33 bátor - “Az USA 44. elnöke”

1. 1 dr who
   2008 június 6 @ 15:36

   nem lesz könnyű legyőznie McCaint, de remélem meglesz, nagyon nagy lenne. drukk innen is Obamának!

2. 2 Molnárgörény
   2008 június 6 @ 16:30

   Nem fog Obama győzni. Még nem érett meg arra az USA, hogy színesbőrűelnöke legyen. Már most fordul át McCain javára az állás, és ez a választás idejére továbblendül. Ha Clinton elvállalta volna az alelnökséget, lehet, hogy lenne esélye, de szerintem meg erre nincs esély, Hillary meg volt győződve arról, hogy nyeri a jelöltállítást, nem fog beállni ennyire a sorba.

3. 3 gabrilo
   2008 június 6 @ 17:13

   Szerintem sem nyeri meg a barack. McCaine tarol majd. És nem is bánom, őszinténszólva.

4. 4 dr who
   2008 június 6 @ 18:09

   gabrilo, miért lenne jobb JM?

5. 5 Hadrian VII.
   2008 június 6 @ 22:50

   dr who,

   például ezért:

   http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/mccain-s-aipac-speech-11447

6. 6 zsófi
   2008 június 7 @ 1:20

   Én drukkolok ennek az embernek, de őszintén szólva én sem nézem ki az amerikaiakból, hogy meghoznak egy ilyen döntést…

7. 7 shadai
   2008 június 7 @ 2:01

   Hadrian VII:

   Obama AIPAC beszéde -
   http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=39525

8. 8 shadai
   2008 június 7 @ 2:09

   Kattintani lustáknak - John McCain beszéde (AIPAC):

   All of you involved in the work of AIPAC have taken up a great and vital cause — and a cause set firmly in the American heart. When President Truman recognized the new State of Israel sixty years ago, he acted on the highest ideals and best instincts of our country. He was a man with courage and a sense of history, and he surely knew what great challenges the Jewish state would face in its early years. To his lasting credit, he resolved that the people of Israel would not face them alone, because they would always have a friend and ally in the United States of America.

   The cause of Israel, and of our common security, has always depended on men and women of courage, and I’ve been lucky enough to know quite a few of them. I think often of one in particular, the late Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson. I got to know Senator Jackson when I was the Navy liaison to the Senate. In 1979, I traveled with him to Israel, where I knew he was considered a hero. But I had no idea just how admired he was until we landed in Tel Aviv, to find a crowd of seven or eight hundred Israelis calling out his name, waving signs that read “God Bless you, Scoop” and “Senator Jackson, thank you.” Scoop Jackson had the special respect of the Jewish people, the kind of respect accorded to brave and faithful friends. He was and remains the model of what an American statesman should be.

   The people of Israel reserve a special respect for courage, because so much courage has been required of them. In the record of history, sheer survival in the face of Israel’s many trials would have been impressive enough. But Israel has achieved much more than that these past sixty years. Israel has endured, and thrived, and her people have built a nation that is an inspiration to free nations everywhere.

   Yet no matter how successful the nation of Israel, or how far removed from the Holocaust, there are experiences that will never pass from memory. Not long ago I was in Jerusalem with Senator Lieberman and our colleague Lindsey Graham, and we went to the Holocaust memorial, Yad Vashem. And for all the boundless examples of cruelty and inhumanity to be found there, for all the pain and grief remembered there, somehow I was especially moved by the story of the camp survivors who died from the very nourishment given to them by their liberators. They had starved and suffered so much that their bodies were too weak even for food. They endured it all, only to die at the moment of their deliverance.

   These are the kind of experiences that the Jewish people carry in memory — and they are far from the worst experiences of the Holocaust. These are the kind of griefs and afflictions from which the State of Israel offered escape. And today, when we join in saying “never again,” that is not a wish, a request, or a plea to the enemies of Israel. It is a promise that the United States and Israel will honor, against any enemy who cares to test us.

   The threats to Israel’s security are large and growing, and America’s commitment must grow as well. I strongly support the increase in military aid to Israel, scheduled to begin in October. I am committed to making certain Israel maintains its qualitative military edge. Israel’s enemies are too numerous, its margin of error too small, and our shared interests and values too great for us to follow any other policy.

   Foremost in all our minds is the threat posed by the regime in Tehran. The Iranian president has called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” and suggested that Israel’s Jewish population should return to Europe. He calls Israel a “stinking corpse” that is “on its way to annihilation.” But the Iranian leadership does far more than issue vile insults. It acts in ways directly detrimental to the security of Israel and the United States.

   A sponsor of both Hamas and Hezbollah, the leadership of Iran has repeatedly used violence to undermine Israel and the Middle East peace process. It has trained, financed, and equipped extremists in Iraq who have killed American soldiers fighting to bring freedom to that country. It remains the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism and threatens to destabilize the entire Middle East, from Basra to Beirut.

