Netanyahu's speech to Congress, March 3rd, 2015

[SouI]

Speaking about lies:

Shame that we cannot have more confidential relations with each other as nations with similar-ish goals.

 

[ResurgentIran]

It is ironic coming from you. You pretty much described what your kind do in this forum all day: clapping and cheering for bunch of lies coming from your regime. And in your case, abusing mod powers by cencoring those who speak against them. Maybe you should take your own advice next time and don't read my posts?

Anyway, as I was saying, pretty important speech. We will certainly hear about its consequences soon.

I dont think it will have important consequences. Neither for Iran or Netanyahu. Business will go on as usual.
It will be tough to get a veto-proof legislation to pass new sanctions on Iran. And Obama will for sure veto them, in case it is not veto-proof.
Lets just say that if the sanctions manage to be passed by a veto-proof majority, which is certainly a possibility, there will not be a nuclear accord, which goes without saying.
And while the sanctions will not collapse in its entirety, the edges of the sanctions regime will start to erode, as the US will be seen as the responsible one for the collapse of talks if it can not control its congress.
The reason the sanctions have had such effect is because the US has gone through great lengths and effort to marshall other countries to comply with them, which was no easy thing to do.
I dont think the US will be able to hold together the sanction-imposing coalition as effectively, if congress violates the interim agreement and passes legislation whilst the nuclear negotiations are ongoing.
Its called overplaying your hand. Obama does not threaten to veto sanctions bill to be nice to Iran, but because he knows it would be a measure of overreach.
And I dont think Iran will advance its nuclear program much further beyond its current stage because they wanna be careful not to escalate, but rather keep the program (by and large) in its current state, while at the same sanction regime beginning to erode.
My two cents.

 

[Serpentine]

Speaking about lies:

What are you trying to say exactly? Just say it.

 

[Solomon2]

I think instead of introducing Google to members here, you'd better provide the proof -

No, I'm not going to do what you ask. I don't want people to blindly trust in Netanyahu's words or my proofs - I want them to confirm it for themselves. (If you were nicer I might reconsider but you're much too rude.)

I don't think we have much to talk about here, whatever floats your boat.

There's something to that. In between the World Wars Winston Churchill was a newspaper columnist. He had the opportunity to meet Hitler then but turned it down. Why? Because if he met Hitler and offended him he'd put Britain on the spot, whereas if he met Hitler and agreed with him he'd compromise his principles. Because Churchill knew, long before other Western leaders would admit it, that Hitler was a monster devoted to conquest and killing and no compromise or agreement could change that. Hitler was thus an enemy of civilized peoples - including the Germans - plain and simple, and could only be opposed.

Once Hitler understood that Churchill understood him, he stopped trying to interview him and sought out others to serve as useful idiots.

 

[Dominance]

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)

I have a question from anybody who celebrates Purim in this forum:
Do you celebrate it just for the hanging of Haman by the order of the Persian king or does it include the 75000 Persians that were "preemptively" massacred as "enemies of Jewish people"?

 

[Serpentine]

No, I'm not going to do what you ask. I don't want people to blindly trust in Netanyahu's words or my proofs - I want them to confirm it for themselves. (If you were nicer I might reconsider but you're much too rude.)

No you won't because you simply can't provide the proof for huge lie he put in your hands to deal with. I don't expect you to do it though, not just because you can't, but because you are here only and only to defend the concept of Zionism and its ideals, it'd be waste of both our times to even try to persuade each other. I just wanted others to know what kind of devil this guy is, liar one indeed.

There's something to that. In between the World Wars Winston Churchill was a newspaper columnist. He had the opportunity to meet Hitler then but turned it down. Why? Because if he met Hitler and offended him he'd put Britain on the spot, whereas if he met Hitler and agreed with him he'd compromise his principles. Because Churchill knew, long before other Western leaders would admit it, that Hitler was a monster devoted to conquest and killing and no compromise or agreement could change that. Hitler was thus an enemy of civilized peoples - including the Germans - plain and simple, and could only be opposed.

