News Carter: Not mincing words about Bush

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Carter, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, criticized the Bush administration's refusal to acknowledge Hamas' 2006 election victory, labeling it "criminal." The discussion explores Carter's motivations for his recent criticisms, questioning whether they stem from a desire for reconciliation in the Middle East, political strategy related to the 2008 elections, pragmatism, or personal conviction. Some participants believe Carter's focus on Middle Eastern issues is deeply personal, while others suggest he is still a political figure. The conversation also touches on the differences in U.S. treatment of Israel and Palestine, with some asserting that Carter's actions reflect a genuine ethical stance rather than mere political maneuvering. The dialogue references Carter's book "Palestine Peace Not Apartheid," suggesting that his views may be rooted in personal conviction rather than opportunism.
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,194
Reaction score
2,426
...Carter, a Nobel Peace Prize winner who was addressing a human rights conference in Ireland, also said the Bush administration's refusal to accept Hamas' 2006 election victory was "criminal." [continued]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/20/AR2007062000233.html

Carter has been slamming the Bush admin laterly and I have to wonder about his motives. Is this his way to help pave the road to reconcilation with nations in the ME, is this political with the 08 elections in mind, is this pragmatism, or is this personal?

I tend to think it's pragmatic and that for him the issue is personal [he was always highly focused on ME issues], but in spite of his well deserved good samaritan image, he is still a political animal.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Carter may still be a political animal, but he is first and foremost an ethical man who cares deeply about injustice. We may examine his motivations (and we should), but I do not believe that he is inclined to lie.
 
we had an honest man in the white house
and replaced him with a brain dead puppet/actor
who was controlled by his nasty wife
 
turbo-1 said:
Carter may still be a political animal, but he is first and foremost an ethical man who cares deeply about injustice. We may examine his motivations (and we should), but I do not believe that he is inclined to lie.
:smile: When did this happen?
 
Smurf said:
:smile: When did this happen?

So, do you have a point?
 
Ivan Seeking said:
So, do you have a point?
A frequent problem here, when hit-and-run posters fail to engage or to provide any food for thought.
 
Ivan Seeking said:
Carter has been slamming the Bush admin laterly and I have to wonder about his motives. Is this his way to help pave the road to reconcilation with nations in the ME, is this political with the 08 elections in mind, is this pragmatism, or is this personal?
I think that Carter is trying to come to terms with the differences in treatment of Israel and Palestine by the US administration(s).

If his consciousness is speaking, then to me he is a good person.
 
MeJennifer said:
I think that Carter is trying to come to terms with the differences in treatment of Israel and Palestine by the US administration(s).

If his consciousness is speaking, then to me he is a good person.

As opposed to those that speak while they're unconscious?

Or as opposed to those that let the voices buried deep in their subconscious come out to speak?

He, he, he.
 
NOt enoguh peanuts have been sold to the Palestinian terrorists as Carter would like have seen, and the Israelis prefer Persia Pistachios over Georgian peanuts.
 
  • #10
Ivan Seeking said:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/20/AR2007062000233.html

Carter has been slamming the Bush admin laterly and I have to wonder about his motives. Is this his way to help pave the road to reconcilation with nations in the ME, is this political with the 08 elections in mind, is this pragmatism, or is this personal?

I tend to think it's pragmatic and that for him the issue is personal [he was always highly focused on ME issues], but in spite of his well deserved good samaritan image, he is still a political animal.
It began with the publication of his book 'Palestine Peace Not Apartheid' in Nov 2006 which presumably would have taken a year or two to research and write prior to publication so unless he was scheming well in advance it would seem he is speaking through personal conviction rather than political spin.
 

Similar threads

Replies
64
Views
9K
Replies
65
Views
10K
Replies
68
Views
13K
Back
Top