经典的英文演讲稿 | 楼主 | 2017-08-06 08:58:25 共有3个回复
  1. 1经典的英文演讲稿
  2. 2小布什离职的中英文演讲稿(经典)
  3. 3100篇美国经典英文演讲稿

经典的英文演讲稿2017-08-06 08:57:28 | #1楼回目录

(1)The World Health Organization is urging health officials to ban commonly-available blood tests for tuberculosis. W.H.O. officials made the call after two studies found that results from a commonly used test are undependable and misleading.

The blood tests are low-cost and produce fast results. They are widely used in developing countries, especially India. The Indian government says the country has more than two million new cases of TB a year.


A blood test used to detect tuberculosis.

But, researchers say the tests being sold are dangerously inaccurate. They say the results are wrong in fifty percent of patients.

David Dowdy studies infectious diseases at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland. He led one of the studies.

DAVID DOWDY: "These tests are actively doing people harm by causing them either to take medicines that they don't need or delaying the diagnosis that they actually do need, to get better."

Traditional tests for TB examine the sputum, a material found in a person's lungs. Active TB is identified if certain bacterium grows in the test material. However, these tests take longer to carry out. Dr. Dowdy says the blood tests are widely used because of the speed of results.

DAVID DOWDY: "What these tests do is they measure antibodies in the blood against TB so anytime anyone has been infected with TB at any time in their life, they will develop antibodies. The problem is that one person's antibodies are not going to be the same as another person's antibodies. And we don't have a test yet that can detect these antibodies acrothe board."

The leader of the other study was Madhukar Pai, an epidemiologist at McGill University in Montreal, Canada. He says the tests are usually used by private medical centers -- not government TB control programs.

MADHUKAR PAI: "So these tests are uniformly not used in the developed world. They are mostly used in countries with weak regulation, and lack of regulation allows these sorts of tests to be on the market and used freely."

Experts say the blood tests are a big businein developing countries, worth millions of dollars a year. The World Health Organization says a million of the tests are done every year. But, the tests are not approved by any recognized supervisory group.

Dr. Pai also says the WHO is pushing scientists to continue research for a quick test.

MADHUKAR PAI: "[Be]cause someday we want a simple dipstick-like test for TB, as we have for HIV and malaria. But right now we don't have such a test for TB for point of care use."

(2)BARBARA KLEIN: For human ancestors, caves were considered places of wonder and mystery. Caves may not be so mysterious today. But they are still filled with unusual creatures and environments that hold great interest for both scientists and visitors.

There are millions of caves around the world. They often can be found on the side of a mountain or hill. Caves are home to some o

f the strangest creatures on earth. These include hydrogen-eating bacteria and insects without eyes.

Fred Luiszer is a cave expert and works at the University of Colorado in Boulder. He says that even space scientists are interested in life underground.

FRED LUISZER: "If they find life on other moons and other planets, life will probably be very similar to what we're finding in caves."

STEVE EMBER: In dark passageways, scientists have discovered small organisms that show promise in fighting cancer. But other cave life can be deadly. A sulphur cave in Colorado is home to a rare form of poisonous bacteria. Their formations look like mucus, the sticky material that protects breathing passages in the body. Frank Luiszer says their scientific name comes from the common expression for what drips out of your nose -- snot.

Penn State/Dan Jones

Snottite is a rare form of gooey, dangling, toxic bacteria that looks like mucus.

FRED LUISZER: "They are called snottites. I mean, when you look at one of them in the cave, it looks just like snot. I'm not kidding you."

STEVE EMBER: Snottites get their energy from sulfur in the air. They also produce a poisonous acid. This can make the cave dangerous for people who are not careful.

FRED LUISZER: "You paout immediately. And if you stayed in that environment for probably, I'm guessing more than an hour or two, it would kill you."

BARBARA KLEIN: Not all things in caves are small organisms. Scientists in Colorado recently discovered a small, red scorpion-like creature that is blind. Bats also live in caves. Mark Maslyn is a geologist and caving expert. He says cavers must be careful not to harm bat colonies.

MARK MASLYN: "Bats are hibernating creatures. And if you wake them up during the wintertime, which is easy to do lights and noise and things like that, then they go outside and their food source, insects, is not available to them, and they die off."

BARBARA KLEIN: Wearing protective clothing, Mister Maslyn walks past visitors in the Cave of the Winds in Colorado Springs. He enters a hidden cave he helped discover.

MARK MASLYN: "This is not on the normal commercial tour."

STEVE EMBER: Using a headlamp for light, he opens an environmental door that leads to what he calls an "easy" tunnel opening. It measures half a meter in width.

MARK MASLYN: "That's the tightest we're doing today."

STEVE EMBER: On the other side of this tunnel is a rock formation that looks like a large crystal flower. Such formations are called anthodites. Mark Maslyn says cavers in the past would take anthodites home with them. He says he always follows this advice for cavers: "Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints, kill nothing but time."

This is good advice to make sure that future generations will also enjoy visiting caves and their many natural wonders.


BARBARA KLEIN: Many archeologists believe that early humans came to North America by crossing the Bering Strait

about fifteen to eighteen thousand years ago. They moved from place to place, hunting and gathering food. Starting about two thousand years ago, some tribes settled in large, permanent villages. An archeology project in western Canada aims to find out why this change took place.

Archeologists from Washington State University and the University of British Colombia are studying an early settlement of the Coast Salish people. Colin Grier is head of a ten-member team studying what he says is one of this group's best-protected villages.


