Obama stoer naar Israel, lief voor Moslimleiders

quote:

Cairo University preps for Obama's big speech to the Muslim world

By Liam Stack

CAIRO – Cairo University is prepping for its close-up.

Water the grass? Check.

Paint the broken concrete curb a shiny new black? Check.

Polish the giant dome? Check.

More police check points? Check.

On Thursday, President Barack Obama will take the stage at Cairo University to deliver a long-awaited address to the Muslim world in which he is will attempt to smooth relations after years of tension.

There are high hopes in the Arab world, in particular, that the American leader will unveil a new Palestinian-Israeli peace proposal. Some Arab leaders – such as Jordan’s King Abdullah II – see this US administration as offering a new window of opportunity.

Initially, both the US and the Egyptian government had planned for Mr. Obama to speak at Al Azhar, a 1,000-year-old mosque and university that claims to be the world’s oldest. Thousands of students come here from around the Muslim world to attend Al Azhar.

But, reportedly for security reasons, a site on the other side of the Nile was chosen: Cairo University.

The university is one of the oldest secular institutions of higher learning in the Arab world. With 200,000 students, it is also the largest university in Egypt. And its often the site of pro-democracy demonstrations.

“I think it’s a great choice,” says Abeer Soliman, a feminist blogger and former newspaper columnist, who is also a Cairo University alumna. “It is a secular place where you go to learn and study science, and he is a secular guy.”

At first, Cairo University wasn’t considered a viable option because its students are in the midst of final exams. But to the consternation of some, President Obama’s historic address to the Islamic world has pulled rank on the academic calendar: Exams have been postponed.

“This will screw up our whole work schedule for days,” says Leila Soueif, a math professor who called the security preparations “unforgivably annoying.”

News of the decision leaked to Egypt’s largest independent Arabic-language daily, Al Masry Al Youm, long before an official announcement was made.

By last week, an army of workmen and security agents had been deployed to turn it into a campus fit – and secure – for a president.

Laborers in plastic sandals climbed the sides of the giant dome that sits atop the university administration building, polishing it with rags and buckets of soapy water. Far beneath them, plainclothes police officers stalked the grounds and soldiers in white summer uniforms manned the gates, meticulously checking IDs as clusters of irritated students waited their turn.

No one seems to have told them, though, that Obama’s visit here was supposed to stay a secret.

“You here Obama visit?” asks one soldier, in broken English, looking up from a handful of student IDs.

“Ah, yes, sir.” But when I identify myself as a reporter, I am quickly escorted off campus.

Bron

quote:

Obama's Outreach to Muslim World Carries High Political Stakes

President Obama makes the most important trip of his fledgling presidency this week, a face-to-face encounter with the Muslim world, culminating with a long-promised speech on U.S. relations with the Muslims.

President Obama backed Iran's claim that it has a right to nuclear energy -- but only if the country proves by the end of the year that its aspirations are peaceful.

Obama told the BBC in an interview broadcast Tuesday that he believes "Iran has legitimate energy concerns, legitimate aspirations," adding that the international community also "has a very real interest" in preventing a nuclear arms race.

The interview comes on the heels of Obama's most important trip of his fledgling presidency, a face-to-face encounter with the Muslim world. Obama's five-day pilgrimage to Egypt this week culminates with a long-promised speech on U.S. relations with the Muslim world.

With that, some speculation is swirling that the U.S. effort to reach Muslims is accompanied by its distancing itself from Israel, which is under pressure by the Obama administration to freeze its settlements in the West Bank.

Obama's speech aims to help repair a strained relationship between the United States and the Muslim world that is critical to pressuring Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program, which the international community fears is a cover for building a nuclear bomb.

The Bush administration had insisted that Iran scrap enrichment before diplomatic talks could begin. But Iran repeatedly rejected the demand and expanded its enrichment activities, triggering three sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions.

Obama will deliver the speech at Cairo University, that White House officials call a bastion of secular Muslim thinking that reflects the side of Islam that the U.S. is appealing to in its case for a strategic partnership.

"Egypt is not only a strategic ally of the United States, but it, like the rest of the Muslim world, is a young country which obviously presents the United States with a terrific opportunity to deepen this cooperation that has really developed over the course of the last several decades, but to deepen that and to press it forward here into the future," Denis McDonough, deputy national security advisor said.

"So the message the president wants to send is not different, frankly, than the one he's been sending since he was inaugurated, namely that we believe that this is an opportunity for us in the United States, who frankly, have arrived at a place here based on many of the advances that come out of the Muslim world, be it science out of Baghdad, be it math and technology out of Al-Andalus (University) or otherwise," he continued.

In his efforts to engage the Muslim world, Obama said during his inaugural speech that the United States "will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist. He also declared earlier this spring in Turkey that the United States "is not and never will be at war with Islam."

Obama has granted interviews to Arabic-language networks, telephoned friendly Arab leaders and sent special envoy George J. Mitchell to the Middle East on a "listening tour."

Obama has rejected the notion that efforts to engage the Arab world comes at the sacrifice of Israel, telling National Public Radio that the U.S. must "retain a constant belief in the possibilities of negotiations that will lead to peace."

"And that's going to require, from my view, a two-state solution that is going to require that each side -- the Israelis and Palestinians -- meet their obligations," he said.

Obama explained those obligations include Israelis freezing settlements and Palestinians continuing to make security gains and ending incitement that worries Israel.

"So the key is to just believe that the process can move forward and that all sides are going to have to give," he added. "And it's not going to be an easy path, but one that I think we can achieve."

But foreign policy experts say achieving a successful peace plan faces long odds, particularly considering that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already rejected Obama's call to freeze settlements, setting up a potential confrontation.

