|
Text of the
speech at Cairo University by President Barack Obama as released by
the White House on June 4, 2009, with indications of applause. |
Personal Commentary: A conservative American perspective / critique.
This professor definitely doesn't deserve tenure. |
|
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
ON A NEW BEGINNING
Cairo University
Cairo, Egypt |
Delivered like a one hour lecture by a professor to students, including
some dubious factual assertions and biased opinions as well as false
moral equivalency to create the illusion of a fair perspective, tailored
to appeal to that audience. |
|
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you very much. Good afternoon. I am honored to be
in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable
institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon
of Islamic learning; and for over a century, Cairo University has been a
source of Egypt's advancement. And together, you represent the harmony
between tradition and progress. I'm grateful for your hospitality, and
the hospitality of the people of Egypt. And I'm also proud to carry with
me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from
Muslim communities in my country: Assalaamu alaykum. (Applause.) |
Why is
the "greeting of peace" specified to be from Muslim communities in
America? Is he in Cairo to reward CAIR for
support? They
sent suggestions for his speech. Try looking up CAIR with our "conservative
search" tool.
Or is he there to speak as the U.S. President who
represents all Americans - rather than to pander to specific groups,
foreign or domestic?
The traditional Assalaamu alaykum greeting of
peace needed no such caveat to suggest that it was only from American
Muslims. It reinforces the myth that we don't respect Muslims
here. |
| We
meet at a time of great tension between the United States and Muslims
around the world -- tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond
any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West
includes centuries of coexistence and cooperation, but also conflict and
religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that
denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which
Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without
regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought
by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as
hostile to the traditions of Islam. |
This
reinforces the radical myth of a clash of civilizations, as though all
Muslims were part of a homogenous group diametrically opposed to the
values and traditions of the West. To assert
that we have "great tensions" with all Muslims around the world is
outrageous.
How is the legacy of colonialism in the region
relevant to such alleged tensions, since we played a pivotal role in
bringing it to an end? What is this nonsense about being
mistreated as innocent Cold War proxies in great power politics, when
leaders in the region readily chose to exploit Cold War differences for
their own perceived advantage, as Nasser did? |
Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent
minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11, 2001 and the continued
efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has
led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to
America and Western countries, but also to human rights. All this has
bred more fear and more mistrust.
So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will
empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, those who promote
conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people
achieve justice and prosperity. And this cycle of suspicion and discord
must end. |
Why
the "but potent" line? That gives the terrorists
more respect. Is their capability to kill innocent people, while
being repeatedly defeated in any military conflicts, an indicator of
being "potent", or just ruthless?
How about "small and ruthless group of terrorists"?
Why are they dignified by treating them as though they were just another
oppressed "minority" group with grievances?
Our relationships ARE defined by our differences as
well as our common interests. It is the tyrants who simply
rationalize their unyielding positions and provoke conflict to gain
power. Those who sow the hatred and conflict for their own
advantage must stop such actions. It is not up to us to make all
the concessions they want. |
| I've
come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and
Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual
respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not
exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and
share common principles -- principles of justice and progress; tolerance
and the dignity of all human beings. |
Once
again, we don't have foreign policy relations with "Muslims around the
world". We deal with individual nations, often led by rulers whose
actions are not very appealing to us. They have the sovereign
right to screw up their own countries as much as their own people will
allow, regardless of their system of government, which doesn't have to
be to our liking at all. We need to differentiate between such
rulers and those whose actions we can support, as well as those whose
threats to us we cannot tolerate. |
| I do
so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. I know there's been
a lot of publicity about this speech, but no single speech can eradicate
years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have this
afternoon all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I
am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly to each
other the things we hold in our hearts and that too often are said only
behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each
other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek
common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, "Be conscious of God and
speak always the truth." (Applause.) That is what I will try to do today
-- to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and
firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far
more powerful than the forces that drive us apart. |
Is he
stating as a premise that we say one thing in public, but something else
in private? Or is he accusing past presidents of doing so?
Or is he accusing Muslims of doing so? Or of
expecting American leaders to do so?
Why not quote this verse of the Koran in the context
of Al Qaeda lies about America?
How about the lies spread by Iran's leaders? |
| Now
part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I'm a Christian,
but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of
Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the
call of the azaan at the break of dawn and at the fall of dusk. As a
young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and
peace in their Muslim faith. |
Louis
Farrakhan and his followers, for example. |
| As a
student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was
Islam -- at places like Al-Azhar -- that carried the light of learning
through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and
Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities -- (applause) --
it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of
algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of
pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it
can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring
spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and
places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has
demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious
tolerance and racial equality. (Applause.) |
He may
claim to be a constitutional law scholar, but history doesn't seem to be
his strength. Algebra dates back to the Greeks,
centuries before the arrival of Islam, and others in ancient Egypt and
Babylon. Many advances in algebra took place in recent centuries -
but not led by the Muslim world for many centuries now.