STEVE EMBER: The dig is taking place in Dionisio Point Provincial Park on Galiano Island in British Colombia.

COLIN GRIER: "Why did the transformation happen when it happened? That's probably the most difficult question to answer. When do people start to settle down?"

VOA - T. Banse

Colin Grier (center) discusses a find with graduate students Chris Arnett (left) and Kelly Derr (right).

STEVE EMBER: Mister Grier's team wants to understand what caused a tribe that moved from place to place to settle and develop a more complex society.

In many cultures, the rise of village life is linked with the start of farming.

COLIN GRIER: "But of course, here no one invented agriculture."

STEVE EMBER: Instead, the Salish people depended on fish, clams, wild animals and plants.

BARBARA KLEIN: The archeologists have identified the ruins of six large houses, which formed two neighboring villages. The largest house could shelter as many as ten families. Experts say the buildings were occupied about one thousand five hundred years ago.

Professor Grier and his team can study objects in and around the ruins to learn about economic changes in the tribe. They can also learn about how tribe members gathered wealth and established a social clasystem.

One possible theory about why ancient tribes settled down and formed villages is because of population pressures.

STEVE EMBER: The researchers have worked closely on this project with a local Indian tribe. Penelakut tribal member Robert Sam says he believes ancestors of his lived in the village. He says he supports the dig.

ROBERT SAM: "It is really interesting to me to see the work that is being done. It shows more of where we were, all the sites that need to be catalogued for our people, our younger generation."

STEVE EMBER: Like other tribes, the Penelakut are concerned that archeological digs could harm human remains. But Mister Sam says there is little risk of that since burial areas were outside the village.

Colin Grier has worked in this area off and on since nineteen ninety-seven. He has enough financial support for two more summer seasons. He hopes that is long enough to learn more about the Salish people.


BARBARA KLEIN: College students from all over the world are competing in the United States Department of Energy's Solar Decathlon. Their goal is to design and build the most inventive, least costly and good looking s

olar-powered house. The Department of Energy says the event helps educate students and the public about clean-energy design and its cost-saving possibilities.

Teams competing for the top prize will be rebuilding their completed projects next month on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.

STEVE EMBER: One of the teams is from Middlebury College in the state of Vermont. This is the first time that students from Middlebury have taken part in the Solar Decathlon since it was first held nine years ago.


Students have been building the small house for months. Middlebury student Addison Godine says that during the summer he worked on the house about ten hours a day.

ADDISON GODINE: "Yeah, it's been a lot of work, but it's finally paying off. The house looks as good as we could have hoped just considering we're the liberal arts team against Cal Tech and all sorts of engineering schools like that. We're the underdogs, but we think we'll do okay."

BARBARA KLEIN: The Department of Energy chooses twenty teams for the Solar Decathlon. Each must design and build a house that is one hundred percent powered by the sun. This is the first year the houses will also be judged on their cost effectiveness. Team Germany won the competition in two thousand nine.

That year, Middlebury students traveled to Washington to see the winning house and the others. They decided they wanted to create a family home, not a single person home. The Middlebury solar-house is shaped like a traditional New England farmhouse. It includes two bedrooms, one washroom and a large living space.

Student Melissa Segil helped create the design.

MELISSA SEGIL: "People are immediately taken by the amount of light in the house. I think people also really like the kitchen."

STEVE EMBER: Students came up with ideas for the house, but had help from professional builders. The Department of Energy gave each team one hundred thousand dollars. But it will cost a lot more to build the house and travel to Washington. So students have raised money for the project.

The Middlebury College house is almost finished. Soon, students will have to take it apart, transport it to Washington, and rebuild it. Addison Godine says students at Middlebury learn a great deal about the world's problems, especially environmental ones.

Courtesy Middlebury College

Professional builders worked with students to construct the solar-powered house.

ADDISON GODINE: "And this competition is our opportunity to create a solution to these problems. Which is really an amazing opportunity."

BARBARA KLEIN: The Solar Decathlon houses will be open to the public from September twenty third to October second. Like the Olympic decathlon, this event is made up of ten events. Houses are judged in ten areas including engineering, building design, communications, and energy balance.

The awards ceremony will take place on October first. The Department of Energy has videos from all twenty teams on its w

ebsite. For a link to that page, visit our website, http://www.oh100.com .


STEVE EMBER: This program was written and produced by Dana Demange with reporting by Shelley Schlender, Nina Keck, and Tom Banse. I'm Barbara Klein.

(3)A movie from Cameroon called "The Big Banana" has come to the United States. It looks at issues with the banana industry like disputed land rights, food insecurity and pollution.


This woman in Cameroon says the land belongs to local villagers and they are asking operators of banana plantations to give it back.

Franck Hameni Bieleu directed the documentary film. He says officials prevented a showing in Yaounde, the capital. He says making the movie was difficult, and even led to his brief detention.

FRANCK BIELEU: "I got arrested because the chief of that part of the village did not want me to film because he is being paid by the banana company. You understand, the thing is, everything around that area is controlled by the company. If you look at the congressman of the region, he is also the director of public relations of the company. The minister of trade of Cameroon is also president of the board of directors of the company."

The company, Plantations du Haut Penja, is French and American owned. Representatives would not talk to the filmmakers. The company and Cameroonian officials did not answer a request for a VOA interview.

Mr. Bieleu says large parts of fertile land in Cameroon are being used for banana exports. As a result, local residents have more and more difficulty growing their own food or finding food to buy.

Also, the use of pesticide chemicals is blamed for polluting water and causing health problems. Villagers accuse the company of destroying their fields to expand the banana plantations after getting land leases from the government.