   Tehran’s continued pursuit of nuclear weapons poses an unacceptable risk, a danger we cannot allow. Emboldened by nuclear weapons, Iran would feel free to sponsor terrorist attacks against any perceived enemy. Its flouting of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty would render that agreement obsolete and could induce Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and others to join a nuclear arms race. The world would have to live, indefinitely, with the possibility that Tehran might pass nuclear materials or weapons to one of its allied terrorist networks. Armed as well with its ballistic missile arsenal, an Iranian nuclear bomb would pose an existential threat to the people of Israel.

   European negotiators have proposed a peaceful endgame for Tehran, should it abandon its nuclear ambitions and comply with UN Security Council resolutions. The plan offers far-reaching economic incentives, external support for a civilian nuclear energy program, and integration into the international community. But Tehran has said no.

   The Iranians have spent years working toward a nuclear program. And the idea that they now seek nuclear weapons because we refuse to engage in presidential-level talks is a serious misreading of history. In reality, a series of administrations have tried to talk to Iran, and none tried harder than the Clinton administration. In 1998, the secretary of state made a public overture to the Iranians, laid out a roadmap to normal relations, and for two years tried to engage. The Clinton administration even lifted some sanctions, and Secretary Albright apologized for American actions going back to the 1950s. But even under President Khatami — a man by all accounts less radical than the current president — Iran rejected these overtures.

   Even so, we hear talk of a meeting with the Iranian leadership offered up as if it were some sudden inspiration, a bold new idea that somehow nobody has ever thought of before. Yet it’s hard to see what such a summit with President Ahmadinejad would actually gain, except an earful of anti-Semitic rants, and a worldwide audience for a man who denies one Holocaust and talks before frenzied crowds about starting another. Such a spectacle would harm Iranian moderates and dissidents, as the radicals and hardliners strengthen their position and suddenly acquire the appearance of respectability.

   Rather than sitting down unconditionally with the Iranian president or supreme leader in the hope that we can talk sense into them, we must create the real-world pressures that will peacefully but decisively change the path they are on. Essential to this strategy is the UN Security Council, which should impose progressively tougher political and economic sanctions. Should the Security Council continue to delay in this responsibility, the United States must lead like-minded countries in imposing multilateral sanctions outside the UN framework. I am proud to have been a leader on these issues for years, having coauthored the 1992 Iran-Iraq Arms Non-Proliferation Act. Over a year ago I proposed applying sanctions to restrict Iran’s ability to import refined petroleum products, on which it is highly dependent, and the time has come for an international campaign to do just that. A severe limit on Iranian imports of gasoline would create immediate pressure on Khamenei and Ahmadinejad to change course, and to cease in the pursuit of nuclear weapons.

   At the same time, we need the support of those in the region who are most concerned about Iran, and of our European partners as well. They can help by imposing targeted sanctions that will impose a heavy cost on the regime’s leaders, including the denial of visas and freezing of assets.

   As a further measure to contain and deter Iran, the United States should impose financial sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran, which aids in Iran’s terrorism and weapons proliferation. We must apply the full force of law to prevent business dealings with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps. I was pleased to join Senators Lieberman and Kyl in backing an amendment calling for the designation of the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization responsible for killing American troops in Iraq. Over three quarters of the Senate supported this obvious step, but not Senator Obama. He opposed this resolution because its support for countering Iranian influence in Iraq was, he said, a “wrong message not only to the world, but also to the region.” But here, too, he is mistaken. Holding Iran’s influence in check, and holding a terrorist organization accountable, sends exactly the right message — to Iran, to the region and to the world.

   We should privatize the sanctions against Iran by launching a worldwide divestment campaign. As more people, businesses, pension funds, and financial institutions across the world divest from companies doing business with Iran, the radical elite who run that country will become even more unpopular than they are already. Years ago, the moral clarity and conviction of civilized nations came together in a divestment campaign against South Africa, helping to rid that nation of the evil of apartheid. In our day, we must use that same power and moral conviction against the regime in Iran, and help to safeguard the people of Israel and the peace of the world.

   In all of this, we will not only be defending our own safety and welfare, but also the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people. They are a great and civilized people, with little sympathy for the terrorists their leaders finance, and no wish to threaten other nations with nuclear weapons. Iran’s rulers would be very different if the people themselves had a choice in the matter, and American policy should always reflect their hopes for a freer and more just society. The same holds true for the Palestinian people, most of whom ask only for a better life in a less violent world.

   They are badly served by the terrorist-led group in charge of Gaza. This is a group that still refuses to recognize Israel’s right to exist, refuses to denounce violence, and refuses to acknowledge prior peace commitments. They deliberately target Israeli civilians, in an attempt to terrorize the Jewish population. They spread violence and hatred, and with every new bombing they set back the cause of their own people.

   During my last visit to Israel in March, I saw for myself the work of Hamas in the town of Sderot, just across the border from Gaza. I saw the houses that have been hit by Hamas rockets. In the face of injuries, death, and destruction thousands of Israelis have fled the town. Many others have stayed, to carry on as best they can. I visited the home of a man named Pinhas Amar, who lives with his disabled wife, Aliza, and their children. One day, last year, the sirens sounded again to alert the town to incoming rocket fire. The rest of the family found cover. Aliza, on the other side of the house, was knocked out of her wheelchair and struck by shrapnel.

