Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No longer 'Just Say No': Bush says quit drugs and fight terrorism
AP | 12/14/01

Posted on 12/14/2001 10:15:53 AM PST by Native American Female Vet

No longer 'Just Say No': Bush says quit drugs and fight terrorism

By Associated Press, 12/14/2001 13:52

WASHINGTON (AP) President Bush said Friday that drug users aid terrorists who get their money from global trafficking in narcotics. ''If you quit drugs, you join the fight against terrorism,'' he said.

Bush offered a new argument in the fight against drugs while signing a bill to expand a federal anti-drug program over the next five years.

''Drug abuse threatens everything, everything that is best about our country,'' he said. ''It breaks the bond between parent and child. It turns productive citizens into addicts. It transforms schools into places of violence and chaos. It makes playgrounds into crime scenes. It supports gangs at home.''

''And abroad, it's important for Americans to know that trafficking of drugs finances the world of terror, sustaining terrorists,'' the president said. The administration has linked the al-Qaida network in Afghanistan to heroin trafficking. The terrorist group, led by Osama bin Laden, is suspected in the Sept. 11 attacks on America.

The bill signed by Bush expands the Drug-Free Communities Support Program, which helps community groups reduce illegal drugs. The program's budget is about $50 million, and would almost double in five years under the bill.

''Over time, drugs rob men, women and children of their dignity and of their character,'' Bush said.

''Illegal drugs are the enemies of ambition and hope and when we fight against drugs we fight for the souls of our fellow Americans.''


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-207 next last
To: boston_liberty
And it fills the coffers of politicians, banking centers of the CITIGroup, Switzerland and the Caribbean.

Starting with Pakistan, a country whose entire government and economy is undergirded by heroin.

141 posted on 12/14/2001 1:58:28 PM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes;Don Myers
Your post #132 is a more than adequate response to this totalist mouth-breather.

Thank you. I'm not ready to put Don into the same category as Dane, Kevin Curry and What about Bob? yet, though. I have hope that he's merely misguided.
142 posted on 12/14/2001 2:01:12 PM PST by FreedomIsSimple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

Comment #143 Removed by Moderator

To: jeffyraven
Whatever drugs do or don't do to the human spirit is not mitigated by prohibition, nor would it be enhanced by legalization.

I'm concerned about perceived approval of drug use as a glamorous and acceptable lifestyle. Legalization in my mind implies that our drug reliant culture is acceptable. A society dependent on drugs isn't really going to be in control of its destiny. Prohibition implies that drug use is not a good thing...and I'm not at all convinced that there was any real attempt over the past decade to do any more than go through the motions as far as the "drug war" is concerned.

And, look at Ritalin...it's a legal, prescribed drug for kids with supposed or real ADD. In some places, it's given out like candy to "cure" behavior variations.

144 posted on 12/14/2001 3:10:25 PM PST by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: dead
The term "Libertoid" was coined by Jonah Goldberg of the National Review Online. He's written a number of opinion pieces criticizing libertarianism and the Libertarian party. Bob must have read one of his articles. They're actually quite good.
145 posted on 12/14/2001 3:35:39 PM PST by Exnihilo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: FreedomIsSimple
FreedomIsSimple, what category is that? This is a conservative news forum, right? Are we allowed to criticize the Libertarian party? I myself am libertarian in many respects, but I have some problems with them as well.
146 posted on 12/14/2001 3:37:17 PM PST by Exnihilo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Native American Female Vet
''Drug abuse threatens everything, everything that is best about our country,'' he said. ''It breaks the bond between parent and child. It turns productive citizens into addicts. It transforms schools into places of violence and chaos. It makes playgrounds into crime scenes. It supports gangs at home.''

This statement is absolutley true. Drugs are not a "victimless" crime. Like most things though, the average person has a hard time understanding this unless they have had personal experience with it...

147 posted on 12/14/2001 4:34:35 PM PST by cactmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cactmh
''Drug abuse threatens everything, everything that is best about our country,'' he said. ''It breaks the bond between parent and child. It turns productive citizens into addicts. It transforms schools into places of violence and chaos. It makes playgrounds into crime scenes. It supports gangs at home.''

This statement is absolutely true. Drugs are not a "victimless" crime. Like most things though, the average person has a hard time understanding this unless they have had personal experience with it...

Parts of the statement have truth, but other parts are simply untrue. Let's parse the statement and determine which is which.

It breaks the bond between parent and child. I'll agree that this statement is true if rephrased as: Drug abuse can break the bond between parent and child. Although I could imagine situations where recovering from drug abuse may actually improve said bonds.

