It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Because he's a private citizen and has that right.
Originally posted by bodrul
as some US fantics have shown they prefer fists first and no diologue.
Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Seems a lot of people on this htread are experts on being bitter and irrelevant.
Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by jerico65
By the way.. .Shouldn't the headline read "Jimmy Carter to Meet Palestinian Government?" When Merkel or Howard or whoever comes to the United States, they don't meet "with Republicans" but rather, with "U.S. Officials" right?
Originally posted by jerico65
Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Seems a lot of people on this htread are experts on being bitter and irrelevant.
Nah, no one is bitter, they just remember what it's like living thru the Carter years.
Originally posted by intrepid
Yeah and for the rest of the world it was a lovely respite between Viet Nam and the South/Central American wars.
Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
You haven't read Jimmy Carter's book, have you?
Man, I can't imagine the excruciating cerebral pain that must come from other people forming your thoughts for you.
Originally posted by US Monitor
Think how many people who currently are against a war with Iran might changed their mind......
Yep, nothing happened while Carter was in office. Oh, wait, we had our embassy in Iran overrun! Damn, how could I forget that.
Originally posted by xmotex
At least wile he was President nobody managed to kill 3,000 people in downtown Manhattan
Man you partisan Republican types use some strange logic... at least we only have a few months left under the rule of the crazies
Carter was by no means the perfect President, but he was nowhere near as incompetent as what we're stuck with now.
Originally posted by Britguy
The man has more guts and morals than anyone else in and around the White House or government right now.
What's better, talk to those with a genuine grievance or continue supplying Israel with the means to eradicate them so their land can be stolen?
From some of the amswers on here I get the impression bombing people trumps peace in a rather sick and twisted game of who's got the biggest stick.
The US State Department doesn't like such things as it shows them in a bad light given their unwillingness to engage in talks to try and bring about peaceful resolutions. They are, after all, part of the problem, being owned by the military industrial paymasters.