   This occurred on December 13. And from that day until the day of my visit just some three months later, more than a thousand rockets had struck Sderot. Today, siren warnings are commonplace, the elementary schools are surrounded by concrete shelters and children walking the streets in costume for Purim celebrations did so in fear. No nation in the world would allow its population to be attacked so incessantly, to be killed and intimidated so mercilessly, without responding. And the nation of Israel is no exception.

   Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas are engaged in talks that all of us hope will yield progress toward peace. Yet while we encourage this process, we must also ensure that Israel’s people can live in safety until there is a Palestinian leadership willing and able to deliver peace. A peace process that places faith in terrorists can never end in peace. And we do no favors to the Palestinian people by conferring approval upon the terrorist syndicate that has seized power in Gaza.

   Likewise, Israel’s chance for enduring peace with Lebanon depends on Lebanese government that has a monopoly on authority within its country’s borders. That means no independent militias, no Hezbollah fighters, no weapons and equipment flowing to Hezbollah.

   Hezbollah fighters recently took up arms against their fellow Lebanese, starting the worst internal fighting since the civil war ended in 1990. In the process, they extracted an agreement for a new political arrangement in which Hezbollah and its allies can veto any cabinet decision. As the leader of Hezbollah often reminds us, this group’s mission is the defeat of Israel. The international community needs to more fully empower our allies in Lebanon — not only with military aid but also with the resources to undermine Hezbollah’s appeal: better schools, hospitals, roads and power generation, and the like. We simply cannot afford to cede Lebanon’s future to Syria and Iran.

   And we have an additional task. In the summer of 2006, Hamas and Hezbollah kidnapped three young Israelis — Gilad Shalit, Eldad Regev, and Ehud Goldwasser — and have held them ever since. I met with the families of two of these men in December 2006, and heard firsthand about their ordeal. I committed then to bring attention to their situation, to insist that the Geneva Conventions are observed, and to call for the swift release of these men. These men are being unlawfully held, and they must be set free and returned home to Israel.

   Another matter of great importance to the security of both America and Israel is Iraq. You would never know from listening to those who are still caught up in angry arguments over yesterday’s options, but our troops in Iraq have made hard-won progress under General Petraeus’ new strategy. And Iraqi political leaders have moved ahead — slowly and insufficiently, but forward nonetheless. Sectarian violence declined dramatically, Sunnis in Anbar province and throughout Iraq are cooperating in the fight against al Qaeda, and Shia extremist militias no longer control Basra — the Maliki government and its forces are in charge. Al Qaeda terrorists are on the run, and our troops are going to make sure they never come back.

   It’s worth recalling that America’s progress in Iraq is the direct result of the new strategy that Senator Obama opposed. It was the strategy he predicted would fail, when he voted cut off funds for our forces in Iraq. He now says he intends to withdraw combat troops from Iraq — one to two brigades per month until they are all removed. He will do so regardless of the conditions in Iraq, regardless of the consequences for our national security, regardless of Israel’s security, and in disregard of the best advice of our commanders on the ground.

   This course would surely result in a catastrophe. If our troops are ordered to make a forced retreat, we risk all-out civil war, genocide, and a failed state in the heart of the Middle East. Al Qaeda terrorists would rejoice in the defeat of the United States. Allowing a potential terrorist sanctuary would profoundly affect the security of the United States, Israel, and our other friends, and would invite further intervention from Iraq’s neighbors, including an emboldened Iran. We must not let this happen. We must not leave the region to suffer chaos, terrorist violence and a wider war.

   My friends, as the people of Israel know better than most, the safety of free people can never be taken for granted. And in a world full of dangers, Israel and the United States must always stand together.

   The State of Israel stands as a singular achievement in many ways, and not the least is its achievement as the great democracy of the Middle East. If there are ties between America and Israel that critics of our alliance have never understood, perhaps that is because they do not fully understand the love of liberty and the pursuit of justice. But they should know those ties cannot be broken. We were brought together by shared ideals and by shared adversity. We have been comrades in struggle, and trusted partners in the quest for peace. We are the most natural of allies. And, like Israel itself, that alliance is forever.

9. 9 shadai
   2008 június 7 @ 2:11

   Kattintani lustáknak - Barack Obama beszéde (AIPAC):

   It’s great to see so many friends from across the country. I want to
   congratulate Howard Friedman, David Victor and Howard Kohr on a successful
   conference, and on the completion of a new headquarters just a few blocks
   away.
   Before I begin, I want to say that I know some provocative emails have been
   circulating throughout Jewish communities across the country. A few of you
   may have gotten them. They’re filled with tall tales and dire warnings about
   a certain candidate for President. And all I want to say is - let me know if
   you see this guy named Barack Obama, because he sounds pretty frightening.

   But if anyone has been confused by these emails, I want you to know that
   today I’ll be speaking from my heart, and as a true friend of Israel. And I
   know that when I visit with AIPAC, I am among friends. Good friends. Friends
   who share my strong commitment to make sure that the bond between the United
   States and Israel is unbreakable today, tomorrow, and forever.

