Secretary Clinton Addresses the U.S.-Islamic World Forum

Posted by DipNote Bloggers
February 15, 2010

Interactive Travel Map | Text the Secretary | Trip Page Also see: Question and Answer Session | View Video

Earlier today, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton addressed the U.S.-Islamic World Forum, discussing ties between the United States and Muslim countries. Secretary Clinton said:

"The ties between the United States and Muslim countries and communities stretch back to America's earliest days. Morocco was the first nation to recognize American independence. Later, we supported the emergence of independent Muslim-majority states after decades of colonial rule. Americans helped establish what are still some of the finest universities in this region. And we, in turn, have been enriched by a long tradition of educational exchanges. Soldiers and sailors from U.S. and Muslim-majority countries have stood side by side in peace-keeping missions worldwide, and we have worked together to rebuild after devastating natural disasters, including the 2004 tsunami, the 2005 earthquake, and now, of course, in Haiti. And the United States joins with other nations to protect Muslims in Bosnia and Darfur from violence and suffering.

So we have a lot to reflect on that is already the substance of our relationship, and what we have accomplished together. But we know that our shared purpose and values have often been obscured by suspicion and misunderstanding. It is time, as President Obama said in his speech in Cairo, for a new beginning based on a commitment to open dialogue and equal partnership, a new beginning that confronts the tensions between us and commits all of us to doing the hard work necessary to resolve them, a new beginning that acknowledges we each have a role and a responsibility in solving the common problems we face.

Now, in the eight months since the President's speech, many around the world have answered that call. But others worry that the United States' commitment is insufficient or insincere, that we have not fully embraced the spirit of mutual respect and partnership, or that we will fail to translate that spirit into the concrete steps needed to achieve real and lasting change in the world..."Full Text



United Kingdom
February 15, 2010

Armstrong in U.K. writes:

Another excellent speech Madam Secretary.

Noticed the mic audio went on a wobble when you started talking about Iran.

When I finished listening to you, I went on a website of Islamic poetry. Very in-depth and profound, also very moving. It showed me, that we are bound together by a creative thread on a deeper level. Poetry is another way of uniting human beings across our globe. So, much in common. We forget sometimes that if we look deep enough, we are ALL are part of the spinning wheel that we are born and die into.

New Mexico, USA
February 16, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

To; Sec. of State, Hillary Clinton

CC; Dipnote Bloggers

Madam Secretary,

It goes without saying that when a government hold its own citizens hostage then it's time to get rid of the government, and engage in regime replacement therapy to secure the peace of nations.

Even if that means war against one..

China seems to be engaged in "sub-prime real estate investing" at the same moment the people of Iran are trying to repossess the premisis.
China should divest itself of such unwise investment before it loses the shirt of its back.

The people of Iran will remember who supported their freedom and who supplied armored personel carriers to the regime in order to run over protesters in the streets with.

Needless to say China cannot expect agreements with the regime to be honored after it's driven from power because of such investments in the Iranian status quo.

If the Saudis can make their transition out of investment insecurity a little easier, then by all means they should sell China the oil it needs.

Folks can make speeches and dance the diplomatic tango, but at the end of the day you're still faced with the kinetic removal of ethical infants off of the world stage, in order to solve multiple problems created by the Iranian regime that directly threatens nation's soverignity and millions of lives in the region.

So if sanction is to be effective, stop entertaining the illusion that behavior change is a rational outcome to be expected.

Use them simply to bankrupt the regime and drive it out of power, along with al;l other means at our disposal- with public intent.

It's far more honest as proposal.

For throughout history, the one thing about autocracy that holds true is its inability to change and remain a viable political entity.

It would be like the President of the USA declaring himself to be a Republican , then anticipating recieving the Democratic party nomination for president anyway next in Iran, the players pulling the strings won't allow change to happen even if Aminidijad were to try and make nice with "the West", or suddenly accept historical fact, and walk the path of peace.

Every once in awhile there proves an exception, and Ghaddafi is one that has survived a change of mindset.

But an exception does not a rule make, and hanging one's hopes on illusions of rationality is a harbringer of catastrophe.

The faster folks figure out that the Iranian regime needs to be gone off the world stage come hell or high water, the faster folks can get a grip on terrorism and instability in the region and beyond. Then too the sooner the Iranian people can stand up something that resembles democracy.

