Sometimes it doesn’t pay to post stuff on here…</p>
<p>(p.s. Over a year and I still can’t get the cute little box around the quotes…)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. I also believe he is using his political power to advance his political beliefs</p>
<p>“Story on Carter and the Logan Act from the famously Republican NPR”</p>
<p>My cousin who is ex-military and a fervent Republican thinks NPR is a taxpayer funded arm of the far left liberal democrats. He refers to it as “national people’s radio”. Why do Repubs think NPR is liberal and dems think it is conservative? I’d like to think it’s cause NPR is balanced, but it is a curious phenomenon to me.</p>