The compass is generally attributed to the Chinese,
again many centuries before Islam.
Arches were popular with the Romans, long before their
use in Islamic architecture.
Yes, there were some centuries of religious tolerance,
but also the great Arab conquests which initially spread Islam by the
sword, and which still inspires the extremists today. |
| I also
know that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first
nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of
Tripoli in 1796, our second President, John Adams, wrote, "The United
States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion
or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims
have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, they have
served in our government, they have stood for civil rights, they have
started businesses, they have taught at our universities, they've
excelled in our sports arenas, they've won Nobel Prizes, built our
tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim
American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend
our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding
Fathers -- Thomas Jefferson -- kept in his personal library. (Applause.) |
Of
course, five years later (1801-1805) we were engaged in the Tripolitan
War after Thomas Jefferson objected to the practice (since 1794) of
paying tribute to the pasha of Tripoli after the Europeans had done so
for centuries. His prior efforts to persuade the Europeans to take
action against the pirates had failed. The issue was that these
North African pirates wanted an even higher tribute than agreed by prior
treaty. He didn't study the Koran because he respected it, or the
contributions to society of Muslims. It's a real
stretch of the imagination to assert that Muslims have played a
prominent role in the development of the United States. Like
almost any other small minority group, there have been a few remarkable
individual achievements, but there is very little which can be
attributed to the Muslim community as such. The same would be true
of most other groups. America is a country which has been
developed by ambitious individuals - not strong minority groups. |
| So I
have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where
it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that
partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is,
not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as
President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of
Islam wherever they appear. (Applause.) |
Is
this what we elected President Obama to do? Why
not ask Islamic leaders stand up and admit the misguided actions of
Muslim extremists and terrorists, and show by action rather than words
that they really are tolerant and deserving of our respect?
Respect is earned, not demanded. We do not owe it to all leaders
in power today. We may recognize that they are the leaders of
their countries, but we don't have to respect them. We may just
tolerate many dreadful leaders just because it isn't our choice to make. |
| But
that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America.
(Applause.) Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is
not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States
has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever
known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded
upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and
struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words -- within our
borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn
from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E
pluribus unum -- "Out of many, one." |
Yes -
E plurubus unum. Where is that practiced in the
Muslim world?
Where is the tolerance of diversity, rather than the
perpetuation of ethnic or tribal rivalries?
Where is the religious tolerance for those who choose
not to be adherents of Islam?
Where is the respect for the rights of women?
Where are the rights of minorities protected?
How about freedom of speech? Is tradition just an excuse for
perpetuating tyranny? |
| Now,
much has been made of the fact that an African American with the name
Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. (Applause.) But my
personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people
has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for
all who come to our shores -- and that includes nearly 7 million
American Muslims in our country today who, by the way, enjoy incomes and
educational levels that are higher than the American average.
(Applause.) |
This
exchange of flattery is misleading. Many of the
American Muslims are quite well educated because that was the means by
which they gained entry to the USA - as students from fairly affluent
families who could afford to send them here for such education.
They stayed here to pursue further opportunities, and to maintain a path
for escape from tyranny at home if needed.
Many American Muslims also came here as refugees from
tyranny, as in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Pakistan and Afghanistan as a few
obvious examples. They have struggled to create a future for their
families here. It is not a simple minority group. It is as
diverse as the "Muslim world", but also more tolerant in a minority
role. |
|
Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice
one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state in our
union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That's why the United
States government has gone to court to protect the right of women and
girls to wear the hijab and to punish those who would deny it.
(Applause.) |
Yes,
we protect minority groups. Can our Muslim
friends in the Middle East say the same? Why does our Secretary of
State feel compelled to adopt their traditional scarf in public, rather
than risk giving offense? She is not a Muslim, so why does it
matter to them? |
| So let
there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that
America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or
station in life, all of us share common aspirations -- to live in peace
and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our
families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is
the hope of all humanity. |
So is
the Baha'i faith - which the Iranians tried to exterminate in recent
decades. So are other faiths which we tolerate and protect as we
do any other, but which Muslims do not respect. It is Islam which
asserts that it is the final word on religion. What about
tolerance of Sufism, or the Parsis (Zoroastrianism)? Buddhism?