Bron

quote:

Arab, Muslim Americans Have High Hopes for Obama's Cairo Speech

By Kane Farabaugh
Dearborn, Michigan

U.S. President Barack Obama is to deliver a long awaited speech to the world's Muslims from Egypt on June 4. The speech is widely seen as an opportunity for President Obama to set a new course in U.S. foreign policy. Arab and Muslim Americans around the United States will be watching closely to understand if Mr. Obama plans to bring a permanent and lasting peace to the Middle East.

Michigan has largest US Arab community

The southeastern part of the midwestern state of Michigan, with 300,000 Arab Americans, is home to one the largest Muslim communities in the United States. In Dearborn, a suburb of Detroit, one-third of the population is Arab American, many of them are Muslim.

Fay Saad of the Arab American National Museum says "We call it Little Beirut. There are of course other ethnic backgrounds, like Iraqis, Palestinians, and Yemenis. It's a very close knit community. We all come together when times are tough, and we all come together when times are good."

2006 was tough for Saad. An Israeli bomb destroyed a family home in Beirut, killing her grandmother and aunt.

Sense of fairness

Saad hopes President Obama will restore what she considers a sense of fairness in dealing with the Palestinians and with Lebanon.

"Our American bombs killed my grandmother. They were American made bombs," she said. "And if America continues to give our bombs and our ammunition to Israel to continue demolishing Arab countries, it's just not fair."

Anan Ameri, a Palestinian-American, and director of the museum, hopes President Obama's speech is a first step in establishing permanent peace between "Israel and Palestine" - her word for the Palestinian territories.

"This is a problem that has been in existence for a very long time, and it's not going to be solved overnight," Ameri said. "But at least the intentions or the messages we are getting is that the Middle East is an important issue and it should be resolved fairly, and that Palestinians should have a fair resolution to their problems."

Local newspaper talks about speech

The Arab American community in Dearborn has its own newspaper. Many recent articles have dealt with Mr. Obama's upcoming speech.

Osama Siblani is the publisher. He says the president should look within the United States for help in launching a peace initiative.

"I think he has two of the biggest assets actually right within his reach," Siblani said. "One of them is President Jimmy Carter, and the other is Arab Americans."

Great expectations

Some of those Arab Americans live in California.

Khaled Soliman works for the city of Los Angeles. He has great expectations for President Obama's speech.

"What I expect from him in Cairo, that he will deliver a message of hope and also show that the United States is sincere in dealing with the Muslim world and really change the image of the last eight years," Soliman said. "And of course, whatever he says, it should be followed by action."

On the east coast of the United States, Malika Rushdan says one speech won't determine whether or not President Obama can improve relations with Muslims.

"I wouldn't want to be in his position because he has a heavy, heavy load to bear and a long road to travel, I think, as far as healing US-Muslim relations throughout the world, and thusfar, I think the verdict is still out," Rushdan said.

Wait and see

The prospects for Arab-Israeli peace efforts, and therefore improved relations with Muslims, will become clearer a few months after the speech, says University of Michigan Professor and author Juan Cole.

"There will be new Palestinian elections in January, set them up right, and you get a government you might be able to negotiate with," Cole said. "So these are challenges for Obama, but they are not insuperable challenges."

Many in the Arab and Muslim American community relate to Mr. Obama's personal narrative as the son of an African Muslim who also lived for a time in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world.

But many also question whether he can use his background and international goodwill to grapple with the foreign policy challenges posed by the Middle East.

Bron

quote:

Indonesia a better choice for Obama's speech to Muslim world: Analyst

Lilian Budianto , The Jakarta Post

Indonesia would be a better choice than Egypt for US President Barak Obama to deliver his speech to the Muslim world, says an analyst.

Obama is scheduled to deliver a major foreign policy speech in Egypt to reach out to Muslims worldwide on Thursday in a movement aimed at mending hostile ties with its Arab adversaries.

“It is true that Indonesia would be more appropriate for Obama’s major speech because it is a democracy with a moderate Muslim majority,” Azyumardi Azra, a history professor at the State Islamic University of Syarif Hidayatullah, said.

“However, Obama's decision might rest on the fact that Egypt is one of the most important American allies in the Middle East, second only to Israel. Obama hopes that Egypt will fully support the US peace plan between Palestine and Israel,” he said.

Bron

Je hoort er thans niet zoveel over, maar dit is over minder dan 48 uur wereldnieuws.
Ik ben benieuwd. Waar zal hij het volgens jullie over hebben en zal hij Israël hard aanpakken?

Zolang de CIA/Mossad hem maar niets aandoet en de schuld aan de moslims geeft, ben ik tevreden.

Ik ben benieuwd.

Ich bin ein Berliner Muslim.

samenvatting?

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 juni 2009 21:52 schreef DirkZz het volgende:
samenvatting?

Obama gaat de moslimwereld toespreken

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 juni 2009 21:53 schreef Tizitl het volgende:

[..]

Obama gaat de moslimwereld toespreken

Heel goed, er is heel wat schade te herstellen na 8 jaar Bush.

http://www.americanrhetor(...)atimeforchoosing.htm

Ik hoop zo'n speech

Egypte.. is dat niet dat land waar die wrede dictator al jaren zijn politieke tegenstanders opruimt en als er dan verzet is gelijk roept dat het terrorisme is?

Al-Qaeda reageert op Obama's bezoek.

quote:

Zawahiri To Obama: "You Are Not Welcome in Egypt"

Al Qaeda No. 2, Ayman Zawahiri said in a new audiotape today that President Obama is not welcome in Egypt. Commenting on Obama's upcoming visit to Cairo, Zawahiri said that President Obama's message to the Muslim World has already been delivered.

"Obama's message to the Muslim World was delivered when he visited the Wailing wall, with the Jewish skullcap on his head…when he performed the Jewish prayers despite claiming that he is Christian," Zawahiri said, reminding his audience of Obama's pledge before the AIPAC conference to make Jerusalem the undivided capital of Israel.

