How the Iraq and Syrian Nuclear Reactors Were Destroyed and Carter's Position About Israel

 Nadene Goldfoot                                             

In public, all 3 leaders had to smile.  Off camera, Carter was writing a book condemning Israel.  It was called Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, and  was a New York Times Best Seller book written by 39th President of the United States Jimmy Carter. It was published by Simon & Schuster in November 2006. 

    The Israeli air force destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor, outside Baghdad, June 7, 1981, inaugurating the Begin Doctrine, which stipulated that Israel would never allow its enemies to attain nuclear weapons.

 Menachem Begin, 6th PM of Israel,  authorized the bombing of the Osirak nuclear plant in Iraq. He was Prime Minister from 21 June 1977 to 10 October 1983.Jimmy Carter was the US president from January 20, 1977 to January 20, 1981. Ronald Reagan was then president from 1981 to 1989.Osirak was hit after only 4 months into his first term.  

Former President Jimmie Carter was not a fan of Israel.  He criticized Israel's attack on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981 without mentioning that it was the site of Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program, that Iran had already attacked the site the year before, and that the UN had failed to take any action to prevent Iraq from acquiring nuclear weapons.  Carter also failed to mention that Iraqi leaders had said that the nuclear bombs Iraq planned to build were specifically intended for use against Israel alone.  Throughout his time in office, Carter continued to omit important facts that would redeem Israel.  Instead, he attacked this tiny Jewish state, the only one in the world. 

His "Holy Land " knowledge is mostly what he teaches in his Sunday school classes, if you ask me.  He shows no knowledge of why it is important to the Jewish people.  

His book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid is a New York Times Best Seller book written by 39th President of the United States Jimmy Carter. It was published by Simon & Schuster in November 2006.  It is an indictment against Israel's very being, starting with the title with the accusation of practicing apartheid which is a lie that Israel's defenders have been fighting and proving that it is a lie.  President Carter, who was able to negotiate peace between Israel and Egypt, has remained deeply involved in Middle East affairs since leaving the White House. He has stayed in touch with the major players from all sides in the conflict and has made numerous trips to the Holy Land (he can't say "Israel?"), most recently as an observer in the Palestinian elections of 2005 and 2006.

In this book, President Carter shares his intimate knowledge of the history of the Middle East.  His knowledge must be warped, in my opinion,  probably due to the writers he has chosen and his personal experiences with the principal actors to come up with such conclusions,  

 He addresses sensitive political issues many American officials avoid.  Pulling no punches, Carter prescribes steps that must be taken for the two states to share the Holy Land without a system of apartheid or the constant fear of terrorism.  What does he think Israel has been doing?  The difference is that Israel is not leaving.  Carter and the Palestinians will have to accept them and their return home.

The general parameters of a long-term, two-state agreement are well known, the president writes. There will be no substantive and permanent peace for any peoples in this troubled region as long as Israel is violating key UN resolutions, official American policy, and the international “road map” for peace by occupying Arab lands and oppressing the Palestinians.  In other words, he's against Israel.  In his eyes, Palestinian Arabs have done no wrong.  He has set the goal for other anti-Semites to follow to this day.  

Except for mutually agreeable negotiated modifications, Israel’s official pre-1967 borders must be honored under his plan. Netanyahu explained on public TV why this is impossible today, as were all previous administrations since the founding of Israel, US government leaders must be in the forefront of achieving this long-delayed goal of a just agreement that both sides can honor.  It's been realized that there will never be peace unless both sides agree to a plan.  The US cannot force an agreement.  Who does Carter think he was?  The Romans, maybe?  

With Jimmy Carter,  it is always  Israel's fault.  Jimmy Carter says that if only Israel ended the occupation, there would be peace.  What occupation?  Israel never occupied.  It was the Romans who occupied their land of Judah and then burned it down in the year 70 CE.  All this time Jews have been living in in other people's lands, usually as 2nd class citizens.  When WWI was about over, and the Ottoman Empire, which oversaw Palestine was on the Axis side, Jews discussed their case for return to their land with the Allies. Many Jews already had been living in Palestine, just like some Arabs.  Jews did everything legal.  In fact, it was the English in the end that stiffed the Jews by giving away 80% of the promised Holy Land to a Saudi prince who was in search of a land to rule, and they gave it to prince Abdullah of Arabia.  Thus we now have Jordan. 

