Trending Topics:

Kerry says Netanyahu was wrong the last time he pushed war for the U.S.

on 53 Comments

It’s now been over a month since the Netanyahu speech was announced in Washington as a morning-after rebuke to the president’s appeal for Iran negotiations in his State of the Union speech, and the drama yielded yet another great reward yesterday when Secretary of State John Kerry said Netanyahu was “wrong” to oppose the U.S. preliminary deal with Iran and criticized Netanyahu for his advice to the U.S. before we invaded Iraq in 2003.

“The Prime Minister was also profoundly forward-leaning about the importance of invading Iraq under George W Bush, and we all know what happened with that decision.”

Below is the Netanyahu testimony on the Iraq war, at CSPAN. Excerpt:

“If you take out Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region… The task and the great opportunity and challenge is not merely to effect the ouster of the regime, but also to transform the region.”

Kerry’s criticism links Netanyahu implicitly with the neoconservatives who pushed the war to transform the Middle East, and makes all but explicit the idea that the neocons pushed the war out of concern for Israel’s security. A friend wrote to me yesterday that Kerry was channeling Walt and Mearsheimer, the realist scholars who described the neocons-for-Israel agenda in their landmark 2006 paper The Israel Lobby.

Talking Points Memo leaped on this idea, leading its story:

Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday slammed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s opposition to a potential nuclear deal with Iran, calling it as wrongheaded as the prime minister’s backing of the Iraq War.

Typically, the New York Times made light of the issue. It said about 17 paragraphs down in its story that Kerry had “needled” Netanyahu on this point. But it wasn’t a needle. Chris Matthews, also excited by the Iraq angle, last night called the Netanyahu speech fallout a “crapstorm” and led off his show with the controversy.

We know this tonight. This fight is escalating… And Secretary of State John Kerry is hitting Netanyahu on his history of hawkish statements including one pushing the United States to invade Iraq, saying how great it would be for the region. It was a very tough shot from the secretary, a sign of how tough this fighting is getting.

Matthews calls it a tough shot, not a needle. I can’t believe the New York Times. It will do anything to avoid looking seriously at the Israel agenda of the Iraq war-planners. Which, thanks to John Kerry, is becoming conventional wisdom after all.

The dual loyalty issue came up on Hardball when Charlie Rangel came on and while professing loyalty to Israel and saying that the two countries are “joined at the hip,” stated his shock to discover that Israeli ambassador Ron Dermer “comes from Florida.”

He’s formerly a Democrat or a Republican activist, as his father was. So he goes over to Israel and now he comes back here playing friendship with his Republican partners.

Yes, what’s that about? And why can a privileged American Jew move to that country and have political power while a Palestinian who was born there can’t go back to his home?

The AP coverage says that Democrats are in a bind on the speech:

Netanyahu’s plans to speak to Congress have irritated many Democratic members, but also have put them in a difficult spot – fearing they will look anti-Israel if they don’t attend.

And why do they fear looking anti-Israel? That’s about campaign donations. AP notes that more Democratic legislators announced they would skip the speech–

Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine and Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky becoming the latest on Wednesday.

Kaine said Netanyahu’s speech was “highly inappropriate” given its proximity to Israel’s March 17 Israeli elections.

Schakowsky said she was concerned that the address could end up scuttling delicate negotiations with Iran.

“If the talks are to fail, let Iran be the party that walks away from the table rather than the United States,” Schakowsky, who is Jewish, said in a statement.

More on the skippers from the Washington Post:

Kaine joins Senate colleagues Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) in skipping the prime minister’s address.

The New York Times reports that Netanyahu is pressing forward on his agenda, taking on Iran.

At a campaign event in Israel on Wednesday, Mr. Netanyahu stood firm, ratcheting up his criticism of the developing deal with Iran. Referring to the world powers negotiating with Tehran, he said “it seems they have given up on that commitment” to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb, according to the Israeli daily Haaretz.

“I respect the White House and the president of the United States,” he was quoted as saying. “But on such a critical topic that could determine whether we exist or not, it is my duty to do everything to prevent this great danger to the state of Israel.”

