Eventually, Fogh Rasmussen was selected as the consensus candidate, but at a steep price. The Dane won the job only after engaging in intensive negotiations with Turkish president Abdullah Gül hosted by Barack Obama. Fogh Rasmussen promised to appoint at least two Turks and publicly to address Muslim concerns about his response to the cartoons. More broadly, Erdoğan announced . Obama “gave us guarantees” concerning Turkish reservations about Fogh Rasmussen. The hoops that Fogh Rasmussen had to jump through to win Ankara's support can be inferred from his cringe-inducing, dhimmi-like remarks on winning the appointment: “As secretary general of NATO, I will make a very clear outreach to the Muslim world to ensure cooperation and intensify dialogue with the Muslim world. I consider Turkey a very important ally and strategic partner and I will cooperate with them in our endeavors to ensure the best cooperation with Muslim world.” वैसे तो फोग रासमुसेन का चयन सर्वसम्मति से हुआ लेकिन भारी कीमत देकर। डेनमार्की को इस पद पर नियुक्ति तब मिली जब बराक ओबामा द्वारा बुलाई गयी बैठक में उन्होंने तुर्की राष्ट्रपति अब्दुल्लाह गुल के साथ सघन विचार किया । फोग रासमुसेन ने वादा किया कि वे कम से कम दो तुर्क को नियुक्त करेंगे जो कि सार्वजनिक रूप से मुस्लिम चिन्ता और कार्टून के प्रति उनकी प्रतिक्रिया को देखेगा। अधिक विस्तार में एरडोगन ने घोषणा की कि ओबामा ने फोग रासमुसेन के प्रति तुर्की आग्रह के लिये गारंटी दी है।
22.
The Saudis are engaging in an underhanded propaganda campaign that subverts the U.S. debate concerning Arabian issues. It is vital to prevent such corruption, especially on the delicate issue of Riyadh's self-proclaimed role as America's “friend” in the war against Islamist terrorism. To do so, editors, journalists, radio and television producers, think tank directors, and speaker-series hosts need to ascertain that whoever deals with Saudi issues is not on that country's dole. A simple question, “Are you receiving funds from Saudi Arabia,” should do the trick. Related Topics: Academia , Saudi Arabia receive the latest by email: subscribe to daniel pipes' free mailing list This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL. Comment on this item सउदी एक गोपनीय संपर्क अभियान में संलग्न हैं जो अरब से संबंधित अमेरिकी बहस को बाधित करती है.यह अत्यंत महत्वपूर्ण है कि ऐसे भ्रष्टाचार को रोका जाए और वह भी इस्लामवादी आतंकवाद के विरुद्ध युद्ध में अमेरिका के मित्र होने के रियाद के स्वयंभू दावे जैसे मुद्दे पर .ऐसा करने के लिए संपादकों , पत्रकारों , रेडियो टीवी प्रस्तुतकर्ताओं , विचारक निदेशकों और व्याख्यानमाला आयोजित करने वालों को सुनिश्चित करना होगा कि सउदी मामले पर विचार रखने वाला उस देश की ओर से तो नहीं बोल रहा . एक सामान्य प्रश्न कि क्या आप सउदी अरब से आर्थिक सहायता प्राप्त करते हैं, काफी कुछ कर सकता है.
23.
This account is inaccurate in several ways (e.g. Martin Kramer had no role in founding Campus Watch), but I write specifically to state that no 'Lobby' told me to start Campus Watch. Neither the Middle East Forum nor myself has ever taken orders from some mythical 'Lobby', and specifically I decided to establish Campus Watch on my own, without direction from any outside source. I challenge Mearsheimer and Walt to provide their information that connects this 'Lobby' to my decision to establish Campus Watch. the Israel lobby is not a secret, clandestine cabal; on the contrary, it is openly engaged in interest-group politics and there is nothing conspiratorial or illicit about its behaviour. Thus, we can easily believe that Daniel Pipes has never 'taken orders' from the lobby, because the Leninist caricature of the lobby depicted in his letter is one that we clearly dismissed. Readers will also note that Pipes does not deny that his organisation, Campus Watch, was created in order to monitor what academics say, write and teach, so as to discourage them from engaging in open discourse about the Middle East. अनेक तरीके से यह कथन सत्य नहीं है (कैम्पस वॉच की स्थापना में मार्टिन क्रेमर की कोई भूमिका नहीं है) परन्तु विशेष रूप से मैं यह स्पष्ट करने के लिये लिख रहा हूँ कि कैम्पस वॉच आरम्भ करने के लिये मुझसे किसी लॉबी ने नहीं कहा था. न तो मैं और न ही मिडिल ईस्ट फोरम ने कभी भी किसी मिथकीय लॉबी से आदेश लिया और कैम्पस वॉच स्थापित करने का निर्णय मैंने स्वयं बिना किसी बाहरी आदेश के किया. मैं मियारशेमर और वॉल्ट को चुनौती देता हूँ कि उस सूचना को सार्वजनिक करें जो कैम्पस वॉच को कथित लॉबी से जोड़ती है.