Mr. Bieleu says the problem exists acroAfrica as foreigners increasingly invest in agricultural land. He says government corruption is stronger than the people's traditional rights to the land.

FRANCK BIELEU: "When a company arrives and just shows the money, the big cash, what happens is the government just gives them the land that they want, and these people cannot defend themselves because they do not have any rights on that land."

Emira Woods with the American-based Institute for Policy Studies helped organize showing the film in the United States. In her opinion the biggest issue facing Africa this century is what many activists call the "land grab."

EMIRA WOODS: "The structure of the problem has to be changed so that more and particularly small- and medium-sized farmers have the opportunities to remain on their land. And at the moment, because of threats from multinational corporations, from sovereign wealth funds, whether it is Saudi Arabia or Iran, the list is actually growing of countries that are looking to Africa as a source of acceto land when arable land is becoming much more scarce on this planet."

The organizers

said they hoped Washington policy makers would watch the film to better understand the need to protect local food production around the world.

(4)A new study looks at privacy in a world where computers can increasingly recognize faces in a crowd or online. Alessandro Acquisti at Carnegie Mellon University's Heinz College in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, led the study.

Professor Acquisti says social networks like Facebook and LinkedIn represent some of the world's largest databases of identities. He sees increasing threats to privacy in facial recognition software and cloud computing -- the ability to store huge amounts of information in data centers.

ALESSANDRO ACQUISTI: "The convergence of all these technologies -- face recognition, social networks, cloud computing -- and all these advances in statistical re-identification techniques and data mining are creating this world where you can blend together online and offline data. You can start from an anonymous face and end up with sensitive inferences about that person."

Recognition systems measure things like the size and position of a nose, the distance between the eyes and the shape of cheekbones. The software compares lots of images to try to identify the person. This is what the professor means by "statistical re-identification techniques."

Facial recognition programs are used in police and security operations. But the software is increasingly popular in other uses, including social media sites.

For the study, the Carnegie Mellon team used software from Pittsburg Pattern Recognition, or PittPat. Google bought that company last month. The software can recognize faces in photos and videos.

The researchers did three experiments. First, they collected profile photos from a dating website. Its users try to protect their privacy by not listing their real name. But comparing their photos to pictures on Facebook identified one out of ten people.

In the second experiment, the Carnegie Mellon researchers asked permission to take pictures of students on campus. They compared these to photos on Facebook. This time they correctly identified one-third of the students.

In the third experiment, they tried to see how much they could learn about people just from a photo. They found not only names but birthdates, personal interests and even locations, when people listed them. And Professor Acquisti says the technology is only improving.

ALESSANDRO ACQUISTI: "Because face recognizers keep improving accuracy, because cloud computing keeps offering more power, and because more and more images of ourselves are going to be online, we are getting really close to this future where what we did as a proof of concept will be possible to do by anyone on a massive scale."

In June, Facebook launched a facial recognition system to help users "tag" or list the names of people in photos. Germany last month became the first country to declare this software an illegal violation of privacy.


B DOUGHTY: And I'm Bob Doughty. Back in May, we did a program about untraditional couples in the United States. Since then there have been some developments.

FAITH LAPIDUS: For example, same-sex couples now have a right to marry in the state of New York. New York became the sixth and largest state to make same-sex marriage legal. The new law took effect in late July.

BOB DOUGHTY: And there are new findings about cohabitating couples in America. This week on our program, we look at some of the reasons why more couples are deciding to live together without getting married.

FAITH LAPIDUS: And, later, we tell you about another development, although this one involves a traditional group. More married couples are staying married.


BOB DOUGHTY: Population experts at the Census Bureau say cohabitation rates jumped between two thousand nine and two thousand ten. There was a thirteen percent increase in the number of couples who started living together without getting married first.

What could have caused such a big increase in just one year? The Great Recession -- the worst downturn in America's economy since the Great Depression in the nineteen thirties. Officially the recession lasted eighteen months. The economy began to grow again in June of two thousand nine.

But the Commerce Department now says the recession was even worse than it thought. And the recovery has been slower than expected. Some economists are warning of the possibility of another recession, a double dip.

FAITH LAPIDUS: Researchers say the Great Recession played a big part in pushing cohabitation rates higher. Now, almost one in ten opposite-sex couples in the United States live together outside marriage.

Increasingly a major difference between couples who get married and couples who do not is money.

Charlie Pinto married his girlfriend in New Jersey earlier this year. Both of them are twenty-six. They met in college, dated for a while, then moved in together. Charlie admits the only way they could pay for the wedding they wanted was with help from their parents.

CHARLIE PINTO: "We wouldn't have been able to have a wedding if it wasn't for our families because we just don't have the money to spend."

Charlie works for a start-up Internet company. His wife, Tracey, is a special education teacher.

Charlie says the wedding cost more than twenty-five thousand dollars. That is typical. A popular wedding website took a survey of American couples. http://www.oh100.com found that in two thousand nine, the average couple spent almost twenty-seven thousand dollars on their wedding.

For some couples, that price may be out of reach.

Yet no one has to spend that much. A judge or court clerk can perform a marriage ceremony for as little as twenty-five dollars in some states.

BOB DOUGHTY: The cost of a wedding is not the only financial factor that couples consider in deciding whether and when to get married. Many people also think about whether they can aff

ord to take care of a family.

D'Vera Cohn is a researcher and writer for the Pew Research Center. Her team did an opinion survey asking people if they thought it was important to be a good provider in order to be married.