The al Qaeda deputy chief accused Obama of approving the "Zionist aggression on Gaza," of sending more troops to Afghanistan and continuing to bomb tribal areas of Pakistan, and of leading the "brutal campaign" against Muslims in the Swat valley. He said the Obama administration's message to the Muslim world can be seen in the continued use of secret prisons and the breach of the Geneva conventions regarding terror detainees.

"Obama's bloodied messages have reached and are still reaching Muslims, and they shall not be masked by the PR campaigns, the theatrical visits and the courteous words," Zawahiri said.

"As for his choice of Turkey and Egypt to be the places from which to address the Muslim world as he claims, well, this choice holds another indication that simply says that the kind of Muslims the Crusader Americans would be pleased with are those who abandon Islam and embrace secularism, those who acknowledge Israel, conclude security agreements with it, and take part in its military drills."

President Obama had visited Ankara last April and delivered a speech before the Turkish Parliament where he pledged to strengthen ties with the Muslim world.

Zawahiri directed part of his criticism at the Egyptian regime, accusing it of further tightening the blockade imposed on Palestinians in Gaza, and accusing Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak of grooming his elder son, Jamal, to succeed him as President," in order to maintain the corruption and the reliance on America, the Crusaders and the Jews."

Zawahiri, who previously called President Obama "a house negro" upon his election in December, said that only the corrupt "butchers and tyrants" of Egypt would welcome President Obama there, but not the sincere honest Egyptians. "The honorable people of Egypt despise Obama and consider him an international criminal, and an arriviste politician who serves the Zionist cause in order to get promoted to the highest levels of government."

He concluded his message by urging Egyptians not to welcome the US President in Egypt. "O’ free and honorable people of Egypt, O’ pious and Mujahids of Egypt, stand in one rank in the face of this criminal who came to try and obtain by ruse, what he failed to obtain in the battlefield, especially after the Mujahideens have foiled the American plots in Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia."

Zawahiri’s statement runs over nearly 12 minutes, and is entitled: "Egypt’s Slayers and the Agents of America Welcome Obama."

Bron

quote:

Op woensdag 3 juni 2009 08:56 schreef Chadi het volgende:
Egypte.. is dat niet dat land waar die wrede dictator al jaren zijn politieke tegenstanders opruimt en als er dan verzet is gelijk roept dat het terrorisme is?

eh ?? JA

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 juni 2009 21:51 schreef FloydP het volgende:
Ich bin ein Berliner Muslim.

Obama maakt nogal een hoop heise om de "toenadering tot de islamitische wereld" en zijn "respect", blahblah. De vraag die bij mij dan blijft is, wat wil je bereiken? Wil je dat de islam water bij de wijn doet? Ik vrees dat Obama slechts van één kant compromissen wil en dat zal voor geen meter opschieten. Ik blijf dus vol scepsis, en zijn toespraak zal ik zeker geïnteresseerd tot me nemen.

Al-Zawahiri heeft toch wel gelijk over Egypte en Turkije. Dat zijn nou niet echt landen waarvan je kunt zeggen dat ze de hele islamitische wereld respresenteren. Denk aan Turkije dat officieël een seculier land is en waar vrouwen geen hoofddoek mogen dragen op openbare plekken. En Egypte waar de islamitische politieke partijen worden onderdrukt. Maar het zijn ook twee landen waar de islamisten de sharia zouden invoeren wanneer ze de kans krijgen. En daar zal Obama vast niet blij mee zijn.

Dat is hypocriet van Obama en de moslimmassa's zien dat. Van echte toenadering is geen sprake zolang Obama de extremisten die geen geweld gebruiken niet accepteert (net zoals Israël waar een extremistische partij in de regering is maar dat wordt wel getolereerd), en de VS seculiere dictatoriale regimes blijven steunen zoals het misdadige Egyptische regime ten koste van de moslims. ("liever Mubarak ipv de Moslimbroederschap")

Ben benieuwd wanneer Tariq Ramadan (van Egyptische komaf) de USA weer in mag. Op die Universiteit waar Obama preekt zal daar vast wel gevraagd worden.

*knip*

[ Bericht 95% gewijzigd door Frutsel op 03-06-2009 13:27:26 (niet doen aub) ]

quote:

In recent days, the president has been getting tough on Israel, pushing a two-state solution in meetings with a resistant Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Nou, als dat al 'getting tough' is.
Matig reltopic weer, KK.

quote:

Op woensdag 3 juni 2009 13:12 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

Agree
Moslimleiders moet je niet gelijk afschieten, zorgt alleen maar voor meer problemen!

[ Bericht 19% gewijzigd door Frutsel op 03-06-2009 13:28:15 ]

Onze 'vriend' El Zawahiri was vanochtend nog ff in het nieuws.
"Obama ur not welcome in Egypt! Understand! NOT WELCOME"

quote:

Op woensdag 3 juni 2009 13:17 schreef Klopkoek het volgende:

[..]

Je moet de andere berichten eens lezen.

Was hij maar zo flink naar Saudi Arabië en die andere mongoloide autoritaire staten.

Nogmaals: ik heb niks met islambashers, niks met Wilders en niks met de Clash of Civilizationsgedachte maar je moet niet buigen voor dictators.

En als je echt respect wil tonen voor de Islam dan doe je dat beter op een andere manier.

Ik heb hem eigenlijk alleen nog in letterlijke zin een buiging zien maken voor een dictator. In figuurlijke zien heb ik nog weinig consessies zien doen. Bovendien is het een heel mooi idealistisch idee om consequent dictators te boycotten, te dreigen, etcetera, maar je kunt je afvragen of dat vanuit een pragmatisch oogpunt wel zo effectief is.

Waarom doet iedereen direct zo spastisch als Obama een handreiking doet naar moslimlanden.

