News Obama's speech in Cairo, June 2009

[Astronuc]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-at-Cairo-University-6-04-09/

I thought it was a reasonably good speech. But the GOP doesn't agree.

GOP chastises Obama's speech over Israeli-Palestinian issue
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/04/obama.speech.political/index.html

I don't see where Obama is apologizing as much as acknowledging past misdeeds.


American Muslims, Jews rate Obama's speech
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/04/obama.muslims.jews/index.html

Certainly there are different views. So, let the dialogue continue.

 

[LowlyPion]

Here is another CNN Report on reactions:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/04/obama.mideast.reactions/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

It was an impressive address. It was almost shocking to see a US President not pandering to the Israelis.

I don't get where Romney and other Republicans are coming from about his apology tours. The last thing the world needs is more of the last administration, with their secret side deals, and their inattention to their own behavior. My guess is that Romney's remarks about apology tours recently is really about jealousy, and trying to steal a news cycle, to pad his resume for 2012, lest anyone forget him by then - a distinct possibility.

Here's a video of the address from CSPAN:
http://cspan.org/Watch/Media/2009/06/04/HP/R/19357/Pres+Obama+Speaks+to+the+Muslim+World+From+Cairo.aspx

 

[skippy1729]

The boy needs a history lesson. In 1948 millions of Muslims voluntarily abandoned their homes in India to live in Pakistan after the partition (and similarly many Hindus left Pakistan). Many stayed and became integrated minorities. The two state solution, very messy, but it is history. They are not demanding repatriation after 60 years. There also was a two state solution for Palestine in 1948: Israel and Jordan. The Arab League nations told the Muslims in Israel to abandon their homes. The Jews did not expel them. Many stayed and became Israeli citizens. The Arab League nations waged (and lost) three wars of aggression in 1948, 1967 and 1973. The Israelis have left Gaza and get rocket attacks in return. Why should they make any more territorial concessions? The Egyptians signed a treaty and got Sinai and the Canal back. The Syrians and Iranians and their Palestinian pawns do not want peace. Peace will come if the Palestinian people take control of their destiny and rid themselves of their extremist "leaders". During the campaign he said it was unacceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons but I am sure he had his fingers crossed. His weakness will embolden the enemies of Israel. He will force them into a preemptive strike against Iran. The blood will be on his hands.

 

[Cyrus]

Excuse me, "the boy"?

"Has his fingers crossed"?

"The blood will be on his hands"?

Incase you didn't notice, this isn't the loney forums.

 

[skippy1729]

Excuse me, "loney"?

I guess this isn't the good spellers forum either.

I suppose I could have made the same points without "the boy". It was disrespectful, but then I don't really respect him. He will say whatever is politically expedient.

I will let the rest of my comments stand.

Skippy

 

[Cyrus]

Excuse me, "loney"?

I guess this isn't the good spellers forum either.

I suppose I could have made the same points without "the boy". It was disrespectful, but then I don't really respect him. He will say whatever is politically expedient.

I will let the rest of my comments stand.

Skippy

It is quite foolish to come on these forums and state with 'certainty' the president of the United States has his fingers crossed with the hopes that another country gets nuclear weapons to cause war, while calling him 'boy'.

I suggest you get real when posting here.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Cyrus. Don't get yourself banned again.


I liked what I heard of the speech which wasn't much unfortunately. From what I have heard it had a great impact.

 

[AhmedEzz]

The boy needs a history lesson. In 1948 millions of Muslims voluntarily abandoned their homes in India to live in Pakistan after the partition (and similarly many Hindus left Pakistan). Many stayed and became integrated minorities. The two state solution, very messy, but it is history. They are not demanding repatriation after 60 years. There also was a two state solution for Palestine in 1948: Israel and Jordan. The Arab League nations told the Muslims in Israel to abandon their homes. The Jews did not expel them. Many stayed and became Israeli citizens. The Arab League nations waged (and lost) three wars of aggression in 1948, 1967 and 1973. The Israelis have left Gaza and get rocket attacks in return. Why should they make any more territorial concessions? The Egyptians signed a treaty and got Sinai and the Canal back. The Syrians and Iranians and their Palestinian pawns do not want peace. Peace will come if the Palestinian people take control of their destiny and rid themselves of their extremist "leaders". During the campaign he said it was unacceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons but I am sure he had his fingers crossed. His weakness will embolden the enemies of Israel. He will force them into a preemptive strike against Iran. The blood will be on his hands.

I would like to see some proofs of what you are claiming, seems that you need a history lesson yourself (I am not going to argue with you but please validate your words with some sort of proof, else state it's your opinion)

 

[kyleb]

There also was a two state solution for Palestine in 1948: Israel and Jordan.