One of the big political beneficiaries of Netanyahu’s blunder is the liberal Zionist group J Street, which now looks exactly like AIPAC, the old Israel lobby, and is getting more and more support inside the Democratic Party.  It has a giant ad in the New York Times today that is disgraceful in its emphasis: it accuses Netanyahu of trying to manipulate the Israeli elections. Who cares about the Israeli election when US foreign policy is on the line? Not a word about Netanyahu’s effort to get the U.S. into a war with Iran. That is the real danger of this speech. But you can see all J Street is worried about is damage to the US-Israeli relationship. Thankfully, as this drama escalates, Americans will talk about the real question, the one John Kerry framed: Should Netanyahu help get us into another war?

J Street ad

J Street ad

Israeli ambassador Ron Dermer has his own graphic that he tweeted. His most alarmist crazy message yet.

Ron Dermer's message from the future

Ron Dermer’s message from the future

Oh and here is more payoff from the speech. Nicholas Kristof in the Times reports angrily from the West Bank, and says that Netanyahu should talk about the occupation in his speech.

the occupation is particularly offensive to me because it is conducted by the United States’ ally, underwritten with our tax dollars, supported by tax-deductible contributions to settlement groups, and carried out by American bulldozers and weaponry, and presided over by a prime minister who is scheduled to speak to Congress next week.

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is senior editor of and founded the site in 2005-06.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

53 Responses

  1. amigo on February 26, 2015, 10:58 am

    As I live in Ireland I would have no way of knowing what Dick and Jane are saying about this whole affair.When I lived in the US I found that most people were reluctant to speak openly and honestly about the Palestinian/Israel issue.I always got the impression that privately they did not support Israel but went along just to avoid accusations of antisemitism or worse. I like to believe that given the space , most Americans would condemn Israel for it,s brutality. Inform them of Israel,s long term interference in America,s affairs, through Netanyahu,s constant doorstepping and you just might get a few very p—-d off Americans.

    • ziusudra on February 26, 2015, 11:46 am

      Greetings Phil.
      Well done supporting the dressing down of PM Netanyahu on the Iran negociations.
      I’m particularly impressed that some Politicians, who are followers of Judaism, are against his up & coming speech.
      Doesn’t he realized that this one would ruin his meeting with the Pres. ever again till the end of his term?
      PS Bibi cried fire one time too many.
      The Roi de Solei even refused to see Court Apes that wore clothing older than 6 months!

    • pabelmont on February 26, 2015, 12:06 pm

      I’d like to believe it too (that most Americans would condemn Israel for it,s brutality). I’d like to believe that Americans are pro-human-rights and only our governments are monsters.

      • amigo on February 26, 2015, 12:31 pm

        Thanks for your reply pabelmont.

        The only way this is going to be resolved is for the US to quit supporting Israel.The only way that is going to happen , is if the American people wake up and see what is being done in their name.That will happen when the message gets out.

    • Real Jew on February 26, 2015, 7:14 pm

      I agree with you amigo that if americans were provided with the facts about the conflict they would indeed stand up against israel. And not just the harm the occupation inflicts on the Palestinians but the hatred it creates towards the united states amoung the entire middle east. In addition how negatively the rest of the world views the US because of this absurd and unfair foreign policy.

      Does anybody really think the US woukd actually go to war with iran if the negotiations fail? Given the disastrous war with Iraq and the American peoples resistance against another war in the middle east i honestly cant imagine a president giving the order to attack. Its not like we can bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities without expecting any retaliation right? And Netanyahu is such a coward he would never face iran on his own. So i really don’t know what he expects to accomplish with his speech

      • Citizen on February 27, 2015, 9:17 am

        As Bibi has said, he knows America, has lived in America, and America “is easily moved.” The only thing he missed in his recent calculation is a glaring disrespect for our first black POTUS would pit our two strongest pc victim groups against each other in a way even Dick and Jane may eventually notice.

