In case you thought The Won's April speech in the Turkish Parliament was his Great Speech to the Arab Street Muslim World, it seems in retrospect you must be mistaken, given that it was not so widely hailed as such afterwards.
"... I also want to be clear that America’s relationship with the Muslim [world] cannot and will not be based on opposition to al Qaeda. Far from it. We seek broad engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect. We will listen carefully, bridge misunderstanding, and seek common ground. We will be respectful, even when we do not agree. And we will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better – including my own country. The United States has been enriched by Muslim Americans. Many other Americans have Muslims in their family, or have lived in a Muslim-majority country – I know, because I am one of them."
Apparently that speech was not quite Great enough - given that all he did was vow that "the U.S. is not and will never be at war with Islam" (CNN).
So he's making another one, even Greater. from Cairo. on Thursday. And Sultan Knish has a preview copy:
.... All was well until my predecessor, responding to a random act of man caused disaster on September 11, began a relentless bombing campaign that devastated the peaceful peoples of Iraq and Afghanistan. We will never know how much ancient wisdom lies buried in Usama Bin Laden's Tora Bora fortress of meditation and learning. Or how much knowledge was lost when US warplanes rained terror and death on the Baghdad offices of Saddam Hussein's Mukhbarat intelligence service.
Worse than even this senseless destruction, were the lost possibilities that my country's rash and hasty actions deprived the world of. I cannot help but think of the young men of the Taliban who will never have the chance to set foot in a classroom-- and then blow it up because it is filled with young girls. I cannot help but wonder what secrets of the universe Saddam's chemical weapons researchers might not have uncovered, had they not been brutally tortured and interrogated by American troops in Abu Ghaib.
But worst of all is the sense of alienation that has come between my people and the American people, between Muslims and non-Muslims, between the people of Cairo and Iowa, all because we have not truly listened to one another.
So I have come here with an apology. A great big apology....
You should read it all, but I'd like for you to also take tangential note of the evolution of Avi Dershowitz.
Here he is October 17, 2008 in the Huffington Post:
I think it is better for Israel to have a liberal supporter in the White House than to have a conservative supporter in the oval office. Obama's views on Israel will have greater impact on young people, on Europe, on the media and on others who tend to identify with the liberal perspective. Although I believe that centrists liberals in general tend to support Israel, I acknowledge that support from the left seems to be weakening as support from the right strengthens. The election of Barack Obama -- a liberal supporter of Israel -- will enhance Israel's position among wavering liberals.
And October 28, 2008:
"Israel's fate will not turn on who is elected president, because we are one of the few countries in the world where Israel is not a divisive issue - not because of the Israel lobby, but because we all support Israel," Dershowitz said.
He added impishly, "I'm glad that I can say with certainty that a lot of pro-Israel people will be on the winning side of the election."
Dershowitz ... said everyone should go ahead and "vote your conscience" - adding that it would be a tragedy if all Jews voted the same way and then found themselves on the losing side, with less ability to influence Washington debate.
He said he was glad that many Jews' consciences still echoed, like his, the voices of the Bundists of 1930s Brooklyn.
"The case for Israel cannot be only a right-wing cause - the case for Israel can be a liberal, progressive cause," Dershowitz said. "I happen to be a liberal, and I'm not going to change my views because of what you describe as realpolitik."
And yet, a week ago in the JPost Avi said: Obama's got it exactly backwards
.... Barack Obama is a man of peace and negotiations. The extreme left wing of his party demands peace at any price, including a nuclear Iran. President Obama must step up to the plate and make the difficult decision to do whatever it takes to prevent Iran from securing nuclear weapons, even if that means exercising the military option as a last resort. Sometimes it takes the use of military force to avoid even greater military dangers. Winston Churchill understood that in the 1930s. Neville Chamberlain did not.
I hope that Barack Obama will be remembered by history more in the image of Churchill than Chamberlain.
"Hope" is the keyword here, the operative fulcrum on which the fate of Israel has come to rest, at least among the 78 Percent. I could have told them... in fact I did tell them, didn't I?
Arugment with Self: We shouldn't engage in I-told-you-so's. Unfortunate as it may be, there is no time for that. We need to disengage from Ego enough to welcome our brothers and sisters into our fold, without recrimination.
They were stupid, yes, but they were misled.
They were weak, but don't forget, they were lied to.
The very fact that they fell for the hopenchange thaing should cause them enough pain without our two cents on top of it. And besides, do we not want the Dershowitznik "wavering liberals" to join us, not the anti-Jews at J Street?
One last caveat. As the stakes rise higher and higher, and some of the 78 Percent start to shake off their hallucination and peel away their slobbering affection, as Dershowitz has begun to do... they are not to be entirely trusted.
Ever again.
Comments