Once Hitler understood that Churchill understood Hitler, he stopped trying to interview him and sought out others to serve as useful idiots.

Good example indeed, but I'd change the roles, with Hitler being the Netanyahu (or better to say the ideals he stands for).

Do you celebrate it just for the hanging of Haman by the order of the Persian king or does it include the 75000 Persians that were "preemptively" massacred as "enemies of Jewish people"?

There is no reliable history record on those numbers. It's not even proved whether a massacre happened or not and if it did, there is nothing certain about the numbers.

 

[TurAr]

I dont think it will have important consequences. Neither for Iran or Netanyahu. Business will go on as usual.
It will be tough to get a veto-proof legislation to pass new sanctions on Iran. And Obama will for sure veto them, in case it is not veto-proof.
Lets just say that if the sanctions manage to be passed by a veto-proof majority, which is certainly a possibility, there will not be a nuclear accord, which goes without saying.
And while the sanctions will not collapse in its entirety, the edges of the sanctions regime will start to erode, as the US will be seen as the responsible one for the collapse of talks if it can not control its congress.
The reason the sanctions have had such effect is because the US has gone through great lengths and effort to marshall other countries to comply with them, which was no easy thing to do.
I dont think the US will be able to hold together the sanction-imposing coalition as effectively, if congress violates the interim agreement and passes legislation whilst the nuclear negotiations are ongoing.
Its called overplaying your hand. Obama does not threaten to veto sanctions bill to be nice to Iran, but because he knows it would be a measure of overreach.
And I dont think Iran will advance its nuclear program much further beyond its current stage because they wanna be careful not to escalate, but rather keep the program (by and large) in its current state, while at the same sanction regime beginning to erode.
My two cents.

As I said in my first post, the consequences will be for Netanyahu and Israel rather than for Iran since he basically fucked with Obama by giving the speech despite his objections. And those congressman who treated him like a celebrity in a bar cannot save him from the President if he decides to punish Netanyahu in anyway.

 

[Arya Desa]

Israel and Iran seem like natural partners to me. Why do they hate each other so much?

 

[ResurgentIran]

No, I'm not going to do what you ask. I don't want people to blindly trust in Netanyahu's words or my proofs - I want them to confirm it for themselves. (If you were nicer I might reconsider but you're much too rude.)

There's something to that. In between the World Wars Winston Churchill was a newspaper columnist. He had the opportunity to meet Hitler then but turned it down. Why? Because if he met Hitler and offended him he'd put Britain on the spot, whereas if he met Hitler and agreed with him he'd compromise his principles. Because Churchill knew, long before other Western leaders would admit it, that Hitler was a monster devoted to conquest and killing and no compromise or agreement could change that. Hitler was thus an enemy of civilized peoples - including the Germans - plain and simple, and could only be opposed.

Once Hitler understood that Churchill understood him, he stopped trying to interview him and sought out others to serve as useful idiots.

This is what I found after searching google. From wikipedia

Journalist Badih Chayban in an 23 October 2002 article in The Daily Star wrote that Nasrallah said, "If they [the Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide." Charles Glass believes that the quotation was likely a fabrication, citing other published accounts of Nasrallah's speech that had no reference to the anti-Semitic comment, and statements by the editor-in-chief of the Lebanese newspaper which published the quotes, that questioned both the translation and the "agenda of the translator."[59] Glass also wrote that a Hezbollah spokeswoman, Wafa Hoteit, denied that Nasrallah made the statement

Ie accusation is highly suspect. And until video proof is provided, we can conclude it probably did not happen and he did not made that statement.
Its innocent until proven guilty. Not guilty until proven innocent.
So Netanyahu used a shady and highly suspect reference about a statement that has never been proven to have been said, so he essentially lied.

However I am not bothered with it. Netanyahu is a proven liar. Even his own Mossad says so, when that Mossad document was leaked, which refuted everything Netanyahu said in the 2012 UN "bomb-cartoon" speech.

