Who knew former President Carter was an anti-semite?

Question

Okay, so maybe he is, maybe he isn't, but I'm rather shocked by all the news I'm hearing since he put out his book supporting the Palestinian cause.

1. Personally lobbied for the re-entry of a Nazi SS officer into the US after being deported for concealing his Nazi ties.

2. When overseeing the establishment of a council to memorialize the holocaust, he said there were "too many Jews" in the council. Also, his people apparently denied acceptance into the board for one Presbyterian Holocaust historian because his name sounded too Jewish.

3. He wrote and published a book opposing an ally of the United States (Israel), and bolstered a group that supports terrorists and terrorism in the Middle East.

My impression of President Carter prior to this book release was generally more of a well-meaning but incompetent administration, so did anyone else know about this stuff?

If you google this stuff, you'll find plenty of reputable sources in papers like the NY Times, Washington Post, AP reports, Reuters, etc. I'm not here to spoon-feed you every bit of research.

Also, President Carter recently apologized in a press statement for his "poor wording" in his book that others have misinterpreted. So it's not his fault he's an anti-semite, we all just misinterpreted his words...

Answer 1

If the three points you stated above are fact, they speak for themselves. How many of these answerers who say he is not anti-Jewish, but rather Anti-Zionist, have actually READ his book? If any, you have to wonder what would have driven them to actually go out and buy such a book so quickly. People usually read books that are aligned with their point of view. But I digress..

The real question is, why is Carter putting himself at the forefront of such a divisive issue at such an old age? Habitat for Humanity seemed like a cause he should have stuck with. From a purely psychological standpoint, It seems the old man has realized he is on his "way out" of this life, and whatever he is doing now supports his religious viewpoint, whatever it is. Remember the grand ceremony the nation had after Reagan's death, and the national holiday after the death of Ford? Maybe he is trying to memorialize himself with the massive Arab world b/c he knows there won't be much of a sendoff for him in the U.S. He really has no credibility here.

Answer 2

I think Jimmy (checkbook) Carter was a horrible president but when someone disagrees with Isreal that automatically makes them an anti-semite.
Because of Him for the last 25 plus years the American taxpayer is giving Israel 8 billion dollars a year. I would love to be a country of 4 million people getting that handout.

Answer 3

Can you source please? E-mail or Internet smear jobs on political figures are often short or absent on fact. Take, for instance, the proven false allegations about Barack Obama's childhood.

I'm not saying this stuff isn't true, but it's interesting how none of it surfaces until Carter has the temerity to look at the current situation in the Middle East in a realistic, instead of cartoonish manner. Until I see some fact checking and verification, any attack that could be politically-motivated (notice, "could be," not "is") should be viewed with at least some skepticism. This is the guy who brought peace between Israel and Egypt, after all. Why would he, against all odds if he had an axe to grind?

Any time someone questions the policies of Israel, the attack dogs come out. It's a lot like how the Cuban-Americans act in Florida when the absurdity of our Cuba policy gets pointed out.

Your points:

1) I'd be interested to hear the reasons why, if true, that Carter lobbied for re-entry. The only things I've found was a note that Carter said to make sure and CONSIDER humanitarian issues when dealing with those cases. That sounds like a rather tepid intercession to me. Mountain out of a molehill? Not sure, since information is pretty sketchy at this point.

2) Even on a topic such as the Holocast, or, perhaps, especially so because of the horrific nature and magnitude of the events, one must make sure that things are accurate and objective. The subject matter doesn't need extra emotion or politics in it. Indeed, if a group of entirely like-minded people were to push forward and put something very strong out there, deniers and critics would be able to undermine it's impact because of a monolithic viewpoint. By having "less Jews" on the council, it blunts the accusations of politicization, pushing an agenda, and propaganda. That would, indeed be a legitimate concern for the integrity of such an effort. A more diverse makeup insures greater credibility and accuracy. Notice, Carter wasn't complaining that there were Jews, or that it was mostly Jewish in it's makeup. Also, I'm not talking about putting any deniers on the board. If you have someone without a Jewish background who would be objective, and who pubicly supports the work of the council, without reservation, that just beefs up the bona fides.

As with all things, context and intent are much more important than parsing a phrase and trying to make it more inflammatory than it was.

