President Bush's Address to the Nation (9/11/02) FULL TRANSCRIPT

President's Transcript on CNN ^ | 09/11/02 | President Bush

[Jeff Head]

I agree with what you say ... to a point.

When and if a time comes when the maddogs infest both sides of the aisle ... and in some cases they already do ... then we must stand, as those with whom Thomas Paine was associated with ... against the resulting tyranny.

Those men not only fought England, they fought the Torries amongst them as well.

For me, the 2nd amendment and abortion are two defining issue I cannot and will not compromise on. No more than our founders would compromise when the loyalist and King's forces moved on their firearms of the day.

To do so renders us physically, morally and spiritually defenseless IMHO.

FRegards.

[Jeff Head]

Howdy. How y'all?

[steveegg]

Preferably, a supermajority to combat the coming defections of McCain, Chafee, Snowe, et al.

[TennTuxedo]

[justshutupandtakeit]

Islamaniacs are big believers in bearing guns and anti-abortion. So choosing between them and Diane Feinstein would certainly be distressing but I would have to go with D.F. since she is not trying to kill me now.

But I agree in general with your drift.

[KDD]

silent leges inter arma...

loosely translated from the latin, means that in time of war the laws are silent and the guns speak.

Iraq is a stategic necessity in countering what will be this country's biggest challenge in the next quarter century...China. A friendly government installed by the U.S. that will allow U.S. military bases in its country will do much to end conflict in the Middle East, stop terrorism and provide a staging area for upcoming conflicts with China, whether such conflicts happen in N. Korea or Taiwan.

Of course we can't say that.

But why else would we aim a cannon at a gnat?

[KDD]

not to mention the desirability of ensuring a steady source of oil.

[Jeff Head]

The comparison is a non-starter. D.F. and the Islamics are both trying to destroy our liberty, one much quicker thaan the other, but both of them sure ... so the obvious qualification is that the individual MUST not be a tyrannt and must support the liberty espoused by the founders and the constitution that defines it. Neither of your options do that and I am sorry if that point was not clear.

I would vote for neither and would set my self in a place best apt to influence and swing things the right way (ie. as I am in Idaho) ... and if there was no other recourse, would have to defer to the same option and course our founders took.

[Jeff Head]

I agree China is the largest, looming external threat. I also believe they either already have, or certainly will, play off the Radical Islamic issue as cannon fodder and a huge distraction while they continue their own moves, up to and including military action if we are distracted/engaged enough.

I try and make that clear and it is one of the foundational purposes for the series, DRAGON'S FURY

FRegards.

[Jeff Head]

We have a supply of oil that is sufficient and steady of we have the will to overcome the useful idiots and simply develop it and produice. Right here on our soil and just off our coasts.

[Jeff Head]

FYI

[KineticKitty]

Thanks for posting this ping

[Jeff Head]

You are welcome.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It is a valid comparision and reflects the reality that in war most principles are compromised. The principle of supporting anti-abortionism cannot allow you to join the Islamaniacs even though they support that principle. In some fights there are only two sides and you have to choose.

Was our strategy in WWII wrong? We joined forces with a nation dedicated to destroying freedom against a more virulent form of evil. We certainly can not allow our policies to be determined by such allies but must use them when it is to our advantage.

Even snakes can be of use.

[Jeff Head]

Like I sadi, sorry iof the pre-qualification was not clear.

There are certain basic principles not up for compromise.

Faced with a choice to either join Islamic Fundamentalist or abject abortionists I would opt to join neither and make my own way.

In answer to your question regarding WW II, we did sell out 200+ million people to a tyrant as bad or worse than the one we defeated. I have been to Eastern Europe, ask them your question. Many of them remember.

I believe we did the wrong thing in allowing Russia at the end of the war to gfain ground as it did. That's where it went wrong my friend. Playing them off against the Nazi's was not wrong ... but giving over tens of millions to either was wrong ... and always will be.

The issue can be drawn, on certain issues, right down the line. And on liberty (free will), the 2nd amendment and abortion that is what I do and teach my kids the same. Our founders pointed this out and led the way on their own defense and firearms.

You are free to do as you please, but I will not vascilate on that point. Further discussion in that direction, pointed at trying to convince me of the reality or neccesity to do so is a pointless exercise.

[Aurelius]

"We joined forces with a nation dedicated to destroying freedom against a more virulent form of evil."

Our country chose an evil ally against an evil foe. The relative virulence of their respective evils was self-serving propaganda written into the history subsequently. Full advantage was taken, as is always done, of the victor's prerogative to write the history.

It would very likely have been possible to have manipulated the Nazis and the Soviets into fighting one another to their mutual destruction. But that would not have served the purposes of various politicians, Roosevelt in particular.

[blackie]

I agree Jeff, GWB was right-on in his UN speech.
It was a powerful indictment of the ineptness of the UN Security Counsel.
It's time to fish or cut bait !!

Death To All Tyrant's !!

Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!

Molon Labe !!

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

Thank you, Jeff. I did not get to watch the speech. However, reading it and watching the PResident's speech to the UN today - and your summation - make me want to stand up and cheer! Thank you and God bless you!

[Jeff Head]

Well said ... and spot on.

[Jeff Head]

Although there was a lot siad about the UN and it's "charter" that I did not agree with in the President's speech, the part about Iraq and the partt about the US taking the path required for our own defense and the UN members choosing whether they want to be a part of it were very good.

We do not need Kofi's permission, we do not need a UN resolution, we do not need a UN colaition ... all we need is to be threatened and have a President willing to nullify that threat and a congress willing to fund it. IOW, all we need is our representatives to decide to do so.