To whom it may concern I have this to say;

It's not "You're with us or against us.." it's more "You're with us...or get out of the way."

Because we'll never get unanaminity in the UNSC to remove the Iranian regime.

It's going to require the willing to stand up for everyone's right to live without the fear of nukes ruining a perfectly good civilization.

Regardless of the flack we'll take for it in doing so.

This is not a situation where a nation can take out a few nuclear sites and call it "good".

You don't leave a regime like this one in power long enough to retaliate.

I hope folks have figured this out, because the only thing more dangerous than a terrorist government with a nuke, is not dealing with it effectively.

And the world has yet to get a grip on this.

Best regards,


Maryland, USA
February 16, 2010

Patrick in Maryland writes:

Hi, Hillary,Pri-Min-Hamad & States People.

I really liked the Q&As; of the Islamic World forum they were very good.

I thought the Pri-Minister Hamad Bin Jassim
did a great job on the questions and answers.
I liked what he said, I think he was right, the people can't rush Democrocy, they need time to work towards it themselve.

I believe Minister Hamad only wants what is best for everyone even Iran, but we can't wait
forever, and wish for the best in the end...

I also thought Hillary, was great at supporting the freedoms we all should have,
no matter where we live...:)

Anyways ,Nice Forum and i heard what you were saying Both of you..Peace.and.Time.:)

Also,was Minister Hamad a Boyscout of a Jedi
He speak very good English..:)LOL

..See Ya..My Friends....:)

South Korea
February 16, 2010

Palgye in South Korea writes:

Is a fool thought of Dubai, at all

That Dubai 60% will pay a debt, declaration does and accomplishes until now and thinks that there is a danger where the economic policy which puts will shake.

Just the plan which will visit Kingdom of Saudi Arabia new, emphasizes the position from the Middle East, thinks two does making persuade with UAE together at all method. Islam there is recognition which is a sibling(?)

When yet Kingdom of Saudi Arabia which is lingering and emphasizes the national setup which UAE is unique about the chief, persuades Dubai, -
To the Middle East the discipline was relaxed, is solved a craving and thinks that financial matter will solve the problem of characteristics only of the themselves the 3rd place is necessary. In the method which entrusts the role, As like Hong Kong.

Also State of Israel does not dislike thinks the thing which will not be. The rule method which will solve the problem of the Middle East inside in democratic method, but, adopts the national operating method which maintains the tradition of the Middle East, prevents a collision and the place where will send the conversation which is informal provides.

from idiot.(The idealist who is not preparation)

When does not accept in case and all favors, the brotherly nations receive the operation circle of all nations and charge they do to make the rule receive and actual and approach is possible in the citizens and if provides a new hope, thinks that. Problem the fate of that nation of spread intelligence of crisis thinks knows.

Wyoming, USA
February 16, 2010

Greg in Wyoming writes:

Perdicaris alive or Rasuli dead!

New Mexico, USA
February 17, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:


Interesting historical reference...

How would you apply the precedent in today's world?

Or better to ask, in what current context did you think it applied?

New Mexico, USA
February 17, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

News Item;

In an interview with the BBC's Kim Ghattas, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appealed indirectly to the Iranian people not to let their country become a military dictatorship.

"You can be adversarial towards the US but still not want to see your country with its history and culture heading in that direction," she said.

Mrs Clinton's words appear to suggest that the Obama administration is seeking to exploit divisions inside Iran, says our correspondent.


Here's a fine example of an editorial foray on the news page, rather than where it the circular bin.

I'm tempted to correct the misunderstanding...

So why not? Could be interesting reading folks, so ...

I'll just apply my knowledge of the Iranian opposition to a face-value interpretation of the Secretary's remarks.

One must first understand that foreign interference in Iran's modern history has been the "boogyman" to the people's desires.

Why do I call it a "boogyman"? Because it is scarier than it actually is.

So when it becomes nessessary to interfere, because their poor excuse for a military dictatorship cloaked in religious dogma has posed imminent threat to other nations, the Iranian people could really use for the international community to level the playing field.

They understand why we must interfere most of all, and it's time folks recognized this fact of life, because that's the way it is.

Ok, so how do folks go about doing that bit of "leveling" peace-ably?

For starters, I think the Saudi King had it about right...that sanctions take time, and being in the immediate vicinity, he'd like to see a faster solution...

I concur, and here it is;

Since the people of Iran consider the government illegitimate, so must the international community, in word and deed.

