Bush at the Knesset: Another Historic, Unheralded Speech

President George W. Bush is the greatest president in american history. I am so proud to have voted for him on two occasions and wish I could vote for him a 3rd time.

He is the greatest president
in our time as evidenced by the hatret of his enimies and
the emulation of his tactics
by the free world.

Mr. Kengor,
Having read the transcript of the President's speech to the Knesset, I was intrigued and struck by the power of the vision. But watching the full speech on CSPAN, I became emotional from his delivery and the response from the Israelis.

My view is that President Bush's speech to congress, Sept 20, 2001, was the most powerful and inspiring politicians speech I've ever witnessed. Luckily, I videotaped the speech because I don't believe it has ever been replayed.

I'll never forget how 20 years ago, the media mocked and ridiculed Pres Reagan for his ridiculous speech at the Brandenburg gate. A generation later, it is his most memorable moment.

David Nathaniel

That was a great speech! It's sad that the media allowed that empty suit Obama to politicize the coverage of the speech, because in historical context, that speech will be for Bush what the Gettysburg address was for Lincoln (though it too was received with a yawn by the media at the time). Those were definitional words by President Bush, and however history turns out he will be viewed as a very important figure, either as the first visionary among many who stemmed the tide of Islamic radicalism and made the world safe for democracy, or as the lone voice who gave it his best shot, but the rest of the world didn't rise up and pay heed to his cautionary remarks. Either way, history will prove Bush was ahead of his time.

What is really great about the president's speech was unspoken. Compared to his post 9/11 address to the nation and subsequent addresses to the nation, he has been consistent throughout his terms in office. He is resolute. President Bush is no banner in the wind, he is the staff which secures the banner of freedom.

I'm proud that Denmark is a country supporting US in Afghanistan and Iraq despite the many accusations made by the leftist that Bush is a disaster. It is embarrassing that Europe never give credit to the USA for the many sacrifices given in behalf of our freedom. I find Bush, along with a great number of conservative Danes, a stalwart reliable protector of freedom and democracy.A great President. The speech is another example of this.

Sirs: I read the piece posted by Paul Kengor. I've always felt that President Bush has had a grievous disservice done to him, mostly by the left wing media who just hate him. President Bush, in my opinion, has dissected the threat that Islam presents and took the steps necessary to contain that threat and then to confront the threat. No, he wont' be here to see his legacy bear fruit and regretfully neither will I. But I firmly believe that Americans of future generations will hail President Bush as a great leader and President and a man who was not afraid to confront evil. And defeat it too.

One is unlikely to find a more committed Bushie than myself but assertions of the man's greatness are premature to say the least. He is the guy we need on the spot; I think that is enough for now. In the fullness of time, presuming continued successes in Iraq, America will see the necessities and dangers of our day and how they were handled more clearly. Gettysburg is an apt metaphor.
Not that W is Lincoln.
Not that he ain't...

I also noticed a not untypical response from an almost brain-dead media, with a callous tin ear. Bush's Knesset speech was a) pretty point blank (which is why the Arabs gave him significant negative feedback) b) threw down a gauntlet c) pointed out Israel's great challenges and perils while simultaneously encouraging, greatly, the Israelis. The Pubs should attempt to run this speech as much as possible on C-Span (I am assuming that each party has some time slots allocated, but what do I know?). It was up there with Reagan's 1976 speech to the Pub convention.

If one were to look objectively, in his eight years of the presidency George W. Bush a clear and distinct legacy on this country and the world. All one can say of the Clinton Administration is Bill Clinton is still looking for his administration's legacy and apparently settled for an attempt to create dynastic rule. Obama has not spelled out what his desires for legacy might be other than to "Hope" to become president and "Change" to a Marxist oligarchy. The world looks to the U.S. to create the atmosphere in which democracy and freedom can flourish. This requires a steady hand at the helm; one without ambiguous speech and complex and confusing narrative. It is clear that if we are to move ever closer to the vision of George W. Bush, it lies in the simplicity of a singular purpose and the ability to strike down those who would impose their own ignorant methodology in an attempt to satisfy their own lust for power. Who better than John McCain to carry this vision forward? I suspect few are fooled by Obama's pledge to stand by Israel - he has not shown the capacity to stand by America.