You are confused Jordan, is across the river from Palestine, and it gained it's independence in 1946.

The Arab League nations told the Muslims in Israel to abandon their homes.

This is a commonly repeated misconception.

The Jews did not expel them.

Militant Zionists expelled hundreds of thousands of Arabs, Muslims and Christians alike. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus" .

Many stayed and became Israeli citizens.

Some areas weren't ethnically cleansed, but they lived under harsh restrictions of martial law for nearly two decades and with more subtle forms of discrimination since then, and many Israeli-Arabs are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internally_Displaced_Palestinians" .

The Arab League nations waged (and lost) three wars of aggression in 1948, 1967 and 1973.

Rather, while the 1973 war was a war of aggression started by Arab states, in 1948 Arab nations stepped in an attempt to stop the ethnic cleansing mentioned above, the 1967 war kicked off with Israel bombing Egypt, and of course you skipped over Israel's previous war with Egypt which was initiated by Israelis parachuting into the Sinai in 1956.

All in all, Obama's speech shows a far better understanding of the history than your distorted recount, which makes me somewhat optimistic that unlike previous administrations he will actually work to bring a just and peaceful to this conflict. My only major complaint is that his call for Hamas to renounce violence comes off as rather hypocritical. Perhaps Hamas could meet him half way by vowing to keep their civilian death toll under that of Israel, and that of our own for that matter.

 

[Astronuc]

I hope that the contrast between Obama's positive speech and the invective-filled tripe from Ayman al-Zawahiri and bin Laden is obvious to many.

 

[BoomBoom]

Ahhh...nice.

Just as the pen can be mightier than the sword, words can be more powerful than bombs.

 

[LowlyPion]

I hope that the contrast between Obama's positive speech and the invective-filled tripe from Ayman al-Zawahiri and bin Laden is obvious to many.

I think their strident screeds are more a gauge of their concern that their iceberg is melting. With Pakistan taking a more aggressive stand against the Taliban and Obama appealing to the university students in Cairo with respect and intellectual honesty ... renouncing the past ways that the US has dealt with things ... but not letting any side off with their stunts ... Israeli settlement expansions, Holocaust deniers, Hamas rocketeers, etc. ... I'd say the extremists on several sides in the Middle East have reason to be mighty concerned that the middle ground may become an attractive oasis that will only grow if nurtured and their positions, and hence their existence, will become irrelevant and inconsequential.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

...

Nevermind him. What did you think of the speech? What about your friends and family?

 

[AhmedEzz]

My family, my friends and myself couldn't be happier. Obama's speech was very encouraging and I kept cheering for him as he went on because in my opinion all of his dealings were correct, fair and on the spot. We are very pleased with everything he said/done.

Myself and a couple of my friends are skeptical that all the good talk won't be converted to action and that his appeals would face strong opposition from strong lobby in the US that would stall and prevent the effort. I don't think Obama would find any resistance from our side.

What did you think ? and how did the speech sound for American people?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

My family, my friends and myself couldn't be happier. Obama's speech was very encouraging and I kept cheering for him as he went on because in my opinion all of his dealings were correct, fair and on the spot. We are very pleased with everything he said/done.

Myself and a couple of my friends are skeptical that all the good talk won't be converted to action and that his appeals would face strong opposition from strong lobby in the US that would stall and prevent the effort. I don't think Obama would find any resistance from our side.

What did you think ? and how did the speech sound for American people?

My wife and I couldn't be happier. While it is true that we can't solve the problems of the world in a day - or in one or two terms of a US President - it is our hope that Obama has shown the world where the heart of America can be found. Judging by Obama's 60% approval rating, it would seem that many of us are willing to admit where we have been wrong, to accept the failings of others, and move on. In a world where you and I can sit and have a discussion as casually as two friends sitting on a park bench, in world where a black man named Hussein is the US President, it becomes clear that we have entered a new age where the only limits on peace are those that we impose on ourselves.

 

[AhmedEzz]

My wife and I couldn't be happier. While it is true that we can't solve the problems of the world in a day - or in one or two terms of a US President - it is our hope that Obama has shown the world where the heart of America can be found. Judging by Obama's 60% approval rating, it would seem that many of us are willing to admit where we have been wrong, to accept the failings of others, and move on. In a world where you and I can sit and have a discussion as casually as two friends sitting on a park bench, in world where a black man named Hussein is the US President, it becomes clear that we have entered a new age where the only limits on peace are those that we impose on ourselves.