   One of the many things that I admire about AIPAC is that you fight for this
   common cause from the bottom up. The lifeblood of AIPAC is here in this
   room - grassroots activists of all ages, from all parts of the country, who
   come to Washington year after year to make your voices heard. Nothing
   reflects the face of AIPAC more than the 1,200 students who have travelled
   here to make it clear to the world that the bond between Israel and the
   United States is rooted in more than our shared national interests - it’s
   rooted in the shared values and shared stories of our people. And as
   President, I will work with you to ensure that it this bond strengthened.

   I first became familiar with the story of Israel when I was eleven years
   old. I learned of the long journey and steady determination of the Jewish
   people to preserve their identity through faith, family and culture. Year
   after year, century after century, Jews carried on their traditions, and
   their dream of a homeland, in the face of impossible odds.

   The story made a powerful impression on me. I had grown up without a sense
   of roots. My father was black, he was from Kenya, and he left us when I was
   two. My mother was white, she was from Kansas, and I’d moved with her to
   Indonesia and then back to Hawaii. In many ways, I didn’t know where I came
   from. So I was drawn to the belief that you could sustain a spiritual,
   emotional and cultural identity. And I deeply understood the Zionist idea -
   that there is always a homeland at the center of our story.

   I also learned about the horror of the Holocaust, and the terrible urgency
   it brought to the journey home to Israel. For much of my childhood, I lived
   with my grandparents. My grandfather had served in World War II, and so had
   my great uncle. He was a Kansas boy, who probably never expected to see
   Europe - let alone the horrors that awaited him there. And for months after
   he came home from Germany, he remained in a state of shock, alone with the
   painful memories that wouldn’t leave his head.

   You see, my great uncle had been a part of the 89th Infantry Division - the
   first Americans to reach a Nazi concentration camp. They liberated Ohrdruf,
   part of Buchenwald, on an April day in 1945. The horrors of that camp go
   beyond our capacity to imagine. Tens of thousands died of hunger, torture,
   disease, or plain murder - part of the Nazi killing machine that killed 6
   million people.

   When the Americans marched in, they discovered huge piles of dead bodies and
   starving survivors. General Eisenhower ordered Germans from the nearby town
   to tour the camp, so they could see what was being done in their name. He
   ordered American troops to tour the camp, so they could see the evil they
   were fighting against. He invited Congressmen and journalists to bear
   witness. And he ordered that photographs and films be made. Explaining his
   actions, Eisenhower said that he wanted to produce, “first-hand evidence of
   these things, if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge
   these allegations merely to propaganda.”

   I saw some of those very images at Yad Vashem, and they never leave you. And
   those images just hint at the stories that survivors of the Shoah carried
   with them. Like Eisenhower, each of us bears witness to anyone and everyone
   who would deny these unspeakable crimes, or ever speak of repeating them. We
   must mean what we say when we speak the words: “never again.”

   It was just a few years after the liberation of the camps that David
   Ben-Gurion declared the founding of the Jewish State of Israel. We know that
   the establishment of Israel was just and necessary, rooted in centuries of
   struggle, and decades of patient work. But 60 years later, we know that we
   cannot relent, we cannot yield, and as President I will never compromise
   when it comes to Israel’s security.

   Not when there are still voices that deny the Holocaust. Not when there are
   terrorist groups and political leaders committed to Israel’s destruction.
   Not when there are maps across the Middle East that don’t even acknowledge
   Israel’s existence, and government-funded textbooks filled with hatred
   toward Jews. Not when there are rockets raining down on Sderot, and Israeli
   children have to take a deep breath and summon uncommon courage every time
   they board a bus or walk to school.

   I have long understood Israel’s quest for peace and need for security. But
   never more so than during my travels there two years ago. Flying in an IDF
   helicopter, I saw a narrow and beautiful strip of land nestled against the
   Mediterranean. On the ground, I met a family who saw their house destroyed
   by a Katyusha Rocket. I spoke to Israeli troops who faced daily threats as
   they maintained security near the blue line. I talked to people who wanted
   nothing more simple, or elusive, than a secure future for their children.

   I have been proud to be a part of a strong, bi-partisan consensus that has
   stood by Israel in the face of all threats. That is a commitment that both
   John McCain and I share, because support for Israel in this country goes
   beyond party. But part of our commitment must be speaking up when Israel’s
   security is at risk, and I don’t think any of us can be satisfied that
   America’s recent foreign policy has made Israel more secure.

   Hamas now controls Gaza. Hizbollah has tightened its grip on southern
   Lebanon, and is flexing its muscles in Beirut. Because of the war in Iraq,
   Iran - which always posed a greater threat to Israel than Iraq - is
   emboldened, and poses the greatest strategic challenge to the United States
   and Israel in the Middle East in a generation. Iraq is unstable, and al
   Qaeda has stepped up its recruitment. Israel’s quest for peace with its
   neighbors has stalled, despite the heavy burdens borne by the Israeli
   people. And America is more isolated in the region, reducing our strength
   and jeopardizing Israel’s safety.

