In this room are dissidents and democratic activists from 17 countries on five continents. You follow different traditions, you practice different faiths, and you face different challenges. But you are united by an unwavering conviction: that freedom is the non-negotiable right of every man, woman, and child, and that the path to lasting peace in our world is liberty. (Applause.)
This conference was conceived by three of the great advocates for freedom in our time: Jose Maria Aznar, Vaclav Havel, and Natan Sharansky. I thank them for the invitation to address this inspiring assembly, and for showing the world that an individual with moral clarity and courage can change the course of history.
I know the president believes this. I believe he will be recognized as one of them someday.
Too much lying by activist jerks, some working for the gov't. Some twist and spin in the press like the article below... too little response by the White House. ... (all emphasis mine)
WASHINGTON - Sworn testimony in the perjury trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby has shone a spotlight on White House attempts to sell a gone-wrong war in Iraq to the nation and Vice President Dick Cheney's aggressive role in the effort.
In 2003 there was nothing "gone wrong" about the Iraq war except that it was plain that the Democrats - in disagreement with it - were taking a bath in opinion polls. As important as polls are to politians, that's a call to arms - so they went on their own covert campaign to smear all of America's best efforts. And if the "effort" had to be made, why shouldn't it be an aggresive one? ...
The drama being played out in a Washington courtroom goes back in time to the early summer of 2003. The Bush administration was struggling to overcome growing evidence the mission in Iraq was anything but accomplished.
The "mission" at the time was to depose Saddam and install a democracy and an ally in the gwot. The American military had just accomplished a part of that, and there's no reason the President shouldn't have offered his thanks and encouragement. ...
The claim about weapons of mass destruction that was used to justify the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 had not been supported. Insurgent attacks were on the rise. Accusations were growing that the White House had distorted intelligence to rationalize the invasion. Trial testimony so far — including eight hours of Libby's own audio-recorded testimony to a grand jury in 2004 — suggest that a White House known as disciplined was anything but that.
Someone could remind this journalist that "claims" and "accusations" do not constitute evidence. It should go without saying that at some point, a little evidence of what this journalist is reporting is needed. The word of a reporter with a spin for sale is not taken for granted to be truthful. The report's author is as much as admitting that the press has no idea what it's talking about regarding the level of "discipline" present at the White House. One could go on and on throughout this junk, but it's apparent to me that this is another example of "controversy sells" rather than reporting honestly...which is too boring. The Wilson scandal may prove that Libby had something to hide, or not. The real scandal here is Wilson is an employee of the US State Dept, and a partisan liar.
First, a democratic congress that refuses to will a victory for the U.S. in Iraq, and now - it had to happen, man-made climate change hysteria. In the IndyStar, from AP in Paris...
However, the panel also said its best estimate was for temperature rises of 3.2-7.1 degrees Fahrenheit. In 2001, all the panel gave was a range of 2.5-10.4 degrees Fahrenheit. On sea levels, the report projects rises of 7-23 inches
Some nerve, calling THAT kind of cushion "science!" Isn't that like saying tomorrow's temperature will be somewher between -20 and +70 degrees?
by the end of the century. An additional 3.9-7.8 inches are possible if recent, surprising melting of polar ice sheets continues.
Did you know that England, long ago, used to grow wine grapes just like France? That was way back when England was much warmer than it is now. Yup. The Vikings of Norway used to sail their long ships to Iceland and Greenland, and even to the Americas...back when it was warmer.
"It's very conservative. Scientists by their nature are skeptics."
Especially when threatened with de-certification for holding beliefs considered heretical to orthodox "science."
While critics call the panel "overly alarmist, it is by nature relatively cautious because it relies on hundreds of scientists, including skeptics.
Why do they keep saying that? So anyway, The Norse settlers in Iceland had to abandon the homes (or they stayed and starved to death) because their growing seasons got shorter and the winters became longer and colder. French wine making moved south to the Mediterranean while the British grew hops and other short season grains, and made ale and beer (which explains why we Americans drink more beer than wine). Don't let me interrupt the global panic!
Authors of the report called it conservative: It used only peer-reviewed published science and was edited by representatives of 113 governments who had to agree to every word.
I live in Indianapolis (GO COLTS!!) which at one time was under a mile or two of ice. It's probable that the planet has warmed some since. That and the fact that no one ever guaranteed us a right to a stable climate draws me to agree somewhat with the concept of global warming. Still, there's something troubling to me about the way man's interference is being "marketed" - as the cause - to us. You can tell when the voice at the other end of the phone line is informing you of, say, a prescription that is ready for pickup - and when they are trying to sell a new medicine to you that you've never needed before. Professor Gray saysgive it time.
"They've been brainwashing us for 20 years," Gray says. "Starting with the nuclear winter and now with the global warming. This scare will also run its course. In 15-20 years, we'll look back and see what a hoax this was." Gray directs me to a 1975 Newsweek article that whipped up a different fear: a coming ice age. "Climatologists," reads the piece, "are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change. ... The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality." Thank God they did nothing. Imagine how warm we'd be?
I'm finding it difficult to commit to anything I've heard about the immigration issue. My thoughts are that our system of law is mocked when our legislators pass or continue with laws that don't work, and our INS systems can't handle what's going on at our southern border. I welcome folks that want to immigrate legally. There are masses of folks that want in. The U.S. economy has masses of jobs for them. I don't see why it's apparently so difficult to simply revise the quotas upward substantially. If the problem is that the Hispanic people are coming here illegally, then arrange it so they can come legally. Then, if they don't want to immigrate according to our pretty generous rules, they don't get in. What we heard from Mr Bush regarding health care had some merit, but we should have seen action on this issue four years ago. I'm convinced that the Republicans could have made some good progress against creeping socialism with programs such as those laid out by the President. Those are my opinions on those items, but I was only really interested in what he would say about Iraq. I liked it. The democrats sat politely, and have since said they are having none of it. A few republicans are stepping with them. Most republicans stood and applauded.
We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us -- unless we stop them.
We know now that U.S. and Georgian authorities have arrested a man "holding" (literally) weapons-grade uranium for sale to buyers that he thought were Islamists in the former Soviet state of Georgia. He told the buyers that he had access to much more.
With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflict and the course we have followed. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled: that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy. (Applause.)
Democrats believe that the war should be being fought in Afghanistan, and focusing on getting Bin Laden. So they could applaud this line, but with their interpretation. Even though Bin Laden and other terror leaders have said that they must win Iraq, and that the battle against America IS Iraq.
Every success against the terrorists is a reminder of the shoreless ambitions of this enemy. The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at work in the world. And so long as that's the case, America is still a nation at war.
Whether the left likes it or not.
What every terrorist fears most is human freedom
I think he should say, "every terrorist hates most..." and stop using the word "fear" regarding the thugs. A fearful terrorist just doesn't sound too threatening to me!
This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we're in. Every one of us wishes this war were over and won. Yet it would not be like us to leave our promises unkept, our friends abandoned, and our own security at risk. (Applause.) Ladies and gentlemen: On this day, at this hour, it is still within our power to shape the outcome of this battle. Let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory. (Applause.)
...
We didn't drive al Qaeda out of their safe haven in Afghanistan only to let them set up a new safe haven in a free Iraq.
Good line...Best line next--
I respect you and the arguments you've made. We went into this largely united, in our assumptions and in our convictions. And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure.
What is Bush going to do, if anything, about Iran? The period for surprises may be over for this lame-duck presidency. But Pres Bush had been surprising none the less. He made a couple of veiled threats to Iran during his speech, but their communications with the American public has been calmly insistent that there are no actions planned against Ahmadinejad. This Cox and Forkum cartoon puts to paper what ignoring Iran looks like to those of us outside the beltway.
"His was a selfless act of courage to save his fellow Marines," said Sgt. Maj. Daniel A. Huff, sergeant major for 3rd Battalion 7th Marine Regiment. "This generation of Marines is as good as any generation we've ever had in the Corps."
...
Tears run from the eyes of U.S. President George W. Bush during a ceremony in honor of Medal of Honor winner Marine Cpl. Jason Dunham in the East room of the White House in Washington, January 11, 2007. Cpl. Dunham was killed when he jumped on a grenade to save fellow members of his Marine patrol while serving in Iraq. REUTERS/Jim Bourg (UNITED STATES)
Lance Cpl. Dean told those assembled about a trip to Las Vegas the two men and Becky Jo Dean had taken in January, not long before the battalion left for the Persian Gulf. Chatting in a hotel room, the corporal told his friends he was planning to extend his enlistment and stay in Iraq for the battalion's entire tour. "You're crazy for extending," Lance Cpl. Dean recalls saying. "Why?" He says Cpl. Dunham responded: "I want to make sure everyone makes it home alive. I want to be sure you go home to your wife alive." Mission accomplished, Corporal Dunham. Semper Fidelis.