D'VERA COHN: "Most people say it's very important for a man to be able to support a family in order to marry, and about a third say it's important for a woman to be able to support a family in order to marry."

Americans may agree that couples should be financially secure before they get married. Yet the weak economy has made financial security even harder to reach. The unemployment rate doubled between two thousand seven and two thousand nine. The rate has fallen but still it was 9.1 percent in July.

FAITH LAPIDUS: The difficulty of finding and keeping a job may be one reason why some couples are choosing not to marry. D'Vera Cohn says it might also be a reason why more couples are deciding to live together.

D'VERA COHN: "We asked cohabiters whether household finances played a role in their decision to move in together. And about a third of them said it did -- of couples who had ever lived together, people who had ever lived as an unmarried couple. So there are indications that people are thinking about money when they're cohabitating."

In other words, couples find they can save money by living together. But they may not feel they have enough money to get married.

Brad Wilcox is a sociology professor at the University of Virginia and head of a pro-marriage group, the National Marriage Project. He says most Americans today expect to live a comfortable, middle-clalifestyle after they get married. And that kind of life -- a house, a car, nice clothes -- is hard for those who do not have much money.

BOB DOUGHTY: Researchers have found something else that increasingly influences decisions about marriage: a college education. Fifty years ago, about three-fourths of American adults were married, no matter how much education they had.

Today, only slightly more than half of adults are married. And most of those married people have college degrees.

Remember Charlie Pinto, the man in New Jersey who got married this year? He and Tracey are examples of this big change in American society.

REPORTER: "Did you both go to college?"

CHARLIE PINTO: "Yes. We did go to college. She went to college as well as me."

REPORTER: "And graduate school?"

CHARLIE PINTO: "No, but that is probably going to be planned for her at some time in the future."

FAITH LAPIDUS:This connection between education and marriage seems to be having several effects. D'Vera Cohn at the Pew Research Center says the first is that Americans are waiting longer to get married.

D'VERA COHN: "In general, college-educated people marry at later ages. Some of that is associated with waiting for their education to be done and to get established in a career."

In other words, marriage now often gets delayed until people finish college, the

n maybe graduate school, then establish a career.

American women now marry for the first time at a median age of twenty-six. Median means half are older and half are younger. The median age for men is twenty-eight.

Men and women are getting married five years later than they did in the nineteen fifties, and a year later than they did twenty years ago.

BOB DOUGHTY: A second effect of education relates again to money. Some people believe they do not have enough money to get married. But getting married can make a financial difference.

Pew researchers found that married couples age thirty to forty-four without college degrees earned about twenty percent more than similar couples who only lived together. Couples in their thirties and early forties with college degrees earned more than twice as much as unmarried, less-educated adults of the same age.

D'Vera Cohn says one reason is probably children.

D'VERA COHN: "What we found was that cohabiters who did not have college degrees were much more likely than cohabiters who do have college degrees to have children in the household, maybe from a prior relationship, maybe outside of marriage, and that really affects their ability to bring in good income."

In short, unmarried couples without college degrees are more likely to have children to support. Researchers say couples with college degrees rarely have children unlethey are married.

Combined, these factors have reshaped what an American family means. More children than in the past grow up with only one parent or with adults they are not related to. It might be a mother's boyfriend or a father's girlfriend. More adults are staying single or staying single longer. And marriage is becoming lecommon, at least among people who did not go to college.

Traditional nuclear families -- meaning married parents with children -- are now in the minority.


FAITH LAPIDUS: Some couples cannot afford to get married. Other couples cannot afford to get divorced. Sanford Ain says the Great Recession has forced some people to stay together -- and he should know.

Mr. Ain is a divorce lawyer in Washington and a fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. He says in the last five years, fewer people have come to his office seeking a divorce.

SANFORD AIN: "People are just unable to afford to get divorced and create two households. They're forced to remain together, at least for the time being."

As a result, he says, many couples may be trying harder to make their relationship work.

SANFORD AIN: "Whereas before, when people had the economic wherewithal to separate more easily, they were leinclined to make their marriage work. Now I think people are forced to make their marriage work for the benefit of themselves and their children."

BOB DOUGHTY: Ending a relationship might seem easier for couples who are unmarried and unhappy. But Mr. Ain has seen an increase in those who wish they could break up, but do n

ot know how to split their money fairly.

SANFORD AIN: "We're also seeing a rise in disagreements among people who are living together -- unmarried cohabitants who have built up equity in properties and savings accounts and other ways that are trying to figure out how to resolve those because there aren't laws that clearly define what the rights are of unmarried cohabitants."

Saying goodbye is not so simple when you own a house together or have joint finances or other legal responsibilities as a couple.

FAITH LAPIDUS: Sanford Ain is in his mid-sixties. In his generation, he says, most people got married right after high school or college. Does he have an opinion about whether waiting is good or bad?

SANFORD AIN: "I think what's important is that people reach a certain level of maturity before making any commitment, and certainly a commitment as important as marriage."

In nineteen eighty, the American divorce rate was about fifty percent. That only means the number of couples who got divorced was about half the number who got married that year. That was right after legal changes around the country made it easier for couples to get divorced.

But some people get married and divorced more than once. So measuring the exact divorce rate is difficult. But members of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers believe that not as many couples are getting divorced anymore. And recent census data showed that, compared to thirty years ago, more younger women are staying married.

One reason might be that many of them grew up with divorced parents and want to try hard to avoid a repeat.

In two thousand nine, among women who had ever been married, only one-fourth of those in their twenties, thirties and forties had ever been divorced. But of course, fewer of them had ever been married to begin with.

