There’s a lot to this story, that I’m not quite sure how to tap into. But let me attempt to lay this out properly, by first reminding you of our post earlier this week, as regards Jimmy Carter, and his planned trip to Syria  to a meeting with Hamas terrorists. It’s that story that got me thinking about the trip that produced this picture of Nancy Pelosi in a headscarf. But that, apparently, wasn’t all that was produced by that trip. To fully understand this, perhaps we should look back to that timeframe… early 2007, by way of an October 2007 post at ‘Wake Up America“. 
That post has to do with the seemingly unconnected, toothless and inconsequential bill aimed to condemming Turkey for genocide back in 1905. As Wake Up America pointed out at the time , there were questions about her motivations from the off.
In the LA Times, Jane Harmon explains her reasoning  for changing her mind on the Armenian Genocide bill she once co-sponsored.
One point she made got me to thinking.
I originally co-sponsored the resolution because I was convinced that the terrible crime against the Armenian people should be recognized and condemned. But after a visit in February to Turkey, where I met with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Armenian Orthodox patriarch and colleagues of murdered Turkish Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, I became convinced that passing this resolution again at this time would isolate and embarrass a courageous and moderate Islamic government in perhaps the most volatile region in the world.
So I agree with eight former secretaries of State — including Los Angeles’ own Warren Christopher — who said that passing the resolution “could endanger our national security interests in the region, including our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and damage efforts to promote reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia.”
Perhaps that is exactly why they are picking this time to push this bill, because Turkey is a key ally to us in our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Having failed in all their attempts to force defeat upon our troops, especially now that good news is coming from Iraq on a weekly basis, is this just another attempt to anger an ally of ours and to harm our relations with Turkey as well as our efforts in Iraq?
It’s starting to look like that’s exactly what was up. Pelosi being there is only part of the game, however… but I’m getting ahead of the story.
Now you may or may not recall that at that meeting, so here’s a refresher from The New Anatolian with AP / Ankara
05 April 2007
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi met Syrian President Bashar Assad yesterday for talks criticized by the White House as undermining American efforts to isolate the hard-line Arab country.
The meeting came one day after Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had a meeting with the Syrian President which proved thawing relations with two neighboring countries. . .
U.S. President George W. Bush has said Pelosi’s trip signals that the Assad government is part of the international mainstream when it is not. The United States says Syria allows Iraqi Sunni insurgents to operate from its territory, backs the Hezbollah and Hamas militant groups and is trying to destabilize the Lebanese government. Syria denies the allegations.
Erdogan and Assad on Tuesday discussed the situation in Iraq and the Arab-Israeli conflict, as part of Ankara’s efforts to play a greater role in the Middle East.
Turkey has been trying to improve ties with neighbor Syria after a chill that lasted until 1999. Ankara previously accused Damascus of harboring the terrorist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and even threatened Syria with war.
With this move, Turkey risks further deterioration of Turkish-American relations which is said to be below zero since March 1, 2003, when Turkish Parliament refused to pass a government motion allowing the U.S. use Turkish air base for its Iraqi offensive.
Turkey is a U.S. ally and member of the NATO military alliance, but it is also a Muslim-majority country that has close ties with most Middle Eastern states. It also enjoys friendly, but occasionally tense, relations with Israel.
After Erdogan’s move, the California Democrat Pelosi and accompanying members of Congress began their day by holding separate talks with Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem and Vice President Farouk al-Sharaa and then met Assad, who hosted them for lunch after their talks.
Why is Turkey important? Remember, please that Turkey has been providing us with a place to run a supply line to our troops in the field. Also, we were allowed to use a Turkish air base to support our Iraqi operations. If Pelosi had been successful at pissing off the Turks enough to shut down the supply line, the long string of advances being made by our people there would come to a halt. Halting the success in Iraq is likely exactly what the Democrats were after, there, and most certainly what Assad would have wanted. Funny, then, how this measure of condemming the Turks 100 years later comes up so soon after the Assad visit. As Wake Up points out, the Wall Street Journal concuded something was amiss as well:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, famous for donning a head scarf earlier this year to commune for peace with the Syrians, has now concluded that this is the perfect moment to pass a Congressional resolution condemning Turkey for the Armenian genocide of 1915. Problem is, Turkey in 2007 has it within its power to damage the growing success of the U.S. effort in Iraq. We would like to assume this is not Speaker Pelosi’s goal.