  2. justicewillprevail on February 26, 2015, 11:31 am

    Truly extraordinary that J Street go to such lengths to avoid the enormous great dinosaur in the room. They must have been up all night thinking about how to frame their ad in order to avoid the whole point of the blundering Benji appearance. As time goes by, the whole zionist fiasco just becomes more like a Monty Python sketch – cartoon bombs, UN ‘oscars’ and all. Trying to hang on the collective denial of reality while promoting a tattered myth is forcing them into utter absurdity, they deserve the ridicule they invite. Have they no idea how out of step and time they are?

    • peterfeld on February 26, 2015, 5:54 pm

      J Street’s whole agenda is factional, to climb within the organized Jewish establishment. Which is why their messaging hypes concern about interfering in Israeli elections, which only interests Jewish establishment apparatchiks.

      Update: Actually, it also fits the administration’s reasoning for stiffing Netanyahu. But sucking up to the administration is also a key J Street tactic.

  3. weiss on February 26, 2015, 11:33 am


    “I respect the White House and the president of the United States ”

    Another blatant LIE by the SAME scumbag who said:

    “911 was GOOD for Israel”


    Remember, killing Arabs is a Zionists’ WET DREAM…

  4. Chu on February 26, 2015, 11:36 am

    Good point about J Street – as they don’t even realize they are looking like Israel Firsters. with their obtuse advert. But J Street was always controlled opposition from DAY 1 – similar to Jodi Rudoren being picked as replacement for Eitan Bronner was when she was selected Jerusalem bureau chief for The New York Times. ~All window dressing really.

    If it’s all so rigged, then why do so many people refer to the same false choices as offering a choice? This hoax will go on for another decade…

    It’s clear to see Israel is a sinking ship, in so many ways, but no zionist wants to tell the tribe they’ve steered way off course. I would feel some sorrow for them if they weren’t so evil to Palestinians – turning off their power in the freezing winter only a few days ago after they bombed them into the stone ago last summer.

    • Walid on February 26, 2015, 12:12 pm

      Chu, JStreet is a hoax in sheep’s clothing. I’ve had that feeling from when this group was constituted.

      • Chu on February 26, 2015, 4:03 pm

        Walid, It’s time to move on from this hoax. Who believes it except probably
        congresspeople? They probably use J Street to counter the angry calls
        from constituents. I could see them saying ‘I support J Street’. Anyway
        J Street should be proud, they gave the occupation another 5 years, and
        perhaps more.

      • seafoid on February 26, 2015, 5:38 pm

        It didn’t even wear the sheepskin last summer, Walid.
        JStreet is as real as the Kardashians.

  5. eGuard on February 26, 2015, 11:58 am

    Crude and true: best of worst options is that he stays Israels PM. Lame duck, prevents more “peace process”.

    Anyone good thoughts on a). Will Israeli’s vote against him because of this?, and b). How is AIPAC arm-twisting the Doubting Democrats to not-boycott?

  6. Pixel on February 26, 2015, 12:03 pm

    The Insiders: Netanyahu is stumbling on his journey to Washington
    By Ed Rogers

    Comment by _ quavaduff _
    9:04 AM CST

    So this BB guys is a nutty as our local RepuliKlans…….I am beginning to understand better who the Palestinians and other folks in that region are dealing with……it’s impossible to negotiate with the Klan


    Seems like some folks are just now learning who “this BB guy is” — and are gaining critical education about Palestine/Israel/Zionism, to boot, through this wondrous debacle!

  7. pabelmont on February 26, 2015, 12:13 pm

    The best of all this is Kerry’s strong suggestion — can this be accelerating? — that we only went to war in Iraq because of Israel’s push (to improve the situation in the region!!!) as filtered 89in part) through the neocons (a 5th column?). Raises two points.

    First, the war clearly did not improve anything. Iraq was more stable and life was better for most Iraqis under Saddam (gulp) than with ISIS and the earlier Shia/Sunni fighting. What was Israel thinking? Is today’s chaos what they wanted? They surd didn’t say so out loud!

    Second, what was USA thinking? What was the purpose of the war, apart from the usual enrichment of the war-profiteers of course — always a sufficient reason.