As I said in my first post, the consequences will be for Netanyahu and Israel rather than for Iran since he basically fucked with Obama by giving the speech despite his objections. And those congressman who treated him like a celebrity in a bar cannot save him from the President if he decides to punish Netanyahu in anyway.

And like I said in my response, I dont think it will have meaningful consequences for Netanyahu either.
Obama can not do very much to Netanyahu.
If anything, this speech boosted Netanyahu politically back home in Israel.

 

[SOHEIL]

LOL

 

[Serpentine]

Anyone believing that this war criminal and baby killer is telling the truth, well it's hard to describe him/her with proper words.
What nuke? Things we learned from leaked spy cables that exposed Netanyahu's lie — RT News

Spy Cables Expose Netanyahu Lies About Iran | Caravan Daily

Reports: Netanyahu, spy agency at odds over Iran's nuclear program - CNN.com

Mossad contradicted Netanyahu on Iran nuclear programme - Al Jazeera English

Benjamin Netanyahu Has Been Lying to Americans For 20 Years | Alternet

Leaked cables show Netanyahu’s Iran bomb claim contradicted by Mossad | World news | The Guardian

Binyamin Netanyahu’s dramatic declaration to world leaders in 2012 that Iranwas about a year away from making a nuclear bomb was contradicted by his own secret service, according to a top-secret Mossad document.

It is part of a cache of hundreds of dossiers, files and cables from the world’s major intelligence services – one of the biggest spy leaks in recent times.

Brandishing a cartoon of a bomb with a red line to illustrate his point, the Israeli prime minister warned the UN in New York that Iran would be able to build nuclear weapons the following year and called for action to halt the process.

 

[Solomon2]

...Ie accusation is highly suspect. ...we can conclude it probably did not happen and he did not made that statement -

Twaddle. Suggestion/hint: Use the search terms "gather jews nasrallah" and limit your search to the years 2001-2002.

 

[500]

What are you trying to say exactly? Just say it.

The leader of Hezbollah gave Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a unique gift to cap off his two-day trip to Lebanon — an Israeli assault rifle captured during the militant group's 2006 war with the Jewish state.

Hezbollah's gift for Ahmadinejad: An Israeli rifle - Yahoo News



Iran openly writes "death to Israel" on its missiles. Iran openly arms and supports terrorists who blow up Israeli buses and markets and indiscriminately shell civilian neighborhoods. So what u are crying I dont know.

This bastard lies like the bastard he is. Why don't you prove that Hassan Nasrallah has said the exact same thing that Nutjobyahoo said?

Bunch of fools sitting in front of him clapping like retards.

Nasrallah alleges ‘Christian Zionist’ plot | News , Lebanon News | THE DAILY STAR

 

[rahi2357]

Obama's Response
President Barack Obama said Tuesday that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered "nothing new" in his much-anticipated speech to Congress, suggesting that the Israeli leader failed to articulate an alternative strategy to halt Iran's attempts to make a nuclear bomb.

"On the core issue, which is how do we prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon which would make it far more dangerous ... the prime minister didn't offer any viable alternatives," he told reporters during an appearance with new Defense Secretary Ashton Carter.

"We don't yet have a deal," Obama noted of the ongoing negotiations with Iran, which Netanyahu vehemently opposes. "It may be that Iran cannot say yes to a good deal. I have repeatedly said that I would rather have no deal than a bad deal. But if we are successful negotiating, then in fact this will be the best deal possible to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Nothing else comes close."

The president added that Netanyahu gave "almost the exact same speech" in 2013, when he warned about an interim nuclear deal struck between major powers, including the United States, and Iran.

Obama said that he was not able to watch Netanyahu's address but that he read a transcript. He did not attend the speech, citing a White House precedent of avoiding the appearance of U.S. meddling in foreign elections; Netanyahu faces an election in just over two weeks.

Asked about House Speaker John Boehner's decision to extend the invitation to Netanyahu without the approval of the president, Obama said that the question "should be directed to Mr. Boehner."