To be clear: We write that we would like to assume, rather than that we do assume, because we are no longer able to discern whether the Speaker’s foreign-policy intrusions are merely misguided or are consciously intended to cause a U.S. policy failure in Iraq.
They also bring up the name of Tom Lantos:
Back when Bill Clinton was President, Mr. Lantos took a different view. “This legislation at this moment in U.S.-Turkish relations is singularly counterproductive to our national interest,” he said in September 2000, when there was much less at stake in the Middle East. According to Reuters, he added that the resolution would “humiliate and insult” Turkey and that the “unintended results would be devastating.”
If Nancy Pelosi and Tom Lantos want to take down U.S. policy in Iraq to tag George Bush with the failure, they should have the courage to walk through the front door to do it. Bringing the genocide resolution to the House floor this week would put a terrible event of Armenia’s past in the service of America’s bitter partisanship today. It is mischievous at best, catastrophic at worst, and should be tabled.
The bill very nearly suceeded in causing serous probelms between us and Turkey.
One name they don’t mention that was more than along for the ride, was Louise Slaughter. She and Tom Lantos were along for the ride, and there’s much in the way of info I’m still sifting through that suggests they were there for far more than this. Fortunate that the Congress… even some Democrats, managed to figure out that damage would be caused by the Turkey condemnation. Wake Up America:
[Update] Since it has been made very clear that Pelosi’s intention to harm our Iraq efforts was the reasoning she has been so set to proceed with the Amenian genocide bill, support from the house is eroding.
WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 â€” Worried about antagonizing Turkish leaders, House members from both parties have begun to withdraw their support from a resolution backed by the Democratic leadership that would condemn as genocide the mass killings of Armenians nearly a century ago.
Almost a dozen lawmakers had shifted against the measure in a 24-hour period ending Tuesday night, accelerating a sudden exodus that has cast deep doubt over the measure’s prospects. Some made clear that they were heeding warnings from the White House, which has called the measure dangerously provocative, and from the Turkish government, which has said House passage would prompt Turkey to reconsider its ties to the United States, including logistical support for the Iraq war.
Until Tuesday, the measure appeared on a path to House passage, with strong support from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. It was approved last week by the House Foreign Affairs Committee. But by Tuesday evening, a group of senior House Democrats had made it known that they were planning to ask the leadership to drop plans for a vote on the measure.
Once again, Nancy Pelosi gets called out and shown to be the political dog she is and others are backing away. More on this tomorrow. [End Update]
All of which brings us to Jimmy Carter, and his planned trip to Syria, openly consorting with Hamas terrorists. I noted the other day, and I note again, the time frame involved, relative to the elections here in the states. Your name doesn’t have to be Andretti to figure out where this race car’s going. Am I suggesting that a former President of the United States is going to commit treason? Yes, I am. And why not? He’s done it before.
We know, for example, by way of Peter Schweizer’s book, “ Reagan’s War: The Epic Story of His Forty-Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism “ , that Carter enlisted the aid of the Soviet Union in both the 80 and 84 Presidential elections. Schweizer apparently found this evidence while pouring over Soviet era documents. Those documents, Schweizer says now, show that in the closing days of the 1980 campaign, Carter sent Armand Hammer to the Soviet Embassy for a meeting, in secret, with Soviet Ambassador Dobrynin. Dobrynin’s records of that meeting record that Carter, through Hammer, complained to Dobrynin about the way things were going in the election, Hammer, say the records, asked for Soviet help, particularly as regards Jewish emigration, which would have helped Carter in key states. According to the Record, Hammer promised Dobrynin that “Carter won’t forget that service, if he is re-elected”.
It gets better.
In 1984, Carter once again took a hand, visiting Dobrynin at his home. Those Soviet era records show that Carter at that meeting, complained to Dobrynin about Reagan and te Defense buildup, and told him that if something wasn’t done about Reagan, “there would not be a single agreement on arms control, especially on nuclear arms, as long as Reagan remained in power.”
The inention of Mr. Carter seems clear; He wanted the Soviets to help him put a Democrat back in the White House… a clearcut case of treason.
So, yes, Carter has done it before, and Pelosi is of the same mold, if her meeting with Assad and her actions as regards Turkey later are of any indication.
And yes, the idea that Democrats commit treason seems well established. But this establishment of pattern gives us only one logical path to follow in terms of Carter’s planned Syria trip: This trip to Syria should be prevented at any cost, including the arrest and jailing of Mr. Carter. And as for Mrs Pelosi… well, follow your nose.