It turns productive citizens into addicts. This one may be true. But whose to say that an addict would have been a productive citizen if she'd never touched drugs? And for a person who was once a productive citizen and fell into a drug addiction is it not possible that the abuse was a symptom of other problems in his life?

It transforms schools into places of violence and chaos. This is patently false. It is the WOD and the criminality of distributing, possessing, or using (some) drugs that creates this effect. Do cigarettes turn schools into sanctuaries of crime and chaos?

It makes playgrounds into crime scenes. It supports gangs at home. Again, it is the fact that drugs are illegal that leads to the crimes being committed. Gangs distributing Mountain Dew don't have turf wars on school playgrounds, even though arguably more kids are hooked on caffeine than any other drug. Do you wonder why this is? It is because there is no reason for gangs to fight over the distribution rights of $10 cans of Mountain Dew since it comes out of a machine in the commons for only $.50.

Like most things, the common drug warrior has a hard time understanding this.

148 posted on 12/14/2001 5:17:28 PM PST by Equality 7-2521
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Equality 7-2521
I'll agree that this statement is true if rephrased as: Drug abuse can break the bond between parent and child. Although I could imagine situations where recovering from drug abuse may actually improve said bonds.

Yeah, if you break a cup and glue it back together, it is better than when it was broken, but it is not like it would've been. That you would even post this shows you have no clue what you are talking about. Your argument is very similar to arguments I've seen on college campuses...based on theory and not reality.

It turns productive citizens into addicts. This one may be true. But whose to say that an addict would have been a productive citizen if she'd never touched drugs? And for a person who was once a productive citizen and fell into a drug addiction is it not possible that the abuse was a symptom of other problems in his life?

You're right, some people would never be productive, however, there are without a doubt plenty of people who were productive or would've been had they not become addicted. Yes, almost always the drug addiction is because of other problems. It's not very often that a clear minded, well adjusted person injects heroin into their arm.

It transforms schools into places of violence and chaos. This is patently false. It is the WOD and the criminality of distributing, possessing, or using (some) drugs that creates this effect. Do cigarettes turn schools into sanctuaries of crime and chaos?

First of all, you are correct, marijuana doesn't usually lead to crimes and chaos directly. However, drugs like LSD, Heroin, Crack etc. dramatically alter the mental state of the user. This leads to all kinds of strange and often bad reactions. (Violence is one of them) Also, you are correct that if all drugs were legal and free to addicts, they probably wouldn't rob and steal as much.

It makes playgrounds into crime scenes. It supports gangs at home. Again, it is the fact that drugs are illegal that leads to the crimes being committed. Gangs distributing Mountain Dew don't have turf wars on school playgrounds, even though arguably more kids are hooked on caffeine than any other drug. Do you wonder why this is? It is because there is no reason for gangs to fight over the distribution rights of $10 cans of Mountain Dew since it comes out of a machine in the commons for only $.50.

You are correct...I used to believe that all drugs should be legal because the people who are going to use them are probably going to use them regardless of the law. (I really believed this, I am not just saying that for the sake of argument) This was until I saw with my own eyes how descructive and addictive hard drugs are. Allowing all drugs to be legal will undoubtedly lead to a small percentage of people (mostly teen-agers) trying these drugs because they will be even more readily available. Once this happens, they have a good chance of ruining their life and probably those around them.

Like most things, the common drug warrior has a hard time understanding this.

Well my friend, I pray to God that you never have to see the affect of drugs on someone you love. You may see things a little differently.

149 posted on 12/14/2001 6:20:58 PM PST by cactmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: What about Bob?
I've insulted you? You, before you were banned and re-registered, have flamed me with some of the most vile stuff I've seen this side of Usenet's alt.religion.scientology.

you're lucky you can post at all on this message board. save your keystrokes; you're obviously not on my level, or you would have debated my #65 instead of telling me to shove it up my ass, calling me a libertoid, evading my honest call for debate, and name calling.

Damn, you are that scared of a 21 year old? what gives?

150 posted on 12/14/2001 7:31:37 PM PST by Benson_Carter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

Comment #151 Removed by Moderator

To: cactmh
Yeah, if you break a cup and glue it back together, it is better than when it was broken, but it is not like it would've been. That you would even post this shows you have no clue what you are talking about. Your argument is very similar to arguments I've seen on college campuses...based on theory and not reality.

Human emotions, interactions, and bonds are not physics laws, which have one constant reaction for every action. Bonds can be made stonger when broken as often as they can be made worse than broken, and that is reality.