"It is very important for all of us Americans to realize that we have a system of government in which foreign policy runs through the executive branch and the president, not through other channels," he added.

=======================================================================

Democrat Pelosi says Netanyahu's Congress speech 'an insult to the intelligence of the US'
Senior US administration official says prime minister did not offer alternative plan of action in speech.

Senior Democratic Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi slammed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to Congress on Tuesday as "an insult to the intelligence of the United States," while a senior US official said that the premier had contradicted himself during the address.

Netanyahu failed to offer an alternative in his speech to the US Congress on the ongoing nuclear talks with Iran, a senior US administration official said on Tuesday.

"Simply demanding that Iran completely capitulate is not a plan, nor would any country support us in that position. The prime minister offered no concrete action plan," the official said.


In his speech to Congress, Netanyahu criticized the emerging nuclear deal with Iran, stating that it would all but guarantee that Iran obtains nuclear weapons.

He said that the US had said repeatedly over the past year that 'no deal is better than a bad deal' and the current deal constitutes "a bad deal. A very bad deal."

Netanyahu said that the alternative to the current deal being formed is not war, as some have suggested, but rather, the alternative is a better deal that will not allow Iran to become a nuclear threshold state.

The senior US official said that the administration was pursuing a deal that "verifiably prevents" Iran from obtaining a weapon, and increases the breakout time "substantially" to a year from the current estimate of two to three months.

"These negotiations are not an opening to a rapprochement with Iran," the official said.

The official said that the proposed length of the deal - a decade or longer - would be "far longer than any other option."

"Military action would set it back by a fraction of that time, at which point Iran would begin to rebuild its program and try to break out for a weapon," the official said.

The official said Netanyahu contradicted himself by arguing that the Iranian government is both "powerful and unchanging" and "weak and vulnerable" and insisting that it needed to change as a condition for a nuclear deal.

"The logic of the prime minister's speech is regime change, not a nuclear speech," the official said.

Underscoring the partisan divide over Netanyahu's address, House of Representatives Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said afterwards that as a friend of Israel, she was near tears during his speech, calling it "an insult to the intelligence of the United States." She said she was "saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran."

As many as 60 of the 232 members of Congress from Obama's Democratic Party sat out the address to protest what they see as a politicization of Israeli security, an issue on which Congress is usually united.

 

[Abii]

@Serpentine

Every week chants of "death to America" and "death to Israel" can be heard from mosques and national channels. School children are forced to chant "marg bar Amrika" on a weekly basis (depending on the school). I spent 5 years in the Iranian school system and day and night I was told to hate the US, to hate Israel and to hate the Brits. Hate, hate and more hate.

Flags are burned. Anti Western murals are all around the country and most are plain racist and disgusting. At best they're filled with hate speech. The entire nation of Iran is being groomed to hate.

Yet, here you are crying because Bibi is getting a positive response from American politicians for trying to defend his country and his people against Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran's use of terror. Nothing he says is a lie and even his exaggerations are coming from the right place. Netenyahoo is fighting tooth and nail for the future of his country and his people. He didn't start the fight with Iran, your akhoonds did and you guys are continuing the fight. You can keep on fighting it at the demise of your own futures and success of your own nation. But don't point fingers at Netenyahoo for his love for his country and people.

Israel and Iran seem like natural partners to me. Why do they hate each other so much?

Israelis don't hate Iran, neither do most Iranians. Unfortunately with the 79 Islamic revolution, Islamic extremism became the voice of Iran and hating Israel became mandatory and a state policy. The Islamic dictatorial regime doesn't recognize the state of Israel and calls it the "Zionist regime." Recognition of Israel is banned and the country's education system, its media and its executive branch are all used to breed anti Western beliefs among the population. The Islamic dictatorship runs on a shia school of thought called "velayate faqih" which gives ultimate power to the clergy. The clergy believe that the country should run on religious principles and ideological beliefs aligned with their school of shia Islam. Everything else is secondary.