小布什离职的中英文演讲稿(经典)2017-08-06 08:57:46 | #2楼回目录












正如所有前任总统一样,我也曾经历过挫折.如果可能的话,我会采取不一样的方式来应对这些措施.但是,我总是为国家利益的最大化来行动.你也许会不同意我所做出的一些决定,但我希望你能理解我是愿意采取这些措施的.未来的几十年,美国将面对更多的艰难抉择,而有一些指导性原则可以塑造我们的道路. 尽管我们的国家要比7年前更为安全,但目前美国最严峻的威胁仍然是另一场恐怖袭击.我们的敌人十分耐心,并且决心要再次发动袭击.美国没有故意挑起冲突.但是我们肩负着庄严的责任,必须同恐怖主义作斗争.我们不能骄傲自满,我们要坚定决心,我们绝不能放松警惕.与此同时,我们必须带着信心和清晰的目标参与世界事务.面对来自海外的威胁,在国内寻求安慰是一种诱人的举措.但是我们必须拒绝孤立主义与保护主义.退缩只会找来危险.在21世纪,国内的安全和繁荣需要依靠国外自由的扩展.如果美国不领导自由事业,那么自由事业就将无所适从.



我了解我们民族的特质,因此我也相信美国的明天会更美好.这是一个鼓励移民们为自由的梦想而去尝试一切事情的国家,这是一个在面对危险使仍然镇定的国家,这是一个面对苦难仍抱有同情心的国家.我们在身边的每一个人身上都可以看到美国的特征.今晚,受我和夫人劳拉的邀请,一切代表也来到了白宫. 我在外科医生克里索夫身上看到了美国人民的伟大个性.克里索夫的儿子,一名海军,在伊拉克光荣地献出了自己的生命.当我见到克里索夫和他家人的时候,他告诉了我一个惊人的消息:他告诉我,为了缅怀儿子,他希望加入美国海军医疗团.克里索夫已经60岁了,超过了年龄限制,但是他的申请得到了批准.在过去的一年中,克里索夫接受了良好的训练,但已经荣升少校的他今晚不能来到这里,他很快就会前往伊拉克,在那里他可以救助我们受伤的勇士并继续他儿子为完成的事业.




Fellow citizens: For eight years, it has been my honor to serve as your President. The first decade of this new century has been a period of consequence -- a time set apart. Tonight, with a thankful heart, I have asked for a final opportunity to share some thoughts on the journey that we have traveled together, and the future of our nation. Five days from now, the world will witnethe vitality of American democracy. In a tradition dating back to our founding, the presidency will pato a successor chosen by you, the American people. Standing on the steps of the Capitol will be a man whose history reflects the enduring promise of our land. This is a moment of hope and pride for our whole nation. And I join all Americans in offering best wishes to President-Elect Obama, his wife Michelle, and their two beautiful girls.

Tonight I am filled with gratitude -- to Vice President Cheney and members of my administration; to Laura, who brought joy to this house and love to my life; to our wonderful daughters, Barbara and Jenna; to my parents, whose examples have provided strength for a lifetime. And above all, I thank the American people for the trust you have given me. I thank you for the prayers that have lifted my spirits. And I thank you for the countleacts of courage, generosity, and grace that I have witnessed these past eight years.

This evening, my thoughts return to the first night I addressed you from this house -- September the 11th, 2001. That morning, terrorists took nearly 3,000 lives in the worst attack on America since Pearl Harbor. I remember standing in the rubble of the World Trade Center three days later, surrounded by rescuers who had been working around the clock. I remember talking to brave souls who charged through smoke-filled corridors at the Pentagon, and to husbands and wives whose loved ones became heroes aboard Flight 93. I remember Arlene Howard, who gave me her fallen son's police shield as a reminder of all that was lost. And I still carry his badge.

As the years passed, most Americans were able to return to life much as it had been before 9/11. But I never did. Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our nation. I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe.

Over the past seven years, a new Department of Homeland Security has been created. The military, the intelligence community, and the FBI have been transformed. Our nation is equipped with new tools to monitor the terrorists' movements, freeze their finances, and break up their plots. And with strong allies at our side, we have taken the fight to the terrorists and those who support them. Afghanistan has gone from a nation where the Taliban harbored al Qaeda and stoned women in the streets to a young democracy that is fighting terror and encouraging girls to go to school. Iraq has gone from a brutal dictatorship and a sworn enemy of America to an Arab democracy at the heart of the Middle East and a friend of the United States.

There is legitimate debate about many of these decisions. But there can be little debate about the results. America has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on our soil. This is a tribute to those who toil night and day to keep us safe -- law enforcement officers, intelligence analysts, homeland security and diplomatic personnel, and the men and women of the United States Armed Forces.

Our nation is blessed to have citizens who volunteer to defend us in this time of danger. I have cherished meeting these selflepatriots and their families. And America owes you a debt of gratitude. And to all our men and women in uniform listening tonight: There has been no higher honor than serving as your Commander-in-Chief.

The battles waged by our troops are part of a broader struggle between two dramatically different systems. Under one, a small band of fanatics demands total obedience to an oppressive ideology, condemns women to subservience, and marks unbelievers for murder. The other system is based on the conviction that freedom is the universal gift of Almighty God, and that liberty and justice light the path to peace.