It would be an honor for us to help this world become a reality. People here vary in ideologies and backgrounds but we share one thing, intellect. As so, we should be among those with initiatives, among those with open-minded mentality and among those who first conduct the proposed discussions. It is up to us, who were lucky enough to become thinkers and intellects, to try and make this peace work. I believe that it is this attitude that might for last bring peace in a much troubled world. It does sound too idealistic but if we didn't believe this and work for it, then what are we up to?

 

[BoomBoom]

Myself and a couple of my friends are skeptical that all the good talk won't be converted to action and that his appeals would face strong opposition from strong lobby in the US that would stall and prevent the effort.

The opposition isn't very strong these days...very vocal, but with minimal support. I do hope that the Israeli leaders fall in line though.

I look forward to great progress on many fronts over the next 8 years!

 

[LowlyPion]

Myself and a couple of my friends are skeptical that all the good talk won't be converted to action and that his appeals would face strong opposition from strong lobby in the US that would stall and prevent the effort. I don't think Obama would find any resistance from our side.

What did you think ? and how did the speech sound for American people?

For myself, I'd say he was representing my thinking on the issues. No one's hands are clean. Not even ours. The way forward will require that centuries of stubbornness and strife will be laid to the side. It is unclear how easily hands may be pried from the hilts of their swords with such a cacophony of parochial interests in the area. It will take the determined effort of all of good will to quiet the rhetoric and get to substance.

 

[Astronuc]

My family, my friends and myself couldn't be happier. Obama's speech was very encouraging and I kept cheering for him as he went on because in my opinion all of his dealings were correct, fair and on the spot. We are very pleased with everything he said/done.

Myself and a couple of my friends are skeptical that all the good talk won't be converted to action and that his appeals would face strong opposition from strong lobby in the US that would stall and prevent the effort. I don't think Obama would find any resistance from our side.

What did you think ? and how did the speech sound for American people?

I'm impatiently waiting for the good deeds/actions.

I hope and expect that Obama will not repeat the bullying of his predecessor.

 

[mheslep]

in 1948 Arab nations stepped in an attempt to stop the ethnic cleansing mentioned above,

As to cause that is difficult to defend, as a) much of refugee action happened after the Arab attack, and b) it is problematic to tie Arab nation motivation solely to the refugees.

 

[mheslep]

From Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei - not so much.

"People of the Middle East, the Muslim region and North Africa -- people of these regions -- hate America from the bottom of their heart," Khamenei said. "For a long time, these people have witnessed aggressive actions by America, and that's why they hate them."

Obama said the United States and Muslim world need a "new beginning" but Khamenei said any change would take more than "beautiful speeches."

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/06/04/Khamenei-Muslims-hate-US/UPI-12081244159083/

 

[kyleb]

The opposition isn't very strong these days...very vocal, but with minimal support.

The opposition to peaceful resolution doesn't have popular support, but that doesn't keep them from having massive pull over our government. We have been funneling arms and cash into Israel's conquest of Palestine for decades, and in doing we've filled the pockets of many people who have no qualms in using whatever resources they can to insure this conflict continues to be the cash cow for them at has always been. For example sake, as it stands http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/25/AR2009032502800.html" , let alone actually take tangible steps to stop their ongoing colonization of the West Bank.

As to cause that is difficult to defend, as a) much of refugee action happened after the Arab attack, and b) it is problematic to tie Arab nation motivation solely to the refugees.

I didn't claim the Arab nations attempt to stop the ethnic cleansing was particularly successful, but hundreds of thousands of Palestinians had already been displaced prior to the surrounding nations sending their armies in. As for your second argument; I wasn't speaking of absolutes, but rather referring to primacy.

 

[BoomBoom]

... as it stands http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/25/AR2009032502800.html" , let alone actually take tangible steps to stop their ongoing colonization of the West Bank.

Well no, in the end, the Israeli government is the only entity that has any direct control over that issue. We have no control over what other countries do, but hopefully we can influence them to do so.

Perhaps a threat to cut funding if they don't comply could pull a lot of weight...
(I'm not sure why we fund them at all in the first place, TBH...tradition?)

 

[kyleb]

We can't control what other countries do, but donations to settler groups could be blocked based on the fact that the settlements are in violation of international law.

As for cutting off our massive "foreign aid" to Israel, again that largely goes to into the coffers of military-industrial complex executives, along with those in the political machine which keeps the gravy train rolling. Like I said, while the lobby isn't large, it is not just vocal but quite strong. Obama has already pledged not to interfere with that, which I can understand as I have little doubt he would be undermined by whatever means necessary if he did, but that leaves how he might be planning to put his words to action as rather a mystery at this point.