[NWS FB] Feedback met SCH als Meki

[ Bericht 38% gewijzigd door paddy op 03-06-2009 14:35:07 ]

quote:

Op woensdag 3 juni 2009 13:17 schreef Klopkoek het volgende:

[..]

Je moet de andere berichten eens lezen.

Was hij maar zo flink naar Saudi Arabië en die andere mongoloide autoritaire staten.

Nogmaals: ik heb niks met islambashers, niks met Wilders en niks met de Clash of Civilizationsgedachte maar je moet niet buigen voor dictators.

En als je echt respect wil tonen voor de Islam dan doe je dat beter op een andere manier.

Te laat, te laat, heeft hij al gedaan:



Niet erg sterk idd, maargoed hij is duidelijk binnenlands een stuk sterker dan in buitenlandse politiek.

Hier ben ik het mee eens, Iran kan zijn nucleaire faciliteiten uitbouwen terwijl dat land toch echt een gevaar kan gaan vormen voor de regio. Dat soort landen moet je niet met fluwelen handschoentjes gaan aanpakken.

Stelt toch allemaal niet zo veel voor?

Obama is het wat vriendelijkere gezicht van de US.

Ondertussen steunt de VS Israel nog steeds door dik en dus, zowel militair als economisch.

Obama zal zeuren bij netanyahu of dat'ie please met fuckin suger on top zijn oplossing accepteert totdat'ie blauw aanloopt in z'n gezicht, maar netanyahu trekt begrijpelijkerwijs zijn eigen plan.

En veranderen doet er natuurlijk niets.

Wat woorden en een glimlach betekenen nog niet een daadwerkelijke verandering. Trap toch niet zo in de media-shows mensen

Ik begrijp het niet. Er is tot nu toe nooit pressie geweest richting Isreal terwijl men altijd op voet van oorlog leeft met de Arabische landen. Nu vraagt met of Israel zich eens in godsnaam aan afspraken wil gaan houden en is men niet meer op voet van oorlog leeft met de Arabieren en vind je het te soft naar de Arabische landen? Ik zeg dat dat aardig in de buurt komt van een gelijkwaardige behandeling. Niets mis mee denk ik. Israel heeft tot op de dag van vandaag bewezen dat het gruwelheden niet uit de weg bij het uitvoeren van zijn politieke agenda. Maakt dan alleen het feit dat dit een volksvertegenwoordiging is, zo'n verschil?

quote:

Bin Laden tape
Al-Qaida-leider Osama bin Laden heeft in een geluidsopname kritiek geuit op president Obama. Op het bandje, dat te horen was op de Arabische zender al-Jazeera, zegt Bin Laden dat de Amerikaanse president "wraak en haat" zaait onder moslims.

Bin Laden veroordeelt het Amerikaanse beleid in Pakistan, waar een offensief tegen militante moslims aan de gang is. Daardoor zouden veel mensen op de vlucht zijn.

Vredesplan
De boodschap valt samen met president Obama's eerste reis door de Arabische wereld. In Saudi-Arabië sprak hij vanmiddag met koning Abdullah. Hij reist later door naar Egypte.

In Caïro houdt hij een toespraak waarin hij ingaat op Amerika's relatie met de islamitische wereld. Mogelijk spreekt hij ook over een vredesplan voor het Israëlisch-Palestijnse conflict.

Bin Laden waarschuwt moslims niet in Obama's charme-offensief te trappen. Ook zijn tweede man, Ayman al-Zawahri, heeft al van te voren kritiek gegeven op het bezoek van Obama.

'Bloederige booschap'
"PR campagnes, zinloze bezoeken en mooie woorden veranderen niets aan de bloederige boodschap die het Amerikaanse leger in Irak en Afghanistan achterlaat," zei Al-Zawahri.

Hij noemt de Egyptische diplomaten die Obama ontvangen "slaven". Hij roept de Egyptische bevolking op om niet naar "crimineel" Obama te luisteren.

Duitsland en Frankrijk
Later deze week gaat Obama ook naar Europa. In Duitsland bezoekt hij het voormalige concentratiekamp Buchenwald. Zaterdag woont hij in Normandië de 65e herdenking van D-Day bij.

Bin Laden heeft ook van zich laten horen:

quote:

Bin Laden kritiseert Obama op videotape

AMSTERDAM - Osama bin Laden zegt dat de Amerikanen zich moeten voorbereiden op de consequenties van de politiek van het Witte Huis. Op een nieuwe geluidsband bekritiseert hij de politiek van de Amerikaanse president Barack Obama en zijn voorganger George W. Bush, zo meldde Arabische televisiezender Al Jazeera woensdag.

‘Obama en Bush hebben het zaad geplant dat de haat doet groeien en de lust voor wraak op Amerika doet toenemen’, aldus de Al Qaidaleider.

Obama, wiens vader moslim was, brengt juist een bezoek aan het Midden-Oosten om de kloof tussen de Verenigde Staten en de moslimwereld te overbruggen. Het imago van de VS is door de houding van Bush en door de oorlogen in Irak en Afghanistan slecht.

De Amerikaanse president is woensdagmiddag aangekomen in Saoedi-Arabië, zijn eerste stop op een rondreis door het Midden Oosten. In Egypte zal hij donderdag een toespraak voor de moslimwereld houden.

Bron

quote:

Bin Laden waarschuwt tegen Obama

Al-Qaida-leider Osama bin Laden heeft in een geluidsopname kritiek geuit op president Obama. Op het bandje, te horen op de Arabische zender al-Jazeera, zegt Bin Laden dat de Amerikaanse president " wraak en haat" zaait onder moslims.

Bin Laden veroordeelt het Amerikaanse beleid in Pakistan, waar een offensief tegen militante moslims aan de gang is waardoor veel mensen op de vlucht zijn.

