Jimmy Carter and the 40 Ayatollahs Diane Alden By Middle East standards the Shah of
Iran was a progressive democrat. In the eyes of President Jimmy Carter and
certain foreign policy factions in the State Department and various think
tanks, the Shah represented the heart of darkness. In an article in May 2002, NewsMax's
Chris Ruddy pointed out: "Remember Carter's human rights
program, where he demanded the Shah of Iran step down and turn over power to
the Ayatollah Khomeini? "No matter that Khomeini was a madman. Carter had
the U.S. Pentagon tell the Shah's top military commanders about 150 of them
to acquiesce to the Ayatollah and not fight him. "The Shah's military listened
to Carter. All of them were murdered in one of the Ayatollah's first acts. "By allowing the Shah to fall,
Carter created one of the most militant anti-American dictatorships ever."
[See: Jimmy Carter's Trail of Disaster.] As has been reported in NewsMax
previously,
Carter still receives a great deal of money from the Arab world for his Carter
Center in Atlanta. These days, Jimmy Carter has
selective blindness toward the Middle East and Israel. He emphasizes the evils
of Israel when it takes self-protective actions against Palestinians, while
turning a blind eye to what the Palestinians and Yasser Arafat are doing. The fact that Yasser Arafat won the
Nobel Peace Prize because he signed one of Carter's paper peace agreements with
Israel is one reason Carter hangs on to his illusions about Arafat and the
Palestinians. He and the foreign policy elite of his era have too much invested
in that failure to admit it IS a failure. Even while Hamas, Hezbollah, and
Islamic Jihad target any and every Israeli who lives in the Middle East, Carter
remains the typical one-world-fits-all leftist in extreme denial. No one
wants to admit that their good intentions and efforts created hell on earth for
millions of people. No one wants to admit that the fruit of their utopian
dreams for a peaceful world will NOT be accomplished through accommodations
with terrorists, utopian leftists, madmen with nukes, or those who are
fanatically anti-U.S. The Only Time Ayatollah
Khomeini Ever Smiled Iranian writer Farhad Mafie offers a
telling picture of the international terrorist connection between Iran and the
rest of the bomb-throwing Islamist world and Yasser Arafat. In a 2002 essay Mafie reports:
"The first and only time that Ayatollah Khomeini smiled was when he sat
next to Mr. Arafat in Tehran in 1979. Mr. Arafat was the first foreign
dignitary actually the first official terrorist who came to Iran after
Iranian generals were summarily executed by order of criminals such as Dr.
Ibrahim Yazdi [now a 'reformist' in Iran's current system]. After Naji, Rahimi,
Khosrowdad, and Nasiri were brutally executed [ The mullahs welcomed Yasser Arafat
warmly indeed. Not surprising considering the fact that the Palestinian
Liberation Organization (PLO) helped the Shah's opponents by training
terrorists, supplying weapons to the mullahs and their leftist supporters, and
participating in killing Iranian demonstrators in Tehran. The PLO provided aid
and comfort to the mullahs and forces to bring down the Shah, thus destabilizing
the entire Middle East. It is not a stretch to insist that
if Jimmy Carter and the policy wonks in his administration had formulated
foreign policy according to American self-interest, the world would be a better
place. When the ayatollahs came to power in Iran, that circumstance gave
immense encouragement to the Islamist fundamentalist madmen in Egypt, Saudi
Arabia, Afghanistan and everywhere else. These same Islamist militarists
eventually murdered Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, another Nobel Peace Prize
recipient, because he signed Carter's first Camp David Peace Treaty with
Israel. Carter does not have the ability to connect the dots, and that makes
him a dangerous man rather than a peacemaker. Carter's vision remains myopic, to
say the least. These days he blames Israel for the failure of peace in the
Middle East. He continues to refuse to take responsibility for his part in
promoting the rise of militant Islam. Carter fails to recognize that the
greater evil was the Shah's replacement. For that reason, Islamist militancy
received a colossal push up the geopolitical ladder. Carter and the Democrats, along with
the policy wonks in the D.C.-New York corridor, harbor the misguided notion
that there is no evil in the world. They never get it through their dreamy
heads that the root cause of many wars and calamities is, in fact, evil. They
prefer to believe that every international problem has a diplomatic answer. They
believe that anyone can be talked into being peaceful if they just push the
right buttons long enough. History, unfortunately, indicates that is not how
things work. As a matter of fact, dialogue with evil legitimizes evil. Evil is
murderous, resentful, envious, hostile, bitter and unforgiving, creating
conflict for no legitimate reason. Mostly it is fatal to one and all. Dialogue only works when countries
or people have decided that their agenda, or at the very least a peaceful
compromise, cannot be accomplished through terror or intimidation. The other
alternative is that they must be totally and completely defeated in battle, as
Germany and Japan were defeated. Carter never understood that some
mindsets or systems can't be accommodated, regardless of good intentions or how
much talking and fine tuning and compromise take place. Yasser Arafat and those
like him, as well as his evil brand of politics, are a case in point. So are
North Korea, Cuba, Saddam Hussein and the government of the Iranian Islamist
militant clerics. Evil is evil, and George Bush was
correct when he called Iran and North Korea and Iraq the "axis of
evil." The Iranian-Arafat
Connection The victorious mullahs and their
leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, greeted Mr. Arafat as a hero as well he should
have been greeted, given the valuable assistance that the Palestinian
Liberation Organization (PLO) had provided. The PLO helped the Shah's opponents
by training terrorists, supplying weapons to the mullahs and their leftist
supporters, and participating in killing Iranian demonstrators in the streets
of Tehran. By doing so, the PLO further inflamed anti-Shah sentiments and
helped further destroy the Shah's political image. Ayatollah Khomeini, as a sign of
appreciation, closed the Israeli Embassy in Tehran and turned it into the PLO's
official headquarters and embassy, complete with Palestinian flag. Later, Fahdie relates, Arafat
"allowed the PLO to have a branch office in Iran's most important and
richest province, Khozestan.