 

[mheslep]

We can't control what other countries do, but donations to settler groups could be blocked based on the fact that the settlements are in violation of international law...

Yes the US President has said numerous times that the US would not be dictating solutions to other countries. Unless of course the country is Israel:

...Rebuffing Israel on a key Mideast negotiating issue, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Wednesday that the Obama administration wants a complete halt in the growth of Jewish settlements in Palestinian territory, with no exceptions.

President Obama "wants to see a stop to settlements -- not some settlements, not outposts, not natural-growth exceptions," Clinton said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-fg-us-israel28-2009may28,0,4140370.story?track=rss

 

[LowlyPion]

Yes the US President has said numerous times that the US would not be dictating solutions to other countries. Unless of course the country is Israel:

On the other hand we have leverage with Israel. And he is after all being fair. Israel has known for decades that building settlements only exacerbates the situations and the tensions throughout the region. I'd say Israel needs a little reminder from time to time when they are not living up to their apparent agreements, notwithstanding even these spineless secret side concessions agreed to by the previous administration that permitted Israel the public appearance of agreeing to stop, but all the while continuing to enhance and extend. He just made sure that they understand that stop means stop. I'd say it's about time.

Sadly for Republicans, even if they hammer at a wedge between Obama and the Jewish vote, if his approach brings any step toward peace, like say recognition of Israel's right to exist, I doubt they will support Republicans still, if only because of Republican extremes on social issues.

 

[mheslep]

On the other hand we have leverage with Israel. And he is after all being fair. Israel has known for decades that building settlements only exacerbates the situations and the tensions throughout the region.

Israel has also known for decades that its existence exacerbates the situations and the tensions throughout the region.

 

[kyleb]

Yes the US President has said numerous times that the US would not be dictating solutions to other countries. Unless of course the country is Israel:

My comment which you quoted was in regard to internal US policy, are you incapable of even comprehending that, let alone addressing it?

Sadly for Republicans, even if they hammer at a wedge between Obama and the Jewish vote...

Polls show American Jews are largely in support of Obama's calls to stop settlement expansion and efforts towards a two-state solution, as they were in his run for office, and Jews as a whole are only a tiny fraction of our population anyway. The Christian Zionists are a much larger part of what I call the "death to Palestine" lobby, and they are mostly staunch Republicans regardless. Obama has popular support by a good margin here and I see little chance of change there, but all the same there is a powerful political machine against him, so what he can actually accomplish is still very questionable.

 

[kyleb]

Israel has also known for decades that its existence exacerbates the situations and the tensions throughout the region.

Sure, and Zionist expansionists have been exploiting and exasperating that animosity for decades, and you all don't seem to have any intention of stopping any time soon.

 

[Alfi]

Re: Obama's speech in Cairo, June 2009

- Israel has also known for decades that its existence exacerbates the situations and the tensions throughout the region.
- Sure, and Zionist expansionists have been exploiting and exasperating that animosity for decades, and you all don't seem to have any intention of stopping any time soon.

Did Obama say something in his speech to spark that off?
From what I listened to, I'd think he'd tell you both to knock it off.

I thought the speech hit the issues bluntly and openly.
This sentence came across as .. get on with it.

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and we will say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. (Applause.) We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.

 

[AhmedEzz]

I was hoping someone would say that.

 

[kyleb]

Did Obama say something in his speech to spark that off?
From what I listened to, I'd think he'd tell you both to knock it off.

If you care take issue with my response to Mheslep, then please actually do so by addressing it directly rather than hiding behind your speculation of how Obama might respond. As for your quote from Obama, I agree completely, which is why I called out Mheslep for his demonstrating interest in casting blame on the rest of the region to absolve Israel's expansionism rather than pursuing peace.

 

[Astronuc]

Some militants respond positively to Obama speech
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090607/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_obama_undercutting_extremists

Some positive developments.

 

[AhmedEzz]

These are all minorities that one only reads about them in European/American media. Sorry to disappoint.

 

[Astronuc]

These are all minorities that one only reads about them in European/American media. Sorry to disappoint.

Are there better sources in English but written by Arab or Muslim journalists? I'm also quite aware that these views are those of a few people quoted in western media. There are millions more voices to be heard - but how to find them.

 

[LowlyPion]

Obama has popular support by a good margin here and I see little chance of change there, but all the same there is a powerful political machine against him, so what he can actually accomplish is still very questionable.

I hope you aren't talking about this right wing hijacked Republican juggernaut of "No".

 

[kyleb]

Are there better sources in English but written by Arab or Muslim journalists? I'm also quite aware that these views are those of a few people quoted in western media. There are millions more voices to be heard - but how to find them.