    Easier for Kerry and friends to say (to pretend) that the USA went to war due without any other reasons than Republican war-lust (they like pushing brown-skinned people around) and Israeli war-lust (maybe some other purpose, but none disclosed).

    • JWalters on February 26, 2015, 6:26 pm

      Netanyahu is the current CEO of Wars R Us. All else is a cover story.
      “War Profiteers and the Roots of the War on Terror”.

    • RoHa on February 26, 2015, 7:10 pm

      “life was better for most Iraqis under Saddam”

      There was a time when I never thought I would write that a country was better off when it was run by a brutal, repressive, murderous, war-mongering, CIA-sponsored, paranoid, thug.

      Only cynicism and my cat save me from total despair.

  8. mhuizenga on February 26, 2015, 12:18 pm

    Haven’t commented here in a long time, but I know it’s the best place for information on these issues, so I read everyday. Thanks for all your work.

    But, more to the point, I honestly don’t understand what Netanyahu and the congress hawks want or how they think. From what I read by foreign policy and intelligence experts (Juan Cole has good information but also the NY times today), bombing Iran would only set it back a year or two. The only real way to eradicate the entire program would be to invade, overthrow the government and dismantle it ourselves. Iraq was a disaster, and repeating that stunt in Iran would be 100x so. Plus our military is stretched already.

    So, the deal (we don’t really know what it is yet) seems to be the best we can do if we take people at their word that “preventing nuclear weapons” is all that they want . However, the cynical part of me wonders if more sanctions to keep economically crippling Iran is what they really desire in addition to this goal. I also don’t doubt that there are some people crazy enough to want an invasion eventually.

    I wonder if Netanyahu will really lay out what his “plan” would look like in this “speech.” I’m guessing he’ll stress the sanctions argument, but I would love to see him argue for an American “invasion.”

  9. hophmi on February 26, 2015, 12:26 pm

    “The best of all this is Kerry’s strong suggestion — can this be accelerating? — that we only went to war in Iraq because of Israel’s push”

    Kerry criticized Netanyahu’s support for the Iraq War. You’ve turned that into “we went to war only because of Israel’s push” something that is not remotely implied by Kerry’s statement; Netanyahu wasn’t even Prime Minister in 2003. So you’re lying now.

    • hophmi on February 26, 2015, 4:24 pm

      And also, gimme a break. Kerry voted for the war. That was not Netanyahu’s fault.

      • italian ex-pat on February 26, 2015, 7:06 pm

        A lot of politicians voted for that war, some of them truly believing the ‘evidence’ of Saddam Hussein’s possession of WMD, others because it fit their agenda. There’s no doubt in my mind thatv

    • Kay24 on February 27, 2015, 1:38 am

      No one is lying here Hops, if you have the courage to watch Netanyahu give testimony in front of members of Congress in the above youtube video, you will see that he is referred to as the “former PM of Israel” obviously he had some clout then, or else some pro war group would not have wanted him to come and lie to America, as usual, urging and trying to convince us that we should get rid of Saddam Hussein. Back then he was still the lying war monger, he is today, and still using the US to do his dirty work. Finally, who died over there Hops? Who was in the front lines? Certainly not a single Jewish soldier from Israel. It must be hard living in denial, the way you do.

    • can of worms on February 27, 2015, 3:48 am

      @hophmi –“You’ve turned that into “we went to war only because of Israel’s push” something that is not remotely implied by Kerry’s statement”

      Who was behind it? Who ‘pushed’ it? Who ‘did’ it, “hophmi”? “Who got the tar, who got the feathers/Who had the match, who set the fires/Who killed and hired?” –A.Baraka

      “We hear the questions rise
      In terrible flame like the whistle of a crazy dog
      Like the acid vomit of the fire of Hell
      Who and Who and WHO who who
      Whoooo and Whooooooooooooooooooooo!’