Every step has been under the UN ruling and Israel's legal ruling.  This land as you call the Holy Land is our land originally,, and your people have been stiffing Jewish people once too many times.  Now you've gone and let the Palestinians have almost 50% of our 20% of land, calling it the West Bank (Jordan's renaming of Judea and Samaria).That would have been fine had they not been attacking Jews every day, killing, maiming, running into them with cars, using knives, rockets, missiles, mortars. They don't hide their intentions.  It's out in the open.  Kartoum's conference said it all.  No peace, No recognition, No  negotiations.  This "warning" was reinforced on October 21, when an Egyptian missile boat sunk the Israeli destroyer Eilat, killing 47 people. It was confirmed in November and December, when the Arab states repeatedly rebuffed attempts by Sweden's ambassador to the Soviet Union, Gunnar Jarring — serving as the U.N. secretary general's special envoy - to induce them to join talks with Israel. In fact, the "three no's of Khartoum" held for a dozen years, until Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel — at which point the other 20 member states expelled it from the Arab League.

Operation Opera (Hebrew: מבצע אופרה), also known as Operation Babylon, was a surprise airstrike conducted by the Israeli Air Force on 7 June 1981, which destroyed an unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor located 17 kilometres (11 miles) southeast of Baghdad, Iraq. 

The Israeli operation came after Iran's partially successful Operation Scorch Sword had caused minor damage to the same nuclear facility a year prior, with the damage having been subsequently repaired by French technicians. 

Operation Opera, and related Israeli government statements following it, established the Begin Doctrine, which explicitly stated the strike was not an anomaly, but instead "a precedent for every future government in Israel".                                   

 Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti was an Iraqi politician who served as the fifth president of Iraq from 16 July 1979 until 9 April 2003. He was behind the Iraq reactor.  Carter was the US president from 1977 to 1981.  The execution of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein took place on 30 December 2006 by US seals under Obama.

      Netanyahu is the Iranian missile's target.

Carter also failed to mention that Iraqi leaders had said that the nuclear bombs Iraq planned to build were specifically intended for use against Israel alone.  

Especially Iran, who themselves had also attacked Iraq's nuclear reactor  in the making, knew what Israel would do in the future to any state that tried to rub them out.  Yet they have had the chutzpa to go ahead and try it.                                                  

It was  Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini  17 May 1900 – 3 June 1989), better known as Ayatollah Khomeini, that was an Iranian political and religious leader who served as the first supreme leader of Iran from 1979 until his death in 1989. He was behind the Iranian attack of the reactor. Iran and Iraq held a war that lasted almost 8 years.

Twenty-six years later, on September 6, 2007, the Begin Doctrine was put into effect again when IAF aircraft destroyed a Syrian nuclear reactor in a remote desert location, underscoring Jerusalem's continued resolve to fend off all existential threats, come what may.  Operation Outside the Box, also known as Operation Orchard, was an Israeli airstrike on a  nuclear reactor with a military purpose, referred to as the Al Kibar site, in the Deir ez-Zor region of Syria, which occurred just after midnight on 6 September 2007. The attack reportedly followed Israeli top-level consultations with the Bush Administration. After realizing that the US was not willing to bomb the site after being told so by U.S. President George W. Bush, 

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert decided to adhere to the 1981 Begin Doctrine and unilaterally strike to prevent a Syrian nuclear weapons capability, despite serious concerns about Syrian retaliation. On 22 March 2018, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officially took responsibility for destroying a nuclear reactor built in the northeastern Syrian province of Deir al-Zor in 2007 after a decade of ambiguity. Surely, the world governments  knew who did it, after knowing about the Begin Doctrine.  Who else?  

We all know that Donald Trump was in office when the Abraham Accords were fulfilled.  The Abraham Accords are a joint statement between the State of Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States, reached on August 13, 2020.