3) His recent book doesn't support terrorists. There's an idiotic "with us or against us" mentality whereby everything one group does must be "good" and everything the other group does is "evil", depending on which side you take. Carter pointing out the horrible treatment of Palestinians by the Israelis is merely an accurate characterization of an issue that people are intimidated into ignoring. As long as injustice like that is ignored, problems can't be solved because we're not acknowledging underlying motivations and causes for anger against Israel. To say that treatment of the Palestinians is bad in the West Bank doesn't excuse or justify terrorist acts, just as being appalled by the terrorist acts doesn't justify the treatment of the Palestinians. We do need to separate the innocent civilians from the terrorists here, and realize it's not just violent thugs who are being crapped on.

Carter is a great spokesman for rights and peace because he is willing to try and put himself in the shoes of others and see their perspectives. He tries to think of them as humans and tries to understand where they are coming from. That doesn't mean that everything gets excused, but as long as you are opposing a cartoonish demon instead of a real person, there's no drive or motivation to make things work.

Carter's book is merely an attemtp to frame the issues so people will consider stepping into the shoes of a group who's point of view is pretty much unknown in most of the west.

Answer 4

Yeah, more and more of it is coming out about his anti-Semitism. This is the first two paragraphs of an article from WorldNetDaily on January 25, 2007.

"Former President Jimmy Carter once complained there were "too many Jews" on the government's Holocaust Memorial Council, Monroe Freedman, the council's former executive director, told WND in an exclusive interview.

Freedman, who served on the council during Carter's term as president, also revealed a noted Holocaust scholar who was a Presbyterian Christian was rejected from the council's board by Carter's office because the scholar's name "sounded too Jewish."

That's like saying there are too many blacks on a planning committe for Black History Month.

Answer 5

It's appalling how mush credit he gets for the Camp David Accords. Anwar Sadat literally risked (and eventually gave) his life to make peace with Israel, and Menachem Begin gave up the entire oil-rich Sinai Peninsula. What did Carter do, babysit?

Answer 6

I am so sick of people berating Jimmy Carter and calling him an "anti-Semite". He wrote a book and in it he included FACTS about Israel and their ethnic cleansing and human rights violations against the Palestinians. So what. It is true. Just because our "kiss *** to the Zionists" based government and public doesn't like the story to be told doesn't mean it shouldn't be told. Bravo to Mr. Carter for realizing that he no longer needs to bow down to AIPAC and our extremely unjust alliance with the real terrorist nation in the Middle East, Israel. He had the guts to make a stance against the evil and all we can do as the American public is jump on the bash Carter bandwagon. Start thinking for yourselves people. Maybe Americans should read a little history and then try to bash this brave and intelligent man.

Answer 7

Although I've always thought he was an incredibly ineffective president, I've always respected President Carter as a man of honor and of extremely high intelligence (the man has a degree in nuclear physics from the Naval Academy...they don't give those out for looks). My opinion of him has been declining for some time now, and this book cements his position among the typical morons of the Left in my opinion.

Israel is a Western democracy, an ally of inestimable strategic value, and a staunch supporter of the US. Carter's newfound hatred of Israel might well be because his foundation is bankrolled by Arabs.

Answer 8

Why isn't Al Gore angry with Carter for cutting down all the trees to sell that book?

Carter knows when terrorists starting targeting the US, and he knows who should have stopped it. He is using the tactic the liberals excel at, diversion.

Answer 9

i didn't know it, but my mother always told me he was anti-Semitic and the worst president we ever had.

did you know that 15 members of the board of the Carter Center have resigned their positions because of that new book? (for those who believe he's well meaning, those people quit because they said that he said stuff in his book that they KNOW is a lie, like conversations they were present for, stuff like that. they said he misrepresented everything and that since he still is promoting the book and stands behind it, they had no choice but resign.)

i found out yesterday (a blog and they had proof) that his Carter Center has had people like Osama's brother make huge HUGE contributions to it. there were a few others, some sheiks, and i think that one prince from Saudi Arabia, the one who gave Carter some award? i can't remember his name.

Answer 10

I confess i did not, but he wasn't exactly popular amongst his colleagues so I cannot say I am surprised.

This is especially interesting since America has been attempting to forge strong relations with Israel over the last fifty or so years.

An interesting question.