Jimmy Carter's Pals

**barbaro** · 17-01-2007, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by Milkman

I believe you are using the definition of "terrorism" in your own way to reinforce you argument.

Anyone can do this, on both sides.

Well, who's blowing up innocent women and children, genius?
It ain't them bad old Yids with sucide belts is it?

Israel does the same thing. They just do it in a different way: tanks, helicopters, soldiers shooting children, and cluster bombs shot into Lebanon that kill and maim innocent civilians.

Far more Palestinians are killed than Israelis.

It has always been this way.

The Isralis use American tanks and helicptors; the Palestinans use bombs in belts.

**stroller** · 17-01-2007, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

No need to give up terrorism until then says Jimmy...

That's not what he said.

It's what the NYP editorial and yourself wish he said, so you could attack him for it.

**man with no head** · 17-01-2007, 11:20 PM

I'll repeat again: Carter is saying (as I would agree) that terrorism is a last resort that is justified because Israel refuses to live according to international law.

So, yeah, Carter is right. Again, why are we defending the right of Israel to exist when Israel clearly violates international law time and time again?

**habiba** · 18-01-2007, 12:57 AM

Originally Posted by Hootad Binky

Just heard an interview this morning with Jimmy Carter on CBC. He made a very convincing argument that the situation of the Palestinians is approaching an "apartheid" type scenario.

Repeat: approaching?? It's already there, with cobwebs on.

Howdy from BKK, mateys. Longtime.

**texpatriate** · 18-01-2007, 07:03 AM

The Palestinian people seem to be their own worst enemy. Unleashing suicide bombers on Israel makes about as much sense as beating a beehive with a stick.

-texpatriate

BTW I'd like to thank whoever it was that inspired me to look for Israeli auto parts. My extremist Jeep now supports Zionism as well as contributing to Global Warming

**Boon Mee** · 19-01-2007, 01:45 PM

Note from Jimmy Carter Interceding for Nazi SS Guard Proven To Have Murdered Jews

Don't worry folks, I'm sure the Lamestream Media will be All Over this story...

**Butterfly** · 19-01-2007, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by texpatriate

The Israeli people seem to be their own worst enemy. Unleashing massive attacks on Palestinians makes about as much sense as beating a beehive with a stick.

-texpatriate

I agree.

**Boon Mee** · 19-01-2007, 04:42 PM

Jimmy Carter actually said the American Revolution was not necessary!?
Thereby dismissing the Declaration of Independance and the Constitution. Worst ex-president or what?

**stroller** · 19-01-2007, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Don't worry folks, I'm sure the Lamestream Media will be All Over this story...

What I wonder, is how many Nazi war criminals have found refuge in the US and partaken in public life, influencing politics, childrens education and so forth there unreprimanded?

Is this one of the guys P. Bush helped escape?

**man with no head** · 19-01-2007, 05:27 PM

The OSI was a sham. Faced with the weakest of evidence and heresay (favorite themes of people like Boon Mee who think people are guilty and don't deserve trials) many peolpe were stripped of their rightful U.S. citizenship and sent back to Europe on allegations of being Nazis (which, unfortunately, could not be challenged since the OSI brought civil suits and not criminal suits....criminal suits require a burden of proof while civil suits do not).

The real truth:

THE HISTORY OF MARTIN BARTESCH

Martin Bartesch was a Volkdeutscher living on a farm in Romania. When he was 16 years old, in 1943, he entered the S.S. under great pressure to avoid service in Russia. He was never a member of the Hitler Youth or any Nazi organization. In September and October 1943 he received training outside of Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria and was then moved about 60 miles away to Linz III. This camp was a work camp (Arbeitslager) run by civilians under SS control and was not the site of beatings or atrocities. Testimony also showed that Bartesch had shared his cigarettes with his charges while on road building assignments and obtained extra food for them. While Mauthausen had been the site of atrocities, Linz III had not. In 1945 Bartesch was transferred to the eastern front. He served against the Soviets and was captured by them at the war's end. When the Soviets overran Romania he lost his home and country. In 1958 Martin Bartesch came to America as a refugee, raised a family here and was a model citizen. While Bartesch was stationed outside of the Mauthausen he did serve as a perimeter guard for three weeks and did shoot an escaping prisoner, named Max Ochsbron. The matter was recorded in the camp records and clearly showed that the prisoner had been trying to escape. Ochsbron appears to have been arrested for forgery.