This is the belief that gave birth to our nation. And in the long run, advancing this belief is the only practical way to protect our citizens. When people live in freedom, they do not willingly choose leaders who pursue campaigns of terror. When people have hope in the

future, they will not cede their lives to violence and extremism. So around the world, America is promoting human liberty, human rights, and human dignity. We're standing with dissidents and young democracies, providing AIDS medicine to dying patients -- to bring dying patients back to life, and sparing mothers and babies from malaria. And this great republic born alone in liberty is leading the world toward a new age when freedom belongs to all nations.

For eight years, we've also strived to expand opportunity and hope here at home. Acroour country, students are rising to meet higher standards in public schools. A new Medicare prescription drug benefit is bringing peace of mind to seniors and the disabled. Every taxpayer pays lower income taxes. The addicted and suffering are finding new hope through faith-based programs. Vulnerable human life is better protected. Funding for our veterans has nearly doubled. America's air and water and lands are measurably cleaner. And the federal bench includes wise new members like Justice Sam Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts

When challenges to our prosperity emerged, we rose to meet them. Facing the prospect of a financial collapse, we took decisive measures to safeguard our economy. These are very tough times for hardworking families, but the toll would be far worse if we had not acted. All Americans are in this together. And together, with determination and hard work, we will restore our economy to the path of growth. We will show the world once again the resilience of America's free enterprise system.

Like all who have held this office before me, I have experienced setbacks. There are things I would do differently if given the chance. Yet I've always acted with the best interests of our country in mind. I have followed my conscience and done what I thought was right. You may not agree with some of the tough decisions I have made. But I hope you can agree that I was willing to make the tough decisions.

The decades ahead will bring more hard choices for our country, and there are some guiding principles that should shape our course.

While our nation is safer than it was seven years ago, the gravest threat to our people remains another terrorist attack. Our enemies are patient, and determined to strike again. America did nothing to seek or deserve this conflict. But we have been given solemn responsibilities, and we must meet them. We must resist complacency. We must keep our resolve. And we must never let down our guard.

At the same time, we must continue to engage the world with confidence and clear purpose. In the face of threats from abroad, it can be tempting to seek comfort by turning inward. But we must reject isolationism and its companion, protectionism. Retreating behind our borders would only invite danger. In the 21st century, security and prosperity at home depend on the expansion of liberty abroad. If America does not lead the cause of freedom, that cause will not be led.

As we addrethese challenges -- and others we cannot foresee tonight -- America must maintain our moral clarity. I've often spoken to you about good and evil, and this has made some uncomfortable. But good and evil are present in this world, and between the two of them there can be no compromise. Murdering the innocent to advance an ideology is wrong every time, everywhere. Freeing people from oppression and despair is eternally right. This nation must continue to speak out for justice and truth. We must always be

willing to act in their defense -- and to advance the cause of peace.

President Thomas Jefferson once wrote, "I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past." As I leave the house he occupied two centuries ago, I share that optimism. America is a young country, full of vitality, constantly growing and renewing itself. And even in the toughest times, we lift our eyes to the broad horizon ahead.

I have confidence in the promise of America because I know the character of our people. This is a nation that inspires immigrants to risk everything for the dream of freedom. This is a nation where citizens show calm in times of danger, and compassion in the face of suffering. We see examples of America's character all around us. And Laura and I have invited some of them to join us in the White House this evening.

We see America's character in Dr. Tony Recasner, a principal who opened a new charter school from the ruins of Hurricane Katrina. We see it in Julio Medina, a former inmate who leads a faith-based program to help prisoners returning to society. We've seen it in Staff Sergeant Aubrey McDade, who charged into an ambush in Iraq and rescued three of his fellow Marines.

We see America's character in Bill Krissoff -- a surgeon from California. His son, Nathan -- a Marine -- gave his life in Iraq. When I met Dr. Krissoff and his family, he delivered some surprising news: He told me he wanted to join the Navy Medical Corps in honor of his son. This good man was 60 years old -- 18 years above the age limit. But his petition for a waiver was granted, and for the past year he has trained in battlefield medicine. Lieutenant Commander Krissoff could not be here tonight, because he will soon deploy to Iraq, where he will help save America's wounded warriors -- and uphold the legacy of his fallen son.

In citizens like these, we see the best of our country - resilient and hopeful, caring and strong. These virtues give me an unshakable faith in America. We have faced danger and trial, and there's more ahead. But with the courage of our people and confidence in our ideals, this great nation will never tire, never falter, and never fail.

It has been the privilege of a lifetime to serve as your President. There have been good days and tough days. But every day I have been inspired by the greatneof our country, and uplifted by the goodneof our people. I have been blessed to represent this nation we love. And I will always be honored to carry a title that means more to me than any other - citizen of the United States of America.

And so, my fellow Americans, for the final time: Good night. May God blethis house and our next President. And may God bleyou and our wonderful country. Thank you. (Applause.)

100篇美国经典英文演讲稿2017-08-06 08:55:28 | #3楼回目录

美国经典英文演讲100篇:Brandenburg Gate Address

Ronald Reagan

Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate

delivered 12 June 1987, West Berlin

[AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED: Text version below transcribed directly from audio.


Thank you. Thank you, very much.

Chancellor Kohl, Governing Mayor Diepgen, ladies and gentlemen: Twenty four years ago, President John F. Kennedy visited Berlin, and speaking to the people of this city and the world at the city hall. Well since then two other presidents have come, each in his turn to Berlin. And today, I, myself, make my second visit to your city.