The Abraham Accords expanded and are now a series of treaties normalizing diplomatic relations between Israel, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco, facilitated by the U.S. Administration[1] between August and December, 2020. In the span of five short months, these four Arab states joined Egypt and Jordan in making peace with Israel. The agreements were called “The Abraham Accords” in honor of Abraham - the patriarch of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.  Now, what does Jimmy Carter say about this?  Saudi Arabia is in the plans, and at least the situation with them has improved a little.  Israeli planes can fly over their air space.                                      

 But has Jimmy Carter ever praised the Abraham Accords, asked algemeiner?                     

While the Carter Center has issued plenty of articles about Israel, most of them critical, the term “Abraham Accords” is not mentioned. I couldn’t find a thing on their website about the peace agreements between Israel and Morocco, Sudan, Bahrain, or the UAE.

This seems odd, since Carter positions himself as a champion of Middle East peace.

It isn’t hard to guess why, however. The Abraham Accords violated the primary rule of “peacemakers” since Oslo — that no Arab nation would make peace with Israel until the Palestinian issue was resolved. According to this worldview, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was the core of instability in the Middle East.  (It's the Arab nations who have been stiffed by the Palestinians.  They dole out money each year and are not getting their bang for the buck.  They're paying for constant warring with Israel).  

All of the arguments about why the Abraham Accords were useless have been proven wrong in the year since they were signed.  Between Trump and his son in law, Jared Kushner, they accomplished the impossible.  Maybe the timing was just right?  Also, the threat over their heads of Iran taking over the Muslim world had a lot to do with the timing.

         Iran being so close to the nuclear bomb making.

Now Iran has been threatening Israel by repeating what Iraq had done, wanting to destroy Israel with nuclear bombs and what Israel had done, also hitting a nuclear reactor of Iraq's.   The Begin Doctrine still stands.  As Iran has stated that they want to drive Israel into the sea, so Israel has warned all people how they will defend themselves.  

Israel has reason to believe their accusations and threats.  The Iranian leaders’ quest is to destroy Israel.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran, calling for Israel's destruction

"Despite the sheer volume of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic statements emanating from the country’s two supreme leaders in the 43 years since the Islamic revolution in Iran, the notion that Tehran’s Islamist rulers seek the destruction of Israel has often been caveated, belittled, or politically recast by other nations.

Perhaps most famous is the case of former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who called for Israel’s destruction in 2005 when paraphrasing a line from the founding father of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Quite literally, Ahmadinejad said, “The occupying regime of Jerusalem must be disappeared from the page of time.” His quote became the subject of a translation controversy and political debate following its popularly rendered but more figurative translation as calling for Israel to be “wiped off the map”—which not just American, but Iranian state-run English-language outlets employed.

Resource:

book:  Thee CASE AGAINST ISRAEL'S ENEMIES, by Alan Dershowitz

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Outside_the_Box

http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/khartoum.asp

https://www.standwithus.com/theabrahamaccords?gclid=CjwKCAjwsMGYBhAEEiwAGUXJaTDoOMVhQswwHUZvtCnOqyK_2FDBhrkN7MQziJnZL3pkA9nDv6rizBoCubkQAvD_BwE

https://www.algemeiner.com/2021/09/20/does-jimmy-carter-support-the-abraham-accords/

Julie Bosman's, Others and Myself's Critique on "Palestine-Peace Not Apartheid" by Former President Jimmy Carter

 Nadene Goldfoot                                              

The book  by former president Jimmy Carter, Palestine--Peace  Not Apartheid,  was published by Simon & Schuster in November 2006.  I note that this was our first president to attack Israel,  in a whole book yet.  Since he had won the 2002 Peace prize, this makes his book almost biblical in admiration.  

It was shocking to me and most of my friends back then. 

Apartheid was a system of institutionalized racial segregation that existed in South Africa and South West Africa from 1948 until the early 1990s.

It is acclaimed to be a great book by amazon readers today. 

                                            

                      Hamas terrorists marching in street

What was going on in Israel when this book came out?

 In January 2006, the Palestinians held parliamentary elections. In a surprise victory, Hamas ousted the Fatah government, but Abbas remained PNA president. The two factions briefly formed a national unity government, but, in June 2007, Hamas took control of Gaza, routing Fatah forces and killing more than 100 people. Israel responded to Hamas' seize by maintaining even tighter control on the goods and people entering and exiting the territories.