   The question is how to move forward. There are those who would continue and
   intensify this failed status quo, ignoring eight years of accumulated
   evidence that our foreign policy is dangerously flawed. And then there are
   those who would lay all of the problems of the Middle East at the doorstep
   of Israel and its supporters, as if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the
   root of all trouble in the region. These voices blame the Middle East’s only
   democracy for the region’s extremism. They offer the false promise that
   abandoning a stalwart ally is somehow the path to strength. It is not, it
   never has been, and it never will be.

   Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who
   threaten Israel threaten us. Israel has always faced these threats on the
   front lines. And I will bring to the White House an unshakeable commitment
   to Israel’s security.

   That starts with ensuring Israel’s qualitative military advantage. I will
   ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat - from Gaza to Tehran.
   Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of
   success, and must be deepened. As President, I will implement a Memorandum
   of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the
   next decade - investments to Israel’s security that will not be tied to any
   other nation. First, we must approve the foreign aid request for 2009. Going
   forward, we can enhance our cooperation on missile defense. We should export
   military equipment to our ally Israel under the same guidelines as NATO. And
   I will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself in the United
   Nations and around the world.

   Across the political spectrum, Israelis understand that real security can
   only come through lasting peace. And that is why we - as friends of Israel -
   must resolve to do all we can to help Israel and its neighbors to achieve
   it. Because a secure, lasting peace is in Israel’s national interest. It is
   in America’s national interest. And it is in the interest of the Palestinian
   people and the Arab world. As President, I will work to help Israel achieve
   the goal of two states, a Jewish state of Israel and a Palestinian state,
   living side by side in peace and security. And I won’t wait until the waning
   days of my presidency. I will take an active role, and make a personal
   commitment to do all I can to advance the cause of peace from the start of
   my Administration.

   The long road to peace requires Palestinian partners committed to making the
   journey. We must isolate Hamas unless and until they renounce terrorism,
   recognize Israel’s right to exist, and abide by past agreements. There is no
   room at the negotiating table for terrorist organizations. That is why I
   opposed holding elections in 2006 with Hamas on the ballot. The Israelis and
   the Palestinian Authority warned us at the time against holding these
   elections. But this Administration pressed ahead, and the result is a Gaza
   controlled by Hamas, with rockets raining down on Israel.

   The Palestinian people must understand that progress will not come through
   the false prophets of extremism or the corrupt use of foreign aid. The
   United States and the international community must stand by Palestinians who
   are committed to cracking down on terror and carrying the burden of
   peacemaking. I will strongly urge Arab governments to take steps to
   normalize relations with Israel, and to fulfill their responsibility to
   pressure extremists and provide real support for President Abbas and Prime
   Minister Fayyad. Egypt must cut off the smuggling of weapons into Gaza.
   Israel can also advance the cause of peace by taking appropriate steps -
   consistent with its security - to ease the freedom of movement for
   Palestinians, improve economic conditions in the West Bank, and to refrain
   from building new settlements - as it agreed to with the Bush Administration
   at Annapolis.

   Let me be clear. Israel’s security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. The
   Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive, and that allows
   them to prosper - but any agreement with the Palestinian people must
   preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized and
   defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must
   remain undivided.

   I have no illusions that this will be easy. It will require difficult
   decisions on both sides. But Israel is strong enough to achieve peace, if it
   has partners who are committed to the goal. Most Israelis and Palestinians
   want peace, and we must strengthen their hand. The United States must be a
   strong and consistent partner in this process - not to force concessions,
   but to help committed partners avoid stalemate and the kind of vacuums that
   are filled by violence. That’s what I commit to do as President of the
   United States.

   The threats to Israel start close to home, but they don’t end there. Syria
   continues its support for terror and meddling in Lebanon. And Syria has
   taken dangerous steps in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, which is
   why Israeli action was justified to end that threat.

   I also believe that the United States has a responsibility to support Israel’s
   efforts to renew peace talks with the Syrians. We must never force Israel to
   the negotiating table, but neither should we ever block negotiations when
   Israel’s leaders decide that they may serve Israeli interests. As President,
   I will do whatever I can to help Israel succeed in these negotiations. And
   success will require the full enforcement of Security Council Resolution
   1701 in Lebanon, and a stop to Syria’s support for terror. It is time for
   this reckless behavior to come to an end.

   There is no greater threat to Israel - or to the peace and stability of the
   region - than Iran. Now this audience is made up of both Republicans and
   Democrats, and the enemies of Israel should have no doubt that, regardless
   of party, Americans stand shoulder-to-shoulder in our commitment to Israel’s
   security. So while I don’t want to strike too partisan a note here today, I
   do want to address some willful mischaracterizations of my positions.

   The Iranian regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the
   region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms
   race, and raise the prospect of a transfer of nuclear know-how to
   terrorists. Its President denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel
   off the map. The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be
   to eliminate this threat.