We come to Berlin, we American Presidents, because it's our duty to speak in this place of freedom. But I must confess, we’re drawn here by other things as well; by the feeling of history in this city -- more than 500 years older than our own nation; by the beauty of the Grunewald and the Tiergarten; most of all, by your courage and determination. Perhaps the composer, Paul Linke, understood something about American Presidents. You see, like so many Presidents before me, I come here today because wherever I go, whatever I do: “Ich hab noch einen Koffer in Berlin” [I still have a suitcase in Berlin.]

Our gathering today is being broadcast throughout Western Europe and North America. I understand that it is being seen and heard as well in the East. To those listening throughout Eastern Europe, I extend my warmest greetings and the good will of the American people. To those listening in East Berlin, a special word: Although I cannot be with you, I addremy remarks to you just as surely as to those standing here before me. For I join you, as I join your fellow countrymen in the West, in this firm, this unalterable belief: Es gibt nur ein Berlin. [There is only one Berlin.]

Behind me stands a wall that encircles the free sectors of this city, part of a vast system of barriers that divides the entire continent of Europe. From the Baltic South, those barriers cut acroGermany in a gash of barbed wire, concrete, dog runs, and guard towers. Farther south, there may be no visible, no obvious wall. But there remain armed guards and checkpoints all the same -- still a restriction on the right to travel, still an instrument to impose upon ordinary men and women the will of a totalitarian state.

Yet, it is here in Berlin where the wall emerges most clearly; here, cutting acroyour city, where the news photo and the television screen have imprinted this brutal division of a continent upon the mind of the world.

Standing before the Brandenburg Gate, every man is a German separated from his fellow men.

Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar.

President Von Weizscker has said, "The German question is open as long as the Brandenburg Gate is closed." Well today -- today I say: As long as this gate is closed, as long as this scar of a wall is permitted to stand, it is not the German question alone that remains open, but the question of freedom for all mankind.

Yet, I do not come here to lament. For I find in Berlin a message of hope, even in the shadow of this wall, a message of triumph.

In this season of spring in 1945, the people of Berlin emerged from their air-raid shelters to find devastation. Thousands of miles away, the people of the United States reached out to help. And in 1947 Secretary of State -- as you've been told -- George Marshall announced the creation of what would become known as the Marshall Plan. Speaking precisely 40 years ago this month, he said: "Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine, but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos."

In the Reichstag a few moments ago, I saw a display commemorating this 40th anniversary of the Marshall Plan. I was struck by a sign -- the sign on a

burnt-out, gutted structure that was being rebuilt. I understand that Berliners of my own generation can remember seeing signs like it dotted throughout the western sectors of the city. The sign read simply: "The Marshall Plan is helping here to strengthen the free world." A strong, free world in the West -- that dream became real. Japan rose from ruin to become an economic giant. Italy, France, Belgium -- virtually every nation in Western Europe saw political and economic rebirth; the European Community was founded.

In West Germany and here in Berlin, there took place an economic miracle, the Wirtschaftswunder. Adenauer, Erhard, Reuter, and other leaders understood the practical importance of liberty -- that just as truth can flourish only when the journalist is given freedom of speech, so prosperity can come about only when the farmer and businessman enjoy economic freedom. The German leaders -- the German leaders reduced tariffs, expanded free trade, lowered taxes. From 1950 to 1960 alone, the standard of living in West Germany and Berlin doubled.

Where four decades ago there was rubble, today in West Berlin there is the greatest industrial output of any city in Germany: busy office blocks, fine homes and apartments, proud avenues, and the spreading lawns of parkland. Where a city's culture seemed to have been destroyed, today there are two great

universities, orchestras and an opera, countletheaters, and museums. Where there was want, today there's abundance -- food, clothing, automobiles -- the wonderful goods of the Kudamm. From devastation, from utter ruin, you Berliners have, in freedom, rebuilt a city that once again ranks as one of the greatest on earth. Now the Soviets may have had other plans. But my friends, there were a few things the Soviets didn't count on: Berliner Herz, Berliner Humor, ja, und Berliner Schnauze. [Berliner heart, Berliner humor, yes, and a Berliner Schnauze.]

In the 1950s -- In the 1950s Khrushchev predicted: "We will bury you."But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the

Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining

standards of health, even want of the most basic kind -- too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.

And now -- now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic

enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control.

Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human

liberty -- the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace.

There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace.

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate.

Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate.

Mr. Gorbachev -- Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

I understand the fear of war and the pain of division that afflict this continent, and I pledge to you my country's efforts to help overcome these burdens. To be sure, we in the West must resist Soviet expansion. So, we must maintain defenses of unassailable strength. Yet we seek peace; so we must strive to reduce arms on both sides.

Beginning 10 years ago, the Soviets challenged the Western alliance with a grave new threat, hundreds of new and more deadly SS-20 nuclear missiles capable of striking every capital in Europe. The Western alliance responded by committing itself to a counter-deployment (unlethe Soviets agreed to

negotiate a better solution) -- namely, the elimination of such weapons on both sides. For many months, the Soviets refused to bargain in earnestness. As the alliance, in turn, prepared to go forward with its counter-deployment, there were difficult days, days of protests like those during my 1982 visit to this city; and the Soviets later walked away from the table.

But through it all, the alliance held firm. And I invite those who protested then -- I invite those who protest today -- to mark this fact: Because we remained strong, the Soviets came back to the table. Because we remained strong, today we have within reach the possibility, not merely of limiting the growth of arms, but of eliminating, for the first time, an entire claof nuclear weapons from the face of the earth.

As I speak, NATO ministers are meeting in Iceland to review the progreof our proposals for eliminating these weapons. At the talks in Geneva, we have also proposed deep cuts in strategic offensive weapons. And the Western allies have likewise made far-reaching proposals to reduce the danger of conventional war and to place a total ban on chemical weapons.