International Fallout           

                              Getting Shalit back from Terrorists

In June 2006, Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups took Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier, from Israeli territory and dragged him into Gaza. Despite prisoner exchange attempts, Shalit has been held hostage ever since. On July 12 2006, Hezbollah militants crossed the Lebanon-Israel border and attacked an Israeli army patrol, killing three soldiers and kidnapping two others. The incident coincided with a series of mortar and rocket attacks on northern Israel by Hezbollah. Both incidents provoked a month-long war in which 1,200 Lebanese and 128 Israelis were killed. Both sides stopped fighting on August 14, 2006. 

The UN and international human rights groups condemned Israel for using cluster bombs in Southern Lebanon. The war was criticized within Israel and sparked more resentment from the Arab world.  

Ha'aretz stated as fact: "The ground invasion was preceded by large-scale artillery shelling from around 4 P.M., intended to "soften" the targets as artillery batteries deployed along the Strip in recent days began bombarding Hamas targets and open areas near the border. Hundreds of shells were fired, including cluster bombs aimed at open areas."

All of these claims are based on the appearance of the shell bursting,

 and none of the sources indicate that actual cluster bomblets have been found. This looks like a case of mistaken identity showing "multiple projectiles" is actually a white phosphorus round or similar, used to 

create a smokescreen. Of course WP is also very controversial. 

However, when Carter's book first came out, that was not the case.   

There were strong critiques against it, thank goodness.  Some people were seeing the inaccuracies thrown against Israel.    

                                                 

Julie Bosman is a national correspondent who covers the Midwest. Born and raised in Wisconsin and based in Chicago, she joined The Times in 2002 and has written extensively about politics, education, law enforcement and literature. Bosman had been with the Times for 12 years, beginning as Maureen Dowd's news assistant in 2002. She'd also covered the 2008 presidential race, education and metro. Her latest role took her to Chicago.

Critical response to Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid has been mixed. According to Julie Bosman, criticism of the book "has escalated to a full-scale furor," much of which has focused on Carter's use of the word "apartheid" in the subtitle. Some critics, including several leaders of the Democratic Party and of American Jewish organizations, have interpreted the subtitle as an allegation of Israeli apartheid, which they believe to be inflammatory and unsubstantiated. 

Tony Karon, Senior Editor at TIME.com and a former anti-Apartheid activist for the ANC, said: "Jimmy Carter had to write this book precisely because Palestinian life and history is not accorded equal value in American discourse, far from it. And his use of the word apartheid is not only morally valid; it is essential, because it shakes the moral stupor that allows many liberals to rationalize away the daily, grinding horror being inflicted on Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza".

The truth is that the American students have not been educated about The Holocaust, Jews or Israel either.  People only believe what they see in print, which was in those days, the newspaper and their church and of course, the TV news with reporters themselves being slanted in their opinions.  Even the book used at Portland State U, Middle East-Past & Present by Yahya Armajani and Thomas M. Ricks, is highly slanted in their chapters covering Israel.  I took the course.  I read the whole book.

 Former President Bill Clinton wrote a brief letter to the chairman of the American Jewish Committee, thanking him for articles criticizing the book and citing his agreement with Dennis Ross's attempts to "straighten ... out" Carter's claims and conclusions about Clinton's own summer 2000 Camp David peace proposal.  Carter's meetings were a failure whereas Clinton's were successful.  

Critics claim that Carter crossed the line into anti-Semitism. My feeling is that the whole book was defaming Israel right from the title, and Israel was created for our remnant of Jews in the world, so in effect he was attacking Jews.  What was happening in Israel was that Palestinians were trying to destroy the Jews-drive them into the sea, and have the country for themselves.  It's obvious, not a time to be pussy-footing around with semantics--oh, he's calling Israel names but certainly not the Jews--oh yes, I know how much we are loved.  For heaven's sake, the title of the book was accusing Israel of Apartheid, a terrible word used against British-held Africa.  It has connotations of cruelty, hatefulness against a defenseless people.  What more do you want in being anti-Semitic?  

