Bibi praised Obama. Oh, puke.....
Duh Progressive
Just now ·
I never thought of myself as a homosexual, but I'm seriously beginning to "have feelings" for #Netanyahu ...such a #BADASS #NetanyahuSpeech
The ManChild in Chief has to be seething in his "situation room".
Jeffrey Goldberg @JeffreyGoldberg 2m2 minutes ago
The real target of this speech is Obama (and Kerry and Wendy Sherman), not Iran.
It's a good day for the adults in congress...
Ken Gardner @kesgardner 36s37 seconds ago
Krauthammer: two takeaways: (1) Israel can't live with the sunset clause of the deal; (2) if Israel must act alone, it will act alone.
ConstitutionENFORCER @JOEBANNAS 3m3 minutes ago
BIBI GET MORE STANDING OVATIONS IN ONE SPEECH THAN O DID HIS WHOLE PRESIDENCY .BIBI BIBI BIBI NO NUKES FOR IRAN , WAKE UP PEOPLE
You wanna bet when he said that Moses comment, valjar/bammy had no idea it was even on the wall?
NETANYAHU: Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you...
(APPLAUSE)
... Speaker of the House John Boehner, President Pro Tem Senator Orrin Hatch, Senator Minority -- Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy.
I also want to acknowledge Senator, Democratic Leader Harry Reid. Harry, it's good to see you back on your feet.
(APPLAUSE)
I guess it's true what they say, you can't keep a good man down.
(LAUGHTER)
My friends, I'm deeply humbled by the opportunity to speak for a third time before the most important legislative body in the world, the U.S. Congress.
(APPLAUSE)
I want to thank you all for being here today. I know that my speech has been the subject of much controversy. I deeply regret that some perceive my being here as political. That was never my intention.
I want to thank you, Democrats and Republicans, for your common support for Israel, year after year, decade after decade.
(APPLAUSE)
I know that no matter on which side of the aisle you sit, you stand with Israel.
(APPLAUSE)
The remarkable alliance between Israel and the United States has always been above politics. It must always remain above politics.
(APPLAUSE)
Because America and Israel, we share a common destiny, the destiny of promised lands that cherish freedom and offer hope. Israel is grateful for the support of American -- of America's people and of America's presidents, from Harry Truman to Barack Obama.
(APPLAUSE)
We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel.
Now, some of that is widely known.
(APPLAUSE)
Some of that is widely known, like strengthening security cooperation and intelligence sharing, opposing anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N.
Some of what the president has done for Israel is less well- known.
I called him in 2010 when we had the Carmel forest fire, and he immediately agreed to respond to my request for urgent aid.
In 2011, we had our embassy in Cairo under siege, and again, he provided vital assistance at the crucial moment.
Or his support for more missile interceptors during our operation last summer when we took on Hamas terrorists.
(APPLAUSE)
In each of those moments, I called the president, and he was there.
And some of what the president has done for Israel might never be known, because it touches on some of the most sensitive and strategic issues that arise between an American president and an Israeli prime minister.
But I know it, and I will always be grateful to President Obama for that support.
(APPLAUSE)
And Israel is grateful to you, the American Congress, for your support, for supporting us in so many ways, especially in generous military assistance and missile defense, including Iron Dome.
(APPLAUSE)
Last summer, millions of Israelis were protected from thousands of Hamas rockets because this capital dome helped build our Iron Dome.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you, America. Thank you for everything you've done for Israel.
My friends, I've come here today because, as prime minister of Israel, I feel a profound obligation to speak to you about an issue that could well threaten the survival of my country and the future of my people: Iran's quest for nuclear weapons.
We're an ancient people. In our nearly 4,000 years of history, many have tried repeatedly to destroy the Jewish people. Tomorrow night, on the Jewish holiday of Purim, we'll read the Book of Esther. We'll read of a powerful Persian viceroy named Haman, who plotted to destroy the Jewish people some 2,500 years ago. But a courageous Jewish woman, Queen Esther, exposed the plot and gave for the Jewish people the right to defend themselves against their enemies.
The plot was foiled. Our people were saved.
(APPLAUSE)
Today the Jewish people face another attempt by yet another Persian potentate to destroy us. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei spews the oldest hatred, the oldest hatred of anti-Semitism with the newest technology. He tweets that Israel must be annihilated -- he tweets. You know, in Iran, there isn't exactly free Internet. But he tweets in English that Israel must be destroyed.
For those who believe that Iran threatens the Jewish state, but not the Jewish people, listen to Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, Iran's chief terrorist proxy. He said: If all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of chasing them down around the world.
But Iran's regime is not merely a Jewish problem, any more than the Nazi regime was merely a Jewish problem. The 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis were but a fraction of the 60 million people killed in World War II. So, too, Iran's regime poses a grave threat, not only to Israel, but also the peace of the entire world. To understand just how dangerous Iran would be with nuclear weapons, we must fully understand the nature of the regime.
The people of Iran are very talented people. They're heirs to one of the world's great civilizations. But in 1979, they were hijacked by religious zealots -- religious zealots who imposed on them immediately a dark and brutal dictatorship.
That year, the zealots drafted a constitution, a new one for Iran. It directed the revolutionary guards not only to protect Iran's borders, but also to fulfill the ideological mission of jihad. The regime's founder, Ayatollah Khomeini, exhorted his followers to "export the revolution throughout the world."
I'm standing here in Washington, D.C. and the difference is so stark. America's founding document promises life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Iran's founding document pledges death, tyranny, and the pursuit of jihad. And as states are collapsing across the Middle East, Iran is charging into the void to do just that.
Iran's goons in Gaza, its lackeys in Lebanon, its revolutionary guards on the Golan Heights are clutching Israel with three tentacles of terror. Backed by Iran, Assad is slaughtering Syrians. Back by Iran, Shiite militias are rampaging through Iraq. Back by Iran, Houthis are seizing control of Yemen, threatening the strategic straits at the mouth of the Red Sea. Along with the Straits of Hormuz, that would give Iran a second choke-point on the world's oil supply.
Just last week, near Hormuz, Iran carried out a military exercise blowing up a mock U.S. aircraft carrier. That's just last week, while they're having nuclear talks with the United States. But unfortunately, for the last 36 years, Iran's attacks against the United States have been anything but mock. And the targets have been all too real.
Iran took dozens of Americans hostage in Tehran, murdered hundreds of American soldiers, Marines, in Beirut, and was responsible for killing and maiming thousands of American service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Beyond the Middle East, Iran attacks America and its allies through its global terror network. It blew up the Jewish community center and the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires. It helped Al Qaida bomb U.S. embassies in Africa. It even attempted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, right here in Washington, D.C.
In the Middle East, Iran now dominates four Arab capitals, Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Sanaa. And if Iran's aggression is left unchecked, more will surely follow.
So, at a time when many hope that Iran will join the community of nations, Iran is busy gobbling up the nations.
(APPLAUSE)
We must all stand together to stop Iran's march of conquest, subjugation and terror.
(APPLAUSE)
Now, two years ago, we were told to give President Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif a chance to bring change and moderation to Iran. Some change! Some moderation!
Rouhani's government hangs gays, persecutes Christians, jails journalists and executes even more prisoners than before.
Last year, the same Zarif who charms Western diplomats laid a wreath at the grave of Imad Mughniyeh. Imad Mughniyeh is the terrorist mastermind who spilled more American blood than any other terrorist besides Osama bin Laden. I'd like to see someone ask him a question about that.
Iran's regime is as radical as ever, its cries of "Death to America," that same America that it calls the "Great Satan," as loud as ever.
Now, this shouldn't be surprising, because the ideology of Iran's revolutionary regime is deeply rooted in militant Islam, and that's why this regime will always be an enemy of America.
Don't be fooled. The battle between Iran and ISIS doesn't turn Iran into a friend of America.
Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic. The other calls itself the Islamic State. Both want to impose a militant Islamic empire first on the region and then on the entire world. They just disagree among themselves who will be the ruler of that empire.
In this deadly game of thrones, there's no place for America or for Israel, no peace for Christians, Jews or Muslims who don't share the Islamist medieval creed, no rights for women, no freedom for anyone.
So when it comes to Iran and ISIS, the enemy of your enemy is your enemy.
(APPLAUSE)
The difference is that ISIS is armed with butcher knives, captured weapons and YouTube, whereas Iran could soon be armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs. We must always remember -- I'll say it one more time -- the greatest dangers facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. To defeat ISIS and let Iran get nuclear weapons would be to win the battle, but lose the war. We can't let that happen.
(APPLAUSE)
But that, my friends, is exactly what could happen, if the deal now being negotiated is accepted by Iran. That deal will not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. It would all but guarantee that Iran gets those weapons, lots of them.
Let me explain why. While the final deal has not yet been signed, certain elements of any potential deal are now a matter of public record. You don't need intelligence agencies and secret information to know this. You can Google it.
Absent a dramatic change, we know for sure that any deal with Iran will include two major concessions to Iran.
The first major concession would leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure, providing it with a short break-out time to the bomb. Break-out time is the time it takes to amass enough weapons-grade uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb.
According to the deal, not a single nuclear facility would be demolished. Thousands of centrifuges used to enrich uranium would be left spinning. Thousands more would be temporarily disconnected, but not destroyed.
Because Iran's nuclear program would be left largely intact, Iran's break-out time would be very short -- about a year by U.S. assessment, even shorter by Israel's.
And if -- if Iran's work on advanced centrifuges, faster and faster centrifuges, is not stopped, that break-out time could still be shorter, a lot shorter.
True, certain restrictions would be imposed on Iran's nuclear program and Iran's adherence to those restrictions would be supervised by international inspectors. But here's the problem. You see, inspectors document violations; they don't stop them.
Inspectors knew when North Korea broke to the bomb, but that didn't stop anything. North Korea turned off the cameras, kicked out the inspectors. Within a few years, it got the bomb.
Now, we're warned that within five years North Korea could have an arsenal of 100 nuclear bombs.
Like North Korea, Iran, too, has defied international inspectors. It's done that on at least three separate occasions -- 2005, 2006, 2010. Like North Korea, Iran broke the locks, shut off the cameras.
Now, I know this is not gonna come a shock -- as a shock to any of you, but Iran not only defies inspectors, it also plays a pretty good game of hide-and-cheat with them.
The U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, said again yesterday that Iran still refuses to come clean about its military nuclear program. Iran was also caught -- caught twice, not once, twice -- operating secret nuclear facilities in Natanz and Qom, facilities that inspectors didn't even know existed.
Right now, Iran could be hiding nuclear facilities that we don't know about, the U.S. and Israel. As the former head of inspections for the IAEA said in 2013, he said, "If there's no undeclared installation today in Iran, it will be the first time in 20 years that it doesn't have one." Iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted. And that's why the first major concession is a source of great concern. It leaves Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and relies on inspectors to prevent a breakout. That concession creates a real danger that Iran could get to the bomb by violating the deal.
But the second major concession creates an even greater danger that Iran could get to the bomb by keeping the deal. Because virtually all the restrictions on Iran's nuclear program will automatically expire in about a decade.
Now, a decade may seem like a long time in political life, but it's the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. It's a blink of an eye in the life of our children. We all have a responsibility to consider what will happen when Iran's nuclear capabilities are virtually unrestricted and all the sanctions will have been lifted. Iran would then be free to build a huge nuclear capacity that could product many, many nuclear bombs.
Iran's Supreme Leader says that openly. He says, Iran plans to have 190,000 centrifuges, not 6,000 or even the 19,000 that Iran has today, but 10 times that amount -- 190,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. With this massive capacity, Iran could make the fuel for an entire nuclear arsenal and this in a matter of weeks, once it makes that decision.
My long-time friend, John Kerry, Secretary of State, confirmed last week that Iran could legitimately possess that massive centrifuge capacity when the deal expires.
Now I want you to think about that. The foremost sponsor of global terrorism could be weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons and this with full international legitimacy.
And by the way, if Iran's Intercontinental Ballistic Missile program is not part of the deal, and so far, Iran refuses to even put it on the negotiating table. Well, Iran could have the means to deliver that nuclear arsenal to the far-reach corners of the earth, including to every part of the United States.
So you see, my friends, this deal has two major concessions: one, leaving Iran with a vast nuclear program and two, lifting the restrictions on that program in about a decade. That's why this deal is so bad. It doesn't block Iran's path to the bomb; it paves Iran's path to the bomb.
So why would anyone make this deal? Because they hope that Iran will change for the better in the coming years, or they believe that the alternative to this deal is worse?
Well, I disagree. I don't believe that Iran's radical regime will change for the better after this deal. This regime has been in power for 36 years, and its voracious appetite for aggression grows with each passing year. This deal would wet appetite -- would only wet Iran's appetite for more.
Would Iran be less aggressive when sanctions are removed and its economy is stronger? If Iran is gobbling up four countries right now while it's under sanctions, how many more countries will Iran devour when sanctions are lifted? Would Iran fund less terrorism when it has mountains of cash with which to fund more terrorism?
Why should Iran's radical regime change for the better when it can enjoy the best of both world's: aggression abroad, prosperity at home?
This is a question that everyone asks in our region. Israel's neighbors -- Iran's neighbors know that Iran will become even more aggressive and sponsor even more terrorism when its economy is unshackled and it's been given a clear path to the bomb.
And many of these neighbors say they'll respond by racing to get nuclear weapons of their own. So this deal won't change Iran for the better; it will only change the Middle East for the worse. A deal that's supposed to prevent nuclear proliferation would instead spark a nuclear arms race in the most dangerous part of the planet.
This deal won't be a farewell to arms. It would be a farewell to arms control. And the Middle East would soon be crisscrossed by nuclear tripwires. A region where small skirmishes can trigger big wars would turn into a nuclear tinderbox.
If anyone thinks -- if anyone thinks this deal kicks the can down the road, think again. When we get down that road, we'll face a much more dangerous Iran, a Middle East littered with nuclear bombs and a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare.
Ladies and gentlemen, I've come here today to tell you we don't have to bet the security of the world on the hope that Iran will change for the better. We don't have to gamble with our future and with our children's future.
We can insist that restrictions on Iran's nuclear program not be lifted for as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and in the world.
(APPLAUSE)
Before lifting those restrictions, the world should demand that Iran do three things. First, stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second...
(APPLAUSE)
Second, stop supporting terrorism around the world.
(APPLAUSE)
And third, stop threatening to annihilate my country, Israel, the one and only Jewish state.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you.
If the world powers are not prepared to insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal is signed, at the very least they should insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal expires.
(APPLAUSE)
If Iran changes its behavior, the restrictions would be lifted. If Iran doesn't change its behavior, the restrictions should not be lifted.
(APPLAUSE)
If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country.
(APPLAUSE)
My friends, what about the argument that there's no alternative to this deal, that Iran's nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?
Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn't get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can't drive. A pilot without a plan can't fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can't make nuclear weapons.
(APPLAUSE)
Iran's nuclear program can be rolled back well-beyond the current proposal by insisting on a better deal and keeping up the pressure on a very vulnerable regime, especially given the recent collapse in the price of oil.
(APPLAUSE)
Now, if Iran threatens to walk away from the table -- and this often happens in a Persian bazaar -- call their bluff. They'll be back, because they need the deal a lot more than you do.
(APPLAUSE)
And by maintaining the pressure on Iran and on those who do business with Iran, you have the power to make them need it even more.
My friends, for over a year, we've been told that no deal is better than a bad deal. Well, this is a bad deal. It's a very bad deal. We're better off without it.
(APPLAUSE)
Now we're being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That's just not true.
The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal.
(APPLAUSE)
A better deal that doesn't leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and such a short break-out time. A better deal that keeps the restrictions on Iran's nuclear program in place until Iran's aggression ends.
(APPLAUSE)
A better deal that won't give Iran an easy path to the bomb. A better deal that Israel and its neighbors may not like, but with which we could live, literally. And no country...
(APPLAUSE)
... no country has a greater stake -- no country has a greater stake than Israel in a good deal that peacefully removes this threat.
Ladies and gentlemen, history has placed us at a fateful crossroads. We must now choose between two paths. One path leads to a bad deal that will at best curtail Iran's nuclear ambitions for a while, but it will inexorably lead to a nuclear-armed Iran whose unbridled aggression will inevitably lead to war.
The second path, however difficult, could lead to a much better deal, that would prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, a nuclearized Middle East and the horrific consequences of both to all of humanity.
You don't have to read Robert Frost to know. You have to live life to know that the difficult path is usually the one less traveled, but it will make all the difference for the future of my country, the security of the Middle East and the peace of the world, the peace, we all desire.
(APPLAUSE)
My friend, standing up to Iran is not easy. Standing up to dark and murderous regimes never is. With us today is Holocaust survivor and Nobel Prize winner Elie Wiesel.
(APPLAUSE)
Elie, your life and work inspires to give meaning to the words, "never again."
(APPLAUSE)
And I wish I could promise you, Elie, that the lessons of history have been learned. I can only urge the leaders of the world not to repeat the mistakes of the past.
(APPLAUSE)
Not to sacrifice the future for the present; not to ignore aggression in the hopes of gaining an illusory peace.
But I can guarantee you this, the days when the Jewish people remained passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over.
(APPLAUSE)
We are no longer scattered among the nations, powerless to defend ourselves. We restored our sovereignty in our ancient home. And the soldiers who defend our home have boundless courage. For the first time in 100 generations, we, the Jewish people, can defend ourselves.
(APPLAUSE)
This is why -- this is why, as a prime minister of Israel, I can promise you one more thing: Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.
(APPLAUSE)
But I know that Israel does not stand alone. I know that America stands with Israel.
(APPLAUSE)
I know that you stand with Israel.
(APPLAUSE)
You stand with Israel, because you know that the story of Israel is not only the story of the Jewish people but of the human spirit that refuses again and again to succumb to history's horrors.
(APPLAUSE)
Facing me right up there in the gallery, overlooking all of us in this (inaudible) chamber is the image of Moses. Moses led our people from slavery to the gates of the Promised Land.
And before the people of Israel entered the land of Israel, Moses gave us a message that has steeled our resolve for thousands of years. I leave you with his message today, (SPEAKING IN HEBREW), "Be strong and resolute, neither fear nor dread them."
My friends, may Israel and America always stand together, strong and resolute. May we neither fear nor dread the challenges ahead. May we face the future with confidence, strength and hope.
May God bless the state of Israel and may God bless the United States of America.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you all.
You're wonderful.
Thank you, America. Thank you.
Thank you.
Full text, worth preserving:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/03/03/full-text-netanyahus-address-to-congress/
Rush's monologue on the speech is equally brilliant to Netanyahu's.
Rush's monologue on the speech is equally brilliant to Netanyahu's.
Glenn Thrush @GlennThrush 8m8 minutes ago
Seemed like the Rs didn't want Bibi to leave the podium... Like if he just stayed up there long enough he'd somehow become THEIR president..
David Axelrod @davidaxelrod 13m13 minutes ago Chicago, ILMay God forgive me for what I'd like to say to Mr. Axelrod at this moment.
Speech broke no new ground nor offered realistic path short of war. But apocalyptic language & GOP cheerleading tailor-made for his base.
David Axelrod @davidaxelrod 13m13 minutes ago Chicago, IL
Speech broke no new ground nor offered realistic path short of war. But apocalyptic language & GOP cheerleading tailor-made for his base.
Filthy prostitute; Axelrod.
Wonderful speech. Wonderful wonderful wonderful!!!
Yes indeed! I'm very glad to hear Bibi repeating what has been said many times previously right here on this forum! His words carry much more weight!
Now let's see how the state controlled media butchers this speech in tonight's news reports to the ignorant masses.
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/234445-pelosi-near-tears-at-bibi-insult (http://thehill.com/homenews/house/234445-pelosi-near-tears-at-bibi-insult)
Pelosi 'near tears' at Bibi 'insult'
By Mike Lillis - 03/03/15 12:38 PM EST
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) hammered Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday, saying the Israeli prime minister's speech to Congress was an "insult" to the country.
“The unbreakable bonds between the United States and Israel are rooted in our shared values, our common ideals and mutual interests," Pelosi said in a statement just after the speech.
“That is why, as one who values the U.S. — Israel relationship, and loves Israel, I was near tears throughout the Prime Minister’s speech — saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation."
WTF is she talking about!
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/234445-pelosi-near-tears-at-bibi-insult (http://thehill.com/homenews/house/234445-pelosi-near-tears-at-bibi-insult)Geez, I am almost in tears and some days in tears with you and your ilk.
Pelosi 'near tears' at Bibi 'insult'
By Mike Lillis - 03/03/15 12:38 PM EST
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) hammered Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday, saying the Israeli prime minister's speech to Congress was an "insult" to the country.
“The unbreakable bonds between the United States and Israel are rooted in our shared values, our common ideals and mutual interests," Pelosi said in a statement just after the speech.
“That is why, as one who values the U.S. — Israel relationship, and loves Israel, I was near tears throughout the Prime Minister’s speech — saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation."
WTF is she talking about!
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/234445-pelosi-near-tears-at-bibi-insult (http://thehill.com/homenews/house/234445-pelosi-near-tears-at-bibi-insult)
Pelosi 'near tears' at Bibi 'insult'
By Mike Lillis - 03/03/15 12:38 PM EST
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) hammered Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday, saying the Israeli prime minister's speech to Congress was an "insult" to the country.
“The unbreakable bonds between the United States and Israel are rooted in our shared values, our common ideals and mutual interests," Pelosi said in a statement just after the speech.
“That is why, as one who values the U.S. — Israel relationship, and loves Israel, I was near tears throughout the Prime Minister’s speech — saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation."
WTF is she talking about!
White House sends out virulent attack dogs to smear Netanyahu.What was the whitehouse unofficial statement? What is the gist of the statements?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/03/wow-democrats-lash-out-at-netanyahu-tell-him-to-go-home-call-him-a-child/ (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/03/wow-democrats-lash-out-at-netanyahu-tell-him-to-go-home-call-him-a-child/)It NEVER fails. For YEARS they have always blame the something with the description that they are doing. They ALWAYS use the words that is the thing they are doing.
Wow! Democrats LASH OUT at Netanyahu, Tell Him to Go Home, Call Him “a Child”
ABC stating 'it was a speech that wasn't supposed to be political, but was from the start....' and focusing on Boehner not asking O's permission.
I only caught snippets of the speech (in the office). Did Netanyahu lay out an alternative to the deal he opposes? If so, what is it? Thanks.
Did Netanyahu lay out an alternative to the deal he opposes? If so, what is it? Thanks.
Just watched the speech in full. Nothing new. Same rhetoric. No plan other than the status quo.
But the speech was certainly well delivered.
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/234445-pelosi-near-tears-at-bibi-insult (http://thehill.com/homenews/house/234445-pelosi-near-tears-at-bibi-insult)
Pelosi 'near tears' at Bibi 'insult'
By Mike Lillis - 03/03/15 12:38 PM EST
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) hammered Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday, saying the Israeli prime minister's speech to Congress was an "insult" to the country.
“The unbreakable bonds between the United States and Israel are rooted in our shared values, our common ideals and mutual interests," Pelosi said in a statement just after the speech.
“That is why, as one who values the U.S. — Israel relationship, and loves Israel, I was near tears throughout the Prime Minister’s speech — saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation."
WTF is she talking about!
Still looking for the official WH response...if you find it post it.You know they so p1ssed off right now and cannot see straight.
Just watched the speech in full. Nothing new. Same rhetoric. No plan other than the status quo.
But the speech was certainly well delivered.
Of course he did! NO deal at all is better than THIS deal but even better would be a MUCH better deal!
So when it comes to Iran and ISIS, the enemy of your enemy is your enemy.
That's a rather strange interpretation of what was said but I suppose we hear what we want to hear....for example polousy
I got the NO deal is better than THIS deal from his speech.Why even deal with them?
But I missed what a MUCH better deal would look like. Would love to hear what Netanyahu said about this.
Thanks.
Why even deal with them?
I got the NO deal is better than THIS deal from his speech.
But I missed what a MUCH better deal would look like. Would love to hear what Netanyahu said about this.
Thanks.
This deal won't be a farewell to arms. It would be a farewell to arms control. And the Middle East would soon be crisscrossed by nuclear tripwires. A region where small skirmishes can trigger big wars would turn into a nuclear tinderbox.
If anyone thinks -- if anyone thinks this deal kicks the can down the road, think again. When we get down that road, we'll face a much more dangerous Iran, a Middle East littered with nuclear bombs and a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare.
Ladies and gentlemen, I've come here today to tell you we don't have to bet the security of the world on the hope that Iran will change for the better. We don't have to gamble with our future and with our children's future.
We can insist that restrictions on Iran's nuclear program not be lifted for as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and in the world.
(APPLAUSE)
Before lifting those restrictions, the world should demand that Iran do three things. First, stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second...
(APPLAUSE)
Second, stop supporting terrorism around the world.
(APPLAUSE)
And third, stop threatening to annihilate my country, Israel, the one and only Jewish state.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you.
If the world powers are not prepared to insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal is signed, at the very least they should insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal expires.
(APPLAUSE)
If Iran changes its behavior, the restrictions would be lifted. If Iran doesn't change its behavior, the restrictions should not be lifted.
(APPLAUSE)
If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country.
(APPLAUSE)
My friends, what about the argument that there's no alternative to this deal, that Iran's nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?
Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn't get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can't drive. A pilot without a plan can't fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can't make nuclear weapons.
(APPLAUSE)
Iran's nuclear program can be rolled back well-beyond the current proposal by insisting on a better deal and keeping up the pressure on a very vulnerable regime, especially given the recent collapse in the price of oil.
Why not? Wouldn't we prefer to watch Iran in the sunlight than wonder what it's doing in the shadows? Is there no value to Israel's security in that?
Why not? Wouldn't we prefer to watch Iran in the sunlight than wonder what it's doing in the shadows? Is there no value to Israel's security in that?They will never change with the current regime. You cannot play nice with them, ever. At least in the shadows they haven't been able to full on make nukes. Now they will be able to.
Thanks for posting (and bolding) those quotes, Bigun.
Bibi laid down a very clear strategy for dealing with Iran.
I don't know how anyone missed it.... **nononono*
Emphasis added by me.
Why not? Wouldn't we prefer to watch Iran in the sunlight than wonder what it's doing in the shadows? Is there no value to Israel's security in that?
Greta Van Susteren
22 mins · Edited ·
As a Leader in the House of Representatives, she does represent all of us.
AJE News @AJENews 6m6 minutes ago
Obama's rebuttal: "Nothing new" in Netanyahu's speech to US Congress. http://aje.io/a539
Note: not read it yet.
Tuesday, March 03, 2015
Netanyahu 1, Obama 0
The confrontation between nations turned out to be Benjamin Netanyahu praising Barack Obama -- and the president looking like the trifling fool he is.
Netanyahu -- who was left sitting and waiting for hours at the White House shortly after The Won as in the childish "I won, I will trump you on that" became president -- let bygones be bygones and praised the president.
Oh the media will pump up a feud, but those who saw the prime minister's speech before Congress today know better.
From Netanyahu:QuoteBecause America and Israel, we share a common destiny, the destiny of promised lands that cherish freedom and offer hope. Israel is grateful for the support of American -- of America's people and of America's presidents, from Harry Truman to Barack Obama. We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel.Hardly sounds angry. You heard of killing with kindness? This is it. By comparison, our president looks peevish and petulant for refusing to see the prime minister and opposing this speech.
Now, some of that is widely known. Some of that is widely known, like strengthening security cooperation and intelligence sharing, opposing anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N.
Some of what the president has done for Israel is less well- known. I called him in 2010 when we had the Carmel forest fire, and he immediately agreed to respond to my request for urgent aid. In 2011, we had our embassy in Cairo under siege, and again, he provided vital assistance at the crucial moment. Or his support for more missile interceptors during our operation last summer when we took on Hamas terrorists.
Meanwhile, the president held a press conference to say, gee, Netanyahu said nothing new. This must not be tracking well for the president, or he would have continued to ignore the speech he said he was going to ignore. Our friends and our adversaries clearly see his weakness.
We have a boy president -- Peter Pan with a bong who never grew up -- the affirmative action figure who never had to make his bed.
Netanyahu showed the world that President 45 is irrelevant. Time to prepare for President 46.
I think Bibi stating before our congress and the world that Israel will do what it needs to do to protect itself, with or without the USA's backing, is major news.
Just watched the speech in full. Nothing new. Same rhetoric. No plan other than the status quo.
But the speech was certainly well delivered.
Myst... thank you for your efforts with this thread. Well done.
What did you think of the number of standing ovations Netanyahu received before Congress?
I think Bibi stating before our congress and the world that Israel will do what it needs to do to protect itself, with or without the USA's backing, is major news.
Netanyahu's a charismatic speaker and really appears empathetic, caring and powerful.--so it was expected and unsurprising.
Let me return the favor and ask you:
Remember for a moment the number of times since 1992 Netanyahu has warned the world-- with time specificity-- that Iran was on the brink of developing a nuclear bomb. For example, in 1992 Netanyahu alerted the world that Iran was 3 to 6 months from developing a nuclear weapon. He presented this same warning again in his 1996 address to Congress during his first term as Prime Minister. (And so forth and so on through 23 years)
If this had been any other leader, not one nearly so handsome, well-spoken, politically savvy and charismatic, would we at least have raised the possibility (among ourselves) that this leader's perpetual focus on and dire rhetoric about Iran and nuclear weapons (for 23 years) might have drifted into a pathology?
I think Bibi stating before our congress and the world that Israel will do what it needs to do to protect itself, with or without the USA's backing, is major news.
But why focus on what our Jewish friend has said
Netanyahu's a charismatic speaker and really appears empathetic, caring and powerful.--so it was expected and unsurprising.
Let me return the favor and ask you:
Remember for a moment the number of times since 1992 Netanyahu has warned the world-- with time specificity-- that Iran was on the brink of developing a nuclear bomb. For example, in 1992 Netanyahu alerted the world that Iran was 3 to 6 months from developing a nuclear weapon. He presented this same warning again in his 1996 address to Congress during his first term as Prime Minister. (And so forth and so on through 23 years)
If this had been any other leader, not one nearly so handsome, well-spoken, politically savvy and charismatic, would we at least have raised the possibility (among ourselves) that this leader's perpetual focus on and dire rhetoric about Iran and nuclear weapons (for 23 years) might have drifted into a pathology?
Ahh...because this is a thread about Benjamin Netanyahu and the world-altering speech he gave today before a joint session of Congress? :pondering:
That's the part of your argument we don't get?
Ahh...because this is a thread about Benjamin Netanyahu and the world-altering speech he gave today before a joint session of Congress? :pondering:Who here referred to it as world-altering?
Ahh, but what was the subject of the speech before Congress?
Who here referred to it as world-altering?
Out of curiosity, who's the "WE"?
"what do you mean we, paleface?" Is that your retort?
Netanyahu's a charismatic speaker and really appears empathetic, caring and powerful.--so it was expected and unsurprising.
Let me return the favor and ask you:
Remember for a moment the number of times since 1992 Netanyahu has warned the world-- with time specificity-- that Iran was on the brink of developing a nuclear bomb. For example, in 1992 Netanyahu alerted the world that Iran was 3 to 6 months from developing a nuclear weapon. He presented this same warning again in his 1996 address to Congress during his first term as Prime Minister. (And so forth and so on through 23 years)
If this had been any other leader, not one nearly so handsome, well-spoken, politically savvy and charismatic, would we at least have raised the possibility (among ourselves) that this leader's perpetual focus on and dire rhetoric about Iran and nuclear weapons (for 23 years) might have drifted into a pathology?
Netanyahu's a charismatic speaker and really appears empathetic, caring and powerful.--so it was expected and unsurprising.
Let me return the favor and ask you:
Remember for a moment the number of times since 1992 Netanyahu has warned the world-- with time specificity-- that Iran was on the brink of developing a nuclear bomb. For example, in 1992 Netanyahu alerted the world that Iran was 3 to 6 months from developing a nuclear weapon. He presented this same warning again in his 1996 address to Congress during his first term as Prime Minister. (And so forth and so on through 23 years)
If this had been any other leader, not one nearly so handsome, well-spoken, politically savvy and charismatic, would we at least have raised the possibility (among ourselves) that this leader's perpetual focus on and dire rhetoric about Iran and nuclear weapons (for 23 years) might have drifted into a pathology?
Obama'sR in V rebuttal: "Nothing new" in Netanyahu's speech to US Congress
Well, wait a moment. We both understand English, don't we?
Netanyahu's speech wasn't supposed to offer an alternative plan.
And how can anyone present a different plan, when they are being shut out on the process regarding the PRESENT 'plan'?
Instead, he did exactly what I said to RiV the other day. Words mean something to Bibi. He essentially said never again, when he shouted "NO MORE!!".
He told the world that he's prepared to go it along to preserve thei existence.
To me.....that's pretty damn "NEW"!!
We've mostly shared the same POV over the years, Right_In-Virginia. Frankly I am surprised and more than a little bit shocked at your position regarding Bibi Netanyahu and Israel in general.
It's not a stretch at all for me to imagine "Breaking News" that Tel Aviv had suffered a nuke attack by Iran or a client state.
Evidently, it is improbable....or even impossible, to you.
You have no interest in what Bibi said, or what he has said, because you've made it clear in the past you despise him. And, on more than one occasion, you've indicated you're not exactly a fan of Israel either.
So, your faux questions and pseudo-concern over Bibi's comments should be viewed in that context.
RightSideNews @rightsidenews 28s28 seconds ago
Valerie Jarrett: Obama Too Busy to Watch Netanyahu Speech; Cites ‘Let Girls Learn’ Initiative
Bibi praised Obama. Oh, puke.....
Diane Feinstein make a comment Sunday nastily declaring that Netanyahu doesn’t speak for her. Now she is standing clapping. He is a smart man how he set this up.
Now, now. This gent is capable of playing a wicked game of chess; this is a gambit, no more, no less.
Well, wait a moment. We both understand English, don't we?
Netanyahu's speech wasn't supposed to offer an alternative plan.
And how can anyone present a different plan, when they are being shut out on the process regarding the PRESENT 'plan'?
Instead, he did exactly what I said to RiV the other day. Words mean something to Bibi. He essentially said never again, when he shouted "NO MORE!!".
He told the world that he's prepared to go it along to preserve thei existence.
To me.....that's pretty damn "NEW"!!
Any praise of that POS Obama still rankles me.
That was a speech!
"That" was Leader.
Netanyahu makes Obama seem so small and immature, and in Obama's own words Junior Varsity.
No wonder Obama and the Democrats were afraid of Netanyahu speaking to Americans... they were hoping we'd forget what a REAL Statesman telling the Truth sounds like...
LOL! Where were you all day?
Everything okay? :laugh:
Admittedly, I'm not as active here as I use to be. I normally visit the site during lunch, but work is getting so busy, I barely have lunch anymore. And once I get home logging back onto a computer after being on one all day is the last thing on my mind.
The best part of the whole thing was when Netenyahu began praising Obama. And used the line, He has helped us in ways no one even knows. When we called him, he was there.
Obama's affiliations are all radical Muslims, and radical Blacks. This would be like a police chief calling out a gang leader and saying, He helped us in ways no one knows. When we called him, he was there.
Obama must have been furious when he heard this, which only makes it more delicious.
The best part of the whole thing was when Netenyahu began praising Obama. And used the line, He has helped us in ways no one even knows. When we called him, he was there.
Obama's affiliations are all radical Muslims, and radical Blacks. This would be like a police chief calling out a gang leader and saying, He helped us in ways no one knows. When we called him, he was there.
Obama must have been furious when he heard this, which only makes it more delicious.
He has helped us in ways no one even knows
I can see him meaning zero didn't know