The speech may have been fantastic, but I will tell you that to many, myself included, it sounded a little hollow.

First, there is the matter of the glaring contradiction between "Bush's consistent affirmation of his belief in "democratic peace" and "Bush made it very clear that Hamas...is not a group worthy of dialogue."

In case you have forgotten, Hamas is the legitimately elected representative party of the "Palestinian" people. Bush's insistence on pressuring Israel into negotiating with Fatah is in fact a complete disregard for the democratic process. Polls routinely show that Abbas has no popular support among the people. He is negotiating for his people without any real mandate from those people to do so.

Even within Israel we have situation not entirely dissimilar. Kadima, headed by Sharon, won the last elections on a "withdraw from Gaza" platform. As is obvious today, Sharon is gone, and most Israelis feel that the Gaza withdrawal was a complete failure and oppose any similar actions in the West Bank. Olmert has unbelievably low approval ratings.

What you have is a US president with the support of barely 35% of his citizens and who is soon on his way back to Texas, an Israeli PM who was never voted for and who is perhaps the least popular PM in Israel's history, and a Palestinian leader who's party lost the last election and who depends on the IDF to secure his position of power, which is almost gone, trying to foist off some fictitious "road map to peace" on the people here. Abbas can barely control Ramallah, his seat of government. How is he supposed to uphold any agreement?

Maybe I am dense, but I am missing the great democratic "will of the people" aspect to all of this.

Now, don't misunderstand me. Hamas is nothing but a disgusting Islamic murder club for Jew haters. But Fatah is responsible for more terror attacks in its history, the last five years included, than is Hamas. Fatah is not "moderate" by any definition that any sane person could devise.

Therein is the glitch in Bush's vision for the future: exactly what evidence, from history or the current world scene, do we have that an Islamic country is even compatible with democracy? What evidence do we have that the Palestinians themselves want a democracy, especially one which is on peaceful terms with the "evil Zionist entity"?

Bush's vision for "democracy" in Israel and the West Bank/Gaza may very well by the end of Israel.

Land for peace is a failure.

Two states living side by side, Jewish and Palestinian, is a pipe dream.

It is time to seek alternative options. The dreams of Oslo and Camp David died with the hundreds of Israelis blown to pieces by the suicide bombers during the intifadah.

There already is a Palestinian country: it is called Jordan. Maybe we should consider renaming it to Palestine (Jordan is, after all, a Jewish name from the Bible--not exactly fitting for a Muslim Arab state) and let the Palestinian Arabs exercise their national aspirations there.

Election Day is 11/4. Bush will take out the Iran nukes on 11/7. Try to impeach him!

I'd put him at number four. First is Washington. Second is Lincoln. Third is Roosevelt. Fourth is Bush.

I disagree with Bush on many issues but I suspect that in 50 years on Iraq he will be judged as Truman is on S. Korea. Can anyone argue S. Korea is worse off? While I think Reagan was the greatest president in my life I am glad that Bush won over Gore or Kerry. Can anyone imagine after 9/11 if either of these dolts were president? it is frightening and now we have Obama (who I still think will NOT be the nominee). What prospect could be more frightening than the democrats in charge of national security? Look at the highest crime cities. Who runs them? Why, liberals. Now were going to put the same ilk in charge of world security?

I am thoroughly surprised by the praises for Bush's speech. I thought that his speech, was delusional at the best, and hypocritical worst.
He is praising the rebirth of Israel's, while pressing the Jews to abandon their ancient homeland of Judea and Samaria, (the same ones that the Arab propaganda calls "West Bank".)
Bush calls Abbas a "partner for peace". Abbas is an old PLO thug, who's doctoral thesis from the Moscow university was attempt to "prove" that Holocaust did not happen. Talking to the Arab press, Abbas, clearly explains that the reason for peace talks is to get as much of "Palestine" as possible to be in a better position for future armed struggle against Israel.