  10. Pixel on February 26, 2015, 1:56 pm

    Bill Kristol Verified account ‏@BillKristol
    9:31 AM – 26 Feb 2015
    “Of course, attendees shouldn’t be rude. But they don’t have to attend these speeches. Rice, Power to address AIPAC”
    Susan Rice, Samantha Power to address AIPAC meeting

    Mendel ‏@Mendel150 18m18 minutes ago
    10:29 AM – 26 Feb 2015
    @BillKristol They should set out a big nosh in the lobby so no one attends those speeches.


    GREAT idea, Bill. I couldn’t agree MORE!!
    Mendel, I’ll bring the lox. You bring the bagels and schmear.

    That’ll show ’em.

  11. Bornajoo on February 26, 2015, 2:12 pm

    They should play that clip of Netanyahu lying about Iraq across as many USA TV networks as possible just before he tells his next load of lies about Iran.

    His welcome song in Congress should be “won’t get fooled again” by The Who

    I never thought Kerry had it in him!

    • Walid on February 26, 2015, 2:19 pm

      Kerry is already very wealthy; he doesn’t rely on Zionist handouts and he doesn’t need to be re-elected.

      • Bornajoo on February 26, 2015, 2:24 pm

        Good point Walid.

        He’s married to that heinz billionaire (I think.)

      • seafoid on February 26, 2015, 5:36 pm

        He has a real Boston accent as well.

      • RoHa on February 26, 2015, 7:22 pm

        Is he bullet-proof as well, or just brave enough to take the risk?

    • Kathleen on February 26, 2015, 4:25 pm

      Think Netanyahu kicked Kerry too many times in the cajones. Clearly more importantly Kerry knows how Netanyahu and Israel have been undermining U.S. National Security for years. He is really being Israel’s best friend..too bad they can not see this.

  12. Kathleen on February 26, 2015, 4:20 pm

    Netanyahu is being hammered all over the place. Yet we still do not see Chris Matthews etc have real experts on his show about the P5+1 negotiations. Experts like the Leveretts. So tired of the pre approved MSNBC contributors who know little in detail about Iran and ongoing negotiations.

    And let’s speak the truth here…neoconservatives did more than push the Iraq invasion. They created, cherry picked and disseminated the false pre-war intelligence. Michael Ledeen, Michael Rubin, Cheney, Libby, Douglas Feith, Cambone, Wurmers, Kenneth Pollack etc all had their hands deep into the bloody pre war doo doo.

    If we had a just international system this cast of deadly characters would be on trial at the Hague with the rest of the Bush administration war criminals. They were more than complicit

  13. German Lefty on February 26, 2015, 5:00 pm

    OT: After the video of a Jew walking in Paris, there’s a video of an Israeli-Jewish immigrant walking in Berlin for 3 hours. Result: Nothing happened to him.
    Then, there’s an article about an American-Jewish immigrant. He has worn his kippah publicly for two years in Germany and nothing happened to him either. He says that most people don’t bother about his kippah. And those who do bother about his kippah simply want to know how it stays on his head. He claims that this is “typically German”: People care less about his religion and more about his technique.

  14. seafoid on February 26, 2015, 5:36 pm

    The CSPAN video is fascinating. Milikovsky said he would like to see regime change in Iraq.
    And was it worth it , bibi? All the rapes, all the dead children, all the killing?

    He also told the Yanks that Saddam was developing nuclear weapons

    What an asshole

    • Kay24 on February 26, 2015, 9:48 pm

      What I cannot understand is, why the US keeps getting “moved” by a proven liar, again and again, and Boehner, as of today, saying nothing is going to budge, that this Master Prevaricator, will give his speech (full of lies) as planned. Shouldn’t we be ashamed that we are looking like dupes, still giving this despicable war monger, the platform, to go against our own President’s efforts to make an agreement with Iran, and give this AH the opportunity to make a political move so that he can win his damn elections? The member of Congress will look the bigger AH’s for standing up and giving this man standing ovations.

      • Citizen on February 27, 2015, 9:51 am

        Very few Americans watch c-span. They watch Maury.