Particularly considering MERMI's long demonstrated ideological bias towards demonising Muslims, http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD238409#_ednref2" looks rather promising.

 

[kyleb]

I hope you aren't talking about this right wing hijacked Republican juggernaut of "No".

I am talking about the vast majority of Congress being in the pocket of the "death to Palestine" lobby, and that lobby being useful idiots for the military industrial complex along with the settlement industry. The massive support for http://jta.org/news/article/2009/05/28/1005474/aipac-backed-letter-gets-329-house-signatures" . This isn't a matter of one wing or another, but rather the support of Israel's ongoing conquest of Palestine spans far and wide across party lines.

 

[LowlyPion]

I am talking about the vast majority of Congress being in the pocket of the "death to Palestine" lobby, and that lobby being useful idiots for the military industrial complex along with the settlement industry. The massive support for http://jta.org/news/article/2009/05/28/1005474/aipac-backed-letter-gets-329-house-signatures" . This isn't a matter of one wing or another, but rather the support of Israel's ongoing conquest of Palestine spans far and wide across party lines.

That resolution is about as useful as the attempt to get a resolution to make next year the year of The Bible. As to the JTA they don't have Congress in their pocket against Obama's evenhanded approach. That letter is luke warm spit that few would object to in any event.

I think you are imagining genies were there are only whispers of shadows. There's no juggernaut of a conspiracy. It seems that Israel was motivated to get their licks in before there was a new administration with backbone and a brain, because I think Netanyahu got an earful his last trip. No more ineptitude in the White House and Israel can stop whining, right along with the other parties in the Middle East and stop finding ways to not get along, and instead find ways to progress.

 

[kyleb]

That letter is just one of countless examples of the "death to Palestine" lobby rallying Congress behind the the Israeli government position I could provide. As for Obama's even handed approach, back when Bush Sr. tried the same Congress left him blowing in the wind, and the lobby support piled behind Clinton who let the lobby run the show, and Bush Jr. did the same.

While you assume I am imaging things here, I get the impression that you really just haven't been following this issue nearly as close as I have. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2894821400057137878" .

 

[mheslep]

...Here is a documentary which explores the workings of the lobby reasonably well[/URL].

Here's an academic reply to Walt and Mearshiemer, the prominent speakers in the documentary.
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/research/working_papers/dershowitzreply.pdf

 

[kyleb]

I am familiar with Deshowitz's response. If you bother to watch the documentary, it is discussed there. Anyway, I can't say I've seen anything academic from him on the subject though, is there anything in his arguments you would care to present specifically?

 

[mheslep]

I am familiar with Deshowitz's response. If you bother to watch the documentary, it is discussed there.

It's mentioned by Perle, not discussed.

Anyway, I can't say I've seen anything academic from him on the subject though,

The paper was posted on the Kennedy school's website under strict rules for inquiry, so Id say it qualifies as an academic work. I list it now only as a reference to be considered when examining the work by the authors in the video.

 

[kyleb]

From the cover page:

The author of this paper is solely responsible for the views expressed in it. As an academic institution, Harvard University does not take a position on the scholarship of individual faculty members, and this paper should not be interpreted or portrayed as reflecting the official position of the University or any of its Schools.

That leaves me curious to know; what specific standards are you suggesting the paper is required to adhere to?

Anyway, it's been a while since I watched the documentary, but I'm pretty sure Wilkerson brings up Dershowitz's response in it as well, and the much of the arguments he has made are addressed throughout the documentary, including Perle's contests being presented as recounting from Dershowitz's.

 

[Office_Shredder]

That leaves me curious to know; what specific standards are you suggesting the paper is required to adhere to?

Does Harvard need to adopt his stance officially in order for his work to be considered academically qualified? Which university published an official statement of support for the documentary you posted?

 

[seyitcan]

I do not trust him.He is still "Uncle Sam"

 

[BoomBoom]

I am talking about the vast majority of Congress being in the pocket of the "death to Palestine" lobby, ...

Seriously??

If you truly believe that, then I don't see how anyone can take your posts seriously...

The sad thing is many from the region believe as you do...I'm not sure whether to laugh my head off, or cry?

 

[AhmedEzz]

Are you denying the existence of such a lobby, or you denying that it is a majority?

 

[BoomBoom]

Are you denying the existence of such a lobby, or you denying that it is a majority?

I am denying that any such lobby pulls any weight whatsoever...we probably have a Nazi lobby too. Every country has their "wacko" populations.

 

[AhmedEzz]

You really deny the existence of a strong pro-Israel lobby in the US?!..gimme a break :(