Hinduism - such as the great tradition of tolerance between India and
Pakistan? We tolerate all religions, and atheists and
agnostics too. Do Sunnis even consistently tolerate Shiites, and
vice versa, after so many centuries of rivalry? |
| Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our
task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will
be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand
that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them
will hurt us all. |
Why
would any student of history assert that we must act boldly, and that
our needs can only be met by doing so "in the years ahead". Great
progress is not achieved through government, especially by acting in
haste. Government is designed to change slowly and very carefully.
Haste not only makes waste, but is also the tool of the tyrant to
silence or thwart any opposition. |
| For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system
weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu
infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a
nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When
violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are
endangered across an ocean. When innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are
slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. (Applause.)
That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is
the responsibility we have to one another as human beings. |
The
power to do apparently good things can also provide the power to do
great harm, despite any good intentions. The unintended
consequences of government actions are magnified by this power to
convert small mistakes into huge and costly ones which are not easily
reversed. An individual or company can do some harm to others, but
government leaders can apply vast resources to foolish mistakes or very
harmful endeavors even when tyranny is not the intent.
It is not the good intentions to create a better world
which matter. Government power is a tempting way to impose
"solutions" to great social challenges, but the greatest progress in
history has not been driven by governments, whether acting alone or in
alliance with others. On the contrary, many of the worst disasters
in history, including genocides, can be traced to governments whose
arrogant leaders were absolutely convinced that their cause was just.. |
And this is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has
often been a record of nations and tribes -- and, yes, religions --
subjugating one another in pursuit of their own interests. Yet in this
new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence,
any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another
will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be
prisoners to it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership;
our progress must be shared. (Applause.)
Now, that does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it
suggests the opposite: We must face these tensions squarely. And so in
that spirit, let me speak as clearly and as plainly as I can about some
specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together. |
What
is this "new age" or new "world order" in which it is stated that we
should not pursue our own interests as a nation? Since when does
any perceived global interdependence justify the abandonment of our
national self-interests? This is the fantasy world of
international socialists. It isn't a question of
us subjugating others. That's the myth spread by extremists who
try to portray America as a tyrannical imperial power trying to control
the world to amass wealth and impose our own way of life and religious
beliefs on others. In fact, it is those tyrants who are trying to
rise to power by using such lies to create the angry mobs and extremists
they need to rise to power. We are the "foreign devils" who they
demonize and blame for every perceived grievance in order to mobilize
people to support their own radical agenda against us.
We should state our interests very clearly, and so
should they. That doesn't involve absolutist, non-negotiable
starting positions as a pretext for brinksmanship or enduring conflict.
We need to understand our differences and interests - not concede as a
weak and naive opening position. Despite major differences, we can
find mutual interests on which we can usefully agree. |
The
first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its
forms.
In Ankara, I made clear that America is not -- and never will be -- at
war with Islam. (Applause.) We will, however, relentlessly confront
violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security -- because we
reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of
innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President
to protect the American people. |
FIRST ISSUE - Violent extremism "in all of its forms"
Not "terrorism", mind you. Extremism.
We won't call it authoritarianism because so many rulers in the region
still fall into that category. That's one form of extremism which
is excluded.
We have never been at war with Islam. That's a myth
spread by the Islamist extremists, and we should not even dignify that
blatant lie this way, as though this was a bold new policy decision.
We should expect our real Islamic friends in the world to
more forcefully refute this lie about us, rather than dignify the lie
with their silence.
Yes - the President does have a solemn duty to protect
the American people - but does he say one word in this entire speech in
defense of those who have defended us, or who still do so?
Is there even one mention of the tens of millions of
Muslims whose freedom we defended when we could have simply left them to
their own fate?
Remember, our interest is to defeat our enemies who
threaten to harm us. What happens to them after they no longer
pose a threat to us is not really our problem. They have to sort
that future out for themselves. We are not really obligated to be
friends or help them achieve a better standard of living. That's
their problem. We may choose to help them, but that is by our own
discretionary choice, not as an obligation. |
| The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need
to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al
Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by
choice; we went because of necessity. I'm aware that there's still some
who would question or even justify the events of 9/11. But let us be
clear: Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were
innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who
had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly
murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states
their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in
many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not
opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with. |
WE DID
GO IN BY CHOICE! FINALLY! Faced with prior
attacks on US interests around the world, President Clinton as well as
the elder Bush and even Reagan had not taken this extremist and
terrorist threat
seriously enough. The threat was already intuitively obvious by
the Carter years, but what did we do about it? For 25+ years
before 9/11 we hardly even took it seriously. It was treated like
a crime problem which was outside of our area of jurisdiction.