Abraham Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, initially accused Carter of "engaging in anti-Semitism" in the book;  "Foxman told James Traub later that he would not call the former president himself an "anti-Semite" or a "bigot". Ethan Bronner also asserted that Carter's "overstatement" in the book "hardly adds up to anti-Semitism."  

Some journalists and academics have praised Carter for what they believe to be speaking honestly about the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in a media environment described as hostile to opponents of Israel's policies.  I argue, what about accuracy?  The honesty comes only from 

Carter in that he's writing about his own belief system; not from facts.

 

Some left-leaning Israeli politicians such as Yossi Beilin and Shulamit Aloni argued that Carter's critique of Israeli policy in the Palestinian territories reflects that of many Israelis themselves.  

 Norman Finkelstein, a pal of Norman Chomsky,  two of the biggest American-Jewish anti-Semites, did Israel  ultimate harm  who defends Carter's analysis in Palestine Peace Not Apartheid: "After four decades of Israeli occupation, the infrastructure and superstructure of apartheid have been put in place. Outside the never-never land of mainstream American Jewry and U.S. media,  this reality is barely disputed."  They have been so anti-against

Israel has said that they are no longer welcome in Israel.  Finkelstein has eased up, but not Chomsky.  

 In this book Carter argues that Israel's continued control and construction of settlements have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Middle East. That perspective, coupled with Apartheid in the titular phrase Peace Not Apartheid (which many regard as a subtitle) and allegations of errors and misstatements in the book, sparked criticism. Carter has defended his book and countered that response to it 

Even the use of "settlements" is a mis-conscrewed term.  Foreign writers such as Carter keep calling cities 50 years old as settlements.  In USA, a settlement was used when forts were built in the wilderness, but then after a few years were called villages, towns and cities.  A settlement feels like something that  is only temporary.  

Here's what Carter said about his title.

Regarding the use of the word "Apartheid" in the title of his book, Carter has said:  It's his denial: 

"It's not Israel. The book has nothing to do with what's going on inside Israel which is a wonderful democracy, you know, where everyone has guaranteed equal rights and where, under the law, Arabs and Jews who are Israelis have the same privileges about Israel. That's been most of the controversy because people assume it's about Israel. It's not."I've never alleged that the framework of apartheid existed within Israel at all, and that what does exist in the West Bank is based on trying to take Palestinian land and not on racism. So it was a very clear distinction."

 "Sorry but that's not distinction at all.  A title refers to what you're writing about.  The title said it all.  This is double talk.   

Book reviews in the mainstream media have been written mostly by representatives of Jewish organizations who would be unlikely to visit the occupied territories, and their primary criticism is that the book is anti-Israel. 

Two members of Congress have been publicly critical. Incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi for instance, issued a statement (before the book was published) saying that "he does not speak for the Democratic Party on Israel." Some reviews posted on Amazon.com call me "anti-Semitic", and others accuse the book of "lies" and "distortions. A former Carter Center fellow has taken issue with it, and Alan Dershowitz called the book's title "indecent."

Evidently Carter had to do a little apologizing-after the deed had been done.  

He also wrote a "Letter to Jewish Citizens of America" explaining "his use of the term 'apartheid' and sympathizing with Israelis who fear terrorism." 

As president, didn't he realize such reactions when using that  title?  

He's implying that Israel is apartheid against the Palestinians.  

 He was attacking Israel's integrity, purpose, all they stood for by

  doing so. 

 He was giving ammunition to Israel's enemies to use against  her.   

Carter blamed his title.  He chose that title. 

 From reading that title, I would not stoop to buy  the book and read it. Millions did.  

Today, the book store my friend just visited was full of  Obama's book that also attacks Israel.

 Bookstores can attract customers with such books, and the authors rake in the proceeds, 

so that Israel's enemies gain more power and ammunition.   

Jimmy Carter was a peanut farmer from Georgia before he became President, not a historian and expert on Israel, though he was a Sunday School teacher.    

Resource: https://www.politico.com/media/story/2014/03/times-julie-bosman-leaves-publishing-beat-for-midwest-gig-001802/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine:_Peace_Not_Apartheid 

Facts About Israel, published by The division of Information, Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, Israel. 

update: 1/3/21  2:30pm.  addition at ending.