   But just as we are clear-eyed about the threat, we must be clear about the
   failure of today’s policy. We knew, in 2002, that Iran supported terrorism.
   We knew Iran had an illicit nuclear program. We knew Iran posed a grave
   threat to Israel. But instead of pursuing a strategy to address this threat,
   we ignored it and instead invaded and occupied Iraq. When I opposed the war,
   I warned that it would fan the flames of extremism in the Middle East. That
   is precisely what happened in Iran - the hardliners tightened their grip,
   and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected President in 2005. And the United States
   and Israel are less secure.

   I respect Senator McCain, and look forward to a substantive debate with him
   these next five months. But on this point, we have differed, and we will
   differ. Senator McCain refuses to understand or acknowledge the failure of
   the policy that he would continue. He criticizes my willingness to use
   strong diplomacy, but offers only an alternate reality - one where the war
   in Iraq has somehow put Iran on its heels. The truth is the opposite. Iran
   has strengthened its position. Iran is now enriching uranium, and has
   reportedly stockpiled 150 kilos of low enriched uranium. Its support for
   terrorism and threats toward Israel have increased. Those are the facts,
   they cannot be denied, and I refuse to continue a policy that has made the
   United States and Israel less secure.

   Senator McCain offers a false choice: stay the course in Iraq, or cede the
   region to Iran. I reject this logic because there is a better way. Keeping
   all of our troops tied down indefinitely in Iraq is not the way to weaken
   Iran - it is precisely what has strengthened it. It is a policy for staying,
   not a plan for victory. I have proposed a responsible, phased redeployment
   of our troops from Iraq. We will get out as carefully as we were careless
   getting in. We will finally pressure Iraq’s leaders to take meaningful
   responsibility for their own future.

   We will also use all elements of American power to pressure Iran. I will do
   everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That
   starts with aggressive, principled diplomacy without self-defeating
   preconditions, but with a clear-eyed understanding of our interests. We have
   no time to waste. We cannot unconditionally rule out an approach that could
   prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. We have tried limited,
   piecemeal talks while we outsource the sustained work to our European
   allies. It is time for the United States to lead.

   There will be careful preparation. We will open up lines of communication,
   build an agenda, coordinate closely with our allies, and evaluate the
   potential for progress. Contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest
   in sitting down with men like Ahmadinejad just for the sake of talking. But
   as President of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and
   principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leader at a time and place
   of my choosing - if, and only if - it can advance the interests of the
   United States.

   Only recently have some come to think that diplomacy by definition cannot be
   tough. They forget the example of Truman, and Kennedy and Reagan. These
   Presidents understood that diplomacy backed by real leverage was a
   fundamental tool of statecraft. And it is time to once again make American
   diplomacy a tool to succeed, not just a means of containing failure. We will
   pursue this diplomacy with no illusions about the Iranian regime. Instead,
   we will present a clear choice. If you abandon your dangerous nuclear
   program, support for terror, and threats to Israel, there will be meaningful
   incentives - including the lifting of sanctions, and political and economic
   integration with the international community. If you refuse, we will ratchet
   up the pressure.

   My presidency will strengthen our hand as we restore our standing. Our
   willingness to pursue diplomacy will make it easier to mobilize others to
   join our cause. If Iran fails to change course when presented with this
   choice by the United States, it will be clear - to the people of Iran, and
   to the world - that the Iranian regime is the author of its own isolation.
   That will strengthen our hand with Russia and China as we insist on stronger
   sanctions in the Security Council. And we should work with Europe, Japan and
   the Gulf states to find every avenue outside the UN to isolate the Iranian
   regime - from cutting off loan guarantees and expanding financial sanctions,
   to banning the export of refined petroleum to Iran, to boycotting firms
   associated with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which has rightly been
   labeled a terrorist organization.

   I was interested to see Senator McCain propose divestment as a source of
   leverage - not the bigoted divestment that has sought to punish Israeli
   scientists and academics, but divestment targeted at the Iranian regime. It’s
   a good concept, but not a new one. I introduced legislation over a year ago
   that would encourage states and the private sector to divest from companies
   that do business in Iran. This bill has bipartisan support, but for reasons
   that I’ll let him explain, Senator McCain never signed on. Meanwhile, an
   anonymous Senator is blocking the bill. It is time to pass this into law so
   that we can tighten the squeeze on the Iranian regime. We should also pursue
   other unilateral sanctions that target Iranian banks and assets.

   And we must free ourselves from the tyranny of oil. The price of a barrel of
   oil is one of the most dangerous weapons in the world. Petrodollars pay for
   weapons that kill American troops and Israeli citizens. And the Bush
   Administration’s policies have driven up the price of oil, while its energy
   policy has made us more dependent on foreign oil and gas. It’s time for the
   United States to take real steps to end our addiction to oil. And we can
   join with Israel, building on last year’s US-Israel Energy Cooperation Act,
   to deepen our partnership in developing alternative sources of energy by
   increasing scientific collaboration and joint research and development. The
   surest way to increase our leverage in the long term is to stop bankrolling
   the Iranian regime.