THE HISTORY OF THE DEPORTATION CASE OF MARTIN BARTESCH

Sometime in 1985 this single entry on camp records was discovered by OSI investigators looking for leads. A computer match was made with the name of Martin Bartesch on immigration files. It was on this weak evidence that the OSI filed its lawsuit against Martin Bartesch. It also issued press releases which, as mentioned above, accused Bartesch of being a mass murderer. The attorneys at OSI did this despite their having a list of those S.S. who had been stationed at Mauthausen (Bartesch is not on them) and the list which shows he was at Linz III. A second OSI list also reveals that Bartesch was never stationed in Mauthausen. The OSI attorney directly in charge of the case was Michael Bernstein, who acted with the consent and approval of OSI director Neal Sher. It was only after the filing of the lawsuit that the OSI started to look for evidence against Bartesch. Advertisements were run in various newspapers stating "OSI urgently seeking Mauthausen witnesses." Investigators combed record files in Prague, Vienna, and Berlin. Bernstein and his aide (named Betty Shave) took several expensive trips to Israel and Paris to interview possible "witnesses." Despite an exhaustive search, the OSI did not discover any evidence of any kind which implicated Martin Bartesch in any crime. As one Department of State telegram put it, "All that could be established from documentation is that the French Jew (No. 14582) Max Ochsbron, born August 20, 1916 in Vienna died on October 28, 1943 at 9:55 A.M. while trying to escape (Auf der Flucht erschossen)."

Indeed, the OSI search only uncovered evidence which exonerated Bartesch. Various interviews with ex-prisoners state time and time again that the interviewees never saw any beatings or killings of prisoners by SS guards at Linz III or even heard of other prisoners complaining of beatings or killings. Linz is mentioned as being "relatively nice." The reports of many interviews are ended with OSI comment, "Interview not useful. He [interviewee] paints a rather easy picture of life at Linz III." Despite this clear evidence of Bartesch's innocence, Neal Sher did not drop the case, or even retract the more extreme and heinous accusations against Bartesch. The discovery requests of the immigration attorney for Bartesch were avoided and Michael Bernstein, with the approval of OSI director Neal Sher, concealed exonerating evidence from the Bartesch family. The declarations regarding mild conditions at Linz III were "forgotten". Even worse, documents were translated in a manner which increased the father's appearance of guilt (omitting the fact that Bartesch had disclosed that he had been in the S.S. in his entry documents and by adding "Concentration Camp Mauthausen" to the list of names of the Linz III guards implying that Linz guards served at Mauthausen. The OSI never admitted that the original charge of killing ten of thousands of persons was incorrect. During the Bartesch deportation suit various citizens wrote protest letters to the White House and Congress supporting Martin Bartesch. The leaked documents reveal that the OSI collected these protest letters and proposed taking administrative and legal action against the letter-writers. Michael Bernstein requested the immigration files of the letter writers in order to investigate them and a memo was circulated at OSI saying that the letters were "irritating" and discussing subpoenaing the protesters for depositions.

The OSI files were filled with collected newspaper articles and letters to the editors of various publications. Director Sher was careful to monitor the publicity OSI cases generated and the OSI evidently worked with private organizations to influence public opinion. A single tragedy put Martin Bartesch's name on a list which the Office of Special Investigation used to find possible Nazi war-criminals. Without any investigation, the OSI leveled the most serious charges against him and ruined him. That was irresponsible conduct for our government. The case was continued after the truth was known because the OSI couldn't admit that a mistake had been made. OSI hasn't had the decency to retract the original charges or to apologize to the Bartesch family.

THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT SUIT

The Freedom of Information Act was meant to be an important law for controlling secret government activity and opening up governmental practices. The OSI clearly failed to comply with the Freedom of Information Act regarding Heinz Bartesch's requests for information. Many documents which were in the Bartesch file were not included on the Vaughn Index. I believe that it is more than a coincidence that all of the documents which provided exonerating evidence for Bartesch or which indicated OSI wrong-doing were simply not listed at all. In other FOIA cases brought by Rad Artukovic or Edward Nisnic, regarding the John Demjanjuk case, the OSI failed to produce or even list many important documents. Thus, the attorneys of the OSI seem to be engaging in a pattern of ignoring or evading the Freedom of Information Act. During the FOIA suit the OSI acted in a hostile and unprofessional manner. Threats were made by the OSI to revive the lawsuit against Martin Bartesch if his son continued to pursue his FOIA suit. Threats of criminal action were made against me for possessing OSI documents. Reasonable discovery requests were opposed. In summary, the documents show that the OSI:

1. filed the de-naturalization suit on very weak evidence while alleging extremely serious crimes;
2. failed to release evidence which exonorated Bartesch;
3. used distorted or incorrect translations;
4. failed to retract the most serious charges against Bartesch when they found to be untrue;
5. collected the names of citizens who wrote to their elected officials;
6. and considered taking administrative action against them.