Since 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran [IRI]
has been working directly with all the terrorist elements within the PLO. It
has even created several new terrorist organizations, such as Hezbollah ['Party
of God'], which was designed and developed by Mr. Mohtashami [also an IRI
reformist] to further enhance the IRI's terrorist bases in the region. These
organizations are supported both militarily with Iranian Revolutionary Guards
and financially with millions of dollars [of the Iranian people's money, of
course]." Fun and Games With the
Ayatollahs For some reason Islamist religious
clerics have a fascination with dogs, killing them or their owners. Not so long
ago in Afghanistan, videos of experiments on a puppy being gassed were
conducted by al-Qaeda and the Taliban. It was certainly big news on CNN. Before
the U.S. incursion into Afghanistan, videos of another pitiful pooch appeared. The
dog had a sign painted on its head that read "Bush." The Taliban and
Islamists torched the dog in their usual sick kind of statement against the
civilized world. In his most recent column,
historian, scholar and writer Michael Ledeen affirms that on Oct. 13 of this
year, religious leader Ali Khamenei's followers "demanded that all dogs
and their owners be arrested. This follows a June decree banning the sale of
dogs, along with public dog walking, which was branded an immoral act and an
offense to the sensitivities of all good Muslims. ..." Ledeen asserts: "As it turns
out, Iran's officials made the mistake of reporting the results of an official
survey which showed that three quarters of the Iranian people 'want good
relations with the United ("Great Satan") States, and that Khamenei
is the most unpopular public figure in the country.' So the head of the polling
institution was accused of disseminating false information and thrown into the
nearest torture chamber, and the editor of the newspaper that published the
story was hauled before some beturbaned and bearded fanatics practicing
'Islamic justice,' and similarly locked away. ..." Unfortunately, for the Iranians
there is no great leader on the horizon. Most opposition leadership has been
murdered or tortured into silence or live in exile. Public hangings and stoning
are rampant in Iran. Street fighting has led to the deaths of hundreds of
people. Reports that I saw indicated that
after the In his essay Ledeen also discusses
the monster demonstrations in Tehran last year demonstrations that the dim
bulb mainstream Western press deemed to be "soccer riots." Recent intelligence reports indicate
that al-Qaeda operatives in northern Italy have been in regular contact with
Iran. Ledeen adds that German officials say that al-Qaeda operatives are in
northern Italy "[and] that leading terrorists may be found in Iran." Furthermore, he continues:
"Just in case you were wondering about Bali, my information is that the
bombs were delivered by Hezbollah operatives, having been trained by experts
from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. The people who gave me this information,
the day after the event, also predicted, spot on, that the next assault would
be in the Philippines." (The entire article may be found at www.nationalreview.com) What Does President Bush
Know About Iran? President Bush understands what is
going on in Iran. His State of the Union speech gave heart to many people in
Iran's struggling opposition parties. That opposition hungered to hear a strong
statement about the "axis of evil." Iran's present government, led by
clerical bully-boys, is part of that axis. Contrary to what the snotty policy
analysts at the New York Times OR what Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton have to
say, the Iranian people are on the verge of throwing the bastards out. They
need hope. Where are Carter and Clinton in giving them any? At least Bush gave
the Iranian opposition hope by calling evil by its right name. Nevertheless, it
is also unfortunate that the Bush house is divided. Secretary of State Colin
Powell either has no clue, or he is so enamored of the usual Foggy Bottom
follies he can't see the forest for the trees. According to Ledeen, Powell and
his deputy Richard Armitage oppose any assistance to the Iranian opposition. It is possible George Bush realizes
that the "reformist movement" and the "third force
movement" in Iran are aliases created by the IRI to keep itself in power. One
can hope. Then there is Europe. It is futile to believe it will offer
encouragement in an effort to bring freedom and democracy to Iran or anywhere
in the Middle East. European oil companies Royal Dutch/Shell, TotalFinaElf and
ENI have signed deals with the ayatollahs that are worth billions of dollars. Thus
they have ignored the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act. That act seeks to bar foreign
firms from making major financial commitments in Iran. What Does the Iranian
Opposition Say? Iranian supporters of the overthrow
of the ayatollahs suggest that the "U.S. should funnel all IRI funds now
available in the U.S. to the Iranian opposition forces." Furthermore, "the U.S. should
stop all the IRI propaganda activities in the U.S. by banning any organizations
and individuals receiving IRI funds, whether directly from Iran or from IRI
sources of income in the U.S." The opposition also suggests that
the U.S. support the Iranian opposition forces by "providing them with
