 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:43 AM This is a link to Obama's speech in Cairo: http://www.salon.com/news/primary_sources/2009/06/04/obama_speech/index.html It wanders a bit towards the end, but the first two thirds is quite astonishing. It really takes the mental fight to the whole Middle East apparatus. It is essentially a repudiation of the entire mission of the Bush administration, admits to the overthrow of the Iranian government by the CIA, and tells the Israelis and the Palestinians what's what. I don't think people are really ready to absorb the full "Obama Doctrine" laid out in this speech -- if he means it, and can do what he says he wants to do. Even if he doesn't, setting the situation as he does is quite an amazing feat of intelligence (something sorely lacking in the gamesmanship of the Middle East). yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Ebbie Date: 04 Jun 09 - 11:18 AM If only... Had this speech depicting this respectful approach been given at the beginning of the administration of 2000, 9/11 may never have happened. Bravo, Obama! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 04 Jun 09 - 11:34 AM This man is bringing about some serious shifts. May he prosper and flourish. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: kendall Date: 04 Jun 09 - 11:57 AM Double the Secret Service. He is making enemies and Osama Bin Laden is one of them. He needs to keep the fires of hate going to maintain his power. If Obama removes the reason they hate us Osama B L will need to get a job. How do you say, "Welcome to Wal Mart" in Arabic? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 04 Jun 09 - 12:04 PM Sallam aleikum Walmaaart, I guess. This speech was a world class example of a decent, strong but understanding leader showing the best side of America: honesty, insight, hope and helpfulness combined with determination. He is (in many respects) far more an American than Bush, Cheny and Rumsfeld ever were inspite of their WASPy backgrounds. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Wesley S Date: 04 Jun 09 - 01:00 PM I can't imagine the spin that someone like Limbaugh will put on this. Maybe his head will just explode. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 01:11 PM Holy shit. I can hardly believe it. I begin to truly fear for Mr Obama's life. He's telling the truth, it seems, and that's quite dangerous in America. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 04 Jun 09 - 01:11 PM IF it does, it will take half his lower GI with it... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: mandotim Date: 04 Jun 09 - 01:29 PM I'm sitting here in the UK, thinking 'you lucky, lucky Americans.' This guy Obama really gets it doesn't he? When a course of action is obviously failing, he doesn'try to do the same thing only louder/harder/more often, he changes the whole game. It's not a proper comparison yet, Obama has a long way to go, but the last person in that sort of position to use that sort of mindset was probably Gandhi when struggling for Indian independence. I hope Americans don't do the 'modern' thing and try to tear him down with trivia. He seems to have the capability to be a truly historic President, and the longer you keep him engaged, energised and optimistic, the better things will be. Tim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 04 Jun 09 - 01:36 PM The flibbertygibbets and the Lower 40 Percentile types will continue to spew; Obama has the grace to tolerate a lot of noise, out of respect, while staying clearly focused on the real signals and doing well and sifting out the important ones. The big danger is our sturdy homebred rednecked superpatriots who are yearning to dramatize the American Revolution or the Civil War and think they have the firepower to make the world better by resorting to mindless violence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: GUEST,mg Date: 04 Jun 09 - 01:44 PM Is it really necessary to call someone a redneck, especially in the context of trying to achieve reconciliation etc. between populations? l;mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: PoppaGator Date: 04 Jun 09 - 01:50 PM I think Amos' use of the term "rednecked" (note the suffix "-ed") was entirely appropriate for the idea he was expressing. He was not name-calling at any specific individual. He was characterizing the type of person who might concceivably perpetrate great harm upon the nation and the world at large. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 01:54 PM That's a very worthwhile point, mg. We had best do what Mr Obama keeps suggesting and focus on what unites us with other people, what we have in common with them...rather than engaging in negative stereotyping and attacks upon those who are different from us in some way. And what do we all have in common? As human beings on a small planet? We all want to live in peace, freedom, and prosperity, and we all want a secure future for ourselves and our children. It can be done. But it cannot be done by attacking one another. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: bubblyrat Date: 04 Jun 09 - 02:17 PM So tell the Palestinians that ,and we might get somewhere !!And while you're at it,get North Korea to see sense,and ask the Iranians to take a fresh look at life ! Try to persuade Russia to abandon its attempts to annexe the Arctic,and teach moderation to the Taleban. Ask Osama Bin Laden round for a cosy chat & a nice cup of tea,and maybe you could ask the Sri Lankan government why they slaughtered tens of thousands of innocent civilians recently ,as they are purported to have done. Oh, and while you are at it----maybe you could convince China of the wisdom of returning Tibet to its rightful owners. Otherwise, I agree with you ...more or less. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Wesley S Date: 04 Jun 09 - 02:23 PM You're right bubblyrat. Since some of the folks out there aren't doing it right lets just bomb them back to the stone age. That should work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: The Barden of England Date: 04 Jun 09 - 02:33 PM Ask Osama Bin Laden round for a cosy chat & a nice cup of tea,and maybe you could ask the Sri Lankan government why they slaughtered tens of thousands of innocent civilians recently ,as they are purported to have done. So that didn't happen in Vietnam nor Iraq then? Nor of course when my country went to Dresden? John Barden |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 02:43 PM You have missed the point, Bubblyrat. Obama, you should note, has never slackened in his resolve to oppose violent extremist forces where and when they must be opposed. That does not change the fact that one improves the world by focusing on what people have in common with each other and what positive things they can do rather than by obsessing over what divides them and holding bitter grudges over past incidents. Most Palestinians, like most Israelis, simply want to live in peace, happiness, and prosperity, and to be in charge of their own destiny and raise their families. Period. Workable solutions are the ones that will enable BOTH the Palestinians and the Israelis to live in peace, happiness, and prosperity and be in charge of their own destiny. That requires a two-state solution, economic improvements for the Palestinians, and peace and security for both Palestinians and Isrealis. Such solutions can be found by people of goodwill...and those people tremendously outnumber the few fanatics and zealots who cause all the violence and suffering. If you expect EVERYONE in the world to instantly change as you would wish them to, you will always be disappointed, and your troubles with them will never end. If you focus only on the WORST people in the world, and ignore and abandon all the others to their fate, the violence will never end. If you change yourself by focusing on positives rather than on fear and hatred, you will be empowered to make positive changes happen...and they will happen a bit at a time...not all at once. You want to change the world for the better? Change yourself. Change your attitude. The world changes one person at a time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill D Date: 04 Jun 09 - 02:46 PM "You want to change the world for the better? Change yourself. Change your attitude. The world changes one person at a time." Amen, Little Hawk! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: LilyFestre Date: 04 Jun 09 - 02:50 PM "If you change yourself by focusing on positives rather than on fear and hatred, you will be empowered to make positive changes happen...and they will happen a bit at a time...not all at once. You want to change the world for the better? Change yourself. Change your attitude. The world changes one person at a time." ~Little Hawk Well said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Michelle |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: open mike Date: 04 Jun 09 - 02:53 PM NPR audio and text transcript of Obama's speech I would like to know the difference between Islam, Moslem and Muslim... can any one define this? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Wesley S Date: 04 Jun 09 - 03:00 PM Little Hawk - It sounds you're a candidate to be bombed back to the stone age too. Just keep it up...... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 04 Jun 09 - 03:16 PM From "Answers.com": The noun Moslem "has one meaning: Meaning #1: a believer or follower of Islam Synonyms: Muslim, Mohammedan, Muhammedan, Muhammadan The adjective Moslem has one meaning: Meaning #1: of or relating to or supporting Islamism Synonyms: Muslim, Islamic Pertains to noun: Islamism (meaning #2)" THere were earlier forms in the nineteenth century including Musselman, and Mohammedan, both of whioch are rarely used now. Thus Islam / Islamism relates to the religious beliefs, and Muslim, Moslem to the followers there of. THe two words derive from the same semantic root. An important distinction is between Muslims and Arabs. Note, from the same source, the distinction around the term "Arab": The term Arab originally meant a member of the Semitic race of people of the Arabian Peninsula east of Palestine. They were the nomadic Bedouins of the desert. Today, Arabs live throughout the world, including parts or all of Algeria, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Some Arabs hold Israeli citizenship. (Note that Iran is not an Arab country. Its roots go back to ancient Persia, with a totally different history and culture.) Although not all Arabs speak Arabic, the language is one of the great unifying and distinguishing characteristics of the people, even though dialects differ from place to place. It is a common misconception that Islam is a unifying force in the Arab world. Not all Arab traditions are Islamic, and Islam does not unite Arabs. Muhammad once commented, "The desert Arabians are most confirmed in unbelief and hypocrisy." There are more Muslims in Indonesia alone than in all Arab countries combined. Some thirty million Chinese are Muslim. In many countries, Muslim and Christian Arabs live side by side, although it is true that in most Arab countries, Islam is the predominate religion. In the Middle East it is not uncommon to meet Arab Muslims, Christians, Druze, and Jews all living within a few blocks of each other. During the time of the Crusades in the Middle Ages, it became the custom of Christians to use the terms "Muslim," "Pagan," "Turk," "Infidel," and "Arab" almost interchangeably. Today, the Western "man on the street" usually thinks "Muslim" when he hears the word "Arab." This misapprehension is the result of mistaking religion for culture. WIkipedia adds: A Muslim (Arabic: مسلم), pronounced /ˈmʊslɪm/, is an adherent of the religion of Islam. The feminine form is Muslimah[1] (Arabic: مسلمة). Literally, the word means "one who submits (to God)". Muslim is the participle of the same verb of which Islam is the infinitive.[2] Muslims believe that there is only one God, translated in Arabic as Allah. Muslims believe that Islam existed long before Muhammad and that the religion had evolved with time from the time of Adam until the time of Muhammad and was completed with the revelation of verse 3 of Surah al-Maeda: More here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 04 Jun 09 - 03:46 PM I think the speech is a good start (from what I have been able to listen to so far... I am having technical difficulties). I find it incredibly ironic when people condemn what the government of Sri Lanka has done to Tamil civilians while supporting what the government of Israel has done to civilians in Gaza. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Ferrara Date: 04 Jun 09 - 03:50 PM Or, to put it more succinctly, Islam is the religion. Parallel to the words Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity etc. Moslem and Muslim are different spellings of the same Arabic word. They mean a member of the religion. Parallel to the words Buddhist, Jewish, Christian etc. Rita |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 04 Jun 09 - 03:54 PM I've noticed that, more often than not, the spelling "Moslem" us used by people who have negative feelings/associations with Islam, and the spelling, "Muslim" is used by almost everyone else. I don't think I've ever seen anyone disseminating a negative view of Islam or of Muslims use the spelling "Muslim". I'm not sure why that would be, but that's what I've noticed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: heric Date: 04 Jun 09 - 03:59 PM I like the man a lot but Rodney King was more succinct. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 04 Jun 09 - 05:10 PM He's being extraordinarily dishonest when he says that violence never produced good results for people in getting their demands met. Both the US and Israel are examples of countries that would not exist today had they not employed methods of violence in order to make it happen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: heric Date: 04 Jun 09 - 05:29 PM I noticed that item, too CC, as unpersuasive. He's a little young to remember Vietnam. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 05:30 PM It is true that violence sometimes does secure a good result for people in getting their demands met....but it is also true that non-violence is a far wiser path for people in general to follow. If you can mobilize enough people in a non-violent way, you can achieve enormous change. In the case of the American Revolution, the colonial population was split about 50/50 between those who wanted a revolt against the crown and those who supported the crown. In the case of the 50% who were in favor of a revolt, I would assume that less than half of them were immediately willing to go out and risk their lives in violent confrontation with the British Army. Given such a situation, you haven't got enough people mobilized to achieve a non-violent change. And so...the zealots resort to violence. Whether they succeed or not...and they may...a whole lot of innocent people get killed, terrorized, and lose their property. I don't call that a very good way of achieving social change. Had the colonists resorted to non-violent forms of pressure on the crown in 1775 and had they mobilized sufficient numbers of people in that effort, the crown would have eventually granted every reform that the colonists were hoping for. And there would have been no revolution. And there would now be a representative and free democracy in the USA, just as there is in Canada. Therefore, I think Obama's promotion of non-violence is wise and judicious, even IF it is not true that violence never produced good results for people in getting their demands met. The American Revolution was an unnecessary conflict, and it resulted because of arrogant hardliners on both sides of the issue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 04 Jun 09 - 05:39 PM I just think that if Obama wants to create an environment in which Muslims can feel free to trust Obama and the US government, he needs to be very careful to not insult their intelligence. And telling them that violence has never worked is something they are painfully aware is not true. He should have been respectful enough to realize that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: heric Date: 04 Jun 09 - 05:45 PM Well said. That's what I would have said if I could write more clearly. (They've all heard of the Mujahideen.) Perhaps he had in mind to convey that the US would be taking that nonviolent viewpoint. . . for a while at least.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 04 Jun 09 - 05:50 PM Another glaring problem is when he says that America doesn't interfere with other countries' peaceful elections. (LOL!) And this, right after his vice president told the people of Lebanon right to their faces that continuing US economic aid to Lebanon would be dependent upon the results of their elections. This is especially insulting considering the results of the recent Israeli elections and our aid to that country being unconditional no matter what the Israeli government does. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 04 Jun 09 - 06:04 PM Any need to question why the nation of Israel has gone into the highest, most thorough "practice alert" in its history...and they chose this week to do it in?