Frankly, I'm getting tired of the bullshit blog links without the poster doing any damned research prior to posting links to blogs which are nearly 100% inaccurate.

Can something be done about this in issues? Mods? This has got to stop.

**man with no head** · 19-01-2007, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Jimmy Carter actually said the American Revolution was not necessary!?
Thereby dismissing the Declaration of Independance and the Constitution. Worst ex-president or what?

Why don't you quote ALL of the quote?

For the non-morons on the forum, I present the WHOLE QUOTE as said by Carter (not the edited version present by BM):

Well, one parallel is that the Revolutionary War, more than any other war up until recently, has been the most bloody war we’ve fought. I think another parallel is that in some ways the Revolutionary War could have been avoided. It was an unnecessary war.

Had the British Parliament been a little more sensitive to the colonial’s really legitimate complaints and requests the war could have been avoided completely, and of course now we would have been a free country now as is Canada and India and Australia, having gotten our independence in a nonviolent way.

This is just too damned easy. Three up, three down. What garbage will BM post next I wonder?

**stroller** · 19-01-2007, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by surasak

Can something be done about this in issues? Mods? This has got to stop.

It is just as annoying for others. I spent my time finding independent sources to put Booner's blogs' rabid diatribes into perspective, too - though not on this occasion.
However, he is not knowingly posting false info, but he is rather carefully selecting highly biased unreliable secondary sources to make his points.

Btw, what's the source for your above quote, surasak?

**barbaro** · 19-01-2007, 07:40 PM

Originally Posted by surasak

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Jimmy Carter actually said the American Revolution was not necessary!?
Thereby dismissing the Declaration of Independance and the Constitution. Worst ex-president or what?

A response:

Why don't you quote ALL of the quote?

For the non-morons on the forum, I present the WHOLE QUOTE as said by Carter (not the edited version present by BM):

More text:

Well, one parallel is that the Revolutionary War, more than any other war up until recently, has been the most bloody war we’ve fought. I think another parallel is that in some ways the Revolutionary War could have been avoided. It was an unnecessary war.

Had the British Parliament been a little more sensitive to the colonial’s really legitimate complaints and requests the war could have been avoided completely, and of course now we would have been a free country now as is Canada and India and Australia, having gotten our independence in a nonviolent way.

This is just too damned easy. Three up, three down. What garbage will BM post next I wonder?

Surasak a link would be good.

Boon Me, you're losing credibility. Posting a very selective piece of text.

BM, are you a Revolutionary scholar? Going back 200 years and carefully selectiong a small portion of text, in attempt to promote your viewpoints with a reference to the Revolutionary War?

**Boon Mee** · 19-01-2007, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by surasak

Frankly, I'm getting tired of the bullshit blog links without the poster doing any damned research prior to posting links to blogs which are nearly 100% inaccurate.
This has got to stop.

I Love this forum - y'all are so easy to wind up!

BTW - haven't heard any counter to post #131, eh?

**stroller** · 19-01-2007, 08:10 PM

One might get the impression you haven't understood the purpose of this forum, but are on what one might call a "trolling" mission here, evident since you first joined as "the gent".

And no, MM, crediblity is not one of Booner's concerns here.

**Boon Mee** · 19-01-2007, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by stroller

One might get the impression you haven't understood the purpose of this forum, but are on what one might call a <A href="http://"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll" target=_blank>"trolling" mission here.

And no, MM, crediblity is not one of Booner's concerns here.

I most certainly do understand but it's the few on here who take such a ridgid, left-wing slant that any opinion other than their's is considered heresy.

Anyhow, find holes in this piece...if you can?

Oh, almost forgot - what about some comment on post #131?
Still waiting....

**stroller** · 19-01-2007, 08:26 PM

Objecting to false info, libel and slander is not an exclusively "rigid left-wing" trait.
But posting such, combined with 'funny' pics and 'funny' one-liners does say something about the poster.

**Boon Mee** · 19-01-2007, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by stroller

Objecting to false info, libel and slander is not an exclusively "rigid left-wing" trait.
But posting such, combined with 'funny' pics and 'funny' one-liners does say something about the poster.