How fast can folks muster up a 2/3 majority vote in the UNGA and strip the Islamic Republic of Iran of its UN membership?

For multiple reasons outstanding, I won't venture a guess.

But it sure will let the Iranian people know who's side we're all on.

Try that tommorrow, see where it gets you, and if the regime gets huffy about it, blockade their ports and shut them off from the rest of the world.

If they wish to ever again threaten to close the straits, use a can opener...

...and feed the worms to the fish.

New Mexico, USA
February 18, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:


"..So if sanction is to be effective, stop entertaining the illusion that behavior change is a rational outcome to be expected.

Use them simply to bankrupt the regime and drive it out of power, along with al;l other means at our disposal- with public intent.

It's far more honest as proposal."

EJ, Posted on Mon Feb 15, 2010


It's times like these that one must wonder whether comments from the peanut gallery like mine carry resonance in the minds of the "powers that be" in gov.

While public acceptance of a possibility is not "public intent", if one accepts the probabilities then implements sanction, it must be logicly concluded that there is public intent not just to change behavior, but to change that behavior even if it means that the regime ceases to remain in power.

A less than definitive intent perhaps, but an honest assesment.


(from State Dept daily briefing February 16, 2010)

QUESTION: -- and that Iran is becoming a military dictatorship? It seems kind of striking that given a year ago, President Obama is talking about deep respect for the Islamic Republic of Iran and sending these kind of Nowruz Persian new year greetings and talking about this country with great respect. And now, the Secretary is talking about a military dictatorship.

And I’m wondering if this is a completely different country than the Iran that President Obama was talking about last year and if your desire to engage Iran bilaterally separately from the nuclear issue has waned?

MR. DUGUID: Well, our desire to engage Iran in a productive and fruitful discussion on a broad range of issues has not diminished. However, what has diminished is the space for political action within Iran itself. Now, I think this is what the Secretary has been talking about. The Revolutionary Guard and its members and affiliates are currently in control of nine of 22 cabinet ministries, and this is an unprecedented level since the Islamic Republic was established.


I would invite Gordon Duguid, Acting Deputy Department Spokesman to revisit his statement by looking at the various ministerial appointments Aminidijad made when he first came into power in 2005. I believe 18 of 22 ministers initially appointed in the weeks after he took office were active or former Rev. Guard members.

What is even more telling is the number of mayors, governors, and other local officials that have ties to the Revolutionary Guard that have been appointed over the years.

While this may be the first time the US gov. has publicly stated the obvious, I can say with personal confidence that the US intelligence community has been considering these facts for at least the last 4.5-5 years since Aminidijad came to power.

What we witnessed in 2005 was a "soft-sell" military coup complete with campaign posters in English on the streets of Tehran as eye-candy for the Western media in the pre-determined elect-show put on by the Iranian government.

In any case that was the assesment I gave to my government in the summer of 2005.

While I can accept that my government takes its time to make determination, and has the right to determine when and where to make public their findings...I would simply suggest you'all in public diplomacy don't wait so long next time to inform your citizens, and those of the rest of the world of the facts.

There's a lot riding on them.

New Mexico, USA
February 18, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

Gordon Duguid ,February 16, 2010
Acting Deputy Department Spokesman
Daily Press Briefing

"The Revolutionary Guard and its members and affiliates are currently in control of nine of 22 cabinet ministries, and this is an unprecedented level since the Islamic Republic was established."

I'm not sure "unprecedented" is an accurate statement, as the following will illuminate.


News Item;

18 of Iran’s 21 new ministers hail from Revolutionary Guards, secret police
Sunday, 14 August 2005
Iran Focus

Tehran, Iran, Aug. 14 - The following is the final list of ministerial nominations presented by Iran’s new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the Majlis (parliament) on Sunday.

The list includes 13 ministers-designate who have been officers and officials in the Revolutionary Guards and its affiliated paramilitary agencies.

At least five of the nominees have background in the notorious secret police, the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS), and revolutionary prosecutor’s offices, including the new cabinet’s two Shiite clerics, Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ezhei and Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi. The latter was Deputy Minister in charge of MOIS for a decade, while the former was the chief representative of the judiciary in the MOIS for years.