Note that there is no mention of the work we did to
help drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan in the 1980s, only to "screw
up the end game" by largely ignoring the growing tyranny in Iraq,
Iran, Afghanistan,
Pakistan, and elsewhere in the region after declaring the Cold War to be
over. A myopic focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict did not
serve our interests well.
The problem is that our political reluctance to
confront extremists, as evident again today, led us to ignore the fact
that so many extremists were very determined to launch a war against us.
The fact beyond dispute is that we emboldened them by doing so little to
stop them for so long. We made it far too easy for them. |
| Now, make no mistake: We do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan.
We see no military -- we seek no military bases there. It is agonizing
for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and
politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring
every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there
were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and now Pakistan determined
to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the
case. |
Why
not speak plain truth, as allegedly was the intention at the start of
the speech? We are not engaged in the occupation
of Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other country. We have fought to
liberate them from tyranny despite the great financial and personal
sacrifices involved. Tens of millions of Muslims today - not only
in these countries but also in Kuwait, Kosovo, and elsewhere, have been
liberated by our efforts. Even so, where is some of the worst
tyranny in the world today? |
| And that's why we're partnering with a coalition of 46 countries. And
despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken.
Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in
many countries. They have killed people of different faiths -- but more
than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are
irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations,
and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent is
as -- it is as if he has killed all mankind. (Applause.) And the Holy
Koran also says whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all
mankind. (Applause.) The enduring faith of over a billion people is so
much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the
problem in combating violent extremism -- it is an important part of
promoting peace. |
This
is one of the better points in the speech, but Islam is part of the
problem as long as those who follow it don't stand up to the extremists
in their midst, and practice what they preach.
Unfortunately, Islam has become very tolerant of tyranny over the
centuries, whether in the name of Islam or on some other pretext.
The problem isn't the religion, but rather those who confuse their
religious devotion with allegiance to their current leaders, good or
bad.
Promoting peace through acquiescence to
well-established tyranny is not a solution. Likewise, change for
the sake of change is not necessarily a good thing. A bad
situation can certainly be made worse, despite good intentions.
The real question, however, is what Muslims are ready to do to try to
make a bad situation better, and to keep trying until they finally
succeed at it. This path doesn't start with tolerance of
extremists. |
| Now, we also know that military power alone is not going to solve the
problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That's why we plan to invest $1.5
billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to
build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of
millions to help those who've been displaced. That's why we are
providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy
and deliver services that people depend on. |
We do
these things because we believe that such developments are a wise
investment in a better future in the region.
Many other countries, including those with Muslim majorities, also make
important contributions. Others contribute to making matters
worse, as in the obvious case of Iran. That should offend all
Muslims, but there is rarely any public condemnation of their actions. |
| Let me
also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of
choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the
world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better
off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in
Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build
international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible.
(Applause.) Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who
said: "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us
that the less we use our power the greater it will be." |
We did
use diplomacy for many, many years and tried to build consensus, but
ultimately we had to make our own choice about whether we regarded
Saddam Hussein's regime to be a sufficient threat to risk a war to
defeat him. It is not our responsibility to do
the bidding of other countries, or of the United Nations, or to do what
will be popular in other countries. Like all other countries, we
ultimately have to make the decision about what is in our best interest
at the time, even if none of the choices available to us are attractive
ones. We do what we think is right at the time, and keep moving
forward. |
| Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better
future -- and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. And I have made it clear to the
Iraqi people -- (applause) -- I have made it clear to the Iraqi people
that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources.
Iraq's sovereignty is its own. And that's why I ordered the removal of
our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our
agreement with Iraq's democratically elected government to remove combat
troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all of our troops from
Iraq by 2012. (Applause.) We will help Iraq train its security forces
and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as
a partner, and never as a patron. |
Actually, this is false. We have no
responsibility to help Iraq forge a better future, and to rebuild.
Indeed, President Obama and many Democratic members of Congress argued
vigorously to pull out before now, even if that meant leaving Iraq
behind as a chaotic mess and potential danger in the future.
Our responsibility was to successfully destroy Saddam
Hussein's regime and thereby give the Iraqis an opportunity to create a
different future for themselves, preferably as friends. We
chose to stay and help the new leaders to do so, rather than just
walk away after the direct threat to our own interests was defeated.
We agreed to help. It wasn't our responsibility to do so.