De boodschap valt samen met president Obama's eerste reis door de Arabische wereld. Morgen houdt hij in Egypte een toespraak tot de moslimwereld. Bin Laden waarschuwt moslims niet in Obama's charme-offensief te trappen.

Bron

quote:

Op woensdag 3 juni 2009 13:16 schreef Klopkoek het volgende:
Die moslimleiders zijn grotere mensenrechtenschenders dan de Israelische elite en dat wil wat zeggen.

Het is toch van de zotte zo poeslief te doen voor die dictators maar wel stoere praat verkondigen over Israel...

Betekent het dan dat de Israëlische elite in jouw ogen minder dictatoriaal is dan de rest van het Midden-Oosten?

quote:

Op woensdag 3 juni 2009 13:09 schreef Klopkoek het volgende:
Gevaarlijke gek is deze man.

Tsja, ik ben het wel een beetje met je eens, maar is Obama daarom gelijk een gevaarlijke gek? Wat dat betreft zijn alle Amerikaanse presidenten gevaarlijke gekken.

Het is inderdaad raar dat Obama minder lief doet tegen het democratische Israël en meer lief tegen de dictatoriale regimes van het Midden Oosten.

Moslimleiders?

Mubarak zal bukken voor zijn meester uit Washington. Speech of geen speech. Alleen ditmaal is zijn meester niet blank, maar lichtgetint.

Verkeerde kloon KK?

Beste koek, waar haal jij het vandaan dat hij Moslimleiders gaat toespreken. Er wordt duidelijk over de bevolking gesproken. Wat de leiders betreft staan de zaken er heel duidelijk voor en zal hij ze echt niet de hemel in prijzen, of te kritisch zijn in deze toespraak. De relaties tussen Amerika en deze regimes zijn heel duidelijk hoor.

quote:

Op woensdag 3 juni 2009 19:39 schreef Alulu het volgende:
Beste koek, waar haal jij het vandaan dat hij Moslimleiders gaat toespreken. Er wordt duidelijk over de bevolking gesproken. Wat de leiders betreft staan de zaken er heel duidelijk voor en zal hij ze echt niet de hemel in prijzen, of te kritisch zijn in deze toespraak. De relaties tussen Amerika en deze regimes zijn heel duidelijk hoor.

Moslimleiders? Je neemt de term toch niet over he?

Jawel, om in zijn woorden te spreken en misverstanden te voorkomen
Ik twijfelde wel even om leider niet tussen haakjes te zetten overigens.

Ik weet niet wat hij gerookt heeft maar dit is simpelweg bizar:

quote:

"And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. And so there's got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples."

http://blogs.telegraph.co(...)untries_in_the_world

quote:

Op woensdag 3 juni 2009 20:03 schreef AlexanderDeGrote het volgende:
Ik weet niet wat hij gerookt heeft maar dit is simpelweg bizar:
[..]

http://blogs.telegraph.co(...)untries_in_the_world

edit: oh hij doelt wel op populatie Wat een nonsens.

De toespraak van Obama begint nu.....

Waarom heeft Fok! niet zoiets??? http://twitterfall.com/?trend=%23cairospeech!%23494234&trend=%23preztrip!%23494234

Volgens twitter loopt hillary rond met een hoofddoekje???

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 11:10 schreef buachaille het volgende:
Volgens twitter loopt hillary rond met een hoofddoekje???

En zo hoort het ook, de oneervolle snol.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 11:19 schreef wikwakka2 het volgende:

En zo hoort het ook, de oneervolle snol.

Dat is waar, heeft dat mens dan totaal geen trots door 2e viool te gaan spelen voor obama??

quote:

cbellantoni
2 minutes ago

cbellantoni We've received embargoed text of Obama's #cairospeech reading through now. Interesting stuff. #preztrip

het lijkt een explosief mengsel te worden...

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 11:01 schreef buachaille het volgende:
De toespraak van Obama begint nu.....

Shit.. heb ik het gemist

p.s, wat is er met mijn topic gebeurd? Mijn topictitel is ook veranderd.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 11:42 schreef TimoerLenk het volgende:
Shit.. heb ik het gemist

p.s, wat is er met mijn topic gebeurd? Mijn topictitel is ook veranderd.

Nou niet helemaal, Obama likt eerst nog wat rond voordat hij echt begint: http://www.youtube.com/whitehouse

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 11:48 schreef buachaille het volgende:

[..]

Nou niet helemaal, Obama likt eerst nog wat rond voordat hij echt begint: http://www.youtube.com/whitehouse

Lol... Barack Obama's speech to Muslim nations will be broadcast live in USA at 6:30 AM Eastern Standard Time.

Dus als het goed is, over een half uurtje.

12:10 PM om exact te zijn, over 8 minuten dus.

Deze toespraak zou wel eens de belangrijkste toespraak van Obama kunnen zijn. Hij kan de USA voor jaren lang de stront in helpen.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 11:42 schreef TimoerLenk het volgende:

[..]

Shit.. heb ik het gemist

p.s, wat is er met mijn topic gebeurd? Mijn topictitel is ook veranderd.

De topics zijn gemerged.

Speech begint

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 12:11 schreef Py het volgende:
Speech begint

Shit, geluid doet het niet...

we must say openly to each other the things we hold in our hearts

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 12:16 schreef buachaille het volgende:
Shit, geluid doet het niet...

Er werd iets positiefs over de islam gezegd.. CNN censuur

Remarks of President Barack Obama

A New Beginning

Cairo, Egypt

June 4, 2009



I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum.



We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world - tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.



Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.



So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.



I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.



I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do - to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.



Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.



As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like Al-Azhar University - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.



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.



So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.



But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words - within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."



Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.



Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.



So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations - to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.



Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all.



For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings.



This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared.



That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together.



The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms.



In Ankara, I made clear that America is not - and never will be - at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people.



The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.



Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case.



That's why we're partnering with a coalition of forty-six countries. And despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths - more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism - it is an important part of promoting peace.