Even while speaking to the Western press, Abbas refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. The Fatah's constitution is still claiming all of "Palestine" for Arabs.
America's support for Israel is also dubious: America give more weapons to Arabs and Muslims, than to Israel: In proportion to it's national product, Egypt gets more military help from America then Israel. Also Saudi Arabia, is now getting 20 billion dollars worth of the most advanced weapons, for the money they steal from us by conspiring with BIG OIL, of which Bush represents.

"Any political science professor who teaches the Bush presidency and ignores this speech is derelict in duty."

Any prof who taught the Bush presidency fairly would be run off campus...

Speaking as an Israeli, I was surprised and moved as I watched and listened to President Bush's speech on video that evening. He could have given a pro-forma address, a speech carefully crafted to offend no-one, but instead one got the impression he was speaking from his heart. It was uplifting to hear such clear words of friendship and support from the President of the United States. It's been a long time since I heard a politician speak about good and evil.

I must say, it's a shame that presidential speeches don't have the force of law!

I asked myself, for whom was President Bush speaking? I know what he said represents the feeling of many Americans. The majority of Americans? I think so, at least at this time.

It seems he wasn't speaking for the Democratic Party, which hyper-politically interpreted Bush's criticism of appeasement as a swipe at themselves, as if the whole speech was simply a campaign exercise for the Republican candidate. How shallow of them.

Will the U.S. - Israel alliance continue through subsequent administrations? I hope so, I suppose so. The relationship runs deep.

But one wonders how the changing demographics of the U.S. will affect this bilateral relationship. Will the growing number of Muslim Americans change perceptions in Washington? And as the Left over time gains more power on Capitol Hill and in the bureaucracy, how will this affect policy?

Time will tell.

It was a fantastic speech, one had to go to whitehouse.gov to read or hear it as the media only focused on a derivative small and misconstrued even that - by the way, if the media were an individual we would say that is one symptom of a borderline personality disordered (BPD) person, to obsess on one word or point and blow it out of context.

Professor R.J. Rummel has written extensively on the principles that President Bush espouses. What Bush is talking about can be backed up with fact.http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/

I'm still amazed everytime I read positive comments about GW. A person would have to live in a bubble larger than the current economic bubble, which is about to burst, not to have witnessed what has happened to this country during his reign of terror. Repeated comparisons to Clinton and others does little justice to anyone. Instead our presidents ought to be measured by thier ability or lack thereof to keep our nation on it's course as a soveriegn Constitutional Republic. Unfortunately the continual cries for democracy around the world fall far short of the founders intial intentions in forming this nation. We must ask ourselves, why would anyone attempt to institute democracies around the world, which have historially failed, when our forefathers clearly designed a Constitutional Republic?
Any president that steers our nation or others further from the original intent of the founders, which Mr Bush has done more successfully than any other president since it's foundations, ought to be suspect of treason. Mr Kengor is guilty of colussion and ought to take the rose colored glasses off for a day or two. Our nation is falling into disrepair as we spend trillions in a fruitless attempt to create peace in the world. The bible teaches that those who bless Israel will be blessed and those who curse her will be cursed. Orchestarting land for peace deals with those who have stated they intend to push Israel into the sea is a curse. The bible also teaches that there will be no peace until Christ returns for a thousand year reign, there can be no peace without the Prince of peace. If George Bush is a Christian as he claims with scripture guiding him, then why isn't he reading and living the simplist of biblical truthes? "You shall no them by their fruit." Please wake up and accept the Truth.

I am convinced that in the future George W. Bush will be seen as the great man he is. And his wife Laura will be given credit also as a noble lady who is the epitome of a REAL woman, not the shrilleries we have suffered since the women's lip movment.

God bless them both!