It wasn't in our interest to leave a mess behind, as when the Soviets
pulled out of Afghanistan. |
| And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists,
we must never alter or forget our principles. Nine-eleven was an
enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was
understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our
traditions and our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change
course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United
States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early
next year. (Applause.) |
This
is one of the most pernicious sections of the speech. We did not
act contrary to our traditions and our ideals, and it defames those who
have served our country honorably, both in political positions as well
as in intelligence, military, and diplomatic or other roles to suggest
that we have used torture on prisoners (as the terrorists have done in
many gruesome ways). There is no good reason to close the very
successful and appropriate prison facility at Guantanamo Bay. If
they don't like it, tough. Let's expose how they treat their
prisoners. |
| So America will defend itself, respectful of the sovereignty of nations
and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim
communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are
isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be
safer. |
It is
one thing to respect the sovereignty of other nations, and quite another
matter to respect the continued rule of dangerous tyrants who are
clearly trying to do us harm. Whether others choose to join us or
not in confronting tyrants who are a threat to our safety, we have to do
what we believe is right to protect ourselves. We welcome support
by our friends, but will not wait indefinitely while tyrants threaten
us. |
The
second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation
between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.
America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is
unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the
recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a
tragic history that cannot be denied. |
SECOND ISSUE: the "situation" between Israelis, Palestinians, and the
Arab world. Not much applause in this
section, except when statements were made in support of the rights of
Palestinians, and critical of Israel.
Is it our policy to try to appeal to this audience, or
to stand up firmly for what we believe is right, whether they agree with
us or not? |
| Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and
anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust.
Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps
where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the
Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed -- more than the entire Jewish
population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, it is
ignorant, and it is hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction -- or
repeating vile stereotypes about Jews -- is deeply wrong, and only
serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories
while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve. |
Why
not make it more personal? This would be
comparable to exterminating the entire Muslim-American population of the
United States today.
How would they feel about that? Of course, such
an idea seems completely preposterous.
We have obviously created a tolerant culture in which
we have assimilated diverse minority groups. Germany didn't,
despite their Christian traditions. They rationalized
anti-Semitism.
How tolerant have countries with large Muslim
majorities been toward their Jewish minorities? Why should the
Israelis trust them? For more on this section of
the speech, see what Erick Erickson wrote at RedState about the stunning
"moral
equivalence" implied here between the Palestinians and the
Holocaust. |
| On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people --
Muslims and Christians -- have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For
more than 60 years they've endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in
refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life
of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They
endure the daily humiliations -- large and small -- that come with
occupation. So let there be no doubt: The situation for the Palestinian
people is intolerable. And America will not turn our backs on the
legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state
of their own. (Applause.) |
If the
Palestinian problem is so intolerable to the Arab countries, or to other
Muslims who have no more direct ties to the Palestinians than we have to
oppressed Zimbabweans, then why haven't they done more to help them over
the last 60 years? Why have they been treated as unwelcome
refugees, rather than embraced and integrated into other Arab nations as
fellow Muslims in need of their compassionate help?
Cut the hypocrisy. The Palestinians have suffered
for 60 years because they chose to pursue the destruction of Israel
rather than to seek a solution to live together in peace.
They chose war and terrorism, and suffered for it. |
| For decades then, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with
legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes
compromise elusive. It's easy to point fingers -- for Palestinians to
point to the displacement brought about by Israel's founding, and for
Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its
history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this
conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the
truth: The only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be
met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in
peace and security. (Applause.) |
Their Arab neighbors didn't want them to stop being
refugees and settle elsewhere in the region. Despite all of the
alleged support of their grievances, who really wanted to take them in?
This is a region in which borders have shifted for many
centuries, often through wars or political agreements which
inadvertently or deliberately disrupted the social traditions and
relationships between the people of the area. Who is to say at
what point in history the situation was more fair, and should be the
basis for the future? It is a future which all the people of the
region need to work out among themselves, and it will continue to evolve
over time. The absolutist positions, as though there were an
intrinsically fair and non-negotiable outcome to impose, have just been
the basis for irreconcilable conflict. |
| That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest,
and the world's interest. And that is why I intend to personally pursue
this outcome with all the patience and dedication that the task
requires. (Applause.) The obligations -- the obligations that the
parties have agreed to under the road map are clear. For peace to come,
it is time for them -- and all of us -- to live up to our
responsibilities. |
There
is no "world's interest", nor is it useful to think of this as the
"world's" problem. Likewise, it is not in America's interest, nor
is it America's problem, other than our general preference to encourage
peaceful coexistence and friendship throughout the region rather than
being forced to take sides in a conflict, as in support for Israel.
If we must choose sides because those in the region have
chosen conflict, then it is only in that scenario that we face a
Hobson's choice and can be expected to stand firmly with Israel.
That doesn't, however, mean that we blindly support anything which
Israel chooses to do. They have their interests, and we have ours.
|
| Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and
killing is wrong and it does not succeed. For centuries, black people in
America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of
segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It
was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center
of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South
Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story
with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign neither
of courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow
up old women on a bus. That's not how moral authority is claimed; that's
how it is surrendered. |
Actually, non-violence has certainly been the exception rather than the
rule, especially in most former colonies of Africa, Asia, and Latin
America. It has been a slow and very painful process.