      • pete on February 27, 2015, 1:48 pm

        That is because our elected officials are totally owned by Israeli backed money. To a congress[..] money and votes are more important than a million Arab children starving to death. Is it any wonder the people in the middle east hate us? My biggest disappointment is that Prez O,Bama did not say “hey […] you can speak here when I say so, therefore you are not welcome here.

      • seafoid on February 27, 2015, 10:17 pm

        Prez O’Bama may be waiting for them to manoeuvre themselves into a noose between him and the American people. There is no point in wasting capital trying to neutralize them when hubris will do it anyway.

    • Marnie on February 27, 2015, 4:55 am

      “I’m tellin’ ya, it was this big!” – and other assorted whoppers and fairy tales told by one of the masters of deception, duplicitousnous and the double-cross.

  15. seafoid on February 26, 2015, 5:44 pm

    Kerry video

    Remember all the mangled and broken American soldiers

    “The common perception of Walter Reed is of a surgical hospital that shines as the crown jewel of military medicine. But 5 1/2 years of sustained combat have transformed the venerable 113-acre institution into something else entirely — a holding ground for physically and psychologically damaged outpatients. Almost 700 of them — the majority soldiers, with some Marines — have been released from hospital beds but still need treatment or are awaiting bureaucratic decisions before being discharged or returned to active duty.
    They suffer from brain injuries, severed arms and legs, organ and back damage, and various degrees of post-traumatic stress. Their legions have grown so exponentially — they outnumber hospital patients at Walter Reed 17 to 1 — that they take up every available bed on post and spill into dozens of nearby hotels and apartments leased by the Army. The average stay is 10 months, but some have been stuck there for as long as two years.
    Not all of the quarters are as bleak as Duncan’s, but the despair of Building 18 symbolizes a larger problem in Walter Reed’s treatment of the wounded, according to dozens of soldiers, family members, veterans aid groups, and current and former Walter Reed staff members interviewed by two Washington Post reporters, who spent more than four months visiting the outpatient world without the knowledge or permission of Walter Reed officials. Many agreed to be quoted by name; others said they feared Army retribution if they complained publicly.
    While the hospital is a place of scrubbed-down order and daily miracles, with medical advances saving more soldiers than ever, the outpatients in the Other Walter Reed encounter a messy bureaucratic battlefield nearly as chaotic as the real battlefields they faced overseas.
    On the worst days, soldiers say they feel like they are living a chapter of “Catch-22.” The wounded manage other wounded. Soldiers dealing with psychological disorders of their own have been put in charge of others at risk of suicide.
    Disengaged clerks, unqualified platoon sergeants and overworked case managers fumble with simple needs: feeding soldiers’ families who are close to poverty, replacing a uniform ripped off by medics in the desert sand or helping a brain-damaged soldier remember his next appointment. ”

    Remember everything that Zionism has done to help them.

  16. JWalters on February 26, 2015, 6:23 pm

    This is why Israelis hate Obama. In subtle steps he’s taking on Israel’s insanity like no American president since JFK. Kennedy tried to stop Israel’s nuclear bomb program and make the Israel lobby register as an agent of a foreign government. The latter would have curtailed Israel’s ability to put money into American political campaigns. Had he succeeded he would have saved the world a lot of grief.

    As the facts come into focus, bit by bit, more and more media people will feel safe telling the truth. This is a very welcome development.

    Another good article on the Israeli facade collapsing.

  17. Daniel Rich on February 26, 2015, 7:58 pm

    MSM, ’en masse,’ embraced the idea of going to war [Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, etc.], so, yes, BiBi should keep his pie hole shut and stay in his pigeonhole in the whaling wailing wall, but let’s not forget the role the media [and their thick think tank pundits] played in bringing us all this crap.

    I’m not going to toot my own horn [as small as it may be], but I succinctly remember the chorus of voices against unlimited warfare to be pretty darn small as well, an odd 13 years ago.

  18. Kay24 on February 26, 2015, 9:52 pm

    There is a guy right now on CNN called Jon Medved claiming the US and Israel are best friends…..really? Do best friends go over the Presidents head, connive with your political rival, and get invited to speak against the President’s policies? As for the polls that show a high number of American still supporting Israel, one should be told who owns these polling companies, who conducts these polls, and WHERE they took the questions too. Certain areas in Florida perhaps?