Sincerely,
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 04 Jun 09 - 06:13 PM My guess would be political theater. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bobert Date: 04 Jun 09 - 06:21 PM Well, I am waiting for then usaual suspects to add their consternative critiques... We all know who they are... Guess they are waiting for Rush to teach them the new company fight song... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Ruth Archer Date: 04 Jun 09 - 06:23 PM He makes me proud to bbe an American, for the first time in a very long time. It was like he lanced a festering boil today. Maybe now some healing can start. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: pdq Date: 04 Jun 09 - 06:28 PM Well, everybody agrees on one thing: Obama can deliver a speech. Here are a couple of points he made in The Speech: "The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al-Qaida 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-Qaida 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-Qaida 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." "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." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 06:59 PM The sooner extremists everywhere are isolated and unwelcome, the sooner we will all be safer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:12 PM Obama is working (as he must) within the limits of the political situation, the limits of what's possible...and he's stretched America's perceived limits of possibility considerably farther in that respect. That's a good thing. Remember: "Politics is the art of the possible." To expect him to totally satisfy any one particular point of view would be unrealistic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Ruth Archer Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:19 PM "Obama is working (as he must) within the limits of the political situation, the limits of what's possible...and he's stretched America's perceived limits of possibility considerably farther in that respect." Exactly. He's used words and terminology that no previous administration has felt able to. It was a milestone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:25 PM DOn't forget that one of the most famous advocates of violence in history was Muhammed himself, who used it to change the religions of tribes all across the Middle East in a sweeping series of physical conquests. I suppose you could say it was successful, but the cost benefit ratio might seem skewed to some. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: bobad Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:27 PM I liked this part of the speech: "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." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: gnu Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:29 PM The rich subjugate the poor. It's in their best interest. Will it change? gnightgnu |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: GUEST,mg Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:31 PM I don't know. I think it is not in the best interest of the rich for there to be poor people, but rather a pretty satisfied group of yeoman who provide a stable underpinning for society. And if there is not desparate poverty to escape, there is a great motivator for becoming filthy rich, as opposed to safe and prosperous, gone. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:43 PM Actually, it's in everyone's best interests to share in a relatively equal manner (not exactly...just relatively). If you visit a place where there is a vast gulf between the incredibly rich and the desperately poor...and you contrast it with a place where everyone or almost everyone is doing reasonably well...you'll see exactly what I mean about that. It is not in the true interests of anyone for there to be poor people. It makes life nasty and dangerous for the whole society in a great variety of ways. Misery creates further misery. A society is best off if everyone is at a decent level, materially speaking...and if everyone feels reasonably secure about their future. The same goes for a family, and a society is a very large extended family. A stupid and shortsighted rich person thinks he's better if almost all the rest are poor. A wiser rich person realizes he's far better off if everyone is doing well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:43 PM To single out Muhammad alone for being famous for spreading religion at the point of the sword is a bit one-sided, in my opinion. The history of the Christian religion (granted, it was a lot of people responsible, rather than just one, still... ) is just as bad, and if we are to believe the Old Testament, the Hebrew patriarchs are responsible for the first recorded total genocide of people of other religions/ethnic backgrounds. Granted, according to archaeologists, the Old Testament is largely fiction, but it's in the book and celebrated by many today. I don't think it serves any purpose to single out the Quran as being any bloodier than the holy books of any of the other major religions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:45 PM I think "Moslem' was a term from another age. It seemed to be the modern term for "Mohammedan" when I was growing up. I suppose older people might have a more negative view of Muslims, so that may be why the term "Moslem" might have a negative tone. I am so pleased to have this guy Obama as president. Could it be that he will will make significant advances toward healing our tarnished image in the world? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 07:56 PM There was a great deal of intertribal warfare occurring between scattered groups of Arabic peoples in Muhammad's day. What he did was no different than what was generally going on...except for this: he was better organized than the rest. His people were extremely well organized, bolstered by the new faith, and they succeeded in a series of military campaigns that united all those warring tribes under a single faith and gave the Arabs true nationhood for the first time. That's quite an accomplishment. Everybody spread religion at the point of the sword in ancient times, mostly because religion was inextricably tied in with all the other political imperatives that usually lie behind wars: land, trade rights, waterways,resources of all kinds, political dominion, money, control, ambition, powerful families...the usual stuff. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 04 Jun 09 - 09:55 PM I think the impressive thing about the speech was the scope of the discussion. Perhaps the most persuasive part of the speech was the part about 9/11 and Al-Qaeda. I think it is amazing that he very coolly took apart the whole Al-Qaeda rhetoric with the sheer evil of what they did -- and right in the middle of a Muslim country. That was very impressive: look, this is why we acted the way we did, both wrongly and rightly. I disagree completely with the approach (they should never have turned these terrorists into warriors, something Obama might have said, just to cut them down further to size), but I think it was a brilliant piece of forensic rhetoric. And in fact the whole speech was an exercise in forensics, which Obama does better than anyone else in the world -- his race speech was like this one. These are the facts we have to deal with: now let's work with them. It is his basic strategy, and we will see how it plays out. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Riginslinger Date: 04 Jun 09 - 10:00 PM He has to be the most gifted public speaker I've ever seen, though I used to like to watch Gaylord Nelson. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 10:42 PM Well said, Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Beer Date: 04 Jun 09 - 11:05 PM Right on Peter T. Omama to me is "Simplify, simplify". He makes thing no matter how difficult look simple. Simple in a sense that this is what it is. No need to get into deep discussions. Here is the problem. We all know it. So lets fix it. Beer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 11:24 PM That could be because he's actually trying to find a real solution...whereas most politicians are merely trying to cover someone's ass, gloss things over, obscure what's going on, obfuscate, grandstand, and give the vague impression that they are looking for a real solution when they are really looking mainly to consolidate their own power, shore up the status quo, protect special interests, and maintain their popularity ratings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 04 Jun 09 - 11:27 PM Well, it's obvious that his audience here in the US is very impressed with the speech, but the stated purpose of the speech was to mend relations with the "Muslim world", and from what I've been reading, they're not quite as enthralled with the speech as people in this thread. One of the biggest criticisms I've been seeing is the fact that he gave the speech in Egypt, whose brutal dictator the US is helping to prop up with US tax dollars. Apparently, a lot of Muslims see that as an endorsement of the Mubarak dictatorship, and they aren't happy about that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jun 09 - 11:49 PM It's a start. Let's see how it plays out and see what happens next. After 8 years of G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney, this is a bit of a relief, wouldn't you say? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 12:22 AM I hope so. Here's some interesting perspective from one commentator on who he thinks the real intended audience was for the speech... http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/06/cairo-speech-was-pitched-to-american-jews.html#idc-container Cairo speech was pitched to American Jews [Cairo] I'm about to go to the airport so I can go home and become a broken record about Gaza. I spent the evening with Egyptian friends and when I woke up this morning I realized how much of my own suspicion and prejudice about Muslims I have overcome in the last few years, and few days. At dinner a friend spoke about a Jewish American journalist who proclaimed to him drunkenly once, I am a Zionist, I hate Arabs. This is the most automatic prejudice in Jewish life, largely unspoken. It seems to me this was the greatness of Obama's speech (which I blew in my coverage yesterday): so much of it was pitched to an American Jewish audience, from this Arab space. In that hall he was a rock star. The silence of the crowd for the first five minutes, before he quoted the Koran and the place exploded, was stargazing silence. The chants of We love you and of Obama! at the end were expressions of hope, that Muslims would again be treated with respect. The speech was pitched to Jews because the ironclad guarantee to Israel and all the Holocaust stuff and the Buchenwald and refusal to particularize Palestinian suffering, as he particularized Jewish suffering, were all nods to the lobby. Egypt understands that; and people say, he is our hope. He is urging American Jews to get past their racism toward the Arab world. Can we follow him? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 05 Jun 09 - 01:08 AM Yeah, it's quite interesting, Carol. I think it was pitched in a number of directions, and one of them was most certainly at American Jews. Obama has to deal with that. He will have to be quite careful how he deals with it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: GUEST Date: 05 Jun 09 - 02:07 AM "I think it is amazing that he very coolly took apart the whole Al-Qaeda rhetoric with the sheer evil of what they did -- and right in the middle of a Muslim country." I agree Carol & I also feel as if the speach would have been better delivered from a Muslim nation seeing as that's who he was mending fences with. Egypt is not a Muslim nation, it is Arab though & it's human rights stance could've been touched on seeing as that's where he choose to speak from. My feeling is that Obama has a tight rope to walk with his iron clap ties to Israel. IMHO he did not stand strong enough in his "asking" of Israel to "please" temper their aggression. This is by far the most important roadblock to peace in the Mid-East & the Mid-East was hoping for more. Other than that, yes it was by far the most positive speach given by a US Prez in many dedcades & probably the most important one too. I would've loved to here some poliicy & plans though. I just don't trust the system to follow & back him, more likely some will be trying to pull the rug out from under him. Barry on another computer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:14 AM Excerpts from www.arabnews.com June 04, 2009 Women delighted at Obama's address by - Siraj Wahab
For women across the Muslim world, US President Barack Obama's historic address from Cairo was nothing short of a blessing.
What struck a chord within me was his focus on education and the empowering of women through education. 'Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons.' I will always remember that line forever. It is so true."
Obama divided his speech into seven sections, mostly political.
However, the sixth issue focused entirely on women's rights.
"Obama's overtures to the Muslim world may still come with bogies attached, but his unequivocal support toward empowerment of Muslim women is a welcome sign indeed,"
"...media in the US have exacerbated many of the problems. They have been feeding the American public with a steady anti-Arab and anti-Muslim diet. However, I have no doubt about the good intentions of Obama.
...he made it clear that the issue of women's rights is a global one that many nations — including the US — need to address. Some women expressed hope that his words might advance that conversation in the Middle East.