Violent rebellion has provided much faster results if one defines
success as gaining power rather than steady social progress.
The violent conflicts have made bad situations worse, or have replaced
one type of tyranny with another. Such governments do not rule by
any moral authority or our liberal notions of what constitutes political
legitimacy. Power changes hands, and government processes and
players change, but little progress happens because progress is not
driven by government programs.
Ruthless atrocities are a very well-established method of gaining and
maintaining power, unfortunately. They stifle social progress -
but that problem does not constrain such tyrants. Retaining power
becomes their top priority. |
| Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The
Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with
institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support
among some Palestinians, but they also have to recognize they have
responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations,
to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence,
recognize past agreements, recognize Israel's right to exist. |
There
was not
much applause here. What has the Palestinian
Authority actually accomplished for Palestinians in all these years?
What have Fatah, Hamas, or others actually done for the people?
Palestinians have become successful in other countries, but what have
decades of reliance on their "leaders" done for them within the region?
Contrast that to refugee populations from other conflict areas. |
| At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right
to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States
does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.
(Applause.) This construction violates previous agreements and
undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to
stop. (Applause.) |
Predictable applause for criticism of Israel.
This is basically a cheap shot at Israel - saying what the crowd wants
to hear, while knowing that it will not actually change Israel's
position. It undermines any illusion that the US would be an
"honest broker" in any negotiations, because it basically tells Israel
to concede this point at the start, rather than as part of any
negotiations. |
| And Israel must also live up to its obligation to ensure that
Palestinians can live and work and develop their society. Just as it
devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in
Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack
of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the
Palestinian people must be a critical part of a road to peace, and
Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress. |
It is
not the responsibility of Israel to provide for the economic development
of Gaza or the West Bank Palestinian communities as long as the people
and their leaders remain committed to the destruction of the state of
Israel. On the contrary, US assistance in Gaza and the West Bank
as well as the UN and other international assistance helps to prolong
the conflict. It isn't Israel which needs to take steps to enable
the progress of the Palestinians. The Palestinians must make their
own choices, and live with the consequences of those choices.
Humanitarian aid enables their leaders to avoid tough choices. |
| And finally, the Arab states must recognize that the Arab Peace
Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their
responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to
distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it
must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the
institutions that will sustain their state, to recognize Israel's
legitimacy, and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the
past. |
They
could have done this at any time over the last 60 years. Is there
any reason to believe that they intend to do so now?
Once again, there's not much applause on this.
Where is the sense of Arab or "Muslim world"
responsibility for prolonging or worsening the Palestinian suffering for
their own political advantage? Where is the outrage over their own
treatment of the Palestinians as refugees? |
| 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. |
We
promise to not be duplicitous? Really?
Will Arab leaders say in public what they say in private to Israelis,
Palestinians, and Arabs or others, including the Iranians?
Transparency is going to be a tough sell in this part
of the world. Nobody is expecting it. |
| Too many tears have been shed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us
have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis
and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the
Holy Land of the three great faiths is the place of peace that God
intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews
and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of
Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra --
(applause) -- as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed,
peace be upon them, joined in prayer. (Applause.) |
The
"story of Isra" raises the thorny question of the status of Jerusalem,
even though most American listeners would not understand this.
While the historical Christian and Jewish ties to
Jerusalem are very well established, this dream of Muslim primacy over
the other "children of Abraham" and their prophets was only realized by
the great Arab conquests after his death, rather than during the life of
Mohammed.
While it is certainly reasonable to expect Jews,
Christians, and Muslims to be able to live together in Jerusalem and
elsewhere, as they have done for many centuries, this was a reckless
reference to the disputed status of Jerusalem as claimed by the
Palestinians. |
The
third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and
responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.
This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and
the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in
part by its opposition to my country, and there is in fact a tumultuous
history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States
played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian
government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts
of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This
history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I've made
it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to
move forward. The question now is not what Iran is against, but rather
what future it wants to build. |
THIRD ISSUE: "our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of
nations on nuclear weapons". The fact
that the United States played some role in the change of government in
Iran fifty years ago is not something for which any apology is needed.
On the contrary, the revolutionary leaders of Iran have spent the last
30 years using this as a flimsy excuse for their own regime and support
of terrorist actions against the United States, for which they offer not
apology at all nor any indication of intention to change such hostile
actions against us. Indeed, they seem bent on achieving the power
to do even greater harm to us, and to Israel or others.