sufficient radio and TV capabilities to broadcast to the Iranian people inside
Iran." (Perhaps from stations maintained in Afghanistan.) The U.S. should publicly and
actively "support a national referendum in Iran under international
observation so that the Iranian people [inside and outside Iran] can freely
vote for their desired form of government." But if the Bush administration is as
divided as Ledeen thinks it is, then Iran may go on killing its own people,
suppressing their desire for greater freedom, while offering aid and comfort to
terrorists worldwide. The end game is the creation of Islamist states
worldwide. An Empty Glory Just recently, former President
Clinton gave speeches in Australia and Britain that in effect supported turning
over U.S. sovereignty to some hodgepodge unaccountable international cabal. Jimmy
Carter is of the same mind. Sadly, Carter and Bill Clinton
promoted foreign policy with a ferocious mindlessness that seeks the praise and
empty glory of the world. They excused cruelty and allowed truly murderous
regimes to have a pass. The despotic and murderous rulers in Iran, as well as
the rise of Islamic terrorists, are among the fruits of the good intentions of
people like Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Another case in point of good
intentions run amok: Clinton's Secretary of State Madeleine Albright vetoed a
U.N. effort to intervene in the bloodbath in Africa between the Hutus and
Tutsis. Millions were butchered in that horror. Meanwhile, Team Clinton jumped
in all the way into a far less devastating war between Christian Serbs and
Muslims in the former Yugoslavia. Since LBJ, Democratic
administrations have had trouble with priorities. With the best of intentions,
they go about wreaking havoc on the world while ignoring the worst of it. Carter counsels against any strong
U.S. or unilateral policy in the Middle East. Since he came on the political
scene, good son Jimmy has given the nod to any geopolitical group who either
works against U.S. interests or is left of Lenin, like the Sandinistas. That kind
of philosophy might make the Nobel Peace Prize Committee happy, but it does
nothing for peace in the world or for America's best interests. One member of
the Nobel Committee openly admitted that Carter received the prize because he
strongly opposed Bush's efforts in the Middle and Far East. George Bush would be foolish to give
Carter, Clinton, the foreign policy and academic left, and the pundits on CNN
and MSNBC the time of day. He would be foolish to have his head turned by the
European elite or the sorry bunch at the Nobel Committee. They have been wrong
in the past and nothing has changed. That is dangerous for the U.S. and for
world peace. Carter's record alone indicates how wrong and how dangerous they
have been. For instance, in the Far East in 1994, Carter helped negotiate a
useless treaty-accord with North Korea. Reports point out that while visiting
the dying despot Kim Il Sung, Carter proclaimed him to be "vigorous,
alert, intelligent and surprisingly well informed about the technical
issues." Carter actually believed that Sung also was "very friendly
toward Christianity." Later, Clinton's secretary of state,
Madeleine Albright, also went to North Korea. While there, she acted and spoke
as if she had been selected prom queen by the brutal regime. This regime has
been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of North Koreans from
starvation. This is another case where a
Democratic administration never sees evil when it comes from some approved
homicidal political system with its accompanying madman. Clinton and Carter
both believe, incorrectly, that they can manipulate people and states through
treaties, accords or expensive parties for visiting dignitaries. It is a safe bet that had Jimmy
Carter won a second term, the downfall of communism in the Soviet Union would
have been delayed by decades. Jimmy and His Good
Intentions Jimmy Carter has done good things in
his life. None of them, however, have to do with foreign policy. His efforts in
that regard have merely led to more chaos in just about every place he has
offered his help. Carter is the quintessential
kindergarten teacher who wants the kiddies to make nice. He is not a discerning
realistic maker of peace, but rather a guy who wanted to be a
"peacemaker" no matter how empty that peace was. Carter never figured out that
sometimes being a maker of peace means smacking the schoolyard bully till he
quits beating up on everyone. He still thinks you can talk people to death with
accords and compromises. For some reason he never realized that evil people
exist and their hearts are far from peace. They lie, cheat, steal and murder to
accomplish their ends. I suspect Jimmy thinks being a
Christian is always about "turning the other cheek." Well, there are
times one must do that, often in fact. However, it is one thing to turn the
other cheek when it is your own, it is a much different thing when the lives of
others in your charge are at stake. Carter's recent Nobel Prize should
have been a prize for the person with the best intentions. Unfortunately, Iran,
the United States and the world have paid the price in blood and heartache in
order for Jimmy Carter to obtain that prize. Read related articles:
Jimmy Carter's Trail of Disaster
Carters Arab Funding May Color
Israel Stance