   Finally, let there be no doubt: I will always keep the threat of military
   action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel. Sometimes
   there are no alternatives to confrontation. But that only makes diplomacy
   more important. If we must use military force, we are more likely to
   succeed, and will have far greater support at home and abroad, if we have
   exhausted our diplomatic efforts.

   That is the change we need in our foreign policy. Change that restores
   American power and influence. Change accompanied by a pledge that I will
   make known to allies and adversaries alike: that America maintains an
   unwavering friendship with Israel, and an unshakeable commitment to its
   security.

   As members of AIPAC, you have helped advance this bipartisan consensus to
   support and defend our ally Israel. And I am sure that today on Capitol Hill
   you will be meeting with members of Congress and spreading the word. But we
   are here because of more than policy. We are here because the values we hold
   dear are deeply embedded in the story of Israel.

   Just look at what Israel has accomplished in 60 years. From decades of
   struggle and the terrible wake of the Holocaust, a nation was forged to
   provide a home for Jews from all corners of the world - from Syria to
   Ethiopia to the Soviet Union. In the face of constant threats, Israel has
   triumphed. In the face of constant peril, Israel has prospered. In a state
   of constant insecurity, Israel has maintained a vibrant and open discourse,
   and a resilient commitment to the rule of law.

   As any Israeli will tell you, Israel is not a perfect place, but like the
   United States it sets an example for all when it seeks a more perfect
   future. These same qualities can be found among American Jews. It is why so
   many Jewish Americans have stood by Israel, while advancing the American
   story. Because there is a commitment embedded in the Jewish faith and
   tradition: to freedom and fairness; to social justice and equal opportunity.
   To tikkun olam - the obligation to repair this world.

   I will never forget that I would not be standing here today if it weren’t
   for that commitment. In the great social movements in our country’s history,
   Jewish and African Americans have stood shoulder to shoulder. They took
   buses down south together. They marched together. They bled together. And
   Jewish Americans like Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner were willing to
   die alongside a black man - James Chaney - on behalf of freedom and
   equality.

   Their legacy is our inheritance. We must not allow the relationship between
   Jews and African Americans to suffer. This is a bond that must be
   strengthened.
   Together, we can rededicate ourselves to end prejudice and combat hatred in
   all of its forms. Together, we can renew our commitment to justice.
   Together, we can join our voices together, and in doing so make even the
   mightiest of walls fall down.

   That work must include our shared commitment to Israel. You and I know that
   we must do more than stand still. Now is the time to be vigilant in facing
   down every foe, just as we move forward in seeking a future of peace for the
   children of Israel, and for all children. Now is the time to stand by Israel
   as it writes the next chapter in its extraordinary journey. Now is the time
   to join together in the work of repairing this world.

10. 10 gabrilo
    2008 június 7 @ 11:59

    Gonoszkodok kicsit. Hehe.

    http://www.thepeoplescube.com/QuoteQuiz/index.php

11. 11 webeth
    2008 június 7 @ 21:25

    Jujj, Sztálint ixeltem H Clinton heylett. Mondjuk akontextusból kiragadott politikus-duma mindig ilyen

12. 12 gabrilo
    2008 június 7 @ 22:30

    webeth,

    hihi:) Érdemes mindet végigikszelni, jók a dumák hozzá. Persze, kontextusból ki van ragadva. Mondjuk néha háton-végigfutós-hideg kíséri a hasonlóságokat:)))

    Progressives whatsoever. It’s socialism baby:))))

13. 13 nemszadista
    2008 június 8 @ 1:00

    Hm, azért mert a (világ)sajtó elkönyvelte, hogy a demokraták fognak nyerni, az még nem lesz feltétlenül úgy is..

    Mellesleg Obama eddig jobb választásnak tűnt a világ szempontjából, mint a másik kettő. Noha kétségtelenül és szokásosan gyenge a felhozatal, Ron Paulnak “persze” esélye sincs.

14. 14 webeth
    2008 június 8 @ 10:12

    Gabrilo,
    Igen végigikszeltem végül mindet mikor rájöttem, hogy mindenhol kommentálják :DDDDDDDD és LOL!

15. 15 vasika
    2008 június 8 @ 10:23

    gabrilo, nem rossz a link, bár egy picinként hatásvadászra van kihegyezve

    a sok hízelgő duma mellett meg én a kutyám (ha lenne) sem bíznám obamára. remélem, és izrael-barátként különösen, h mccain veri novemberben

16. 16 drwho
    2008 június 8 @ 10:37

    “Noha kétségtelenül és szokásosan gyenge a felhozatal.”

    ebben egyetértünk.

17. 17 Király Rák
    2008 június 8 @ 10:51

    Ezt muszáj beillesztenem, hogy lehessen fontolvahaladózni.

    McCain reagáló beszéde: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7RuX4pQPLY

    Szerintem mondanivalójában (különbségek Bush-hoz képest) és stílusában (Obama szlogenjeinek finom átértelmezése) is zseniális. Ha McCain nem lenne ilyen öreg, biztos lenne a győzelme.

18. 18 Király Rák
    2008 június 8 @ 10:53

    (szerintem egyébként McCain-nek az előző választásokat kellett volna megnyerni Bush helyett)

19. 19 shadai
    2008 június 8 @ 11:18

    McCain-nek öregember hangja van. Ageism, tudom.

