Peanut Khadr Accuses Jewish Group of ‘Slander’ After Questioning Book

8 thoughts on “Peanut Khadr Accuses Jewish Group of ‘Slander’ After Questioning Book”

1. *No, he just hates Israel and loves Arab money… *
   In a (pea)nut shell – YES!

   Some additional info just in:
   (sorry,no url).

   What is going on in the world

   By Alan Dershowitz

   I have known Jimmy Carter for more than thirty years. I
   first met him in the spring of 1976 when, as a relatively
   unknown candidate for president, he sent me a handwritten
   letter asking for my help in his campaign on issues of crime
   and justice. I had just published an article in The New York
   Times Magazine on sentencing reform, and he expressed
   interest in my ideas and asked me to come up with additional
   ones for his campaign. Shortly thereafter, my former student
   Stuart Eisenstadt, brought Carter to Harvard to meet with
   some faculty members, me among them. I immediately liked
   Jimmy Carter and saw him as a man of integrity and
   principle. I signed on to his campaign and worked very hard
   for his election. When Newsweek magazine asked his campaign
   for the names of people on whom Carter relied for advice, my
   name was among those given out. I continued to work for
   Carter over the years, most recently I met him in Jerusalem
   a year ago, and we briefly discussed the Mid-East. Though I
   disagreed with some of his points, I continued to believe
   that he was making them out of a deep commitment to
   principle and to human rights.

   Recent disclosures of Carter’s extensive financial
   connections to Arab oil money, particularly from Saudi
   Arabia, had deeply shaken my belief in his integrity. When I
   was first told that he received a monetary reward in the
   name of Shiekh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahayan, and kept the
   money, even after Harvard returned money from the same
   source because of its anti-Semitic history, I simply did not
   believe it. How could a man of such apparent integrity
   enrich himself with dirty money from so dirty a source? And
   let there be no mistake about how dirty the Zayed Foundation
   is. I know because I was involved, in a small way, in
   helping to persuade Harvard University to return more than
   $2 million that the financially strapped Divinity School
   received from this source. Initially I was reluctant to put
   pressure on Harvard to turn back money for the Divinity
   School, but then a student at the Divinity School-Rachael
   Lea Fish-showed me the facts
   http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=348172>. They
   were staggering. I was amazed that in the twenty-first
   century there were still foundations that espoused these
   views. The Zayed Centre for Coordination and Follow-up-a
   think-tank funded by the Shiekh and run by his son- hosted
   speakers who
   called Jews “the enemies of all nations,” attributed the
   assassination of John Kennedy to Israel and the Mossad and
   the 9/11 attacks to the United States’ own military, and
   stated that the Holocaust was a “fable.” (They also hosted a
   speech by Jimmy Carter.) To its credit, Harvard turned the
   money back. To his discredit, Carter did not.

   Jimmy Carter was, of course, aware of Harvard’s decision,
   since it was highly publicized. Yet he kept the money.
   Indeed, this is what he said in accepting the funds: “This
   award has special significance for me because it is named
   for my personal friend, Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan.”
   Carter’s personal friend, it turns out, was an unredeemable
   anti-Semite and all-around bigot.

   In reading Carter’s statements, I was reminded of the bad
   old Harvard of the nineteen thirties, which continued to
   honor Nazi academics after the anti-Semitic policies of
   Hitler’s government became clear. Harvard of the nineteen
   thirties was complicit in evil. I sadly concluded that Jimmy
   Carter of the twenty-first century has become complicit in
   evil.

   The extent of Carter’s financial support from, and even
   dependence on, dirty money is still not fully known. What we
   do know is deeply troubling. Carter and his Center have
   accepted millions of dollars from suspect sources, beginning
   with the bail-out of the Carter family peanut business in
   the late 1970s by BCCI, a now-defunct and virulently
   anti-Israeli bank indirectly controlled by the Saudi Royal
   family, and among whose principal investors is Carter’s
   friend, Sheikh Zayed. Agha Hasan Abedi, the founder of the
   bank, gave Carter “$500,000 to help the former president
   establish his center…[and] more than $10 million to Mr.
   Carter’s different projects.” Carter gladly accepted the
   money, though Abedi had called his bank-ostensibly the
   source of his funding-“the best way to fight the evil
   influence of the Zionists.” BCCI isn’t the only source:
   Saudi King Fahd contributed millions to the Carter Center-
   “in 1993 alone…$7.6 million” as have other members of the
   Saudi Royal Family. Carter also received a million dollar
   pledge from the Saudi-based bin Laden family, as well as a
   personal $500,000 environmental award named for Sheikh
   Zayed, and paid for by the Prime Minister of the United Arab
   Emirates.