  19. Kay24 on February 27, 2015, 2:05 am

    “Netanyahu’s plans to speak to Congress have irritated many Democratic members, but also have put them in a difficult spot – fearing they will look anti-Israel if they don’t attend.”

    Really? They seem to be more apprehensive about being seen as anti Israel, MORE than anti Obama/American. Have they been reduced to this? There are many ways of handling this, they can always say they are not against Israel, but do not agree with how Netanyahu has handled this. They can always say that they do not want to be seen as pro war. Surely they are smarter than that? Or are they willing to look like American Idiots?

  20. bryan on February 27, 2015, 4:00 am

    Is this the same guy who in an address to Congress in 1996 bemoaned the tragic death of Rabin (“This is not the first time that a Prime Minister of Israel addresses a joint meeting of Congress. My immediate predecessor, Shimon Peres, addressed this body — and before him, the late Yitzhak Rabin, who was tragically cut down by a despicable, savage assassin. We are grateful that Israeli democracy has proved resilient enough to overcome this barbaric act, but we shall always carry with us the pain of this tragedy.”) despite the fact that a certain Likud leader and future Prime Minister of Israel had accused Rabin of being “removed from Jewish tradition … and Jewish values”, had organised anti-Rabin rallies where posters portrayed Rabin in a Nazi SS uniform or being the target in the cross-hairs of a sniper, and was accused by Rabin of inciting anti-Oslo political violence?

    Is this the same guy who predicted in 1992, and 1995, that Iran was 3-5 years away from acquiring an atomic bomb, and in a 1996 speech to Congress predicted that an Iranian bomb was “extremely close” and who in a 2012 speech to the UN claimed Iran would obtain a nuclear bomb the following year?

    Granted there are buffoons in Congress but surely the right to address Congress should be reserved for statesmen of vision and integrity, not cynical and dissembling propagandists dissing Congress for an impromptu election stunt?

  21. Nevada Ned on February 27, 2015, 8:48 am

    Netanyahu is trying to get the US to attack Iran, as many MW readers have commented. But why?

    Israeli leaders (not just Netanyahu), are happy that the US has destroyed iraq. Now they want to have the US destroy Iran, a county of 70 million. That would enable Israel’s goal of being the regional superpower in the Middle East.

    One neglected point (in the MW discussion) is that Netanyahu has been supported financially by Sheldon Adelson, to the point of being a creature of Adelson. Lots of Congressional representatives fervently hope not to end up targeted by Adelson, who spent $100 M in the last election, and will likely spend even more in the future. Journalist Connie Brueck had a long piece in The New Yorker (June 2008 issue), documenting Adelson’s vast influence in Israeli politics. Addison is an even bigger fish in Israel than he is in the US, because Israeli politics is a smaller pond than US politics. Addison even established a free newspaper in Israel to promote his extremist ideas.

    The system of private donations controlling public officiais is a system of legal organized bribery. In this case, Adelson controls Netanyahu, and then Adelson uses Netanyahu (and the rest of the Israel lobby) to pressure Congress to promote Adelson’s drive to attack Iran.

    While Connie Brueck documented Adelson’s enormous clout in politics, a full account of the Israel Lobby and its power should also include the Israeli/US businessman Haim Saban, (owner of Paramount pictures) a major donor to Democrats. Saban gave $10M to establish the Saban Center at the Brookings Institute, which is normally considered a centrist think tank, but which now has a extremist Zionist branch.

    • annie on February 27, 2015, 10:39 am

      Adelson controls Netanyahu, and then Adelson uses Netanyahu (and the rest of the Israel lobby) to pressure Congress to promote Adelson’s drive to attack Iran.

      imho it’s more likely adelson found in netanyahu someone who thinks like he does, shares his goals, and whom he trusts is most able to materialize those goals for israel and zionism, and therefore he supports him. that’s different than controlling someone. plus, he doesn’t have to completely control netanyahu because he can also financially support even more radical groups in israel who will apply pressure on netanyahu or make it appear he is being pressured to garner the same results.

