By Georgy Gounev | Obama should have told the Islamic world in his speech that it was not the Europeans but the Muslims that unleashed an all out invasion of Europe on two occasions.
On June 4, President Obama delivered in Cairo his speech designed to define the new American approach toward Islam. It could be successfully argued that President Obama is uniquely qualified to address the Muslims since he is the son of a foreign born Muslim man and a representative of a racial group that for a long time had an underprivileged status within the American society.
This factor, powerful enough on its own merits, has been immensely reinforced by the effective way the speech was delivered. It should not be forgotten that Barack Obama undoubtedly is the best campaigner among all residents of the White House. The speech itself was a mixture of passion, somewhat subdued by a touch of humility, and the firm conviction of the President during that hot day in Cairo that he was not just a President of the United States but also a leader of the world busy reconciling the United States with the Muslims. Without blinking, one of his sycophants from the media world, modestly defined Mr. Obama as a God while delivering his Cairo speech…
In the course of the Divine Revelation, (if we accept the definition of the adoring journalist), the Muslim world was assured of American friendship and, was made knowledgeable of the fact that President Obama wants to see the creation of a Palestinian state living peacefully next to Israel. The Jewish State for its part has to freeze the settlements in the occupied territories of the West Bank and the Middle Eastern idyll would be complete. There are small problems like the answers to some interesting questions. For instance, who will rule this peaceful Palestinian state given that the main political forces – Al Fatah and Hamas are at each other throats? How peaceful would the Palestinian state be given that Hamas, the more popular organization, still dreams about the destruction of the Jewish state? Or, how will Israel evacuate the settlers from the West Bank considering the level of religious fanaticism of many who are fully convinced that the land they live on has been given to them by God? Not by Obama but by the Jewish one…
In a more general plan, the President spoke highly about the Muslims, quoting the “Holy” Koran and condemning the European colonialism of the Muslim lands. As a Harvard graduate it could be assumed that the President should have known and should have mentioned that as a matter of fact not the Europeans but the Muslims were the ones that had unleashed an all out invasion of Europe on two occasions.
The European offensive by Islam took place first under the form of an Arab expansion, and secondly, as the incorporation of South Eastern Europe into the Ottoman Empire. This included the attempt to add Central Europe to its Balkan prey which expired at the gates of Vienna during the Seventeenth Century.
The numerous admirers of the Cairo performance missed an important gap in Mr. Obama’s logic, when according to the inspirational speaker, a very convincing demonstration of the freedom the Muslims are entitled to, is the right of the Muslim women to wear hijab on the streets of the American cities. Yes, without any doubt, wearing hijab in America could be considered a form of freedom.
However, the right NOT TO WEAR HIJAB in the Muslim countries would also constitute an act of freedom for the Muslim women, wouldn’t it, Mr. President? If so, why didn’t you mention this form of freedom in your speech?
In the course of the same performance President Obama demonstrated two basic features typical of his approach to public statements. To start with, the President is in the habit of touching only those aspects of his statements that will enhance his positive image and will help him extract some kind of benefit from his presentation.
The President is also accustomed to presenting the same facts in a completely different light depending upon the audience. Back in the States, for instance, when the winning of the important Jewish vote was paramount, Mr. Obama pointed out the Jewish connection to his name – as it turned out, the Muslim name Barack corresponds to the ancient Jewish name of Baruh. The Jewish listeners were also informed, that although formally Muslim, his Kenyan father had been an agnostic. Therefore, according to the tough rules and requirements of Islam, he could not be considered a Muslim.
In Cairo the same Kenyan father had been presented to the world-wide Muslim audience as a person “coming from many generations of Muslims”… Given that too many people would say “So what?” or “Every politician does that,” let’s accept this “flexibility” as something natural if not unavoidable.
The continuation of our effort to take a second glance at the Cairo speech would reveal a shocking reality. The magnitude and importance of this reality has been deliberately or unconsciously ignored by the main line sycophantic American media that has escalated the traditional honeymoon between the new President and the media to the level of an endless love affair.
The entire speech was based on a wrong premise, due to the deliberate omission of the main reason for the tension between the United States and the Muslim world. The main reason for the tension is the open war unleashed by the Jihadist Islamic Totalitarianism against the Christian world, the Democratic world and the State of Israel.
It would have been reasonable to expect the President of the United States to address the issue involving the speedy Islamization of Europe propelled by the fundamentalist imams instigating hatred for the democratic institutions of the very countries that had opened their doors to the Muslim immigrants.
Isn’t this an issue that affects only the Europeans? No, it isn’t because the countries most affected by the jihadist exploitation of the demographic trends are NATO members and consequently, American allies. In addition, countries which are not American Allies are under the same pressures and are facing the same dangers. President Obama and his advisers evidently were under the wrong impression that the Muslim World won’t handle the truth about the delicate issues involving the relationship between the United States of America and the global Muslim community. As a result, the speech was politically correct and, in reality, ineffective. This show of political correctness underestimates the ability of the Muslims to appreciate a crystal clear message informing them that every Muslim man who doesn’t want his life to be determined by ignorant and cruel tyrants, (like the Taliban regime in Afghanistan), and every Muslim woman, who does not want to be made a prisoner in her own home, will be treated as our brothers and sisters in the war between the civilization and the dark forces dreaming to impose a barbarous and tyrannical form of Totalitarianism upon all of us.
Almost seven decades ago another American President by the name of Franklin Delanor Roosevelt made a statement that received much less coverage than the Cairo speech of Mr. Obama. It contained a far more important message. On July 4, 1941 President Roosevelt warned his compatriots who were dreaming of avoiding an American participation in WWII that the United States won’t survive “as an island of Democracy surrounded by a Totalitarian ocean.” Those words are as true today as they were seventy years ago. Unfortunately the world didn’t hear the timeless message circa 1941 from Cairo, which would have been the proper place for its reinforcement.
Email Dr. Gounev at “firstname.lastname@example.org”