Yeah, I've got a sense of humor which seems to be sorely lacking with some others posting hereabouts.

Talk about me 'cherry-picking' selected quotes - but no response to the factual material I've posted from the most rabid bleeding-hearts here...

**stroller** · 19-01-2007, 09:33 PM

I suggest you select your sources more carefully, so the very few worth replying to won't get lost between all the rubble you post.
People may have become reluctant to even click on your blog-links and wasting their time wading through all the gibberish.

That's as clear as I can put it, pal.

**Boon Mee** · 19-01-2007, 11:01 PM

Well, back on topic: What do y'all think of Carter supporting the release of a convicted Nazi SS war criminal, eh?

**man with no head** · 20-01-2007, 12:57 AM

Originally Posted by Milkman

Originally Posted by surasak

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Jimmy Carter actually said the American Revolution was not necessary!?
Thereby dismissing the Declaration of Independance and the Constitution. Worst ex-president or what?

A response:

Why don't you quote ALL of the quote?

For the non-morons on the forum, I present the WHOLE QUOTE as said by Carter (not the edited version present by BM):

More text:

Well, one parallel is that the Revolutionary War, more than any other war up until recently, has been the most bloody war we’ve fought. I think another parallel is that in some ways the Revolutionary War could have been avoided. It was an unnecessary war.

Had the British Parliament been a little more sensitive to the colonial’s really legitimate complaints and requests the war could have been avoided completely, and of course now we would have been a free country now as is Canada and India and Australia, having gotten our independence in a nonviolent way.

This is just too damned easy. Three up, three down. What garbage will BM post next I wonder?

Surasak a link would be good.

Boon Me, you're losing credibility. Posting a very selective piece of text.

BM, are you a Revolutionary scholar? Going back 200 years and carefully selectiong a small portion of text, in attempt to promote your viewpoints with a reference to the Revolutionary War?

It's directly from BM's link. That's the great part about busting him. He posts part of the quote in an attempt to lie, falsify, and defame but fails to post the remaining part of the quote.

BM simply posted that Carter stated that the Revolutionary War was not necessary....not posting the qualify reason as to WHY Carter THOUGHT it could have been avoided.

It's like me saying "The sky is black because it's night." and Boon Mee would post some link to a crap blog saying "Surasak says the sky is black!"

**man with no head** · 20-01-2007, 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Well, back on topic: What do y'all think of Carter supporting the release of a convicted Nazi SS war criminal, eh?

You're really grasping at air here because the exact nonsensical article is being posted over and over on a bunch of redneck blogs, and, when you stop for a moment and actually consider Carter's reason it makes sense.

The National Review is hardly a liberal newspaper or periodical. Here's what they posted online about this nonsense:

Much has been made over the last 24 hours of the revelation that Jimmy Carter "interceded on behalf of a Nazi SS Guard."

But is that really what he did?

The NY Sun republishes the letter written by Ann Bartesch Bresnen, daughter of Martin Bartesch, along with Carter's handwritten note at the top of the first page.

The plain language of Carter's note makes clear he is not intervening on behalf of Martin Bartesch, but on behalf of Bartesch's children and grandchildren. "I hope that in cases like this, that special consideration can be given to affected families for humanitarian reasons."

Carter's not suggesting that OSI give any consideration at all to Mr. Bartesch. Rather, he's asking that OSI consider the concerns of Mrs. Bresnen, who states that "My children and three other grandchildren will not have their grandparents around for birthdays, graduations, weddings and all those important occasions that we all cherish spending with our loved ones."

Is that a backdoor way of supporting Mr. Bartesch? I think it's strained to read it that way...Carter's not suggesting that Bartesch is innocent, or wrongly deported. There is a real-life impact that the deportation has on the family Mr. Bartesch created in America, the family which does not know him as the evil SS Guard, but knows him as "dad" or "grandpa." Perhaps there could be a work-around by which OSI allowed Mr. Bartesch to attend his grandchildren's wedding with US Marshall escort, for example, with the Bartesch family picking up the tab.

The Corner on National Review Online

If you Google the information in BM's original link you'll find the same boring article posted over and over again, word for word. This is generally indicative of a chain letter, and, makes it highly suspicious.

History shows that Martin was deported under highly controversial circumstances and upon arrival back in Austria was released because there was no evidence to hold him. But due to the way the OSI works there is no appeal and once your citizenship is stipped there's no appeal, no way to get it back. A procedure based on heresay and false evidence because it's not considered a criminal case, thus, the courts have held that defendents have no Constitutional rights of appeal, representation, or a right to see evidence.