24.
The second initiative originates in Lower Saxony, where the interior minister, Uwe Schünemann , also a CDU member, has stated he would consider making radical Islamists wear electronic foot tags. Doing so, he says, would allow the authorities “to monitor the approximately 3,000 violence-prone Islamists in Germany, the hate preachers [i.e., Islamist imams], and the fighters trained in foreign terrorist camps.” Electronic tags, he suggested, are practical “for violence-prone Islamists who can't be expelled to their home countries because of the threat of torture” there. But Mr. Schünemann's proposal goes well beyond these applications, tagging not just potential terrorists, but also “hate preachers” who break the law not by personally engaging in violence but by articulating beliefs that encourage others to terrorism. Tagging them breaks new conceptual ground by aggressively going to the ideological source of violence. इस संबंध में दूसरी पहल लोएर सैक्सोनी में हुई है जहां क्रिश्चियन डेमोक्रेटिक यूनियन के ही सदस्य आंतरिक मंत्री वी सुनेमान ने स्पष्ट कहा है कि वे इस बात पर विचार कर रहे हैं कि कट्टरपंथी इस्लामवादियों की गतिविधियों की जानकारी रखने के लिए उनके पैर में इलेक्ट्रोनिक यंत्र लगाया जाए . उनके अनुसार ऐसा करने से अधिकारियों को जर्मनी में उपस्थित लगभग 3000 हिंसा प्रिय इस्लामवादियों , नफरत फैलाने वाले इस्लामवादी इमामों और विदेशी आतंकवादी शिविरों में प्रशिक्षण प्राप्त करने वाले लड़ाकों पर नजर रखने में आसानी होगी . उनके अनुसार यह इलेक्ट्रोनिक यंत्र इस्लामवादियों के संबंध में व्यावहारिक होगा क्योंकि उन्हें प्रताड़ना के भय से उनके मूल देश नहीं भेजा जा सकता .
25.
Apr. 11, 2013 addenda : Some reflections that did not fit the main article: (1) Before this article appeared, I gave a several interviews ( here , here and here ) advocating tactical support for the Assad regime; these prompted name-calling by CAIR and some hysterical reactions about me urging genocide in Syria. No: I look forward to the day when Syria is at peace with itself and a good neighbor, when its government is democratic and law-abiding. But until that distant time, I prefer that evil forces direct their attentions against each other than against the outside world. (2) To the argument that early Western support for the rebels would have prevented the Islamists from dominating them ( which they now do ), I reply that Western powers did provide early support to rebels in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt and look what that achieved - Islamists dominate all three of those countries. The same would likely have been the case in Syria. Western assistance is not that influential in altering the course of an ideological movement. (3) I dislike advocating support for Assad and respect the intentions of those who share my goals but disagree with my means. I do, however, see them engaging in wishful, non-strategic thinking. (4) That my approach gives priority to strategic considerations marks it, in the context of modern Western politics, as conservative. Liberals enjoy a confidence in their own wellbeing that conservatives lack. Where liberals tend to worry about others (snail darters), conservatives tend to worry about themselves (a sufficient electricity supply). Consistent with this temperamental difference, the former focus on civilian welfare in Syria and the latter on Western security. (5) My advice is hardly original to me but is old-fashioned Realpolitik. Put differently, it fits into a divide-and-rule tradition that goes back to the Romans. (6) Assad's staying in power has the advantage that the regime's chemical weapons are less dangerous than if he fell. इस भावना के अनुरूप मेरा तर्क है कि अमेरिका को हारते हुए पक्ष की सहायता करनी चाहिये और वह कोई भी क्यों न हो, जैसा कि मई 1987 के विश्लेषण में मैंने कहा था, “ 1980 में जब इराक ने ईरान को धमकी दी थी तो हमारा हित कुछ मात्रा में ईरान के साथ था। परंतु 1982 की गर्मियों से इराक रक्षात्मक हो गया और अब वाशिंगटन पूरी तरह इसके साथ है..... भविष्य की ओर यदि देखें तो क्या इराक एक बार पुनः आक्रामक हो सकेगा वैसे तो यह सम्भव नहीं दिखता परंतु असम्भव भी नहीं है, अमेरिका को फिर से युद्ध में आना चाहिये और ईरान को सहायता करने के सम्बंध में सोचना चाहिये” ।
How to say engaging in Hindi and what is the meaning of engaging in Hindi? engaging Hindi meaning, translation, pronunciation, synonyms and example sentences are provided by Hindlish.com.