    • Walid on February 27, 2015, 11:34 am

      “… the Brookings Institute, which is normally considered a centrist think tank, but which now has a extremist Zionist branch. ”

      Brookings also has a branch in Doha, Qatar. How about that?

  22. Vera Gottlieb on February 27, 2015, 9:19 am

    And the frigging people in Washington don’t have brains of their own???????????

  23. AnotherProudZionist on February 27, 2015, 11:23 am

    John Kerry voted for the Iraq war and made lots of speeches in support of the war. He is a huge hypocrite.

    There are widespread lies promoted by the left that Saddam didn’t have weapons of mass destruction. So what did he gas the kurds with Helium balloons? Even the very liberal New York Times published a report about ISIS seizing Iraqi chemical weapons.

    “However, according to a report published by The New York Times on Tuesday, the U.S. military not only recovered massive stockpiles of chemical weapons in Iraq, including in the Muthanna complex now controlled by ISIS, it actively attempted to keep the discovery of the munitions a secret. The report, which is based on interviews with several former U.S. army personnel, alleged that between 2004 and 2010, soldiers found thousands of rusty and corroded chemical munitions.”

    Apparently ISIS used some of those weapons against the Kurds in Kobani.

    Iraq was preparing to invade Saudi Arabia. It invaded Kuwait. Now that Saddam is overthrown we can sit back in our comfortable armchairs and criticize but if he hadn’t been overthrown we would have had a very powerful and hostile tyrant in control of the Middle East. Obama has thrown victory away so the Iranian are the new threat and boy are they a threat. Netanyahu was right then and he’s even more right now.

    • annie on February 27, 2015, 1:49 pm

      The report, which is based on interviews with several former U.S. army personnel, alleged that between 2004 and 2010, soldiers found thousands of rusty and corroded chemical munitions.

      apz, i found your quote here:

      yes it did, which was reflected in the Duelfer Report, that’s old news. here’s the nyt:

      “remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.”

      but there’s no evidence saddam was stockpiling these nor was that alleged by the nyt.

      So what did he gas the kurds with Helium balloons

      probably from chemical weapons supplied by the US, as reported in that same nyt article:

      expansive but largely secret chapter of America’s long and bitter involvement in Iraq.

      The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.

      so much for your redacted source (btw, we don’t publish links to front page magazine so don’t bother trying) also, the source at ibtimes links to a report that doesn’t support the allegation made. at least i couldn’t find it.

      Even the very liberal New York Times published a report about ISIS seizing Iraqi chemical weapons.

      where? because all i could find was a nyt report saying the area where the US ran into old ’90 era rotting munitions was now an area under isis control. the ibtimes claim was sourced to the rubin center, barry rubin’s neocon outfit (otherwise known as meria) link:


      even they pose it as a question.

      Apparently ISIS used some of those weapons against the Kurds in Kobani.

      not according to any source docs mentioned. ibtimes:

      The report has prompted fears that ISIS could have access to vast stockpiles of chemical weapons, including sarin, mustard gas, and VX, a nerve agent.

      the nyt only claimed

      Munitions are unaccounted for in areas of Iraq now under control of ISIS.


      acknowledged that chemical weapons were turning up in Iraq, and predicted that troops would find more.

      which is old news:

      The report acknowledged that only small stockpiles of chemical WMDs were found, the numbers being inadequate to pose a militarily significant threat.

      imho, this is a bunch of rehashed old news.

      Iraq was preparing to invade Saudi Arabia. It invaded Kuwait. Now that Saddam is overthrown we can sit back in our comfortable armchairs and criticize but if he hadn’t been overthrown we would have had a very powerful and hostile tyrant in control of the Middle East.

      oh please. saddam was our guy until he wouldn’t whistle our tune.

      Obama has thrown victory away so the Iranian are the new threat and boy are they a threat.

      triple yawn. and how did you leapfrog from saddam era ’90’s chem weapons and ISIS to iran being a threat? that’s quite the divert.

Leave a Reply