While we pursue these arms reductions, I pledge to you that we will maintain the capacity to deter Soviet aggression at any level at which it might occur. And in cooperation with many of our allies, the United States is pursuing the

Strategic Defense Initiative -- research to base deterrence not on the threat of offensive retaliation, but on defenses that truly defend; on systems, in short, that will not target populations, but shield them. By these means we seek to increase the safety of Europe and all the world. But we must remember a crucial fact: East and West do not mistrust each other because we are armed; we are armed because we mistrust each other. And our differences are not about

weapons but about liberty. When President Kennedy spoke at the City Hall those

24 years ago, freedom was encircled; Berlin was under siege. And today,

despite all the pressures upon this city, Berlin stands secure in its liberty. And freedom itself is transforming the globe.

In the Philippines, in South and Central America, democracy has been given a rebirth. Throughout the Pacific, free markets are working miracle after miracle of economic growth. In the industrialized nations, a technological revolution is taking place, a revolution marked by rapid, dramatic advances in computers and telecommunications.

In Europe, only one nation and those it controls refuse to join the community of freedom. Yet in this age of redoubled economic growth, of information and

innovation, the Soviet Union faces a choice: It must make fundamental changes, or it will become obsolete.

Today, thus, represents a moment of hope. We in the West stand ready to cooperate with the East to promote true openness, to break down barriers that separate people, to create a safer, freer world. And surely there is no better place than Berlin, the meeting place of East and West, to make a start.

Free people of Berlin: Today, as in the past, the United States stands for the strict observance and full implementation of all parts of the Four Power

Agreement of 1971. Let us use this occasion, the 750th anniversary of this city, to usher in a new era, to seek a still fuller, richer life for the Berlin of the future. Together, let us maintain and develop the ties between the Federal Republic and the Western sectors of Berlin, which is permitted by the 1971 agreement.And I invite Mr. Gorbachev: Let us work to bring the Eastern and Western parts of the city closer together, so that all the inhabitants of all Berlin can enjoy the benefits that come with life in one of the great cities of the world.

To open Berlin still further to all Europe, East and West, let us expand the vital air acceto this city, finding ways of making commercial air service to Berlin more convenient, more comfortable, and more economical. We look to the day when West Berlin can become one of the chief aviation hubs in all central Europe.

With -- With our French -- With our French and British partners, the United States is prepared to help bring international meetings to Berlin. It would be only fitting for Berlin to serve as the site of United Nations meetings, or world conferences on human rights and arms control, or other issues that call for international cooperation.

There is no better way to establish hope for the future than to enlighten young minds, and we would be honored to sponsor summer youth exchanges, cultural events, and other programs for young Berliners from the East. Our French and British friends, I'm certain, will do the same. And it's my hope that an authority can be found in East Berlin to sponsor visits from young people of the Western sectors.

One final proposal, one close to my heart: Sport represents a source of

enjoyment and ennoblement, and you may have noted that the Republic of Korea -- South Korea -- has offered to permit certain events of the 1988 Olympics to take place in the North. International sports competitions of all kinds could take place in both parts of this city. And what better way to

demonstrate to the world the openneof this city than to offer in some future year to hold the Olympic games here in Berlin, East and West.

In these four decades, as I have said, you Berliners have built a great city. You've done so in spite of threats -- the Soviet attempts to impose the East-mark, the blockade. Today the city thrives in spite of the challenges

implicit in the very presence of this wall. What keeps you here? Certainly there's a great deal to be said for your fortitude, for your defiant courage. But I believe there's something deeper, something that involves Berlin's whole look and feel and way of life -- not mere sentiment. No one could live long in Berlin without being completely disabused of illusions. Something, instead, that has seen the difficulties of life in Berlin but chose to accept them, that continues to build this good and proud city in contrast to a surrounding totalitarian presence, that refuses to release human energies or aspirations, something that speaks with a powerful voice of affirmation, that says "yes" to this city, yes to the future, yes to freedom. In a word, I would submit that what keeps you in Berlin -- is "love." Love both profound and abiding.

Perhaps this gets to the root of the matter, to the most fundamental distinction of all between East and West. The totalitarian world produces backwardnebecause it does such violence to the spirit, thwarting the human impulse to create, to enjoy, to worship. The totalitarian world finds even symbols of love and of worship an affront.

Years ago, before the East Germans began rebuilding their churches, they erected a secular structure: the television tower at Alexander Platz. Virtually ever since, the authorities have been working to correct what they view as the tower's one major flaw: treating the glasphere at the top with paints and chemicals of every kind. Yet even today when the sun strikes that sphere, that sphere that towers over all Berlin, the light makes the sign of the cross. There in Berlin, like the city itself, symbols of love, symbols of worship, cannot be suppressed.

As I looked out a moment ago from the Reichstag, that embodiment of German unity, I noticed words crudely spray-painted upon the wall, perhaps by a young Berliner (quote):

"This wall will fall. Beliefs become reality."

Yes, acroEurope, this wall will fall, for it cannot withstand faith; it cannot withstand truth. The wall cannot withstand freedom.

And I would like, before I close, to say one word. I have read, and I have been questioned since I've been here about certain demonstrations against my

coming. And I would like to say just one thing, and to those who demonstrate so. I wonder if they have ever asked themselves that if they should have the kind of government they apparently seek, no one would ever be able to do what they're doing again.

Thank you and God bleyou all. Thank you.