Let's get something straight right from the get-go. I'm a registered Democrat (though I have voted and will vote otherwise again on occasion) and second to few on the same environmental issues that Jimmy Carter championed while in the Oval Office. I voted for him. So I'm not automatically triggered to be nauseated by the man.



But it's when Mr. Peanut turns to Arab-Israeli issues that he totally loses it.



His "truths" crumble before any objective assessment. He has never met an Arab disemboweler of Jewish babes and grandmas that he hasn't blamed the Jews themselves for.



Pardon me if I'm not sounding too respectful, but the ex-president has been shown to be a blatant hypocrite and, despite delusions about his own self-worth (an argument could be made that the Camp David Accords occurred despite him, not because of him), an outright menace to the survival of a viable Jewish State. What's even more frightening, John Kerry has mentioned him as his potential special envoy for the Middle East (not that George Bush's James Baker is any better).



And then there he was on July 26th, amid current genocidal atrocities being carried out by Arabs against Black African Sudanese just as he spoke, ranting on behalf of Palestinian Arabs at the Democratic Convention. No attempt at balance either.



Carter's vision, like Chamberlain's in Munich prior to World War II as he betrayed Czechoslovakia (allegedly over a heavily German-populated Sudetenland), is to buy "peace" for America and the world via selling out friends - this time, Israel. Missing was any mention about what the Arabs need to do themselves in order to allow peace to blossom, like stopping their hate mongering and terrorism and agreeing that others, besides themselves, are due a semblance of justice, for starters. All that we heard were simply more fulmination about what America must do to help Arabs who still will not accept an Israel regardless of size and despite any additional concessions it will make. His was the typically one-sided squeeze-the-Jews message that he has repeatedly given.



Almost a year earlier, for example, in an Indian summer blast of hot air in the September 23, 2003 Washington Post ("The Choice For Israelis"), Carter proclaimed that the "occupied territories" and the settlement issue were the main causes of Arab resentment and thus the violence, as well. James Pinkerton reported similar statements in the Houston Chronicle this past April. This is Mr. Peanut's standard line when it comes to Arab-Israeli politics.



There's no rest for those who care, and we are forced to repeat some key facts, ad nauseam, with the hope that they will register with an ever-wider audience. So, here we go again.



Surely, Jimmy Carter is aware of poll after poll taken among Arabs showing that even if Israel withdrew completely from the disputed areas (not "occupied Arab lands"), the Arabs would still reject Israel's right to exist. It's not how big Israel is, but that Israel is that has always been the problem - and Mr. Peanut knows this. And he knows about the offers made by Ehud Barak and Bill Clinton at Camp David 2000 and Taba, which would have handed over 97% of those disputed territories, including one-half of Jerusalem and a $33 billion bonus as icing on the cake, to Yasser Arafat's boys. And he knows what the bloody Arab "counter-offer " has been - hundreds of deliberately murdered Israeli civilians. Arafat built that fence recently put on trial in Geneva. Yet, Carter insists on prodding Jews to take suicidal chances and forsake security measures with a bloodthirsty enemy in a way he wouldn't dream of asking others to do.



Who's kidding whom here?



Surely he knows that the PLO was formed in 1964, long before Israel was in the territories. And surely he knows that nothing has changed in the Arab mindset since then or before. Carter sees the Palestinian Authority websites, maps, schoolbooks, hears the imams calling for death to the Jews, etc. He knows full well that the proposed 22nd or 23rd Arab state, the second one to be created within the original borders of Mandatory Palestine as Britain received it on April 25, 1920, plans to replace Israel, not live side-by-side with it. The evidence for this is overwhelming.



It's no accident that at the summits leading up to the Roadmap, Ahmed Qurei', the latest Arafatian chief marionette, went on record opposing the use of the word "Jewish" along with "State of Israel." Of course, not a peep out of Mr. Peanut about this and its implications. And these folks still insist that Israel, after being made to return to its nine-mile-wide, pre-'67 armistice line existence, agree to absorb millions of real or alleged descendants of Arab refugees. The half of Israel's Jews who were refugees themselves from so-called "Arab" lands doesn't seem to register with him. And the lie that the so-called "Geneva Initiative", led by Carter's politically impotent Arab and suicidal Israeli friends, renounced the "right of return" was just that - a lie.



At the close of hostilities after the invasion by Arab states of a nascent Israel in 1948, the fragile, UN-imposed armistice lines made Israel a constant temptation to its enemies. Most of Israel's population and industry lies in that narrow waistband. Mr. Carter knows full well that you need a magnifying glass to find Israel in a map of the region, a microscope for a map of the world.



He has frequently brought up UN Resolution #242 to support his position for Israel's departure from the disputed territories. Just like Chamberlain had to know that Hitler would not be satisfied with just the Sudetenland back in 1938, but sacrificed the Czechs anyway, the evidence is quite clear regarding Arab intentions in their well-known "destruction in stages scenario" for Israel. And Chamberlain, er, Carter, knows this as well. Yet, while he's been a bit more careful in his wording of late, he still implies that a virtually total Israeli withdrawal is required by 242. That's what his continuous rants over occupation and settlements are all about.



Nations have acquired territories, toppled governments and such thousands of miles away from home in the name of their own security, but Mr. Carter can't seem to figure out that Israel's nine-mile wide, artificially-imposed existence (the '49 armistice lines were never meant to be final borders) was a travesty of justice in desperate need of rectification.



[Part 1 of 2]