We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon.



Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be."



Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future - and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq's sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq's democratically-elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron.



And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.



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.



The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.



America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.



Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction - or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews - is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.



On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.



For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers - for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought 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.



That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them - and all of us - to live up to our responsibilities.



Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign 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.



Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist.



At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.



Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.



Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.



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



Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.



The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.



This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.



It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.



I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.



The fourth issue that I will address is democracy.



I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.



That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.



There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments - provided they govern with respect for all their people.



This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.



The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom.



Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.



Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one's own faith by the rejection of another's. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld - whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.



Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.



Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.



Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's Interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action - whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster.



The sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights.



I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.



Now let me be clear: issues of women's equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.



Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity - men and women - to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.



Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity.



I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations - including my own - this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities - those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith.



But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.



This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement.



On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in on-line learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo.



On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world.



On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health.



All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life.



The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek - a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.



I know there are many - Muslim and non-Muslim - who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort - that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country - you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.



All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort - a sustained effort - to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.



It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples - a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today.



We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.



The Holy Koran tells us, "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another."



The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace."



The Holy Bible tells us, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."



The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you.

Wat een ongelooflijk voorspelbaar zeikverhaal. Obama zeikt over de rug van hindoes, boedhisten etc. alleen om zijn pro-islam verhaal de wereld in te sturen. De USA is fucked met zo'n idioot in het Witte Huis.

waar heb je dat vandaan, die speech? Handig :-)

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 12:27 schreef Apache4U het volgende:
waar heb je dat vandaan, die speech? Handig :-)

Goeie uitvinding, dat getwitter

quote:

That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.

wtf????

quote:

They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation.

Wat een idioot, er wordt geen fuck bezet gehouden. Obama:

Niet een heel sterke speech, wat hij zegt over de West Bank, dat alle settlements moeten stoppen is niet waar te maken, heeft de Israelis niet onder controle denk ik.

Verder iedereen lief doen tegen elkaar en flink wat geslijm en symboolcadeautjes.

[ Bericht 13% gewijzigd door AlexanderDeGrote op 04-06-2009 13:05:38 ]

Ik vind het anders wel een goeie speech

Ik vind het ook een erg goede speech. Dit zag ik zijn voorganger niet doen.
Link is trouwens : http://bit.ly/12Xazf (pdf)

Wat grappig, al die rechts Christelijke conservatievo's die beginnen te janken zodra er een keer iemand liefde en verdaagzaamheid predikt ipv bommen en granaten. Maar goed, 2000 jaar geleden hebben ze zo iemand ook al een keer vermoord natuurlijk. .

Goeie speech.

Mooie speech. Natuurlijk vooral symbolisch, maar wel de juiste symboliek. Eindelijk moreel leiderschap van een Amerikaanse president.

Goeie speech, het was ook niet anti-Joods aangezien hij het ook over de holocaust had.
De goeden onder ons moeten samenwerken, en we moeten de haatzaaiers isoleren, zoals 1 persoon in dit topic die ik niet bij naam zal noemen.

Waarom staat er in de topiclist dat KlopKoek de TS is en als ik het topic zelf bekijk blijkt dat TimoerLenk te zijn?

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:09 schreef FloydP het volgende:
Goeie speech, het was ook niet anti-Joods aangezien hij het ook over de holocaust had.
De goeden onder ons moeten samenwerken, en we moeten de haatzaaiers isoleren, zoals 1 persoon in dit topic die ik niet bij naam zal noemen.

Nou je mag gerust man en paard noemen. Even voor jou informatie, er is een wezelijk verschil tussen een dode jood en een levende....

http://www.hetvrijevolk.com/?pagina=2678&titel=Petje_af_voor_dode_joden

Goede speech. Op bepaalde punten liet hij Moslims ook naar zichzelf in de spiegel kijken wat betreft religieuse vrijheden bijv. Ik denk dat het wel belangrijk was om zo direct te spreken en bepaalde vooroordelen en "standaardgezeik" onder bepaalde Moslims weg te nemen zoals "Amerika is in oorlog met Islam". In veel zaken klonk hij erg realistisch en met een blik op de toekomst. Hoewel Israel-Palestina probleem niet veel zal verbeteren en gewoon veel te ingewikkeld in elkaar zit om voorlopig echte verbeteringen te signaleren (Hamas zal geen geweld afzweren, Israel wil delen niet meer afstaan en nederzettingspolitiek niet stoppen in bep. gebieden etc)

Als hij echt populair wil wordne moet hij korte metten maken met die dictators.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 12:24 schreef buachaille het volgende:
Wat een ongelooflijk voorspelbaar zeikverhaal. Obama zeikt over de rug van hindoes, boedhisten etc. alleen om zijn pro-islam verhaal de wereld in te sturen. De USA is fucked met zo'n idioot in het Witte Huis.

He Bart-Jan Spruyt, houd toch eens op met je conservatieve kletskoek

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:23 schreef Chadi het volgende:
Moet Obama ook gelijk afzweren dat ie de niet gekozen leiders in moslim landen niet erkent en ze dwingt af te treden. Doet hij dat dan is ie pas populair .. aangezien hij het niet gaat doen omdat de VS dan geen druppel olie krijgt moeten we zijn woorden net als die van de rest van de gillers over mensen rechten etc etc scharen onder de noemer hypocriet!

Iets te kort door de bocht denk ik en onrealistisch. Maar zijn boodschap wat betreft democratie en dat de government een resultaat moet zijn van de "will" of the people is heel duidelijk volgens mij voor een ieder die dat begrijpt. En daar valt Mubarak absoluut niet onder, dat weet hij en alle Egyptenaren. Alleen hij kan dat niet publiekelijk zeggen ("Mubarak, je moet openlijke verkiezingen houden en bent niet de rechtmatige president") zoals er veel meer zaken door politici nooit publiekelijk gezegd kunnen worden.
Hij was heeel duidelijk over democratie en welke taak een overheid heeft, op meerdere vlakken, naar eigen bevolking en rechtmatigheid ervan.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:23 schreef Chadi het volgende:
Als hij echt populair wil wordne moet hij korte metten maken met die dictators.