   It’s worth noting that, despite the influx of Saudi money
   funding the Carter Center, and despite the Saudi Arabian
   government’s myriad human rights abuses, the Carter Center’s
   Human Rights program has no activity whatever in Saudi
   Arabia. The Saudis have apparently bought his silence for a
   steep price. The bought quality of the Center’s activities
   becomes even more clear, however, when reviewing the
   Center’s human rights activities in other countries:
   essentially no human rights activities in China or in North
   Korea, or in Iran, Iraq, the Sudan, or Syria, but activity
   regarding Israel and its alleged abuses, according to the
   Center’s website

   The Carter Center’s mission statement claims that “The
   Center is nonpartisan and acts as a neutral party in dispute
   resolution activities.” How can that be, given that its
   coffers are full of Arab money, and that its focus is away
   from significant Arab abuses and on Israel’s far less
   serious ones?

   No reasonable person can dispute therefore that Jimmy Carter
   has been and remains dependent on Arab oil money,
   particularly from Saudi Arabia. Does this mean that Carter
   has necessarily been influenced in his thinking about the
   Middle East by receipt of such enormous amounts of money?
   Ask Carter. The entire premise of his criticism of Jewish
   influence on American foreign policy is that money talks. It
   is Carter-not me-who has made the point that if politicians
   receive money from Jewish sources, then they are not free to
   decide issues regarding the Middle East for themselves. It
   is Carter, not me, who has argued that distinguished
   reporters cannot honestly report on the Middle East because
   they are being paid by Jewish money. So, by Carter’s own
   standards, it would be almost economically “suicidal” for
   Carter “to espouse a balanced position between Israel and
   Palestine.”

   By Carter’s own standards, therefore, his views on the
   Middle East must be discounted. It is certainly possible
   that he now believes them. Money, particularly large amounts
   of money, has a way of persuading people to a particular
   position. It would not surprise me if Carter, having
   received so much Arab money, is now honestly committed to
   their cause. But his failure to disclose the extent of his
   financial dependence on Arab money, and the absence of any
   self reflection on whether the receipt of this money has
   unduly influenced his views, is a form of deception
   bordering on corruption.

   I have met cigarette lobbyists, who are supported by the
   cigarette industry, and who have come to believe honestly
   that cigarettes are merely a safe form of adult recreation,
   that cigarettes are not addicting and that the cigarette
   industry is really trying to persuade children not to smoke.
   These people are fooling themselves (or fooling us into
   believing that they are fooling themselves) just as Jimmy
   Carter is fooling himself (or persuading us to believe that
   he is fooling himself).

   If money determines political and public views-as Carter
   insists “Jewish money” does-then Carter’s views on the
   Middle East must be deemed to have been influenced by the
   vast sums of Arab money he has received. If he who pays the
   piper calls the tune, then Carter’s off-key tunes have been
   called by his Saudi Arabian paymasters. It pains me to say
   this, but I now believe that there is no person in American
   public life today who has a lower ratio of real to apparent
   integrity than Jimmy Carter. The public perception of his
   integrity is extraordinarily high. His real integrity, it
   now turns out, is extraordinarily low. He is no better than
   so many former American politicians who, after leaving
   public life, sell themselves to the highest bidder and
   become lobbyists for despicable causes. That is now Jimmy
   Carter’s sad legacy.

   Alan Dershowitz is a professor of law at Harvard. His most
   recent book is Preemption: A Knife that Cuts Both Ways
   (Norton, 2006)

2. Thank you Gramfan. A real awful stinker he is, this peanut Khadr.

   That’s why we don’t cut him any slack here…

3. As horrible a president as Carter was, he’s been far more insufferable since he’s been out of office. Do they grow peanuts in Gaza? If so, Peanut Brain needs to go there and retire. Maybe the palestinians will give him an outfit worn by Arafatpig as a token of gratitude-few Americans shill for them as much and as well as he does.

4. He is a real creep for sure. Wasn’t it him and Clinton who made big cutbacks on the CIA and FBI which could have facilitated 9/11?

   Sheik, did any of my emails get through? Happy to help:)

   ISLAMSFORLOSERS says
   “Do they grow peanuts in Gaza?”

   No,,the only thing they use soil for is buliding tunnels for weapon smuggling. Then again, maybe they think by putting weapons underground they will grow? Pardon my mirth!

5. Gramfan-

   We can only hope one of those tunnels is reserved for Peanut Brain for his final resting place. As for your comment on growing weapons it would not surprise me if many palestinians actually believe that. They seem to be the ummah’s dumbest members. No wonder nobody else in the ummah wanted to take them in after 1948-who’d want this bunch lowering their national IQ level?

6. ISLAMSFORLOSERS

   He’ll be buried in Arlington I suppose: doesn’t deserve it.
   Loved the rest of your post. I wouldn’t be surprised about that either,lol!

   Can one have a national IQ in the minuses? Yes, that would indeed have happened, given some of the s*** they all believe.

7. You blokes truly crack me up with you’re comments.
   Maybe he uses a peanut for a brain?
   D.T.

8. Anything to dispel Satan Khomeini’s “there’s no humor in Islam” statement. Islam is humorous in the extreme (unintentionally, of course)-you just have to look for it.

Comments are closed.