"Obama's views on women's education are more than welcome.
arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=123246&d=5&m=6&y=2009&pix=kingdom.jpg&category=Kingdom
Excerpts from www.gulfnews.com June 04, 2009
....on a scale of ten points, it would get six.
...expecting the speech to tackle...the Palestinian question...or...the Israeli nuclear arsenal.
...hoping it would include criticism of the US policies of the former administration.
...Obama's speech showed that US policies towards the Arab region will continue as they are.
...Obama's description of the Arab peace initiative as just a "beginning not an end" constitutes a "dangerous thing",
...it was just a new way of perceiving the same idea and the result will be the same!"
..."Obama's speech was about appeasement ...
..."very typical of western perception
gulfnews.com/region/Egypt/10319951.html gulfnews.com/region/Egypt/10319946.html
Sincerely, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:46 AM The Jerusalem Pos Friday, June 5, 2009 US reassured Jews ahead of speech By E. B. Solomont
...they were surprised to hear Obama voice his support for peaceful nuclear power in Iran.
..."We were completely blindsided by this statement," ....
...Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, founder and president of The Israel Project. "I was deeply disappointed in his speech today."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244035002748&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Jun 4, 2009 16:52 | Updated Jun 5, 2009 8:55
....He reinforced the portrayal of Israel as a modern colonial upstart.
... the fact that we were in exile - from this land, this historic Jewish homeland. This is the only place on earth where the Jews have ever been sovereign, the place we never willingly left, the place to which we always prayed to return.
This president, in that place, should have emphasized the point - stressed the physical root of our legitimacy to a Muslim world, and especially a Palestinian populace, that overwhelmingly refuses to acknowledge it.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244035000729&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Charley Noble Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:43 AM Here's a link to a well-written report from a retired peace Corps volunteer who is resident in Cairo: Click here for report It's nice to be able to access such on the spot coverage. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:45 AM "Published: June 4, 2009 "When President Bush spoke in the months and years after Sept. 11, 2001, we often — chillingly — felt as if we didn't recognize the United States. His vision was of a country racked with fear and bent on vengeance, one that imposed invidious choices on the world and on itself. When we listened to President Obama speak in Cairo on Thursday, we recognized the United States. " (NYT Editorial) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:21 AM Excerpt from John Coyne's piece (linked upthread by Charlie Noble): "..As I sat there and listened to an American president talk truthfully, even painstakingly so, and passionately about shaping a relationship with Muslim countries based on mutual interests and mutual respect, I teared up. Really. He didn't lecture. He didn't threaten or swagger. There wasn't a cowboy bone in that body. He wasn't apologizing, either. He very clearly laid out what US interests are and was clear that he will defend them. But here's the difference from the past eight years: he framed our interests in terms of human rights and peace. He was able to communicate in language that his audience not only relates to, like verses from the Koran, but in a way that demonstrates he can see all sides to a problem, that he can see the world from their eyes, too. By doing that, he affirmed the dignity of his audience — and did America very proud. Ok, so all of that is emotional, but there were even greater emotions among Egyptians that went beyond "wow" and "pride." Maybe some of my more eloquent friends can give me a better word to describe the impact of the whole day, but let me try to describe the sense in the example of one Egyptian contact. My friend always plays her cards close to the chest. I usually consider her to be fair, but not "pro" U.S. Yesterday tears were streaming down her face. When I saw her after the speech and asked her what she thought, she started in. Her view was that never in her life had such a cross section of Egypt been together in one room. Egyptian government officials, opposition leaders, religious leaders, bloggers, journalists, activists, students, Muslim Brotherhood, the Israeli ambassador (he was invited with other regional ambassadors), intellectuals and artists. To her there was suddenly hope. If Obama can bring these people together and speak to each group's different concerns, she thinks he just may be able to do it on a bigger scale and actually achieve peace in the region. She said she had long lost hope for peace but that it was "woken up," as she put it. And that surprised her and overwhelmed her. ..." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill D Date: 05 Jun 09 - 02:19 PM What *I* see in both these replies and in world response is that those who already have "an ax to grind" tend to focus on whatever part of the speech gave any comfort to their 'perceived enemies'. The are 'disappointed' that he didn't extol/promise/offer praise for THEIR sacred cows and roundly condemn the evils of **them**. GodMan deals with the Middle-East |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill D Date: 05 Jun 09 - 02:26 PM No..HERE is the GodMan cartoon I was looking for! Can we translate that into several languages and drop leaflets all over the Middle-East? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 02:33 PM Since Muslims were supposed to be the intended targets of the speech, whatever "axe" they do or don't have to grind would seem to be irrelevant, no? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 02:42 PM More perspective from the target audience. The correspondent who wrote this, Seham, is a Palestinian American... http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/06/obama-cairo-followup.html If only he would have mentioned that Al-Azhar University was a beacon of Islamic and Arabic thought before it was plunged into backwardness by U.S. supported dictators in Egypt. If only people knew that under Mubarak, Al-Azhar represents little more than a place where regular book burnings occur and where extremists can be taught how to sow sectarian discord against their Shia brothers and sisters... I don't know where to begin, there are so many things I took issue with, but I guess I'll start with the 9/11 lecture. In the last six years, Arabs have witnessed the slaughter of over one million dead Iraqis and thousands of dead Lebanese and Palestinian civilians. Americans sent to Iraq wearing military uniforms have raped and killed children and tortured many, many others. Yet, I'm sure Americans don't want to be judged by rapists like Steven Green or murderers like George Bush. Well Arabs don't want to be reminded about the hijackers at every opportunity, either. Especially considering that those hijackers were not the democratically elected representatives of the Arab people. Obama also talked about bus bombings, the last of which was carried out in 2004 and about his upcoming visit to a concentration camp in Germany. But he did not mention the more recent slaughter of thousands of people in Lebanon and Palestine by Israel. He couldn't bring himself to condemn the war when it was happening, he didn't want to step on toes, it was a bullshit claim but I cut him some leeway anyway. But five months later he has yet to utter a condemnation of the indiscriminate slaughter of Palestinian civilians and he has no plans to visit Gaza. And I wonder why he mentioned the holocaust and holocaust denial to his Arab audience, Arabs are not responsible for the holocaust and while I denounce the stupidity of those that deny history, I am baffled as to why the holocaust is being viewed within the frame of Muslim denial instead of Christian criminality. And, as far as Palestinians go, we are very aware of the holocaust and we know who perpetrated those crimes because we have been paying the price ever since. He insulted my intelligence when he talked about Muslims and the founding of this country. There was no mention of how those first Muslims ended up in the US, but they got here on slave ships and they were black Africans and Arabs. And yes, they fought in America's wars, some were even injected with syphilis in the process. Maybe these half-truths were easy for his audience today to accept because they seem to giddy to be recognized and spoken to, even if it is done so condescendingly. I can't blame them because they are just so delighted that they aren't being portrayed as sandal wearing terrorists for once. But I wasn't impressed with the revisionist history of how black Muslims first got to the U.S. On Palestine and Israel his statement on the settlements were disturbing. He said that Israel must halt settlement growth but he doesn't say anything about the ones that are already there which are just as illegal as the ones that are currently being built and expanded. Does he think that the "old" settlements are legitimate negotiating factors? I was confused when he said that Hamas should recognize Israel, which Israel is it that Hamas should recognize? 1948 borders or 1967? Or Israel within the borders of 2000, 2007, 2008, 2009? Considering that the illegal settlements are constantly expanding, I can see how confusing it must be for Hamas to figure out which Israel to recognize. His lecturing to Arabs about how they need to take "responsibility" were laughable in light of the fact that this week he reiterated his full support for Israel at the UN and has stated repeatedly that he will not halt welfare to Israel. Meanwhile, Richard Goldstone is leading the UN investigation team in Gaza and he says he is amazed by the devastation which he has seen. He also says that Israel is doing nothing to assist his investigation--an investigation for a war crimes that were funded by the U.S. Angry Arab says it best: "Shoukran," Mr. Obama replied, which in Arabic means "thank you." Look how nice, how sensitive, and how humane. Why did not other presidents think of that. If only that word was used before. I mean, if you print the word "shoukran" (it should be "shukran" but hey, it is the New York Times), on bombs and missiles that are being dropped on Arabs and Muslims, I think that they will no more mind US wars. Really. Just by using the word, Obama guaranteed a switch in Arab/Muslim public perceptions of the US. In fact, I once entered a French restaurant in Paris: and I started to hit customers and trashing the place. When some customers gathered to attack me, I yelled: "Merci." With that, the entire crowd started to cheer and they went to the kitchen to bake me a croissant. You should try that trick sometimes. "Thank you." -As`ad. Oh but thanks for telling us that we have pretty calligraphy, Obama. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 02:58 PM Perspective from another member of the target audience, also a Palestinian American, Ali Abunimah (who, when his face is shaved, and his head is not, reminds me a lot of the owner of the Mudcat)... http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/04/barack-obama-middleeast Once you strip away the mujamalat – the courtesies exchanged between guest and host – the substance of President Obama's speech in Cairo indicates there is likely to be little real change in US policy. It is not necessary to divine Obama's intentions – he may be utterly sincere and I believe he is. It is his analysis and prescriptions that in most regards maintain flawed American policies intact. Though he pledged to "speak the truth as best I can", there was much the president left out. He spoke of tension between "America and Islam" – the former a concrete specific place, the latter a vague construct subsuming peoples, practices, histories and countries more varied than similar. Labelling America's "other" as a nebulous and all-encompassing "Islam" (even while professing rapprochement and respect) is a way to avoid acknowledging what does in fact unite and mobilise people across many Muslim-majority countries: overwhelming popular opposition to increasingly intrusive and violent American military, political and economic interventions in many of those countries. This opposition – and the resistance it generates – has now become for supporters of those interventions, synonymous with "Islam". It was disappointing that Obama recycled his predecessor's notion that "violent extremism" exists in a vacuum, unrelated to America's (and its proxies') exponentially greater use of violence before and after September 11, 2001. He dwelled on the "enormous trauma" done to the US when almost 3,000 people were killed that day, but spoke not one word about the hundreds of thousands of orphans and widows left in Iraq – those whom Muntazer al-Zaidi's flying shoe forced Americans to remember only for a few seconds last year. He ignored the dozens of civilians who die each week in the "necessary" war in Afghanistan, or the millions of refugees fleeing the US-invoked escalation in Pakistan. As President George Bush often did, Obama affirmed that it is only a violent minority that besmirches the name of a vast and "peaceful" Muslim majority. But he seemed once again to implicate all Muslims as suspect when he warned, "The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer." Nowhere were these blindspots more apparent than his statements about Palestine/Israel. He gave his audience a detailed lesson on the Holocaust and explicitly used it as a justification for the creation of Israel. "It is also undeniable," the president said, "that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation." Suffered in pursuit of a homeland? The pain of dislocation? They already had a homeland. They suffered from being ethnically cleansed and dispossessed of it and prevented from returning on the grounds that they are from the wrong ethno-national group. Why is that still so hard to say? He lectured Palestinians that "resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed". He warned them that "It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered." Fair enough, but did Obama really imagine that such words would impress an Arab public that watched in horror as Israel slaughtered 1,400 people in Gaza last winter, including hundreds of sleeping, fleeing or terrified children, with American-supplied weapons? Did he think his listeners would not remember that the number of Palestinian and Lebanese civilians targeted and killed by Israel has always far exceeded by orders of magnitude the number of Israelis killed by Arabs precisely because of the American arms he has pledged to continue giving Israel with no accountability? Amnesty International recently confirmed what Palestinians long knew: Israel broke the negotiated ceasefire when it attacked Gaza last November 4, prompting retaliatory rockets that killed no Israelis until after Israel launched its much bigger attack on Gaza. That he continues to remain silent about what happened in Gaza, and refuses to hold Israel accountable demonstrates anything but a commitment to full truth-telling. Some people are prepared to give Obama a pass for all this because he is at last talking tough on Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. In Cairo, he said: "The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop." These carefully chosen words focus only on continued construction, not on the existence of the settlements themselves; they are entirely compatible with the peace process industry consensus that existing settlements will remain where they are for ever. This raises the question of where Obama thinks he is going. He summarised Palestinians' "legitimate aspirations" as being the establishment of a "state". This has become a convenient slogan to that is supposed to replace for Palestinians their pursuit of rights and justice that the proposed state actually denies. Obama is already on record opposing Palestinian refugees' right to return home, and has never supported the right of Palestinian citizens of Israel to live free from racist and religious incitement, persecution and practices fanned by Israel's highest office holders and written into its laws. He may have more determination than his predecessor but he remains committed to an unworkable two-state "vision" aimed not at restoring Palestinian rights, but preserving Israel as an enclave of Israeli Jewish privilege. It is a dead end. There was one sentence in his speech I cheered for and which he should heed: "Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Goose Gander Date: 05 Jun 09 - 03:08 PM There has been a change in rhetoric. It remains to be seen whether there will be a change in policy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: heric Date: 05 Jun 09 - 03:43 PM The anonymous writer "Seham," is a California nutball and not part of anyone's intended audience. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 03:45 PM Where does that information come from? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: heric Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:03 PM Which part? The California location comes from just clickling back through her earlier articles on the website and their intros. The nutball part comes from . . . . me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:04 PM He (the California nutball quoted above, if that is what he is) strikes me as exactly opposedto the whole concept of reconciliation. As such, he sounds like a man who is overly involved in pasthatred, and unable to step away from his own bitterness. This is not a matter of blame, but simply an observation: a man in that state of mind will not heal or recover until he overcomes his attachment to anger. This does not gainsay the fact that the United States has past offenses to rectify as well as past acts of goodwill that are often ignored in the rush to make noise in the commons. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:05 PM On what basis is the accusation of nutball being made, and on what basis does the person calling her that claim to know who she is? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:11 PM It really doesn't matter how people who belong to the target demographic view the world. What matters is how they received the speech, since it was ostensibly aimed at them. If the objective is to heal the wounds of the past, which Obama has suggested they are, then adequately addressing those wounds is the first prerequisite. Arrogantly dismissing them, as some people above seem to want to do, simply won't do the job. But the person in question (a she) has very good reasons for seeing things the way she does. http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/01/one-americans-awakening-i-was-7-when-they-punched-my-grandfather-in-the-face-and-none-of-the-men-in-.html One American's awakening: 'I was 7 when they punched my grandfather in the face, and none of the men in my family dared say anything' (Anyone new to this blog should be aware that while it has a Jewish character, it represents an effort, in the new global environment, to cross borders and hear what members of other groups have to say. This is both a selfishly-curious desire on my part and also an effort at service: to use journalistic skills to try and change American understanding. Yesterday I was emailing with a young Palestinian-American woman in California who told me some wrenching stories about her relatives but said I couldn't put them on the site. Why not? Because some Americans associated with Al Awda (a Palestinian group dedicated to right of return) have been prevented by Israel from even visiting the territories because of their outspokenness. Then I asked this woman her story, and she wrote the following. Ten minutes later another email came in which she apologized for giving in to her "crazy" in sending this to me. But I said I found it moving and helpful; and she said I could post if I did not use her name. I usually remove profanity from postings. This is a vital exception.--Phil Weiss) My parents are both from the West Bank. They came here in the 60's and my older siblings and I were all born here. I wish I could be a normal 25 year old and just care about getting high and watching Cribs but I can't. It's getting harder and harder for me to focus on anything other than this issue and I am finding less and less people for me to feel "comfortable" around. At the height of the bombing my best friend wanted me to stop watching Al Jazeera and go SHOPPING with her! Totally fucking senseless! Yeah, OK, I'll pretend like I didn't see a kid's head sticking out of the rubble like a freaking horror movie and I'll go to Nordstrom's with you and try on boots? Seriously? People don't want to hear this shit, and I'm scared that Obama will come off as being "progressive" on this issue when he really isn't and that he will inadvertently legitimize the Zionist position on Palestine. I don't think I want any of this on your blog, I'm just ranting now and I am pissed. I've been so fucking pissed since I was 7. That's the first time I ever understood what occupation and apartheid meant. When I went to the West Bank for the first time to meet my grandparents and I saw my grandfather get punched in the face. I was getting hassled (at age 7!) by the soldiers because I couldn't understand what they were saying to me, I didn't understand their accents so my grandfather interjected and told them I was American and they punched him in the face and told him to mind his own business. I saw my dad and brother go white with rage but then at the same time there wasn't shit they could say because that 18 year old hooligan with a gun might decide to throw everyone in jail or worse. Very humbling experience. Nobody likes to see people disrespected or dehumanized in that way. But in that flash-- to see all the men in your family psychologically mindfucked like that is something else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:20 PM I thought the location was thought out and appropriate, I appreciated Obamaa's directness, uprightness, and I personally enjoyed listening to the brickbats tossed at it by some of the AM radio right who were not unlike CarolC's aggrieved crybabies above, just picking at different points. Obama was speaking broadly to a broad audience. His main points were part of a cohesive whole and he himself made the point that it was only a speech and not a solution. He handled himself well, and made me just a bit more proud to be an American, which he has been doing for some time, now. I didn't agree with some of the points, found innaccuracies as well, but on balance, I think it took some guts and some smarts, and this approach (what FDR once described as 'Jaw-Jaw not War-War' should have been tried far far earlier in recent history, but we had no one capable of making the effort. (I used to use the word 'Moslem' until about 10 or more years ago when I shifted to 'Muslim' because most folks who seemed to know what they were talking about it used that term. I never heard nor read that it was pejorative and I don't think it was, but etymology marches on in spite of us) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill D Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:28 PM "..., whatever "axe" they do or don't have to grind would seem to be irrelevant, no?" ?? I don't see that. It seems very relevant...at least to me. What you are doing, Carol, is demonstrating my point that those who do not WISH to be reconciled or to find any positive thing in the speech, will not find any. Those quotes, no matter who they are from, just show that some will NEVER be happy unless they get everything THEY want, and see former enemies punished also. Obama's point that everyone must give a little and listen better is lost on those determined to hate & carry grudges forever....on ALL sides. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:37 PM If the objective of the speech was to mend relations with the Muslims of the world and with the people of the Middle East, as we have been told it was, then the reactions of those people are an important indication of the success or lack of success of the speech. If, on the other hand, the objective of the speech was to reinforce Americans' sense of smug superiority over the Muslims of the world and the people of the Middle East, and also Americans' "fuck you" attitude towards the feelings of the Muslims of the world and the people of the Middle East, then judging by some of the posts above, the speech would appear to have been a success. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:45 PM That's a vivid tale, and heart-wrenching. As far as I can see, Obama is doing the exact opposite of legitimizing the "zionist" position--which, I might add, is a charged term intended to promulgate difference and controversy. As far as the right of return is concerned, how far back in time would you think it should be taken? Twenty years? One hundred? Two thousand? It is obvious that the youth of BOTH sides of this ridiculous interlocked equation have to get over their myths, their scars, their terror and their losses, and find a footing from which some sort of harmony is possible. I have seen Arabs and Israelis become the fastest of friends when they were not constantly exposed to old hatred and new terror. I know it is possible. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: bobad Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:46 PM ".....if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth" Truer words were never spoken. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill H //\\ Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:52 PM Intended audience aside it has to be agreed---I believe--that he is a brilliant speaker and knows how to use language. A breath of fresh air following GWB and the on-going growling from Cheney. ANother thing that should be thought about---the speech was meant to be translated into many languages so it had to be diplomatic without great quotable flourishes such as, say, a Gettysburg Address. Since it was delivered in Egypt---I was listening---one could almost time the beat for the applause lines---any thing that smacked of anti-Israel comment got applause---criticism of Palestinians (however slight)---silence. Bill Hahn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 05 Jun 09 - 04:58 PM I endorse Amos and Bobad's points above, Obama is attempting to provide a perspective that allows some commonality to enter what should be a Jawboning approach to getting some peace in the situation. Whether or not the tales quoted by CarolC's sources are true, they enter into a 'one said, t'other said' back-and-forth of aggrievement and bereavement, which may have some validity, but Obama's speech was deliberately pitched above that range. Trying to drag it down by picking away at one part of it or what the AM radio profiteers were (I think they were making a big deal about Obama's trying to show some Muslim participation in historical America or challenging his count of the number of Muslim US citizens)are likewise missing th point, not to assert an aura of smugness but to attempt to establish a commonality. This is an excellent political move which is well worth doing, but in no wise quaranteed of success. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bonzo3legs Date: 05 Jun 09 - 05:02 PM A true wonder compared with the lying fucking gits in the UK govenment! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill D Date: 05 Jun 09 - 06:26 PM "...the reactions of those people are an important indication of the success or lack of success of the speech." Well, last night I saw an Islamic scholar who teaches at an American school say that it gave him goosebumps to hear an American president finally saying some of those things and saying them in respectful way to Islam. I gather there were others who saw it as, at least, a good beginning. No one pretends that one speech is all that is required. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 05 Jun 09 - 07:10 PM "As far as the right of return is concerned, how far back in time would you think it should be taken? Twenty years? One hundred? Two thousand?" Two thousand years to cover Palestinians as well as Jews would seem a fair compromise. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 05 Jun 09 - 07:20 PM The "right of return" going back over a hundred years is damn silly, if you ask me. If we tried to enforce it worldwide, it would mean the displacement of probably about 80% of all the people on the face of the Earth at this time. It would mean war in virtually every country on the planet. It isn't important where people live. It's important that they find a way to coexist in peace and mutual tolerance and harmoniously share the places where they already are living or wherever else they choose to peacefully go. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill H //\\ Date: 05 Jun 09 - 07:23 PM I would agree with McGrath except for one point---which is probably the sticking point in the entire scenario. Palestinians, to my knowledge, were the Israelites and were forced out of their native land all those many moons ago. In the history of the area---a blink of an eye in terms of the universe--Jews were the inhabitants and then forced out into the very unkind (mostly) Diaspora, So a brief and concise history: They came home. They were not welcome. They were warred against. They perservered. End of story. They also are willing to compromise ---well, perhaps, not this leader; leaders prior to him and they were thwarted at all turns. Check the papers---Carter, Clinton, etc; Bill Hahn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:01 PM I would say that right of return for those expelled and their descendents would at least conform to international law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:06 PM By the way, according to most archaeologists, including Israeli archaeologists, the biblical narrative of the history of Jews in the Levant is largely fiction. And also, according to most experts, including Israeli experts, most Jews have no historical familial connection whatever to what is now Israel. In other words, there never was an expulsion of the Jews from that region, and the accounts of the Jewish kingdom there are greatly exaggerated. So European Jews really do not have any historical right of return, nor to any Jews other than the Arab Jews whose families never left the area. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:29 PM CarolC I will support the giving of $1BILLION to each Arab refugee from Israel, right after you support the giving of the same to each Jewish refugee from the Arab nations ( ie, the ones that declared war on Israel in 1948). That means $820,000,000,000,000 to the Jews that Israel resettled, and $640,000,000,000,000 to the Palestinians. Net result is $180,000,000,000,000 to the Jewish refugees. Waiting on the Arab nations to pay up... "In other words, there never was an expulsion of the Jews from that region, and the accounts of the Jewish kingdom there are greatly exaggerated." You had best provide a source for this- as it contradicts what is known about the states in the period 1200BCE to 300 ACE. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:40 PM How many times do I have to repeat that I support allowing all of the Jewish refugees from Arab countries to return to their countries of origin before the above poster will actually notice that I have said this? Five hundred? A million? I have, probably dozens of times, said that I support allowing Jews who were expelled from their countries of origin to return to those countries. Which is no more and no less than what I am advocating for the Palestinians. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: heric Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:43 PM >>Arrogantly dismissing them, as some people above seem to want to do, simply won't do the job.<< I shan't be lured into your slippery talk. This is a person who believes Americans slaughtered a million civilians in Iraq. Maybe you do, too, but let's start with the assumption that Obama doesn't. This is a person who believes that Obama insulted her intelligence by not discussing America's cruel history of enslaving Arabs. This is what Obama said (can you suggest a way he would have better addressed her concerns without undermining his entire message? - he wasn't there to regurgitate the full litany of all grievances and grudges): "I know, too, 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, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, 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." Then you so charmingly said: "If the objective of the speech was to mend relations with the Muslims of the world and with the people of the Middle East, as we have been told it was, then the reactions of those people are an important indication of the success or lack of success of the speech. If, on the other hand, the objective of the speech was to reinforce Americans' sense of smug superiority over the Muslims of the world and the people of the Middle East, and also Americans' "fuck you" attitude towards the feelings of the Muslims of the world and the people of the Middle East, then judging by some of the posts above, the speech would appear to have been a success. " This is a person who wanted him to overtly demonize his hosts and declare before the world "that under Mubarak, Al-Azhar represents little more than a place where regular book burnings occur and where extremists can be taught how to sow sectarian discord against their Shia brothers and sisters." What do you think Obama should have said? Can you please all and each of a billion people all of the time? P.S. http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/SStephan/islamic_slavery.htm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: mg Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:45 PM You can't go back very far with right of return and 2000 years is beyond comprehension..not that it would not be desired but that it could not reasonably be accomodated without abusing the present population. It will always be a problem after wars and various diaspora...the Irish are still worried that people will come back with the desire to reclaim what their families left in the famine, or I was told so in Ireland recently. I could go right to where my ancestors were but I wouldn't kick the people out who live there...and that is 160 or so years...not 2000. It does matter where one lives..it can't always be accomodated. The Palestinians want their own land..not country..their own little farms and houses and orchards back. It does not mean they will get this..they probably won't..but some should be set aside in pepertuity for at least a Williamsburg-type situation, so that children can see what their grandparents were talking about, and can have picnics etc. on the grounds as they were kept long ago. Down the road from me is a Palestinian who had an orange orchard stolen from him. He is hopefully forgetting this now as he is developing Alzheimers. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:46 PM I wasn't referring to anything the above poster said when I said what that person has quoted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:46 PM Well, the one who posted directly after my last post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:51 PM Here's my source about the biblical history being largely fiction... http://mideastfacts.org/facts/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=32&Itemid=34 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 09 - 09:52 PM Before or after you let the Arab countries build concentrationa camps and ovens? Since the majority of Arabs ( non-Jewish) stayed in Israel and becam citizens, and the vast majority of the Jews in Arab nations were expelled, perhaps the Palestinians should be treated by the Israelis the samne way that they were treated by the other Arab nations- IE, kept in camps and denied citizenship. THAT is what the Arab nations did to the Palestinian refugess, while Israel resettled the Jews expelled from Arab nations. It would seem to me that if the Arabs want to have Israel resttle those Palestinians, the Arab nations should pay Israel back the entire costs of the Jewish resettlement. Now, lets talk about the 77% of Mandate Palestine RESERVED for only the Arabs, in violation of the League of Nations Mandate itself. Since the Arabs got 77% of the Mandate territory, they HAVE their homeland- and could have settled there after 1948 IF THEY RENOUNCED VIOLENT ACTIONS against Israel ( check the Jordanian offers) SO, the West Bank is part of the Israeli JEWISH homeland, and if the Palestinians are settled there they should be subject to Israeli law. Since Jordanian ( the Arab Muslim Palestinian homeland) LAW prohibits ownership of land by Jews, I presume you will allow Israel to make the same laws, and prohibit ownership of land by Muslims. After all, if it is good enough to treat Jews that way, shouldn't the Palestinians be happy to be treated the same? Or do you still apply different rules to Jews and Muslims? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 10:19 PM More documentation that the Bible's historical account of Jewish history is largely fiction... http://themagneszionist.blogspot.com/2007/07/no-rivkele-there-wasnt-roman-exile-of.html http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/966952.html In this popular refutation of the book described in the above link, the only thing that is being disputed is the idea that Israeli historians didn't already know about what the author said in his book... http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/999386.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 10:28 PM Of course the Israelis resettled the Jews into Israel. That was their goal all along, and is the reason why they worked very hard to get those Jews expelled from their home countries. The countries of origin of those Jews won't put them in gas chambers if they are returned as a part of a resettlement of Palestinian refugees back to their areas of origin. Especially if they are guaranteed that Israel will not make them suffer for allowing them back in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill H //\\ Date: 05 Jun 09 - 10:28 PM Here we go again!!! Only proves that Obama can be fair minded and practice diplomacy and we get to hear the same tired old diatribes from the same tired old repeating people Bill Hahn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 10:36 PM In reference to the response to my request for information about why Seham was being called a "nutball", I can understand why someone might not agree with everything she said. I agree with some of it, and I haven't made up my mind yet about the rest of it. But I really don't see anything in what she said that qualifies her as a nutball. Nevertheless, her perspective on the speech is hardly unique to her. It's a fairly common perspective among people with a similar background. And if healing the relationship between the US and people with her ethnic background and establishing a dialogue with them is the goal, I really don't see how that goal is served by calling them names because of the perspectives they articulate, or even denying the validity of their perspectives. One thing I like about Obama (who, by the way, I campaigned for and voted for in both the primary and the general election) is that when people say things he doesn't necessarily agree with, he never belittles them or invalidates their feelings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 10:38 PM But the point is that a lot of people who are in the stated targeted audience don't agree that he was being fair minded. Suggesting that they should take it or leave it, and not allowing them the room to disagree, sure sounds like a continuation of the Bush policies on the Middle East, only with a fancy bow on to make it look nicer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: number 6 Date: 05 Jun 09 - 10:42 PM Right on Carol .... so true. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 10:43 PM :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 05 Jun 09 - 10:45 PM For my part, Carol, I have no problem with her reciting her own history or the history of others in her tribe or whatever; but the voice that refuses to make any reach at all to overcome the past is not the voice of reason. Using the past as motivation for future hatred is very unwise. This is not a matter of sides; it is unwise for humans generally. What ideal scenario do you think the Arabs and Jews of Jordan, Israel, Palestine and Egypt should be striving for. then? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Riginslinger Date: 05 Jun 09 - 10:56 PM Jews moving in from Europe and constructing housing in Palestinian territories is a lot like Mexicans coming across the border, illegally, in the US, and sucking onto the welfare system. Personally, given what I've been through, I don't blame them a bit for being pissed off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill D Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:02 PM WHY cannot we have ONE thread about Obama, current events or hope for peace without these predictable diversions into hurling of self-serving minutae on the entire history of the Mid-East? GIVE IT A REST! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:03 PM At the very least a public recognition of the Nakba, and an admission that what was done to the Palestinians was wrong. And then actually being an honest broker in the Middle East rather than being Israel's lawyer. This would mean that Israel doesn't get an automatic veto in the UN from the US, and also that Israel would be held to the same standards as the Palestinians. If US recognition of the elected Palestinian government should have strings attached based on its adhering to international law, recognition of the state of Israel, and ending violence, then so should US recognition of the elected Israeli government be dependent on the government of Israel doing the same (and recognizing the state of Palestine within the internationally recognized borders of where that state is supposed to be). If economic aid to the Palestinians (in particular, the Palestinians in Gaza) is conditional upon their fulfilling the terms of the roadmap, ending violence, and recognizing Israel, then economic aid to Israel should be conditional upon their doing the same and recognizing the state of Palestine withing the internationally recognized borders of where that state should be. The US should also end its participation in the blockade of Gaza and should assist the Gazans in getting the things they need into Gaza. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill D Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:04 PM gee....I forgot to say "pretty please, with sugar on it.." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill D Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:04 PM ,,,but obviously, I didn't say it fast enough |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:05 PM BECAUSE THE SPEECH WAS ALL ABOUT THE MIDDLE EAST AND ABOUT MUSLIMS AND PALESTINIANS. THAT'S WHAT THE SPEECH WAS ABOUT. WE ARE DISCUSSING OBAMA'S SPEECH THAT WAS ABOUT THE MIDDLE EAST, ABOUT MUSLIMS AND ABOUT PALESTINIANS. ANYONE WHO CANNOT COMPREHEND WHAT THIS MEANS MAYBE OUGHT TO FIND ANOTHER OBAMA THREAD TO POST TO. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill D Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:09 PM No, it was not... you heard only what you wanted to hear. goodnight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:15 PM The stated purpose of the speech was to try to heal the relationship between the US and the people in the Muslim parts of the world and the people of the Middle East, and to start a dialogue with them. Therefore, it is entirely in keeping with the subject of the speech to discuss the impact that the speech had on the people who the Obama administration stated were the intended targets of the speech. Anyone who thinks this is not reasonable is the one who is only hearing what they want to hear. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: heric Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:40 PM Fair enough that nutball isn't a nice word, but it is difficlut enough, if not impossible, address ~legitimate~ grievances by way of unpalatable compromises. This is his stated goal (and I think it's sincere.) With great effort, great skill and a lot of luck, he might achieve some of that in some measure. The first thing he needs is a sufficient level of support from a sufficent number of affected people. So his target audience is not everyone. We all know in advance that many people will reject his requests or refuse his suggestions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 05 Jun 09 - 11:48 PM Oh, I agree that the job in front of him is huge and extraordinarily difficult. But listening to what the people he was addressing have to say about the speech is an important part of what needs to be done to make it work. Listening is always half the job. Obama has said this many times himself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Ebbie Date: 06 Jun 09 - 02:54 AM People who hear only the people who don't like what was said - for whatever reason - need to cast a wider net. Perhaps it is necessary to go into all the nuances of what was said and what was left unsaid but it isn't what I wanted out of this thread. In my opinion, some people forget the tremendously large and complicated task that President Obama has before him. If, as it appears to me, the President is picking carefully at the tapestry in order to reweave the damaged parts without causing irreparable damage to what could ahve been. I admire his skill and insight, concerned about the brinksmanship in all parties concerned (in the mideast and, it seems, just about everywhere) and cautiously optimistic for the future. And again, I say, Bravo, Obama! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 06 Jun 09 - 06:31 AM Some people seem to think that the inclusion of viewpoints that are critical of the speech suggests that those who provide those viewpoints hear only the people who don't like what was said. First of all, this is a rather large assumption (and in incorrect one, at that). Secondly, it shows that there are people who think that only one side of the issue should be allowed to be expressed. While I have provided an alternative point of view, unlike quite a few other people in the thread, I have not suggested that other people should not provide any other perspectives besides the ones I have provided. Personally, I am aware of all of the different perspectives on the speech. But the response from many of the people who were the intended targets of the speech is as important as any other, and should be included in this discussion. I understand that a lot of people might find those perspectives to be a bit of a buzz kill, but it's not really about them after all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bobert Date: 06 Jun 09 - 07:55 AM I didn't hear the entire speech but I have heard some of it and heard the views of some folks whoes opinions (David Broder, E. J. Dione) on NPR and what does seem to be the best part about the speech is that Obama successfully changed the tone of the of the debate/discussion... If he achieved nothing else, this is a major step forward... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 06 Jun 09 - 08:24 AM I like Ebbie's metaphor of reweaving damaged threads. You can see throughout the speech the threads of everyone's narrative, everyone's agenda, but with an attempt at reweaving them. Perhaps the most important aspect of the speech is the acknowledgment that everyone in the region has a story to which they cling, and which gives them meaning, and that these stories intersect for worse and better. Even just acknowledging in the open that everyone's story has partial validity, and is also partially wrong, is a pretty big deal. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Jun 09 - 09:28 AM I suppose it's a matter of whether Obama's is holding a half-empty glass or a half-full glass. But when you put it in the context of a previous history where the glass has been completely empty, with the bottom knocked out, and it's being waved around as a jagged-ended weapon, either way is a welcome advance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 06 Jun 09 - 10:02 AM Or it will be if something actually changes for the better for the ones most severely effected. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 06 Jun 09 - 03:29 PM so CarolC it sounds like you are coming somewhat around to the view that it is not ONLY poor defeated deprived Palestinians who have the legitimate reactions to Obama's speech. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 06 Jun 09 - 03:31 PM Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Although I find some opinions more reprehensible than other, but that's my opinion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: pdq Date: 06 Jun 09 - 05:31 PM At least Obama got E Pluribus Unum correct, unlike Al Gore... "Well, back in 1994 then-Vice President Gore gave a little-known speech ruminating on the meaning of the melting pot. This is what he said: 'We can build a collective civic space large enough for all our separate identities, that we can be E Pluribus Unum—out of one, many.' Latin students everywhere know that E Pluribus Unum means 'Out of many, One'--precisely the opposite of what Gore said." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 06 Jun 09 - 06:27 PM Gore probably knows it too, and simply mispoke at the time. At least, I would hope so. But anything is possible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 07 Jun 09 - 03:56 PM "One for Many" and "Many for One"? (You do go ON, D'Artagnon) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 07 Jun 09 - 05:02 PM First cousin to d'Artagnan? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 07 Jun 09 - 06:18 PM Carol: This post of yours: More documentation that the Bible's historical account of Jewish history is largely fiction... http://themagneszionist.blogspot.com/2007/07/no-rivkele-there-wasnt-roman-exile-of.html http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/966952.html In this popular refutation of the book described in the above link, the only thing that is being disputed is the idea that Israeli historians didn't already know about what the author said in his book... is indicative of your frequent references to 'sources' of which you cannot determine any validity, because of your lack of first hand information and of a background of study that would allow you to distinguish between bulk and bunk. I don't mind it especially, because you are a good retriever of interesting sites (just not necessarily cogent sites to your purpose). What I found so interesting about the first reference, an effort to debunk the 'Roman Exile of the Jews' is that I'm not aware of any assertion of a Roman Exile in the first place. The Bar Kochba revolt is not biblical in any event, and it is historical. But the history indicates the Romans soundly defeated this revolt and killed many if not most of the revolters. There is plenty of historical evidence of Jews in the area, the Dead Sea Scrolls and Masada. The Babylonian exile is a staple of Jewish self-definition, it occurred much earlier, yet is long long after the events of the Five Books of Moses. Your reference to the HaAretz article is simply some guy's theory with no corroboration that I'm aware of. It's interesting stuff, it's a long way from playing out. It seems to be a cognate of the well-known theory of Koestler's about European Jews originating from a Turkic tribe called Khazars. After over a generation, it certainly has not been proven (it may even have been disproven). There's plenty of genetic research going on, my understanding is it indicates that European Jews and modern Arabs bear the cousinly markers that indicate a relationship closer than European Jews and European tribes. But it's not something I'm going to lean on, as I am a lot more careful about distinguishing fact from theory than you appear to be by your eager sourcing. You seriously weaken your arguments when you readily cite this stuff, because you appear not to cite the strongest arguments to your partisan position, you cite ALL arguments. You've also failed to make a logical argument that even if it were true (which it isn't) that modern Jews are not linked by ancestral habitation in the Mideast, why several million Israelis with a going democratic nation should not defend their interests against an antagonistic population which seeks to destroy them. They forged a nation the way any nation gets created, and they have all the rights that go with any nation making itself unique, including the very nation we live in. The fact that there are Palestinians at all now is because the Arab nations made it a policy to not resettle them, as opposed to Israel's policy of resettling the Jewish refugees and displaced persons from the rest of the world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 07 Jun 09 - 10:38 PM Okay, robomatic, so Al Gore is a major dumbass, then. ;-D Now what? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 07 Jun 09 - 11:06 PM It's interesting that Obama has picked "e pluribus unum" -- Garry Wills wrote a whole book about how Abe Lincoln picked out "All men are created equal" as his radical version of the American legend -- the Declaration of Independence, and not the Constitution. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 07 Jun 09 - 11:43 PM Before people assert that my sources have no credibility, people really ought to bother to take the time to actually read them. I did not address the issue of Israel as an ongoing concern, because that assertion was not made, and I would not have had any reason to correct it even had it been made. My reason for providing the evidence of most Jews' origins being Europe, and not the Middle East, was to correct the misinformation posted about it earlier in the thread, which is used quite often as an attempted justification for the continuing oppression, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and genocide of the Palestinians. The Jews who live in Israel are there, and I would not advocate moving them to anywhere else. However, European Jews are not in a position to use their holy books as evidence of having more of a right to live in the area that is now Israel and Palestine than the non-Jewish indigenous people do. They do not have their origins in that area, and have no historic claim to it. If, by saying that there would be no Palestinians had the Arab countries been willing to resettle them is one of the more ridiculous arguments I think I've ever seen. The people in Gaza are Palestinians. Most of the people in the West Bank not living in Jewish settlements are Palestinians. The non-Jewish Israeli Arabs are Palestinians. And the people who fled what is now Israel during the Nakba - who are the indigenous people of that area, and their descendents, are Palestinians. Whether or not they were settled by other countries would not change the fact that they are Palestinians. But I can understand why the poster asserting their lack of existence would want to do so. It's not enough to try to get rid of them physically. Genocidal people sometimes also need to remove any cultural trace of a people as well. Wouldn't want any reminders of their dirty deeds bothering their precious consciences (if they actually have any). By the way, the term for the practice of denying the existence of a people is 'cultural genocide'. On the other hand, maybe the person making these arguments is only joking. If so, that person has a really sick sense of humor. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 07 Jun 09 - 11:56 PM The assertion was made earlier in the thread that the Jews were forced out of what is now Israel and occupied Palestine a long time ago, and then they returned. I was addressing this assertion specifically. It entirely factually incorrect. The people who became the people who call themselves Palestinians are the descendants of Christians and Jews who were indigenous to the region. The Ashkenazim and Sephardim originated in Europe and not the Middle East. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: DougR Date: 08 Jun 09 - 01:31 AM Considering he essentially gave Iran the "go-ahead" to produce nuclear weapons it's a bit of a puzzlement to me why so many of you are so accepting of the speech, but wha the hey? What else is new? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 08 Jun 09 - 07:12 AM And why aren't the Iranians allowed to develop nuclear weapons if they choose? The Israelis did. The Pakistanis did. The Russians did. Now let's see if we can name three countries that are very near to Iran..... But of course America and Israel get to decide, because they are good nations, and would never do any harm to anyone. (The only objection I can see to the Iranians doing what they please is that they are actual signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, unlike certain nations. Oh yes, and other nations that signed the Treaty pledged to work towards the elimination of their nuclear weapons, and how is that going?) yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 08 Jun 09 - 10:42 AM DougR, You are twisting his words badly, I fear. HE gave no such go-ahead. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Jun 09 - 01:33 PM Doug, he gave Iran the go-ahead to develop its own nuclear power stations for generating electrical power. That is not a go-ahead to develop nuclear weapons. I see no reason on Earth why Iran should not have the right to build nuclear power stations if they wish to...same as any other country that is a signatory to the NNPT. To treat the Iranians differently from the way you treat everyone else in the world is the height of hypocrisy, but that's what you do when you've already basically decided that another nation is "bad" and therefore it doesn't have the same rights you or your friends (like Israel) do. Israel, as a matter of fact, apparently has a right that no one else does. They can secretly build several hundred nuclear weapons and delivery systems...pretend they don't even have them...refuse to officially admit to having them...and the USA doesn't say "boo" about it...and no one does anything about it. Hypocrisy, Doug. Sheer, total, hypocrisy on the part of the USA policy-makers of the past. You would think they were all paid employees of the Israeli government, in fact. Obama is simply trying to treat everyone in a fair and even-handed way now...while dealing with that sort of entrenched prejudice and hypocrisy...and I wish him the best of luck in reversing a totally unfair and ridiculous situation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: DougR Date: 08 Jun 09 - 05:13 PM You REALLY think Iran will be content merely developing nuclear power plants Peter? I assume, though, from your post you have no objection to them having the bomb. Amos: By inference. If Iran was content to only construct power plants they have had lots of opportunities. Even Russia offered to supply them with the "know how" and supply the necessary ingredients to build power plants. If Iran had agreed to inspections they would probably have had their power plants up and operating by now. Wonder why they did not agree to inspections? Huh? Of course, maybe you join Peter as one who sees no problem with Iran building the bombs. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Jun 09 - 05:49 PM You REALLY think Israel will be content merely developing nuclear power plants, Doug? I assume, though, from your post you have no objection to them having the bomb. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 08 Jun 09 - 06:11 PM sorry- that was me. LH, " I assume, though, from your post you have no objection to them having the bomb." No more than I object to the French or English having the bomb.- ALL developed it BEFORE the NPT. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Jun 09 - 06:27 PM I also object to anyone having the bomb. Unfortunately, it's very hard to get countries to give up any weapons they already have. I would prefer that everyone who had the bomb begin dismantling their bombs by stages until none were left. BB - The problem with Israe that differs from France or England is this: Israel will not officially admit that it has the bomb, and it won't say how many it has, and it armed itself in secrecry. If any other country in the world were doing that or had done that, the USA would consider it to be intolerable. Israel benefits from a double standard in a way that no other country in the world is allowed to benefit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 08 Jun 09 - 07:23 PM "will not officially admit that it has the bomb, and it won't say how many it has, and it armed itself in secrecry." You mean like North Korea, Iran, and who knows who else? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 08 Jun 09 - 07:27 PM The question of whether Iran should have nuclear weapons is, of course, complicated. The main problem is that nuclear weapons appear to be the only deterrent to invasion (if Saddam Hussein really had nuclear weapons, do you think he would be dead now? I doubt it) if the countries who do have nuclear weapons are allowed to do what they please with the fate of other countries. That is why the Bush administration was so poisonous: by assuming the right to do what they pleased, they were the ones who pushed Iran into its current activity. Anyone who knows anything about the last eight years knows that the Americans refused time and again to respond to very serious appeals by the Iranians to link up with the Americans. The bullheaded stupidity of the Bush administration is responsible if Iran does get nuclear weapons. The graver problem is the fact that if Iran gets nuclear weapons, everyone else in the neighbourhood will have them -- here I mean Saudi Arabia, friend and gallant ally. Obama and everyone else knows this. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: DougR Date: 09 Jun 09 - 06:37 PM Not complicated to me, Peter. Iran's government cannot be trusted NOT to use the bomb, particularly against Israel. Also, Iran cannot be trusted NOT to provide the bomb to terrorists (Oops...I don't suppose we are supposed to call them that anymore, not sure what the latest Obama adjective is considered appropriate). DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 09 Jun 09 - 07:21 PM I don't recall that the Iranian government has recently agreed to the obliteration of all Iranians. The Iranians are not about to commit suicide. It's just rhetoric. The Soviet Union (remember them?) continually threatened to obliterate America -- never happened. Why? Because they didn't want to die. Same with the Iranians. The whole Iranians threatening Israel is nonsense. Nuclear weapons are a deterrent (hello?). What the Israelis and the Americans are unhappy about is that the Iranians would have a little freedom to manoeuvre, threaten, pontificate, etc. Meanwhile, the Israelis -- and the American government right now -- are actually threatening the Iranians ("nothing is off the table" continues to be reiterated), because they can. They don't want to lose the right to threaten the Iranians. The Iranians of course have no right to threaten anyone. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Amos Date: 09 Jun 09 - 08:19 PM DougR: You probably cannot see how your postulate of those who cannot be trusted leads, through a domino series of resistance and enforcement, to the exact conditions it predicts should be avoided. Iranians, like other humans, relish self-determination, not dependency. It costs them nothing to shoot off their mouths and make a show. One sure path out of this mess--which was largely brought about by your kind of thinking--is Obama's promotion as hard as possible on nuclear disarmament. I am sure that also makes little sense to you. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 10 Jun 09 - 06:34 PM I really am puzzled by the assumption that the people of Iran are insane, murderous and suicidal and that the people of Israel are not. That clearly seems to be an assumption held by some people, but what on earth is it based on? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 10 Jun 09 - 06:38 PM The fact that Israel has had nuclear weapons for forty years, and never declared that they wanted any other country to be destroyed. The fact that Iran signed the NPT, then violated it, demonstrating that Iran does not honor it's treaty obligations. Noone said that "the people of Iran are insane, murderous and suicidal "- Just that their leaders are. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Little Hawk Date: 10 Jun 09 - 06:54 PM The Israeli's actions have spoken even louder than their words in that respect, BB. They are the single most aggressive power in the Middle East, and the one that has repeatedly shown its willingness to invade and attack other people, occupy their land, and steal portions of their land for settlement by Israelis. The reasons they have not used atomic weapons on anyone yet are: 1. It would be far too costly in terms of the after-effects and the general world reaction...they would become an international pariah if they did. 2. It might trigger a Third World War among major powers which would probably result in the destruction of Israel as well as a hell of a lot of other people. 3. It has not been necessary. They can easily win military victories without the use of their nuclear weapons. They would have to be both stupid and insane to use nuclear weapons. I don't think they're stupid. As to whether they're insane...well...no, probably not. Just bloody arrogant and besotted with their own sense of historical victimhood and entitlement, that's all. McGrath - That assumption you allude to, the "assumption that the people (or leaders) of Iran are insane, murderous and suicidal and that the people (or leaders) of Israel are not" is based on one simple thing: It's based upon the desire to have an excuse to justify a massive first strike on Iran by Israel or the USA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 10 Jun 09 - 07:23 PM So how does what you said there, bruce, add up to grounds for assuming that the people of Iran, or the government they elect, is that different in these respects from the people of Israel and the government they find themselves electing? Pretty unpleasant governments in some respects at times, in both cases, but that's how it goes in other places as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 11 Jun 09 - 02:05 AM The leaders of Iran have not ever said they want any other country destroyed, either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peace Date: 11 Jun 09 - 02:37 AM Yeah. Iran is led by fuckin' angels. From Amnesty International's site: '"All 42 women who registered as candidates for the elections have, along with a large number of male candidates, been barred by Iran's Council of Guardians from standing in the elections on grounds of 'suitability'. Jelveh Javaheri, a prominent member of the women's rights Campaign For Equality was arrested at her home on 1 May by security officials acting without an arrest warrant. She has been charged with "acting against national security through membership in the One Million Signatures Campaign and with the aim of disrupting public order and security." The CFE is collecting signatures on behalf of its campaign for women's rights. Last year dozens of women's rights campaigners were detained, interrogated and some tried for their peaceful activities, including up to 10 who were sentenced by lower courts to prison terms and, in at least two cases, flogging. Meanwhile, the influential women's magazine 'Zanan' was forcibly closed down during 2008, while women's rights websites are regularly blocked. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 11 Jun 09 - 02:59 AM Straw man argument there. Changing the subject from the accusation that Iranian leaders have called for destroying other countries to trying to make it look like the subject is whether or not the leaders of Iran are angels. As I've said many times before, the people of Iran want to be allowed to deal with their problems without outside interference. The current drive coming from some quarters, to try to whip up support for an attack on Iran by either Israel or the US is not what the people of Iran want. Continuing to spread lies about the intentions of the leaders of Iran, like for instance, the lie about calling for Israel's destruction, does not help those women who are being arrested, and aren't being allowed to stand in elections. Quite the opposite. The more of that sort of rhetoric people in the US, Israel, and the rest of the West engage in, the more the hardliners in the Iranian government are strengthened. This is all for a purpose, however. For Israel (as was said at the recent AIPAC conference) Ahmadinejad is the gift that keeps on giving. The longer he stays in office, the more they believe they will be able to convince people of the need to attack Iran (something that the people of Iran most definitely don't want, human rights abuses of their leaders notwithstanding). The people who are working so hard to whip up negative emotions toward Iran want Ahmadinejad to remain in power, and they are doing everything they possibly can to see that he wins the election. The last thing in the world they want to see is a moderate win the election. This is because they don't really give a crap about human rights in Iran. All they care about is creating a pretext for attacking Iran and destroying it as a regional power. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 11 Jun 09 - 10:50 PM The people of Iran have had some interesting publicized debates and will be voting insofar as the religious authorities let them. Let's see how the election falls out and how the fallout from the election falls out. Carol, I noticed that you backed off of your sources of Jewish origins and defauilted to a simple statement of your version of things. I think one of the main problems in the Mideast as well as in some of the forum threads is a simple refusal to acknowledge Jews as Palestinians. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 12 Jun 09 - 07:40 AM I'm not sure I understand the last comment directed at me. Looks to me like random shooting from the hip though. However, let's dissect the comments previously made about my sources, now that I have a little time to do it... The first comment is meaningless. It says that, first of all, I cannot determine the validity of my sources (this is a non-criticism that is more verbal sleight of hand than an actual argument, because it doesn't actually dispute any specifics or offer counter arguments about those specifics, it just generally smears the whole idea that I could even have any legitimate sources, based on arbitrary criteria that the person making the comment reserves the right to enforce), and it attempts to use this sort of blanket sliming as a way of invalidating every reference I ever supply, now and in the past and the future. I expect that someone who would make such an argument has such an exalted view of their own intellect, they can't even imagine that anyone not like them could possibly see through it. I would inform this person that their intellect is not as superior as they think, because anyone not sharing their world view can see arguments like this one for what it is... an attempt to manipulate peoples' perceptions using verbal sleight of hand. In other words, typical hasbara self-aggrandizing, bullshit. Secondly, it attempts to suggest that there is not any first hand information or a background of study that would allow me to distinguish between bulk and bunk. If we were to follow these criteria every time we attempt to determine which arguments are valid and which are not, we would not ever be able to make any arguments at all, since no-one in the world has the first hand information or background of study to be able to rely entirely on these things. Every argument anyone ever makes on historical subjects relies on the work of others, and relies on making decisions about which other people's work can stand up to the rigors of critical examination. In other words, more typical hasbara self-aggrandizing bullshit. Thirdly, this person's suggesting that since they are not aware of any assertion of a Roman exile of the Jews, that means that no-one in the history of this issue has ever made the assertion of a Roman exile of the Jews. There are two very serious flaws with this line of reasoning. The first is that this argument is incredibly solipsistic (ie: more typical hasbara self-aggrandizing bullshit), and secondly, the person making this argument has failed to specify what they mean by "Roman exile of the Jews". Do they mean Jews exiled from Rome, or do they mean Jews exiled from the holy land by Romans? Then, they try to obfuscate by suggesting that there being historical evidence of Jews in the area of what is now Israel and Palestine somehow proves that the Ashkenazim are the descendents of the people whose suggested by this historical evidence. The point of the work described in the links I provided shows that, while such people did live in the area, 1. they are not the ancestors of the Ashkenazim, and 2. the biblical account of the history of the nature of their society and its size relative to other groups in the area, is false. Not sure what point is being made in reference to the Babylonian exile. Which Ha'aretz article is being criticized by this person? I posted links to two Ha'aretz articles. Then this person attempts to obfuscate by saying that there is genetic research going on, and they even admit that there is no actual credibility to any theories that have so far been articulated based on this research, and tries to use this in a rather bizarre way to try to smear my use of material that is accepted as valid by the majorities of experts on these subjects. (In other words, more typical hasbara self-aggrandizing bullshit.) They also try to smear my arguments by saying that I cite all arguments (a false assertion), that and that this weakens my arguments, and they further try to smear them by calling them 'partisan'. This one is a real gem. I would inform the person making this argument that their attempt to insult my intelligence with this one has backfired: it's an insult to their own intelligence for them to think that this sort of slimy attempt to manipulate the discussion would ever work. There is nothing wrong with any of the sources I've provided, other than the fact that person using these tactics finds it inconvenient that they effectively dismantle this person's arguments. If this person actually had any legitimate counter arguments for any of the specific information presented in my sources, they would provide those arguments. They have not done so - because they haven't got any. (In other words, more typical hasbara self-aggrandizing bullshit.) This person then uses a straw man to try to invalidate my arguments. I have never said that modern Jews are not linked by ancestral habitation to the Mideast (and this person knows it). I have said that Ashkenazim and Sephardim are not linked by ancestral habitation to the Mideast. There is a very big difference between these two things (and this person knows it). And then they try to use this straw man as a springboard for introducing a new subject into the debate: the question of whether or not Israel has a right to defend itself against an antagonistic population which seeks to destroy them. This question is fallacious in several respects. First of all, Israel is not attempting to defend itself against an antagonistic population that is trying to destroy it. It is attempting to establish an ever growing empire in the Middle East, and waging serial wars of aggression as well as covert acts of aggression in service to this agenda. Secondly, under international law and agreements they have signed, they do not have the right to do this, nor do they have the right to make itself unique if doing so entails abridging the rights of the other peoples in the region. I have already addressed the last comment. As I have said several times before, these kinds of hasbara verbal sleight of hand manipulative smears and non-arguments do not work. People can see right through them. Obi-wan was a fictional character. It really is not possible to fool people by using the Jedi trick of telling them lies and expecting those lies to become the listener's inner truth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 12 Jun 09 - 07:52 AM Apologies for the mixed tenses. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Donuel Date: 12 Jun 09 - 02:18 PM I Can't Wait until Cheney gives his speech in Cairo.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: DougR Date: 12 Jun 09 - 05:27 PM For an interesting take on why the Israelis are a bit cool to the speech, read the op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal written by Judea Pearl (yes the father of Daniel Pearl who had his head severed from his body by Islamic extremists). I'd provide a link (though I doubt many of you will read it anyway) but I haven't bothered to become schooled in the process. Very interesting article though. I also could recommend Charles Krauthammer's column in today's edition of the Washington Post, titled, "Obama fails to realize all wrongs aren't equal." DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 14 Jun 09 - 08:11 AM Carol: You went a long way around the bush to beat yourself up. Your assertion without argument that Ashkenazim and Sephardim are not genetically related to Israelites is precisely the kind of thing you argue by linkage, where you link to rather outlandish partisans. They don't know what they're talking about, but they say it anyway. They are not state-of-the-art scientists nor historians, they are fools with theories. But they say it in English, you link to them, and act as if you've made an argument because you have 'sources'. Thus your judgement comes into question. Israel as an independent country has a right to defend itself. That is not linked to anything else. It stands by itself. If you don't believe it you have no problem with me, you have a problem with the concept of nationhood. As to whether or not one of the smallest nations in the Mideast is trying to aggrandize an empire (as opposed to defending its borders) I think your interpretation is severely skewed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 14 Jun 09 - 01:25 PM As usual, Glenn Greenwald pins people like Charles Krauthammer to the wall, responding to the same absurd column: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/12/self_absorption/index.html He is absolutely right. The sheer childishness and bigoted narrowmindedness of the American right wing are astonishing. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 09 - 01:45 PM Ad hominem attacks on my sources are not arguments. I see that once again, the poster attacking my sources has not actually offered any counter arguments to any of the arguments made by the sources I've linked to, they've only attacked the whole idea that my sources could possibly be credible. First of all, we have no reason to accept this person's opinion about the credibility of my sources, and secondly, the lack of any counter arguments is proof that this person is just making stuff up as they go along. If they actually had any legitimate counter arguments, they would have presented them by now. Israel is not defending itself. None of the wars Israel has participated in has been a defensive war except the 1973 war. In every other war, Israel has been on the offensive. In most of the wars Israel has participated in, it has sought to increase the size of its territory. It currently is waging an illegal (under international law) occupation of land that does not belong to it (under international law). Israel has called for and helped to accomplish the destabilization and fragmentation of other countries in the region (and it is continuing to do so) in order to ensure that it would be the only major power in the region. I would say that anyone who tries to argue that Israel is not trying to aggrandize an empire is the one whose interpretation is severely skewed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Riginslinger Date: 14 Jun 09 - 02:14 PM Some news outlets are now blaming the election results in Iran on Obama's speech in Cairo. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 14 Jun 09 - 02:20 PM I think that's hardly fair. Israel may be doing all these things, but (a) it is surrounded; and (b) there is a very strong theme in Arab countries that Israel's existence is illegal, and that they should be wiped off the face of the earth. In traditional wars, that usually means you only have to lose once. I can see the mindset that propels Israel towards "offensive defence" -- again, given the past history (cf. the Holocaust), but given that Israel has over a hundred nuclear weapons, its existence is not seriously threatened. It is the disconnect between its existing power and its psychology (not exactly enhanced by suicide bombers) that has got them into today's situation where they are essentially operating unethically in defence of themselves. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 14 Jun 09 - 02:55 PM Carol: Now Now. I DID answer your posting regarding your sources, which you referred to as "documentation". One of them was a debunking of something that was never asserted, a Roman exile. This has no impact on history in any sense, other than to sow confustion. The other was a book review in HaAretz about one man's theory of Jewish origins. It is you who like to put up the straw man, in fact for you I'll make it a verb, You were 'straw-manning' a rather pointless argument, seeking to de-legitimize Israel's existence by positing that the current Jewish inhabitants of Israel who moved in from Europe were somehow not linked to the ancient Israelites. I refuted your "documentation" (although they remain your (inadequate) sources, of course). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 09 - 03:07 PM No counter arguments have been presented against any of the arguments that have been made in the links I posted. No specific point made in those links has been examined with any credible refutation of those points. If someone wants to dispute a point in an argument, they need to specify which point they are disputing, and they need to present some sort of credible source of information that refutes that point. That has not been done. The only thing that has been offered so far is opinions about the credibility of my sources. That is not an argument, it is a non-argument and nobody is fooled by it. On the subject of Israel defending itself - all of the Arab countries have said they would recognize Israel within its internationally recognized borders, and they have offered this as a proposal to Israel. Israel has refused to even consider this proposal, because Israel wants to hold on to land that it has taken by conquest. This is not self-defense, it is expansionism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 09 - 03:24 PM Another bit of dishonesty I note on the part of the person who is making ad hominem attacks on my sources without actually debating them is the fact that they are only acknowledging two of the sources of documentation I provided, rather than all four of them. For instance, one of the two Haaretz articles I provided links to provides quite a bit of official documentation in support of what Shlomo Sand says in his book. The reviewer's main complaint about Sands' book is that it is suggesting that what he is saying about the history of the Jews is not already common knowledge among academics. This reviewer shows that the academic community has long known what Sands is proposing to present to readers for the first time. And the reviewer provides examples with sources to back up his claims. The other article I posted that this person appears to be trying to pretend I never posted provides a lot of archaeological evidence that comes from reputable Israeli archaeologists. The fact that this person would think people can be fooled by these kinds of tactics is pretty astonishing, but certainly says a lot about their mindset and overall world view (ie: seriously deluded and extremely dishonest). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 14 Jun 09 - 03:46 PM CarolC: You are implicitly admitting that my critique of the two I cited was justified, you can't go back to them with any confidence so you 'spread the manure' so to speak. And you originally referred to them as "documentation" which is maybe how you think of them (talk about deluded!) but they are far from that. I like your tactic of avoiding naming folks. Sort of like McCain going "that one!" I think it will meet with similar success. this person |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 09 - 04:10 PM Nice try. No cigar. I'm not implicitly doing any such thing. More dishonest twisting of my words. No counter arguments have been offered for any of the points made in any of the sources I have provided, and I have been very consistent in pointing this out. But the two articles that the above poster is trying to ignore are important because all of them provide supporting documentation. Ignoring some of the documentation altogether and making ad hominem attacks on the other two as not being supported (because some of the supporting documentation is being ignored) is totally dishonest, and doesn't work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 09 - 04:13 PM By the way, my avoidance of naming people is not a tactic. It's a rule that has been imposed on me by the head of the Mudcat police. It's not a choice that I would make myself, and it does make things a lot more confusing for everyone, but there it is. There's nothing I can do about it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 14 Jun 09 - 04:30 PM My point was not that Israel was right about its possible extinction, it was that there were some grounds -- not realistic -- given the toxicity of the region. The willingness of Arab governments to recognise Israel's existence is worth about as much as Iran's statements about its nuclear plans. I note that Ha'aretz published a poll today that showed that 1 out of 5 of the Jewish population of Israel (Arab Israelis not counted) were worried about a nuclear Iran. Hardly panic in the streets. It's all just to keep eyes off of the illegal settlements (also worth noting that in Netanyahu's speech today he still has nothing to say about the settlements). yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 09 - 04:40 PM I disagree with the idea that the Arab proposal is not credible (if that is what is being suggested). There is no reason to think that. Israel's populace, I'm sure, believes in the idea of existential threats coming from outside sources. The government knows better. Their leaders at various times in Israel's history have said as much. They say that it's necessary to make their people believe that their existence is under threat in order to make them want to do the bidding of the government (of course, they are hardly unique in that regard). They have also, at various times, said that the borders of the Jewish state are the business of the Jews and no one else. The real existential threat, of course, comes from within. The longer Israel holds out on relinquishing the lands it took in 1967, the more likely Israel and occupied Palestine will end up being a single democratic state of all of its people. In other words, the two state solution will be dead, and the one state solution will resolve itself like South Africa. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Bill H //\\ Date: 14 Jun 09 - 07:29 PM I was going to stay out of this morass but, let's face it, there is an outside threat---I believe Syria, Hamas, and Iran are serious. Does Israel have internal problems---sure. All the more reason for Netanyahu to be flexible and for people (all people) respect the fact that Obama is practicing diplomacy. Something that has not been in done in quite a few years--well at least 8. It is also good to recall that Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton did make some progress but much of it torpedoed by Arafat and now his group has lost much credulity with their own people who seem to favor Hamas. Hamas, I believe, we all realize is set on the destruction of Israel---a 2 state solution is not something they want. Should their efforts prevail you can find another rogue state in the are while now we have 2 allies (perhaps 3) there who trust in a democratic governance. As to Carol C. What can I say. It is always the same story and, frankly, how much time is wasted in these diatribes that would be highly paid if she had a contact at Fox or some other openminded netweork or paper. Bill Hahn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 14 Jun 09 - 08:53 PM Fox? Openminded? in which alternative universe? Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Riginslinger Date: 14 Jun 09 - 09:32 PM At least the speech got Ahmadinejad elected, if it didn't do anything else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 09 - 09:43 PM FOX NEWS wouldn't accept me because they are promoting the same exact line on the Middle East as the person who is suggesting that I should work there. However, there are very few people making sure the disenfranchised people in this discussion have an opportunity to be heard. I will continue to work hard to make sure they get a chance, whenever possible. If someone thinks they can silence people who do this by making slimy smears against them like the one immediately following my last post, they are mistaken. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 09 - 09:52 PM And I am including the one against Arafat as well as the one against me. Arafat certainly was not an effective advocate for his people, but it's not because he wasn't willing to make compromises. It was because he was essentially working for the Israeli government, and doing their bidding. However, he was still standing at the negotiating table when Israel walked away from it, so it was Israel that torpedoed the last round of peace talks. The reason the Hamas was elected, however, was because Fatah ran two candidates rather than one, which split the vote three ways. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 15 Jun 09 - 12:53 AM "working for the Israeli government"? Delusion seems to be working both sides of the political street..... Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peace Date: 15 Jun 09 - 01:01 AM "It was because he [Arafat] was essentially working for the Israeli government, and doing their bidding." This gets better and better. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peace Date: 15 Jun 09 - 01:01 AM So, uh, Israel ended up with the $300,000,000 that Arafat stole from the Paslestinians? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 15 Jun 09 - 02:10 AM Israel sure didn't mind that Arafat was taking money from the Palestinians. Arafat agreed to a lot of things that weren't in the Palestinians' interest. Oslo was one of them. And then, when he set up his security apparatus, it wasn't for the purpose of protecting Palestinians. It was for the purpose of policing Palestinians on behalf of the government of Israel... essentially, doing Israel's job for it. If that's not working for the government of Israel, I don't know what is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 15 Jun 09 - 02:12 AM Let's say that the $300,000,000 (if in fact he actually took that much, which I have not seen any credible evidence of) was Arafat's pay for being willing to be corrupt on Israel's behalf. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: Peter T. Date: 15 Jun 09 - 07:33 AM The Palestinians themselves used to call Arafat "the walking catastrophe", but the logic here isn't that great. You might just as well say that Hamas is working for the Israeli government because it is keeping any agreements from happening. Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: CarolC Date: 15 Jun 09 - 08:09 AM Hamas at least is not selling the Palestinians out. And they're not keeping any agreements from happening, either. They have said that if the Palestinian people voted in a referendum to accept a two state solution and to recognize Israel, they, Hamas, would not stand in the way of it. The people who are keeping agreements from happening are the ones who are trying to get the Palestinians to agree to things that they would not agree to themselves if they were in the Palestinians' shoes (that would be the governments of Israel and the US). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 15 Jun 09 - 09:51 AM Hamas was in fact set up with backing from Israel as a way of undermining the effectiveness of Fatah. It proved rather more effective at that than may have been anticipated. "Working for" is sound bite language. However it appears fair to say that for those within the Israeli government who are opposed to any settlement that could be accepted by most Palestinians, Hamas is effectively a partner. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Obama's astonishing speech in Cairo From: robomatic Date: 18 Jun 09 - 05:23 PM Hamas was in fact set up with backing from Israel as a way of undermining the effectiveness of Fatah. It proved rather more effective at that than may have been anticipated. That's crazytalk! I believe in letting a thousand voices be heard, not a thousand conspiracy theories. I believe that the other thing Hamas had going for it was it was perceived, (rightly or wrongly I do not know) as being less corrupt than Fatah. |