20. 20 Bajnok
    2008 június 8 @ 14:00

    Ezen nyilatkozatok alapján Obama egy fekete Orbán Viktor.
    Kaméleon politika már azelőtt mielőtt megválasztották volna…
    Nem tudom hogy ezek után hogy fogja képvilselni a szavazói akaratát.
    Egyátalán el lehet hinni egy ilyen ember szavát amikor egyik nap lenyilatkozik valamit, másik nap meg megcáfolja?
    Nem lenne belőle jó elnök.
    McCain fog nyerni, meglássátok.

21. 21 Király Rák
    2008 június 8 @ 19:02

    shadai: Hát ha eccer öregember, milyen legyen neki. Nem csiripelhet minden elnökjelölt csábos Hillary-trallákat. :D

22. 22 Hadrian VII.
    2008 június 9 @ 10:45

    Anti-Semitism on Obama’s Website

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/06/anti-semitism_on_obamas_website.asp

23. 23 shadai
    2008 június 9 @ 10:52

    “The Obama campaign’s real sin here is apparently having the naïve belief that it could harness the excitement of the blogosphere without dragging in all of the detritus that goes with it. Now that the Obama campaign knows it has been providing platforms to cretins, one can expect it to take remedial steps.”

    Azt hiszem ezen a tanulságon a JP és a Konzervatórium is elgondolkozhat. ;]

24. 24 Hadrian VII.
    2008 június 9 @ 11:12

    Igen :).

    Egyébként pedig nem meglepő, hogy Obama külpolitikai álláspontja(i) (váltogatja azért gyakran) ilyen embereket vonzanak. Úgy gondolom, kicsit optimista az az álláspontod, hogy az ő regnálása jobb volna a zsidóknak és Izraelnek. De ha nyer Obama, akkor legyen neked igazad!:)

25. 25 gabrilo
    2008 június 9 @ 11:30

    webeth,

    jó mi?:))) Némelyik kommentáron borultam:)))

26. 26 gabrilo
    2008 június 9 @ 11:34

    Hadrian,

    szkepszis az amcsi demokraták irányába indokolt, akárhogy is:)))

    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTc0NDgzOTlkY2MyNzJhNDgyNGNkY2JkMWQ0NGJkOWI=

    (és minnyá gyün Lelkész, hogy mindenbül kihozom ezt a cuccost. És hát, tényleg.)

27. 27 lelkesz
    2008 június 9 @ 12:54

    A szkepszis mindig minden irányába indokolt, kedves anarchista barátom! :P
    No ha végre tudunk találkozni, körbeszkepsziseljük a várost, de most én Szegeden vagyok és az itteni légkör nem indokolja, hogy az USA elnökválasztásán törjem a fejem, mert itt jó. Egyébként meg rég nagy baj, hogy csak két párt közül lehet választani…

28. 28 lelkesz
    2008 június 9 @ 12:58

    http://us.st12.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/yhst-15933615135155_2005_4416428

    Hehe.

29. 29 gabrilo
    2008 június 9 @ 20:44

    Lelkész,

    nyem igazán:))) Az, amit ma szkepticizmusnak neveznek, az a hagy. jelentés kifordítása. És vagy szolpszizmus, vagy csak valami túlzott önbizalom:(((

    Szerintem is baj hogy pártok közül kell választani, és csak kettő közül. Ha lenne egy monarcha, felőlem hat is vitatkozhatna egymással.

30. 30 drwho
    2008 június 9 @ 21:43

    most olvasom, hogy egy két százalék most Obama előnye JM előtt, ez azárt nem túl biztató…

31. 31 shadai
    2008 június 9 @ 21:51

    A Rasmussen Reports szerint 8% az előny:
    http://href.hu/x/5zbc

    Továbbá a “kedveltségi” előny:
    kedveli/nem kedveli:
    Obama: 58/41
    McCain: 52/45
    Nagyon kedveli / nagyon nem:
    Obama: 36/27 %
    McCain: 16/21 %

    Most áll fel az összes demokrata szimpatizáns Obama mögé, a demeknek már 81% támogatja, ami azeddigi legmagasabb szám. Mivel a demek sokkal többen vannak, min a rep-ok, ez igen bíztató.
    Obamának a pénzgyűjtés is sokkal jobban megy, rengeteg a grassroots támogató, olyan emberek, akik 10-20 dollárokat adnak.
    Persze még hosszú az idő novemberig, addig még sok dolog történhet.

32. 32 drwho
    2008 június 9 @ 22:33

    remélem nem durvul el túlontúl a kampány bár tartok tőle hogy igen nasty lesz. drogmúlt, nők, vallás etc. olvastam még, hogy Clintonon keresztül akarják még szorongatni, az is gyenge pont, mindenestre egy perce sem pihenhet az Obama team. ez jó:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU09Tal3J1o

33. 33 nabokov
    2008 július 5 @ 1:57

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=s3_jh2dO78U&feature=related