Hoe dan????
Afzetten? Dan is de hele wereld weer boos.
Die dictators staan synoniem voor die corrupte samenlevingen waar het een f*ckin jungle is en iedereen voor zichzelf werkt. Dus de bevolking moet zelf OOK veranderen qua gedrag en mentaliteit en dat zal tijd kosten. Werkt twee kanten op namelijk. Als een Mubarak weggaat komt er een andere dodo die alle macht opeist en precies zelfde doet. Ik snap wat je bedoelt overigens maar het is niet realistisch.

Goede speech.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 12:35 schreef buachaille het volgende:

[..]

Goeie uitvinding, dat getwitter
[..]

wtf????

Schandalig staaltje dhimmitude inderdaad, geven aan liefdadigheid makkelijker maken.

Het is een wat voorspelbare, voornamelijk symbolische speech natuurlijk. Het is een stuk interessanter om te zien welk beleid en welke resultaten voortvloeien uit dit soort woorden.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:07 schreef Jarno het volgende:
Wat grappig, al die rechts Christelijke conservatievo's die beginnen te janken zodra er een keer iemand liefde en verdaagzaamheid predikt ipv bommen en granaten. Maar goed, 2000 jaar geleden hebben ze zo iemand ook al een keer vermoord natuurlijk. .

Goeie speech.

Ik ben geen rechts-conservatieve persoon, meer een op gelijkheid gerichte atheist a la 1789, 1848 en 1917. Obama's geslijm naar religies staat me gewoon niet aan, net als zijn irritante gewoonte om reele tegenstellingen te erkennen in speeches en vervolgens er niet op een praktische manier op in te gaan. Het is pure symboolpolitiek en de grenzen daarvan zullen binnenkort duidelijk worden als Israel niet meewerkt aan deze voor hun vrij negatieve speech.

Hadden beter Dr. Phil kunnen sturen.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:43 schreef AlexanderDeGrote het volgende:

[..]

Ik ben geen rechts-conservatieve persoon, meer een op gelijkheid gerichte atheist a la 1789, 1848 en 1917. Obama's geslijm naar religies staat me gewoon niet aan, net als zijn irritante gewoonte om reele tegenstellingen te erkennen in speeches en vervolgens er niet op een praktische manier op in te gaan. Het is pure symboolpolitiek en de grenzen daarvan zullen binnenkort duidelijk worden als Israel niet meewerkt aan deze voor hun vrij negatieve speech.

Hadden beter Dr. Phil kunnen sturen.

Dus wat je zegt is dat hij eigenlijk 4-5 miljard mensen had moeten uitkafferen omdat ze een religie aanhangen. Gelijkheid, maar dan alleen voor de atheïst.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:44 schreef Mutant01 het volgende:

[..]

Dus wat je zegt is dat hij eigenlijk 4-5 miljard mensen had moeten uitkafferen omdat ze een religie aanhangen. Gelijkheid, maar dan alleen voor de atheïst.

Er zijn andere opties dan slijmen of uitkafferen. Je kunt ook gewoon iemand de hand reiken zonder over metafysische denkwijzen te praten.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:43 schreef AlexanderDeGrote het volgende:

[..]

Ik ben geen rechts-conservatieve persoon, meer een op gelijkheid gerichte atheist a la 1789, 1848 en 1917. Obama's geslijm naar religies staat me gewoon niet aan, net als zijn irritante gewoonte om reele tegenstellingen te erkennen in speeches en vervolgens er niet op een praktische manier op in te gaan. Het is pure symboolpolitiek en de grenzen daarvan zullen binnenkort duidelijk worden als Israel niet meewerkt aan deze voor hun vrij negatieve speech.

Hadden beter Dr. Phil kunnen sturen.

Kan je wat voorbeelden geven waar Obama in deze speech 'er niet op een praktische manier mee omging' ? Beetje abstract wat je hier neerzet. Of welk gedeelte 'voor Israel negatief is' en waarom?

quote:

And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

Naieve sukkel.

Het is niet leuk om zoiets te moeten zeggen maar het is positiever om hem naief te noemen dan evil, en laat ik vandaag maar positief blijven om de sfeer hier niet al teveel te verzieken.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:58 schreef buachaille het volgende:

[..]

Naieve sukkel.

Het is niet leuk om zoiets te moeten zeggen maar het is positiever om hem naief te noemen dan evil, en laat ik vandaag maar positief blijven om de sfeer hier niet al teveel te verzieken.

"Hoi ik sta hier vandaag voor jullie om jullie ervan te overtuigen dat er een oplossing moet komen voor de nucleaire problematiek. Ik geloof er natuurlijk geen zak van dat jullie dat ook willen, maar goed'.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:58 schreef buachaille het volgende:

[..]

Naieve sukkel.

Het is niet leuk om zoiets te moeten zeggen maar het is positiever om hem naief te noemen dan evil, en laat ik vandaag maar positief blijven om de sfeer hier niet al teveel te verzieken.

Nah eerder dat mensen heel hard hun alu hoedjes op gaan doen als je begint over een moslimsamenzwering.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 14:02 schreef IHVK het volgende:

Nah eerder dat mensen heel hard hun alu hoedjes op gaan doen als je begint over een moslimsamenzwering.