The Majlis is scheduled to have a 40-hour debate on the nominations, beginning next Sunday. It will then proceed to vote on each nominee and is widely expected to approve all of them." />

Full Article and complete list w/ bio;


( submitted for posting in the interests of accuracy )

New Mexico, USA
February 18, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

Quote of the Day

These are very tough sanctions. A combination of those things could well trigger a regime change.

--U.S. national security adviser Gen. James Jones, on new U.N. penalties being considered for Iran as a result of its nuclear activities

The above quote of the day was "gone missing" from a previous post and was the basis for the pondering...

( "It's times like these that one must wonder whether comments from the peanut gallery like mine carry resonance in the minds of the "powers that be" in gov." )


I'll say one last thing....this whole buisiness with Iran is 31 years's getting real old folks, and I don't think anyone could be called "impatient" if they were to want to have seen this resolved as of yesterday.

As we say in New Mexico "Es tiempo"...(it's time.)

Patty M.
February 18, 2010

Patty M. writes:

Hillary's hair is getting longer....right on!

Donald M.
Virginia, USA
February 19, 2010

Donald M. in Virginia writes:

2 18 10

In reference to the country of Iran, I still remember when Iraq and Iran were at war for 8 years. The leader of Iran appears to be very nervous and trying to show off his growth of Nuclear Power, "he has the sword." My take on Iran is simple, over the years Russia has been selling Military equipment, along with Nuclear products. It doesn't take rocketscience to figure out eventually with all the right pieces he will have the Nuclear bomb. He has proven the tests with missiles and once again it won't be long before he marries up the Nuclear Weapon to the Missile, creating the "Intercontential Ballastic Missile."

Flashback to 1945 when United States attacked two Japanese cities using a fixed wing aircraft. In all aspects of security, you don't need a Missile to destroy millions of lives. Considering in 1945 it was two bombs dropped at a high altitude. However, I hope the Sanctions will do some good. My gutt tells me that when the United States leaves Iraq, this will be an Opportunity for Iran to invade and steal the oil wells. I hope our Generals and Leaders have considered this theory. Once you pull the troops out, what recourse will you have when or if Iran does go into Iraq?

I noticed on the news Iran was bragging about 20 percent enrichment of Uranium. The leader seems to make alot of threats, "sabor rattling."

How ironic the Unitied States can go to the world and say were building Nuclear Power Plants then tell others Nations they cannot? We tell other nations to disband its Nuclear weapons and yet we continue to store these deadly weapons. A balance has to happen.

I think we all can agree that Nuclear Power is clean energy. What is not being talked about is when you have Major Earthquakes in the area of a Nuclear Power Plant. I'm also sure that someone will comment by saying, "The power plants are placed away from the fault lines" A good example, Japans largest Nuclear Power plant years back had an earthquake and it shook the power plant. We also know with 3-Mile Island and Russia both experienced accidents. The question remains on how many Nations around the world have Nuclear power and produce Nuclear Weapons? How much of Weapons Grade has the Russians sold over the years, have they accounted for all the Material?

We have some of the most brilliant minds in the world and our best is still Nuclear Power? I'm thinking this form of energy regardless of how clean and how many millions or billions of dollars it generates, there still needs to be a replacement that is more safe to the public and less harmful when or if the next Earthquake happens for the environment. If Global Warming or Climate Change is about using alternative energy and renewable power, then a thought needs to presented using a new energy product to replace Nuclear Power, then you wouldn't have to spend millions or billions on the waste materials or have to worry about Nuclear Weapons or the creation. Subsequently, or the victims from an accident or from Nuclear Warfare.

The world would be far safer without Nuclear Power or Nuclear Weapons. The United Nations should draft up a resolution that prevents Nations from building Nuclear Missiles or Rockets, or even Nuclear Bombs. It should also block Nations from selling these kinds of weapons to any country in the world.


New Mexico, USA
February 22, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

News item;

"Iran has warned that airlines will be banned from flying into its airspace, unless they use the term "Persian Gulf" on their in-flight monitors.

The transport minister has threatened to impound planes that fail to comply."



And if we simply designate the geopgraphic feature as "The gulf of idiocy." as being most politically correct, what then?

As stated in an earlier post on this thread, "..hanging one's hopes on illusions of rationality is a harbringer of catastrophe."

No more do I want to hear any spokesman of the US Dept of State declare that " ..the ball is in their court."

You leave the driving to mullahs and the Rev. Guard, you are looking at a multiple car pile-up.

Get a grip while you still can.


Latest Stories