You are correct...I used to believe that all drugs should be legal because the people who are going to use them are probably going to use them regardless of the law. (I really believed this, I am not just saying that for the sake of argument) This was until I saw with my own eyes how descructive and addictive hard drugs are. Allowing all drugs to be legal will undoubtedly lead to a small percentage of people (mostly teen-agers) trying these drugs because they will be even more readily available. Once this happens, they have a good chance of ruining their life and probably those around them.

I won't agrue with that, as I believe it as well. However, I also believe the solution to save these children's lives is much worse than the life some of these children will live. I'd rather not see a teenage herion addict....however, if a teenager is arrested with heroin, in reality, it makes the kid's life more difficult if he wants to become clean, having a pesky criminal record following him around all the time.....and without sufficient opportunities to go clean, it is more likely the kid will go straight again....not that I'm for the govt. helping the kid out, but I'm also not for the govt. giving the kid a strike against him.

Well my friend, I pray to God that you never have to see the affect of drugs on someone you love. You may see things a little differently.

Unfortunately for me, my step-mother died of cirrosis of the liver from alcohol abuse, at the age of 39. Still, I was glad that when she was alive, she was able to hold down a fairly decent job so my half-sister could live alright, and was able to afford her alcohol instead of spending a fifth of her income on it. Ideally I would have like to seen her quit, but unfortunately, ideals are not always reality, so in that case, I'd rather see the lesser of the two evils prevail...

152 posted on 12/16/2001 7:09:53 PM PST by Nate505
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: ThreeYearLurker
You know I had a Grandfather that thought just like you, I can here him just as plain as day "Them dope smokers ain't worth a $hit, they need to lock em all up." Then he would walk to his medicine cabinet and take his Mepergams, Zanex & similar medications that he took through out the day for his supposed ailments, do you fall in that category. Oh, by the way I can't think of one Terrorist that is supported with local grown crops, can You?
153 posted on 12/17/2001 5:19:00 AM PST by HELLRAISER II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Nate505
"Human emotions, interactions, and bonds are not physics laws, which have one constant reaction for every action. Bonds can be made stonger when broken as often as they can be made worse than broken, and that is reality."

Really? Maybe in the case of a spouse this could be true. Ask a person whose mother or father abandoned them for years at a time because of drugs and then came back into their life if their bond is "stronger" than it would've been had the mother/father not been an addict.

154 posted on 12/17/2001 6:05:35 AM PST by cactmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Native American Female Vet,Wolfie,boston_liberty,What about Bob?
re : WASHINGTON (AP) President Bush said Friday that drug users aid terrorists who get their money from global trafficking in narcotics.

This is not a new fact, it is very well known, there has always been a link between Terrorists/freedom fighters/insurgents and drugs but should we forget the middle men, the chaps who helped grease certain wheels, aided the logistics step forward those brave men from the various Intelligence Agencies.

A certain intelligence Agency in the 1980s was deeply involved in the international trafficking of the addictive drugs heroin and cocaine, the enormous profits from which finance covert illegal operations and various South American military.

By the end of the 1980's it was calculated that the illegal use of drugs in the a certain country now netted its controllers over $110 billion a year, money well used to fight terrorists!! and fund freedom fighters .

I am confused should it not be that it is patriotic to take drugs.

Cheers Tony

155 posted on 12/17/2001 6:23:29 AM PST by tonycavanagh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tonycavanagh, Jim Robinson, Admin Moderator, John Robinson
Post 151 (removed by moderator) was a spoof picture pointing out the hipocrisy of Bush's war on drugs.

Help me understand so that I don't violate the posting guidelines in the future. Why was it removed?

Is criticism of the President not allowed on Free Republic? Is this GOPRepublic or FreeRepublic? Is the purpose of this web site to advance Republicans or constitutional government?

Thanks for clearing this up.

156 posted on 12/17/2001 6:30:01 AM PST by NC_Libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Don Myers
The individual has rights as long as those rights do not interfere with the rights of others. A society is built of many individuals, not just one person.

Right. Tell me how somebody down the block, puffing on a bowl of weed in the privacy of his own home, violates your rights?

157 posted on 12/17/2001 7:01:11 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Huck
still support the WOD?

I do.

Huh?

158 posted on 12/17/2001 7:03:55 AM PST by Le-Roy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Le-Roy
The question was asked if an accurate poll would show that "a majority of people...still support the WOD." I answered that I do believe that an accurate poll would show that a majority of Americans support the WOD.
159 posted on 12/17/2001 7:38:23 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
You guys want all drugs legalized, not just weed. And folks don't just sit in their homes smoking weed.
160 posted on 12/17/2001 7:47:19 AM PST by Don Myers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-207 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson