V-Twin Forum banner

1 - 2 of 2 Posts

17,245 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
It's a little long, but fascinating reading.
And disillusioning.

X-President For Sale, by Alan M. Dershowitz

>> Jimmy Carter is making more money selling integrity
>> than peanuts. I have known Jimmy Carter for more
>> than 30 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 Middle 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 Sheik 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
> ...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.
>> They were staggering. I was amazed that in the 21st
>> century there were still foundations that espoused
>> these views. The Zayed Centre for Coordination and
>> Follow-up - a think-tank funded by the Sheik 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 the1930s, which continued to
>> honor Nazi academics after the anti-Semitic
>> policies of Hitler's government became clear.
>> Harvard of the 1930s was complicit in evil. I sadly
>> concluded that Jimmy Carter of the 21st 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, Sheik 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."
>> BCC 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 Sheik 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, Iran, 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 I -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 I, 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 Ara 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 [integrity] to apparent integrity than Jimmy Carter.
>> The publicperception 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
1 - 2 of 2 Posts