Nou ja, misschien dat mijn beeld van de islamitische wereld een beetje vervormd is geraakt omdat ik als nieuws-verslaafde iets te vaak de krant lees, maar naar mijn idee zijn sommige landen nog niet rijp om necleaire technologie te bezitten. Bijvoorbeeld Pakistan / Noord Korea / India / Iran / Venezuela ... die landen vertrouw ik niet.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 14:16 schreef Nielsch het volgende:

Dat klopt! De een ademt jammer genoeg en de andere gelukkig niet meer...

SPOILER

Om spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.

Ik begrijp dat je je hersens moet heb zitten pijnigen om een punt terug te kunnen maken in de discussie, maar met deze opmerking zet je je zelf buitenspel.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:55 schreef Alulu het volgende:

[..]

Kan je wat voorbeelden geven waar Obama in deze speech 'er niet op een praktische manier mee omging' ? Beetje abstract wat je hier neerzet. Of welk gedeelte 'voor Israel negatief is' en waarom?

Hier stukje over West Bank:

quote:

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.

Deze nederzettingen moeten 'stoppen'. Hoe? Als je wilt dat Israel dat doet moet je wel met een heel goed plan komen. Heeft Obama dat? Ik hoop het, maar ben niet zo zeker.

quote:

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign 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.

Wrong, het geweld van de twee Intifadah's heeft de Palestijnen wel degelijk geholpen hun zaak onder de aandacht te krijgen en het wordt ook massaal gesteund door het volk op dit moment. Net als met de nederzettingen is de realiteit op de grond hier sterker.

quote:

Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist.

Geen burgeroorlog met Fatah geweest, geen inval in Gaza eerder dit jaar, ze moeten gewoon ff lief gaan doen. Wat zou jij doen als je Hamas was en dit hoorde?

En dan nog dit:

quote:

Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's Interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action - whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster.

Malaria en natuurrampen hebben geen ruk met religie te maken.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 14:13 schreef buachaille het volgende:

[..]

Nou ja, misschien dat mijn beeld van de islamitische wereld een beetje vervormd is geraakt omdat ik als nieuws-verslaafde iets te vaak de krant lees, maar naar mijn idee zijn sommige landen nog niet rijp om necleaire technologie te bezitten. Bijvoorbeeld Pakistan / Noord Korea / India / Iran / Venezuela ... die landen vertrouw ik niet.

Ik lees minstens zo vaak de krant en ben toch beduidend minder anti-MO dan jij. Misschien moet je eens de telegraaf links laten liggen.

Walgelijke schijnvertoning weer.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 14:28 schreef TheMagnificent het volgende:
Walgelijke schijnvertoning weer.

Dit topic of Obama?

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 14:26 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

Ik lees minstens zo vaak de krant en ben toch beduidend minder anti-MO dan jij. Misschien moet je eens de telegraaf links laten liggen.

De Telegraaf lees ik alleen als ik bij de afhaalchinees zit te wachten. En jij leest zeker de Volkskrant

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 14:13 schreef buachaille het volgende:

[..]

Nou ja, misschien dat mijn beeld van de islamitische wereld een beetje vervormd is geraakt omdat ik als nieuws-verslaafde iets te vaak de krant lees, maar naar mijn idee zijn sommige landen nog niet rijp om necleaire technologie te bezitten. Bijvoorbeeld Pakistan / Noord Korea / India / Iran / Venezuela ... die landen vertrouw ik niet.

Ik ben het voor de verandering met je eens.
Laten we kernwapens niet beschikbaar stellen aan iedereen.

Echter Iran verscheelt wat mij betreft niet veel van Israël. Het beste was eigenlijk de situatie in de Koude Oorlog.
Als er nu twee of drie supermachten (uit compleet verschillende) weer kernwapens hebben en de rest niet, zou het meer stabiliteit opleveren.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 13:30 schreef Alulu het volgende:

[..]

Hoe dan????
Afzetten? Dan is de hele wereld weer boos.
Die dictators staan synoniem voor die corrupte samenlevingen waar het een f*ckin jungle is en iedereen voor zichzelf werkt. Dus de bevolking moet zelf OOK veranderen qua gedrag en mentaliteit en dat zal tijd kosten. Werkt twee kanten op namelijk. Als een Mubarak weggaat komt er een andere dodo die alle macht opeist en precies zelfde doet. Ik snap wat je bedoelt overigens maar het is niet realistisch.

Fuck ze.. boos omdat ze geen olie meer krijgen. Laat ze dan d etering krijgen.. ze willen toch zo graag dezelfde rechten als anderene n gunnen anderen die rechten toch ook???

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 14:30 schreef IHVK het volgende:

[..]

Dit topic of Obama?

Obama.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 14:33 schreef IHVK het volgende:
Ik ben het voor de verandering met je eens.
Laten we kernwapens niet beschikbaar stellen aan iedereen.

Echter Iran verscheelt wat mij betreft niet veel van Israël. Het beste was eigenlijk de situatie in de Koude Oorlog.
Als er nu twee of drie supermachten (uit compleet verschillende) weer kernwapens hebben en de rest niet, zou het meer stabiliteit opleveren.

Wat mij betreft verschilt Israel wel degelijk wezelijk van een land als Iran. Misschien mis ik de arabische nuance maar een oproep van iran om israel te vernietigen heb ik van de kant van israel nog niet vernomen.

Daarnaast is het bijzonder negatief te noemen dat de joodse bevolking van Iran de afgelopen decennia is gedecimeerd, in tegenstelling tot het arabische deel van israel dat sterk is toegenomen (en dan wil ik het niet hebben over de tegenwind die de arabieren ondervinden in israel maar alleen kijken naar cijfertjes).

edit: als dit niet door de beugel kan, dan weg.

quote:

Op donderdag 4 juni 2009 14:37 schreef buachaille het volgende:
PM'tje van Nielsch:
[..]

Tja buachaille, weet jij nog wat je zei over Marokkanen, of moet ik dat er ook bij gaan halen? Niet zo scheinheilig doen mannetje.