This is exactly the kind of crap the Bush administration shoved through Congress last year in creating the military commissions and just this week was announced to be part of the Pentagon manual for dealing with SUSPECTED terrorists. People who can be convicted and put to death based solely on heresay and other flimsy evidence that would never stand up in a real court of law.

**man with no head** · 20-01-2007, 01:21 AM

"When They Sandbag Jimmy Carter, Jewish Leaders Deny the Facts"

Last night 100 progressive people, almost all Jewish (one wore Muslim head covering), crowded the Village Temple in New York to learn about conditions in the Occupied Territories. The speakers were a former Israeli soldier and a former Palestinian resistance fighter. They said the following:

—There are 530 checkpoints in the West Bank. Only 30 are on the Green Line between the West Bank and Israel. Yes; some of those have stopped suicide bombers. The purpose of the other 500 has nothing to do with security. "The strategy there is to destroy Palestinian society, to prevent any joint organized struggle [against the occupation]," said the Israeli.

—The Israeli P.M. recently promised the Palestinian President that the checkpoints would be relaxed. They have not been. "The army receives these instructions and... does not take the instructions," the Israeli said, citing Israel's leading newspaper. Thus the army acts on its own as a repressive force (Israeli generals have long defied civilian supervision).

—The Palestinian, his brother, and his father have spent 25 years in Israeli jails, much of that time without due process, for such offenses as graffiti and other statements opposing the occupation. The man's family has lost many acres of its land to Jewish settlers, in a village outside Bethlehem.

—Arbitrary laws prevent Israelis from carrying Palestinians in their cars in the Occupied Territories. The intention, says the Israeli, is to keep the two sides from talking.

The situation these men describe is worse than apartheid. "Three and a half million people live without any rights," said the Israeli, whose own sister was killed by a suicide bomber. "You want to stop these people [suicide bombers], you should give them a reason to live."

The campaign by the U.S. Jewish leadership to smear Jimmy Carter will one day be taught in history books, as an effort by a privileged elite to suppress the truth. Slavery and segregation also had powerful defenders who misrepresented those conditions. Despite all their well-connected efforts, these people will lose for two simple reasons: the facts are against them, and a movement has begun to discover those facts. The progressive Jews jamming the temple last night are the evidence.

The Brit Tzedek tour by these two former combatants in the Occupied Territories continues across our country over the next month. It is aimed at one thing: to open Jews' eyes and ears. Let us pray.

The New York Observer's MondoWeiss: When They Sandbag Jimmy Carter, Jewish Leaders Deny the Facts

**man with no head** · 20-01-2007, 01:23 AM

"Is Israel/AIPAC behind the Carter smear campaign?"

Norah O'Donnell on MSNBC just now did a very aggressive job of interviewing Steve Berman, one of the Jews who resigned from the Carter Center advisory board in protest of Carter's book. O'Donnell asked whether he had been "lobbied" by Jewish groups to do so. Berman said he hadn't. She didn't seem to believe him, virtually repeating the question, this time adding "AIPAC", and then bridled at the fact that these so-called friends of Carter did all this without even talking to their former leader ahead of time. Didn't you owe the former President that? she asked.

O'Donnell made her own point of view clear when she showed footage of Carter, on Hardball, saying that the United States has been deprived (by the lobby) of the vigorous debate about the Occupied Territories that goes on every day in Israel itself. I applaud her for being a tough journalist who knows a smokescreen.

O'Donnell's stance is significant. It demonstrates that, 10 months on, and notwithstanding the inability of the New York Times to cover the matter and the smearing of the authors by the Washington Post, Walt & Mearsheimer have mainstreamed the lobby as an issue in our public life. The battle is on. American attitudes on Israel are changing.

More and more Americans recognize a simple truth: the hateful Israeli occupation has undermined our image across the Arab world.

The New York Observer's MondoWeiss: Norah O'Donnell Sees Israel Lobby Behind Carter Row

**Boon Mee** · 20-01-2007, 06:27 AM

Originally Posted by surasak

"Is Israel/AIPAC behind the Carter smear campaign?"

You call the accuracies put forth in the 'Commentary Online' piece a smear campaign by Israel?
Only one who is lost in the far-left fever swamps can defend Carter from those points raised...

Thread: Jimmy Carter's Pals

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions