BRAVO Lizze and company.
Elizabeth Warren will not attend Netanyahu speech
SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images
Senator Elizabeth Warren attended banking hearing in Washington on Feb. 24.
By Bryan BenderGlobe Staff March 03, 2015
WASHINGTON — Senator Elizabeth Warren and two other members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation plan to skip Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress Tuesday, saying they are protesting the invitation made by House Speaker John Boehner.
Representatives Katherine Clark, a Melrose Democrat, and Jim McGovern, a Democrat of Worcester, also are planning to miss the event.
Warren announced she would not attend the speech in a statement issued by her office Monday evening.
“I strongly support Israel, and I remain deeply concerned about the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon, which I discussed in detail with Prime Minister Netanyahu when we met in Jerusalem last November,’’ the Democratic senator said in a statement. “It’s unfortunate that Speaker Boehner’s actions on the eve of a national election in Israel have made Tuesday’s event more political and less helpful for addressing the critical issue of nuclear nonproliferation and the safety of our most important ally in the Middle East.”
Clark struck a similar tone.
“Speaker Boehner has poisoned a critical foreign policy discussion with partisan gamesmanship,” Clark said in a statement. “I will continue my full-throated support for Israel, but I will not be part of Speaker Boehner’s attempt to divide our Congress and country over one of our strongest allies.”
Netanyahu will appear Tuesday at the invitation of House Speaker Boehner. President Obama and his chief diplomat were not involved in the invitation, a departure from protocol that has injected a sense of partisanship into the speech and outraged some Democrats.
Elizabeth Warren will not attend Netanyahu speech
SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images
Senator Elizabeth Warren attended banking hearing in Washington on Feb. 24.
By Bryan BenderGlobe Staff March 03, 2015
WASHINGTON — Senator Elizabeth Warren and two other members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation plan to skip Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress Tuesday, saying they are protesting the invitation made by House Speaker John Boehner.
Representatives Katherine Clark, a Melrose Democrat, and Jim McGovern, a Democrat of Worcester, also are planning to miss the event.
Warren announced she would not attend the speech in a statement issued by her office Monday evening.
“I strongly support Israel, and I remain deeply concerned about the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon, which I discussed in detail with Prime Minister Netanyahu when we met in Jerusalem last November,’’ the Democratic senator said in a statement. “It’s unfortunate that Speaker Boehner’s actions on the eve of a national election in Israel have made Tuesday’s event more political and less helpful for addressing the critical issue of nuclear nonproliferation and the safety of our most important ally in the Middle East.”
Clark struck a similar tone.
“Speaker Boehner has poisoned a critical foreign policy discussion with partisan gamesmanship,” Clark said in a statement. “I will continue my full-throated support for Israel, but I will not be part of Speaker Boehner’s attempt to divide our Congress and country over one of our strongest allies.”
Netanyahu will appear Tuesday at the invitation of House Speaker Boehner. President Obama and his chief diplomat were not involved in the invitation, a departure from protocol that has injected a sense of partisanship into the speech and outraged some Democrats.
You too Al:
[h=1]Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken Join Growing List Of Democrats Skipping Netanyahu Speech[/h] The Huffington Post | By Mollie Reilly
Posted: 03/02/2015 8:11 pm EST Updated: 1 hour ago
Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Al Franken (D-Minn.) announced Monday that they will not attend Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Tuesday address to a joint session of Congress.
One day after President Barack Obama said he would veto any new sanctions against Iran, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) invited Netanyahu to make his case to Congress against a nuclear deal. Boehner extended the invitation without first consulting the White House, a move seen by some as disrespectful to Obama. The administration has pushed back on the speech, calling Boehner's invite a breach of protocol.
"I strongly support Israel, and I remain deeply concerned about the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon, which I discussed in detail with Prime Minister Netanyahu when we met in Jerusalem last November," Warren said in a statement, according to the Boston Globe. “It's unfortunate that Speaker Boehner’s actions on the eve of a national election in Israel have made Tuesday’s event more political and less helpful for addressing the critical issue of nuclear nonproliferation and the safety of our most important ally in the Middle East."
In a statement earlier Monday, Franken described the speech as a "partisan spectacle."
"This has unfortunately become a partisan spectacle, both because of the impending Israeli election and because it was done without consulting the administration,” Franken said. "I’d be uncomfortable being part of an event that I don’t believe should be happening. I’m confident that, once this episode is over, we can reaffirm our strong tradition of bipartisan support for Israel."
According to The Hill, more than 50 congressional Democrats have said they are skipping the controversial speech. Among those boycotting are Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Vice President Joe Biden is also missing the speech due to overseas travel.
Obama will not meet with Netanyahu during his time in the U.S. due to his visit's proximity to the mid-March Israeli elections. In a Monday interview with Reuters, Obama said the rift over the prime minister's visit was not personal and will not be "permanently destructive" to U.S.-Israeli ties.
"This is not a personal issue," Obama said. "I think that it is important for every country in its relationship with the United States to recognize that the U.S. has a process of making policy."
Netanyahu also addressed the controversy during a Monday speech at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference.
"Our alliance is sound, our friendship is strong," Netanyahu said. "Despite occasional disagreements, the friendship between America and Israel grew stronger and stronger decade after decade, and our friendship will weather the current disagreement as well to grow even stronger in the future. And I'll tell you why: because we share the same dreams, because we pray and hope and aspire for that same world."
[h=1]Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken Join Growing List Of Democrats Skipping Netanyahu Speech[/h] The Huffington Post | By Mollie Reilly
Posted: 03/02/2015 8:11 pm EST Updated: 1 hour ago
Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Al Franken (D-Minn.) announced Monday that they will not attend Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Tuesday address to a joint session of Congress.
One day after President Barack Obama said he would veto any new sanctions against Iran, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) invited Netanyahu to make his case to Congress against a nuclear deal. Boehner extended the invitation without first consulting the White House, a move seen by some as disrespectful to Obama. The administration has pushed back on the speech, calling Boehner's invite a breach of protocol.
"I strongly support Israel, and I remain deeply concerned about the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon, which I discussed in detail with Prime Minister Netanyahu when we met in Jerusalem last November," Warren said in a statement, according to the Boston Globe. “It's unfortunate that Speaker Boehner’s actions on the eve of a national election in Israel have made Tuesday’s event more political and less helpful for addressing the critical issue of nuclear nonproliferation and the safety of our most important ally in the Middle East."
In a statement earlier Monday, Franken described the speech as a "partisan spectacle."
"This has unfortunately become a partisan spectacle, both because of the impending Israeli election and because it was done without consulting the administration,” Franken said. "I’d be uncomfortable being part of an event that I don’t believe should be happening. I’m confident that, once this episode is over, we can reaffirm our strong tradition of bipartisan support for Israel."
According to The Hill, more than 50 congressional Democrats have said they are skipping the controversial speech. Among those boycotting are Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Vice President Joe Biden is also missing the speech due to overseas travel.
Obama will not meet with Netanyahu during his time in the U.S. due to his visit's proximity to the mid-March Israeli elections. In a Monday interview with Reuters, Obama said the rift over the prime minister's visit was not personal and will not be "permanently destructive" to U.S.-Israeli ties.
"This is not a personal issue," Obama said. "I think that it is important for every country in its relationship with the United States to recognize that the U.S. has a process of making policy."
Netanyahu also addressed the controversy during a Monday speech at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference.
"Our alliance is sound, our friendship is strong," Netanyahu said. "Despite occasional disagreements, the friendship between America and Israel grew stronger and stronger decade after decade, and our friendship will weather the current disagreement as well to grow even stronger in the future. And I'll tell you why: because we share the same dreams, because we pray and hope and aspire for that same world."
No, Mr. Netanyahu—you do not speak for American Jews
https://org.salsalabs.com/o/525/images/Final netanyahu ad.pdf
https://org.salsalabs.com/o/525/images/Final netanyahu ad.pdf
[h=1]Benjamin Netanyahu’s Long History of Crying Wolf About Iran’s Nuclear Weapons[/h] By Murtaza Hussain @mazmhussain
Today at 11:40 AM
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to address the U.S. Congress tomorrow about the perils of striking a nuclear deal with Iran. Netanyahu, not generally known for his measured rhetoric, has been vociferous in his public statements about the dangers of such compromise, warning that it will allow Iran to “rush to the bomb” and that it amounts to giving the country “a license” to develop nuclear weapons.
It is worth remembering, however, that Netanyahu has said much of this before. Almost two decades ago, in 1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind,” adding that, “the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close.”
Almost 20 years later that deadline has apparently still not passed, but Netanyahu is still making dire predictions about an imminent Iranian nuclear weapon. Four years before that Congressional speech, in 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”
In his 1995 book, “Fighting Terrorism,” Netanyahu once again asserted that Iran would have a nuclear weapon in “three to five years,” apparently forgetting about the expiration of his old deadline.
For a considerable time thereafter, Netanyahu switched his focus to hyping the purported nuclear threat posed by another country, Iraq, about which he claimed there was “no question” that it was “advancing towards to the development of nuclear weapons.” Testifying again in front of Congress again in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Needless to say, these claims turned out to be disastrously false. Despite this, Netanyahu, apparently unchastened by the havoc his previous false charges helped create, immediately went back to ringing the alarm bells about Iran.
A 2009 U.S. State Department diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks described then-prime ministerial candidate Netanyahu informing a visiting Congressional delegation that Iran was “probably one or two years away” from developing weapons capability. Another cable later the same year showed Netanyahu, now back in office as prime minister, telling a separate delegation of American politicians in Jerusalem that “Iran has the capability now to make one bomb,” adding that alternatively, “they could wait and make several bombs in a year or two.”
In statements around this time made to journalists, Netanyahu continued to raise alarm about this supposedly imminent, apocalyptic threat. As he told The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg in a 2010 interview, “You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs,” adding, “that’s what is happening in Iran.”
In 2012 Netanyahu said in closed talks reported by Israeli media that Iran is just “a few months away” from attaining nuclear capabilities. Later that same year, he gave a widely-mocked address at the United Nations in which he alleged that Iran would have the ability to construct a weapon within roughly one year, while using a printout of a cartoon bomb to illustrate his point.
Despite this heady rhetoric, Netanyahu’s estimates of an imminent Iranian nuclear bomb have consistently been at odds with analyses made by his own intelligence agency. In 2011, departing Mossad intelligence chief Meir Dagan said in his final intelligence summary that, contrary to Netanyahu’s repeated statements at the time, an Iranian nuclear weapon is in fact not imminent, and that any military action against the country could end up spurring the development of such a weapon.
Just last week, leaked intelligence cables reported by Al Jazeera revealed that at roughly the same time in 2012 that Netanyahu was brandishing his cartoon bomb and telling the United Nations that Iran was close to obtaining a nuclear weapon, Israeli intelligence had actually determined the country was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.”
The conclusion from this history is inescapable. Over the course of more than 20 years, Benjamin Netanyahu has made false claims about nuclear weapons programs in both Iran and Iraq, inventing imaginary timelines for their development, and making public statements that contradicted the analysis of his own intelligence advisers.
Despite this, he continues to be treated by lawmakers and media figures as a credible voice on this issue.
When Netanyahu gives his address to Congress, he can likely be counted on to say much the same things he’s been saying for the past two decades about an impending Iranian nuclear threat, and credulous pundits and politicians can be counted on to believe him.
Today at 11:40 AM
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to address the U.S. Congress tomorrow about the perils of striking a nuclear deal with Iran. Netanyahu, not generally known for his measured rhetoric, has been vociferous in his public statements about the dangers of such compromise, warning that it will allow Iran to “rush to the bomb” and that it amounts to giving the country “a license” to develop nuclear weapons.
It is worth remembering, however, that Netanyahu has said much of this before. Almost two decades ago, in 1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind,” adding that, “the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close.”
Almost 20 years later that deadline has apparently still not passed, but Netanyahu is still making dire predictions about an imminent Iranian nuclear weapon. Four years before that Congressional speech, in 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”
In his 1995 book, “Fighting Terrorism,” Netanyahu once again asserted that Iran would have a nuclear weapon in “three to five years,” apparently forgetting about the expiration of his old deadline.
For a considerable time thereafter, Netanyahu switched his focus to hyping the purported nuclear threat posed by another country, Iraq, about which he claimed there was “no question” that it was “advancing towards to the development of nuclear weapons.” Testifying again in front of Congress again in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Needless to say, these claims turned out to be disastrously false. Despite this, Netanyahu, apparently unchastened by the havoc his previous false charges helped create, immediately went back to ringing the alarm bells about Iran.
A 2009 U.S. State Department diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks described then-prime ministerial candidate Netanyahu informing a visiting Congressional delegation that Iran was “probably one or two years away” from developing weapons capability. Another cable later the same year showed Netanyahu, now back in office as prime minister, telling a separate delegation of American politicians in Jerusalem that “Iran has the capability now to make one bomb,” adding that alternatively, “they could wait and make several bombs in a year or two.”
In statements around this time made to journalists, Netanyahu continued to raise alarm about this supposedly imminent, apocalyptic threat. As he told The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg in a 2010 interview, “You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs,” adding, “that’s what is happening in Iran.”
In 2012 Netanyahu said in closed talks reported by Israeli media that Iran is just “a few months away” from attaining nuclear capabilities. Later that same year, he gave a widely-mocked address at the United Nations in which he alleged that Iran would have the ability to construct a weapon within roughly one year, while using a printout of a cartoon bomb to illustrate his point.
Despite this heady rhetoric, Netanyahu’s estimates of an imminent Iranian nuclear bomb have consistently been at odds with analyses made by his own intelligence agency. In 2011, departing Mossad intelligence chief Meir Dagan said in his final intelligence summary that, contrary to Netanyahu’s repeated statements at the time, an Iranian nuclear weapon is in fact not imminent, and that any military action against the country could end up spurring the development of such a weapon.
Just last week, leaked intelligence cables reported by Al Jazeera revealed that at roughly the same time in 2012 that Netanyahu was brandishing his cartoon bomb and telling the United Nations that Iran was close to obtaining a nuclear weapon, Israeli intelligence had actually determined the country was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.”
The conclusion from this history is inescapable. Over the course of more than 20 years, Benjamin Netanyahu has made false claims about nuclear weapons programs in both Iran and Iraq, inventing imaginary timelines for their development, and making public statements that contradicted the analysis of his own intelligence advisers.
Despite this, he continues to be treated by lawmakers and media figures as a credible voice on this issue.
When Netanyahu gives his address to Congress, he can likely be counted on to say much the same things he’s been saying for the past two decades about an impending Iranian nuclear threat, and credulous pundits and politicians can be counted on to believe him.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s Long History of Crying Wolf About Iran’s Nuclear Weapons
By Murtaza Hussain @mazmhussain
Today at 11:40 AM
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to address the U.S. Congress tomorrow about the perils of striking a nuclear deal with Iran. Netanyahu, not generally known for his measured rhetoric, has been vociferous in his public statements about the dangers of such compromise, warning that it will allow Iran to “rush to the bomb” and that it amounts to giving the country “a license” to develop nuclear weapons.
It is worth remembering, however, that Netanyahu has said much of this before. Almost two decades ago, in 1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind,” adding that, “the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close.”
Almost 20 years later that deadline has apparently still not passed, but Netanyahu is still making dire predictions about an imminent Iranian nuclear weapon. Four years before that Congressional speech, in 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”
In his 1995 book, “Fighting Terrorism,” Netanyahu once again asserted that Iran would have a nuclear weapon in “three to five years,” apparently forgetting about the expiration of his old deadline.
For a considerable time thereafter, Netanyahu switched his focus to hyping the purported nuclear threat posed by another country, Iraq, about which he claimed there was “no question” that it was “advancing towards to the development of nuclear weapons.” Testifying again in front of Congress again in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Needless to say, these claims turned out to be disastrously false. Despite this, Netanyahu, apparently unchastened by the havoc his previous false charges helped create, immediately went back to ringing the alarm bells about Iran.
A 2009 U.S. State Department diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks described then-prime ministerial candidate Netanyahu informing a visiting Congressional delegation that Iran was “probably one or two years away” from developing weapons capability. Another cable later the same year showed Netanyahu, now back in office as prime minister, telling a separate delegation of American politicians in Jerusalem that “Iran has the capability now to make one bomb,” adding that alternatively, “they could wait and make several bombs in a year or two.”
In statements around this time made to journalists, Netanyahu continued to raise alarm about this supposedly imminent, apocalyptic threat. As he told The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg in a 2010 interview, “You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs,” adding, “that’s what is happening in Iran.”
In 2012 Netanyahu said in closed talks reported by Israeli media that Iran is just “a few months away” from attaining nuclear capabilities. Later that same year, he gave a widely-mocked address at the United Nations in which he alleged that Iran would have the ability to construct a weapon within roughly one year, while using a printout of a cartoon bomb to illustrate his point.
Despite this heady rhetoric, Netanyahu’s estimates of an imminent Iranian nuclear bomb have consistently been at odds with analyses made by his own intelligence agency. In 2011, departing Mossad intelligence chief Meir Dagan said in his final intelligence summary that, contrary to Netanyahu’s repeated statements at the time, an Iranian nuclear weapon is in fact not imminent, and that any military action against the country could end up spurring the development of such a weapon.
Just last week, leaked intelligence cables reported by Al Jazeera revealed that at roughly the same time in 2012 that Netanyahu was brandishing his cartoon bomb and telling the United Nations that Iran was close to obtaining a nuclear weapon, Israeli intelligence had actually determined the country was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.”
The conclusion from this history is inescapable. Over the course of more than 20 years, Benjamin Netanyahu has made false claims about nuclear weapons programs in both Iran and Iraq, inventing imaginary timelines for their development, and making public statements that contradicted the analysis of his own intelligence advisers.
Despite this, he continues to be treated by lawmakers and media figures as a credible voice on this issue.
When Netanyahu gives his address to Congress, he can likely be counted on to say much the same things he’s been saying for the past two decades about an impending Iranian nuclear threat, and credulous pundits and politicians can be counted on to believe him.
That has to be one of the dumbest cartoon illustrations about a serious matter in history. Reminds me of Wiley E. Coyote cartoon, lol. By the way, isn't he the one that stood up in front of Congress before the Iraqi invasion and swore up and down that if the US invaded Iraq, there will be peace and stability throughout the middle East when Saddam was gone? Talked Congress that it was the right thing to do? We all know what happened. What a Joke of a leader.
Get Over It
Rabbi Mark Wildes speaks to the Guessers (like trying to treat Stevie Wonder for Nearsightedness)
After listening to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to AIPAC in which he justified his decision to address Congress tomorrow, I have just one comment: Get over it. The world needs to get over the political question as to whether Netanyahu should have accepted the invitation to speak before Congress and focus on the real issue: how best to deal with Iran.
Israel and the United States have legitimate differences over how to prevent Iran from going nuclear and that is all we should be discussing. Focusing so much time on whether the Prime Minister insulted the President or whether he accepted the invitation in order to help with his reelection at home distracts from the serious and existential threat Israel today faces. With such a critical issue before us we cannot afford to allow petty politics to get in the way of America and Israel working together to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power.
One last point: The Prime Minister in his talk today made an interesting distinction between America and Israel’s stance on this issue. Whereas America’s primary concern is its security and standing in the world, Israel’s sole concern is her very survival. That distinction helps account for the stricter tone and approach the Prime Minister is advocating in comparison to the approach of the US Administration. Clearly this issue is critical for both countries but it’s only life and death for one. Therefore, despite the politics and possible breaches of protocol, we must speak up. As the holiday of Purim approaches and we recall the last Persian leader who threatened the Jewish people, we must follow the example of Mordecai and Esther to lend our support to those who speak in defense of our people.
Rabbi Mark Wildes speaks to the Guessers (like trying to treat Stevie Wonder for Nearsightedness)
After listening to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to AIPAC in which he justified his decision to address Congress tomorrow, I have just one comment: Get over it. The world needs to get over the political question as to whether Netanyahu should have accepted the invitation to speak before Congress and focus on the real issue: how best to deal with Iran.
Israel and the United States have legitimate differences over how to prevent Iran from going nuclear and that is all we should be discussing. Focusing so much time on whether the Prime Minister insulted the President or whether he accepted the invitation in order to help with his reelection at home distracts from the serious and existential threat Israel today faces. With such a critical issue before us we cannot afford to allow petty politics to get in the way of America and Israel working together to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power.
One last point: The Prime Minister in his talk today made an interesting distinction between America and Israel’s stance on this issue. Whereas America’s primary concern is its security and standing in the world, Israel’s sole concern is her very survival. That distinction helps account for the stricter tone and approach the Prime Minister is advocating in comparison to the approach of the US Administration. Clearly this issue is critical for both countries but it’s only life and death for one. Therefore, despite the politics and possible breaches of protocol, we must speak up. As the holiday of Purim approaches and we recall the last Persian leader who threatened the Jewish people, we must follow the example of Mordecai and Esther to lend our support to those who speak in defense of our people.
AIPAC SNUBBED OBAMA’S ADVISER SUSAN RICE, AND YOU HAVE TO SEE HER PRICELESS REACTION!
Posted by soopermexican on Mar 2, 2015 at 8:18 PM in Foreign Policy | 73 Comments
By soopermexican
The Obama administration continues to pretend that relations between the United States and Israel have never been better:
I don’t know what kind of crack she’s smoking because it’s clear to everyone that the relationship is cracked and the gulf is widening. Evidence of this came during the speech from Obama’s adviser Susan Rice to AIPAC about the impending nuke deal with Iran that Obama lusts after so much. Twice they snub her policies, and her facial reaction is just priceless:
It’s clear that the crowd was not down with the Obama plan at all – this is her first reaction to their applauding what she doesn’t want to do:
And this is after she says, “some just want us to impose sanctions and walk away!’
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/aipac-snub...-to-see-her-priceless-reaction/#ixzz3TI8vLU3Y
Posted by soopermexican on Mar 2, 2015 at 8:18 PM in Foreign Policy | 73 Comments
By soopermexican
The Obama administration continues to pretend that relations between the United States and Israel have never been better:
I don’t know what kind of crack she’s smoking because it’s clear to everyone that the relationship is cracked and the gulf is widening. Evidence of this came during the speech from Obama’s adviser Susan Rice to AIPAC about the impending nuke deal with Iran that Obama lusts after so much. Twice they snub her policies, and her facial reaction is just priceless:
It’s clear that the crowd was not down with the Obama plan at all – this is her first reaction to their applauding what she doesn’t want to do:
And this is after she says, “some just want us to impose sanctions and walk away!’
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/aipac-snub...-to-see-her-priceless-reaction/#ixzz3TI8vLU3Y
Obama attacks Netanyahu's credibility ahead of speech
Washington (CNN)The differences between President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were on display Monday when the two offered dramatically divergent takes on a nuclear deal with Iran -- even as Netanyahu struck a conciliatory tone during his visit to Washington.
Obama told Reuters that a deal with Iran to freeze its nuclear activity for at least 10 years, with verification measures, would be "far more effective in controlling their nuclear program than any military action we could take, any military action Israel could take and far more effective than sanctions will be."
He also said Netanyahu has been wrong before -- pointing to the 2013 interim deal with Iran.
"Netanyahu made all sorts of claims. This was going to be a terrible deal. This was going to result in Iran getting $50 billion worth of relief. Iran would not abide by the agreement. None of that has come true," Obama said. "It has turned out that in fact, during this period we've seen Iran not advance its program. In many ways, it's rolled back elements of its program."
Netanyahu, meanwhile, reaffirmed that the U.S.-Israeli relationship remains strong and, despite controversy surrounding his Tuesday address to Congress, said the two nations "will weather this current disagreement."
"Our friendship will weather the current disagreement as well, to grow even stronger in the future — because we share the same dreams...because the values that unite us are much stronger than the differences that divide us," he said in his address to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee annual policy conference, drawing enthusiastic applause from the crowd.
Polling has shown Americans disapprove of House Speaker John Boehner's move to invite Netanyahu to speak to Congress without notifying the White House. That, and the timing of the speech so close to the Israeli election, has critics accusing Boehner and Netanyahu of politicizing the issue of Iranian nuclear talks, and a growing number of Democrats are planning to boycott what they see as an attack on the president.
But in his address to AIPAC, the prime minister refuted those critics, insisting that his Tuesday speech is "not intended to inject Israel into the American partisan debate," and reaffirming his support for Obama.
"My speech is not intended to show any disrespect to Obama or the esteemed office that he holds—I have great respect for both," he said.
Netanyahu instead framed his Tuesday address as part of a "moral obligation" to sound the alarm on Iran, which he warned has "vowed to annihilate Israel, and if develops nuclear weapons, it can achieve that goal."
"As prime minister of Israel, I have a moral obligation to speak up in the face of these threats while there is time to avert them," he said.
While he'll face a more skeptical audience on Tuesday, Netanyahu's speech Monday was punctuated with enthusiastic applause and multiple standing ovations from an auditorium packed with thousands of pro-Israel activists, business leaders and others in town for the annual AIPAC policy conference.
Netanyahu is expected to use his Tuesday speech to lay out what he believes are the emerging contours of a deal with Iran and warn Congress against accepting a bad deal, and to push for tougher sanctions.
Closing out Monday's AIPAC events, National Security Adviser Susan Rice took a direct jab at Netanyahu, declaring that "soundbites won't stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon."
And while she sought to diffuse some of the tension between the two nations with a speech peppered with Hebrew and recollections of her personal experiences with Israel, she offered a direct refutation to the goal of many in the room to deny Iran nuclear capabilities entirely.
She received her biggest applause of the night after mentioning the possibility of having Iran "forego its domestic enrichment capacity entirely," but immediately shot the crowd down.
"But as desirable as that would be — it is neither realistic or achievable," she said.
"The plain fact is no one can make Iran unlearn the scientific and nuclear expertise it already possesses," Rice added, and cautioned that it wasn't a "viable negotiating position" to attempt to block Iran from using its nuclear capacity for domestic energy reasons.
But she emphasized that the U.S.' and Israel's goals and security concerns are the same, and sought to reassure the pro-Israel crowd that the White House had Israel's best interests in mind during the negotiations.
"We have Israel's back come hell or high water," she said.
Last week top White House officials warned the way it's been handled has damaged ties between the two nations. Obama has declined to meet with Netanyahu during his visit, and will not be attending the speech.
Netanyahu acknowledged during his Monday address that disagreements between the U.S. and Israel are "only natural from time to time," because there are "important differences" between the two nations.
He said that Israel exists in a far more dangerous region of the world, and while "America's the strongest power in the world, Israel is strong, but it's much more vulnerable."
But on Monday, UN Ambassador Samantha Power, speaking just before Netanyahu, reaffirmed the U.S' commitment to a strong alliance with Israel.
"We believe firmly that Israel's security and the U.S.- Israel partnership transcends politics. It always will," Power said. "This partnership should never be politicized and it cannot and will not be tarnished or broken."
Power insisted that the "bond between the United States and Israel is still a national commitment," and declared that relationship "should never be a partisan matter."
"We cannot and we will not lose sight of that," she said.
AIPAC activists will fan out across Capitol Hill on Tuesday to lobby legislators to support a bill slapping tougher sanctions on Iran and one subjecting any eventual deal to congressional approval.
Because of the increasingly tense atmosphere surrounding the speech, it risks backfiring on Netanyahu, and even some of his allies have expressed concerns that he may ultimately undermine his cause.
RELATED: Will Netanyahu's speech to Congress backfire?
AIPAC CEO Howard Kohr acknowledged Sunday that "the way this speech has come about has created a great deal of upset among Democrats," but said the situation hasn't risen to the level of a crisis yet, and "frankly, it's up to us to not let it become a crisis.
He said the speech would be "important," and added that "we hope and urge members of Congress to be there to hear what he has to say."
Congressional Republicans have broken with Obama, with Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, saying the United States should "not do this through appeasement."
"The biggest problem we have on the face of the planet is Iran getting a nuclear weapon," he said on CNN's "The Situation Room." "And we have to do anything and everything we can in our powers to make sure that won't happen."
Washington (CNN)The differences between President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were on display Monday when the two offered dramatically divergent takes on a nuclear deal with Iran -- even as Netanyahu struck a conciliatory tone during his visit to Washington.
Obama told Reuters that a deal with Iran to freeze its nuclear activity for at least 10 years, with verification measures, would be "far more effective in controlling their nuclear program than any military action we could take, any military action Israel could take and far more effective than sanctions will be."
He also said Netanyahu has been wrong before -- pointing to the 2013 interim deal with Iran.
"Netanyahu made all sorts of claims. This was going to be a terrible deal. This was going to result in Iran getting $50 billion worth of relief. Iran would not abide by the agreement. None of that has come true," Obama said. "It has turned out that in fact, during this period we've seen Iran not advance its program. In many ways, it's rolled back elements of its program."
Netanyahu, meanwhile, reaffirmed that the U.S.-Israeli relationship remains strong and, despite controversy surrounding his Tuesday address to Congress, said the two nations "will weather this current disagreement."
"Our friendship will weather the current disagreement as well, to grow even stronger in the future — because we share the same dreams...because the values that unite us are much stronger than the differences that divide us," he said in his address to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee annual policy conference, drawing enthusiastic applause from the crowd.
Polling has shown Americans disapprove of House Speaker John Boehner's move to invite Netanyahu to speak to Congress without notifying the White House. That, and the timing of the speech so close to the Israeli election, has critics accusing Boehner and Netanyahu of politicizing the issue of Iranian nuclear talks, and a growing number of Democrats are planning to boycott what they see as an attack on the president.
But in his address to AIPAC, the prime minister refuted those critics, insisting that his Tuesday speech is "not intended to inject Israel into the American partisan debate," and reaffirming his support for Obama.
"My speech is not intended to show any disrespect to Obama or the esteemed office that he holds—I have great respect for both," he said.
Netanyahu instead framed his Tuesday address as part of a "moral obligation" to sound the alarm on Iran, which he warned has "vowed to annihilate Israel, and if develops nuclear weapons, it can achieve that goal."
"As prime minister of Israel, I have a moral obligation to speak up in the face of these threats while there is time to avert them," he said.
While he'll face a more skeptical audience on Tuesday, Netanyahu's speech Monday was punctuated with enthusiastic applause and multiple standing ovations from an auditorium packed with thousands of pro-Israel activists, business leaders and others in town for the annual AIPAC policy conference.
Netanyahu is expected to use his Tuesday speech to lay out what he believes are the emerging contours of a deal with Iran and warn Congress against accepting a bad deal, and to push for tougher sanctions.
Closing out Monday's AIPAC events, National Security Adviser Susan Rice took a direct jab at Netanyahu, declaring that "soundbites won't stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon."
And while she sought to diffuse some of the tension between the two nations with a speech peppered with Hebrew and recollections of her personal experiences with Israel, she offered a direct refutation to the goal of many in the room to deny Iran nuclear capabilities entirely.
She received her biggest applause of the night after mentioning the possibility of having Iran "forego its domestic enrichment capacity entirely," but immediately shot the crowd down.
"But as desirable as that would be — it is neither realistic or achievable," she said.
"The plain fact is no one can make Iran unlearn the scientific and nuclear expertise it already possesses," Rice added, and cautioned that it wasn't a "viable negotiating position" to attempt to block Iran from using its nuclear capacity for domestic energy reasons.
But she emphasized that the U.S.' and Israel's goals and security concerns are the same, and sought to reassure the pro-Israel crowd that the White House had Israel's best interests in mind during the negotiations.
"We have Israel's back come hell or high water," she said.
Last week top White House officials warned the way it's been handled has damaged ties between the two nations. Obama has declined to meet with Netanyahu during his visit, and will not be attending the speech.
Netanyahu acknowledged during his Monday address that disagreements between the U.S. and Israel are "only natural from time to time," because there are "important differences" between the two nations.
He said that Israel exists in a far more dangerous region of the world, and while "America's the strongest power in the world, Israel is strong, but it's much more vulnerable."
But on Monday, UN Ambassador Samantha Power, speaking just before Netanyahu, reaffirmed the U.S' commitment to a strong alliance with Israel.
"We believe firmly that Israel's security and the U.S.- Israel partnership transcends politics. It always will," Power said. "This partnership should never be politicized and it cannot and will not be tarnished or broken."
Power insisted that the "bond between the United States and Israel is still a national commitment," and declared that relationship "should never be a partisan matter."
"We cannot and we will not lose sight of that," she said.
AIPAC activists will fan out across Capitol Hill on Tuesday to lobby legislators to support a bill slapping tougher sanctions on Iran and one subjecting any eventual deal to congressional approval.
Because of the increasingly tense atmosphere surrounding the speech, it risks backfiring on Netanyahu, and even some of his allies have expressed concerns that he may ultimately undermine his cause.
RELATED: Will Netanyahu's speech to Congress backfire?
AIPAC CEO Howard Kohr acknowledged Sunday that "the way this speech has come about has created a great deal of upset among Democrats," but said the situation hasn't risen to the level of a crisis yet, and "frankly, it's up to us to not let it become a crisis.
He said the speech would be "important," and added that "we hope and urge members of Congress to be there to hear what he has to say."
Congressional Republicans have broken with Obama, with Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, saying the United States should "not do this through appeasement."
"The biggest problem we have on the face of the planet is Iran getting a nuclear weapon," he said on CNN's "The Situation Room." "And we have to do anything and everything we can in our powers to make sure that won't happen."
State Department Tweets Speech by Cleric Who Blames Unrest on Global Zionist Conspiracy
Cleric: Unrest due to ‘new global colonialism allied to world Zionism'
The State Department’s counterterrorism office is facing pushback after promoting recent remarks by a Muslim cleric who blamed regional unrest in the Middle East on what he called a “conspiracy” by a “new global colonialism allied to world Zionism.”
The State Department’s official anti-terrorism Twitter account last week tweeted out remarks made by a leading Muslim cleric who, during a speech in Mecca, linked terrorism by the Islamic State (IS) to a plot by supporters of Israel around the world.
Al-Azhar Grand Imam Ahmed al-Tayeb, a leading voice in Sunni Islam, made the comments during a counter-terrorism rally held in the Muslim holy city last week, according to AFP.
http://freebeacon.com/national-secu...o-blames-unrest-on-global-zionist-conspiracy/
Cleric: Unrest due to ‘new global colonialism allied to world Zionism'
The State Department’s counterterrorism office is facing pushback after promoting recent remarks by a Muslim cleric who blamed regional unrest in the Middle East on what he called a “conspiracy” by a “new global colonialism allied to world Zionism.”
The State Department’s official anti-terrorism Twitter account last week tweeted out remarks made by a leading Muslim cleric who, during a speech in Mecca, linked terrorism by the Islamic State (IS) to a plot by supporters of Israel around the world.
Al-Azhar Grand Imam Ahmed al-Tayeb, a leading voice in Sunni Islam, made the comments during a counter-terrorism rally held in the Muslim holy city last week, according to AFP.
http://freebeacon.com/national-secu...o-blames-unrest-on-global-zionist-conspiracy/
So far, so good on the reviews of Benji's speech.
First things first, props to Big Benji for making Nazi Pelousy cry during his speech.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi dismissed a speech Tuesday from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as full of “condescension” and an “insult to the intelligence of the United States.”
Well, Miss Pelousy...if you want to know true condescension and insulting the intelligence of Americans...how about passing a bill to find out what's in it? Or forcing everyone to sign up for a health care plan from which you and your cronies couldn't exempt yourselves fast enough? All in the name of "We know what's best for you, because the masses are too inept and feeble to take care of themselves."
Dims are shaken to the core by Ben's speech...probably because they have zero idea what real leadership looks like.
By the way, John Kerry decided that the U.S. and Iran would have to conclude a framework deal by the end of this month. Benji is only guilty of wanting to speak to Congress before it is handed a diplomatic fait accompli that amounts to a serial betrayal of every promise the Stuttering Clusterfuck ever made to Israel.
First things first, props to Big Benji for making Nazi Pelousy cry during his speech.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi dismissed a speech Tuesday from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as full of “condescension” and an “insult to the intelligence of the United States.”
Well, Miss Pelousy...if you want to know true condescension and insulting the intelligence of Americans...how about passing a bill to find out what's in it? Or forcing everyone to sign up for a health care plan from which you and your cronies couldn't exempt yourselves fast enough? All in the name of "We know what's best for you, because the masses are too inept and feeble to take care of themselves."
Dims are shaken to the core by Ben's speech...probably because they have zero idea what real leadership looks like.
By the way, John Kerry decided that the U.S. and Iran would have to conclude a framework deal by the end of this month. Benji is only guilty of wanting to speak to Congress before it is handed a diplomatic fait accompli that amounts to a serial betrayal of every promise the Stuttering Clusterfuck ever made to Israel.
Great speech. Lots of "Knockout" lines. "The enemy of your enemy is your enemy." Loved it! Loved the entrance.
Even better, he praised Obama, but then he destroyed the deal Obama was preparing to push on congress, without attacking our president personally. Considering how Obama has been spending US taxpayer's money to influence the Israeli public to vote him out and attacking him like he himself is running against Bibi in two weeks, that's quite a wire for Bibi to walk. He also praised both Dems and Pubs, and it seemed sincere, not once mentioning Feinstein, Warren and the rest of the morons who are on the wrong side of history. The only entity he tore down was Iran.
Even better, he praised Obama, but then he destroyed the deal Obama was preparing to push on congress, without attacking our president personally. Considering how Obama has been spending US taxpayer's money to influence the Israeli public to vote him out and attacking him like he himself is running against Bibi in two weeks, that's quite a wire for Bibi to walk. He also praised both Dems and Pubs, and it seemed sincere, not once mentioning Feinstein, Warren and the rest of the morons who are on the wrong side of history. The only entity he tore down was Iran.