We should not apologize to these tyrants. We should
be just as unyielding in our opposition to their actions as long as they
choose to threaten us rather than seek genuine agreements. |
| I recognize it will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will
proceed with courage, rectitude, and resolve. There will be many issues
to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward
without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to
all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a
decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It's about
preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this
region and the world down a hugely dangerous path. |
We
should not even attempt to overcome these
"decades of mistrust", as attributed to our past actions in Iran,
especially at a time when these Iranian leaders show absolutely no
interest in abandoning their policy of hostility towards us.
On the contrary, we should make it abundantly clear that
Iran remains #1 on the threat list as a focus of our attention, and that
we will not hesitate to use our power to defend ourselves and our allies
against either direct or indirect provocations, threats, or attacks.
They must know without any doubt, as the Soviets did, that action
against us would be suicidal madness. |
| I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that
others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nation
holds nuclear weapons. And that's why I strongly reaffirmed America's
commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons.
(Applause.) And any nation -- including Iran -- should have the right to
access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities
under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the
core of the treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it.
And I'm hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal. |
This
fantasy is not a viable basis for policy, and had no place in this
speech. Reagan sought movement towards the elimination of nuclear
weapons, and there has been some progress over the last 20 years in that
regard, but the Muslim world (such as Pakistan, Iraq, Libya, and Iran at
least, and likely Syria too) has been pushing in the opposite direction.
Iran was already offered several options for peaceful
nuclear power plants, but chose instead to develop their own dual-use
technology capabilities and conceal key elements of their programs from
detection or inspection. Why should we encourage others to follow
this path of deception, rather than denounce it openly? |
The
fourth issue that I will address is democracy. (Applause.)
I know -- I know there has been controversy about the promotion of
democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to
the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: No system of government can or
should be imposed by one nation by any other. |
FOURTH ISSUE: Democracy No longer in the top
3, much less #1.
Especially in Egypt.
|
| That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect
the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its
own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not
presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume
to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding
belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak
your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule
of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is
transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as
you choose. These are not just American ideas; they are human rights.
And that is why we will support them everywhere. (Applause.) |
What
signal did this send prior to the upcoming elections in Lebanon and
Iran? It suggests that we are indifferent to
both the form of government in a country, as well as the outcome of
changes in power - whether by election or other means.
We may think that all people yearn for certain things
from their governments, but we are conceding from the outset that we
will do nothing to help them achieve such aspirations.
We will "support" these basic ideas, but if you read
them carefully, they allow a lot of room for tyranny by treating it all
as somebody else's problem, and mostly as none of our business. |
| Now, there is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is
clear: Governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable,
successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them
go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding
voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And
we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments -- provided they
govern with respect for all their people. |
By
this standard, anyone who wins an election is OK with us "provided they
govern with respect for all their people". What does that actually
mean? Are we going to stand up for minority rights in every
country? Will we not welcome relations with China if they crush
resistance in Tibet or among the Uighurs or others? Will we be OK
with the junta in Myanmar as long as they abuse everyone equally?
Will we actually do something about Sudan and Darfur? This is just
meaningless, hollow, and evasive rhetoric. |
This last point is important because there are some who advocate for
democracy only when they're out of power; once in power, they are
ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. (Applause.) So no matter
where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a
single standard for all who would hold power: You must maintain your
power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of
minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise;
you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings
of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients,
elections alone do not make true democracy.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Barack Obama, we love you!
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you. (Applause.) |
I
thought that Obama just insisted (above) that we had no right to impose
our approach to government political legitimacy and stability on others.
It's their choice to make, good or bad. This was
just a cheap shot at the regime in Egypt, given the tradition of
repression of political opposition there.
Why? Does such crowd applause advance our
interests in our relationship with Egypt? Is it in our interest to
embolden the opposition there? Isn't that what Carter did in Iran?
How did that gesture work out for us, and for the Iranians?
Yes, elections alone don't make a democracy. In
fact, we've recently proven that an election can potentially unravel
centuries of progress. If Obama wants to run for office in Egypt,
they are welcome to him. Clearly he might get one vote. |
The fifth issue that we must
address together is religious freedom.
Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of
Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a
child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an
overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People
in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based
upon the persuasion of the mind and the heart and the soul. This
tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it's being challenged
in many different ways. |
FIFTH ISSUE: Religious freedom |
| Among some Muslims, there's a disturbing tendency to measure one's own
faith by the rejection of somebody else's faith. The richness of
religious diversity must be upheld -- whether it is for Maronites in
Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. (Applause.) And if we are being honest,
fault lines must be closed among Muslims, as well, as the divisions
between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in
Iraq. |
|
| Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live
together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For
instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it
harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That's why I'm
committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can
fulfill zakat. |
|
| Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim
citizens from practicing religion as they see fit -- for instance, by
dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We can't disguise
hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism. |
|
| In fact, faith should bring us together. And that's why we're forging
service projects in America to bring together Christians, Muslims, and
Jews. That's why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's
interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of
Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into interfaith
service, so bridges between peoples lead to action -- whether it is
combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural
disaster. |
|
| The
sixth issue -- the sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights.
(Applause.) I know –- I know -- and you can tell from this audience,
that there is a healthy debate about this issue. I reject the view of
some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow
less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is
denied equality. (Applause.) And it is no coincidence that countries
where women are well educated are far more likely to be prosperous. |
SIXTH ISSUE: Women's rights. |
| Now, let me be clear: Issues of women's equality are by no means simply
an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, we've
seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the
struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American
life, and in countries around the world. |
|
| I am convinced that our daughters can contribute just as much to society
as our sons. (Applause.) Our common prosperity will be advanced by
allowing all humanity -- men and women -- to reach their full potential.
I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order
to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in
traditional roles. But it should be their choice. And that is why the
United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support
expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment
through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams. (Applause.) |
|
Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity.
I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The
Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also
offensive sexuality and mindless violence into the home. Trade can bring
new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and change in
communities. In all nations -- including America -- this change can
bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we lose control over our
economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities --
those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our
traditions, and our faith. |
SEVENTH ISSUE: Economic development and opportunity
This is the last subject, and appropriately enough
since he seems to think that economic development is driven by
government programs.
|
|
But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be
contradictions between development and tradition. Countries like Japan
and South Korea grew their economies enormously while maintaining
distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within
Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times
and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of
innovation and education. |
|
|
And this is important because no development strategy can be based only
upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young
people are out of work. Many Gulf states have enjoyed great wealth as a
consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader
development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation
will be the currency of the 21st century -- (applause) -- and in too
many Muslim communities, there remains underinvestment in these areas.
I'm emphasizing such investment within my own country. And while America
in the past has focused on oil and gas when it comes to this part of the
world, we now seek a broader engagement. |
|
|
On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase
scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America.
(Applause.) At the same time, we will encourage more Americans to study
in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with
internships in America; invest in online learning for teachers and
children around the world; and create a new online network, so a young
person in Kansas can communicate instantly with a young person in Cairo. |
|
|
On economic development, we will create a new corps of business
volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries.
And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how
we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social
entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the
world. |
|
|
On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support
technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help
transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create more jobs. We'll
open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and
Southeast Asia, and appoint new science envoys to collaborate on
programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize
records, clean water, grow new crops. Today I'm announcing a new global
effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate
polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to
promote child and maternal health. |
|
|
All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to
join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious
leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help
our people pursue a better life. |
|
The
issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a
responsibility to join together on behalf of the world that we seek -- a
world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American
troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each
secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful
purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights
of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is
the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.
I know there are many -- Muslim and non-Muslim -- who question whether
we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of
division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it
isn't worth the effort -- that we are fated to disagree, and
civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that
real change can occur. There's so much fear, so much mistrust that has
built up over the years. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we
will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young
people of every faith, in every country -- you, more than anyone, have
the ability to reimagine the world, to remake this world.
All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question
is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or
whether we commit ourselves to an effort -- a sustained effort -- to
find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and
to respect the dignity of all human beings.
It's easier to start wars than to end them. It's easier to blame others
than to look inward. It's easier to see what is different about someone
than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path,
not just the easy path. There's one rule that lies at the heart of every
religion -- that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
(Applause.) This truth transcends nations and peoples -- a belief that
isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian or
Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization,
and that still beats in the hearts of billions around the world. It's a
faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today. |
CONCLUSION |
| We
have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the
courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written. |
"A
new beginning" |
The Holy Koran tells us: "O mankind! We have created you male and a
female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may
know one another."
The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of
promoting peace."
The Holy Bible tells us: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be
called sons of God." (Applause.) |
|
The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is
God's vision. Now that must be our work here on Earth.
Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you. Thank you very much. Thank
you. |
Back
to the peace theme of the opening greeting, and the "new beginning"
concept that a new world order now starts with his election.
The professor got a lot of applause for the usual
populist political message, telling the audience largely what they
wanted to hear (and getting remarkably little applause whenever comments
didn't fit their expectations). No tenure for you. You were
elected president of the United States, not a new world order, or the
Muslim world. We the people won't be fooled again. |
