Trending Topics:

Factchecking Netanyahu: An annotated guide to the Israeli P.M.’s speech to Congress

on 64 Comments

The following is an annotated version of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress on March 3, 2015. The Mondoweiss annotations were made by Allison Deger, Adam Horowitz and Eamon Murphy, and anyone is welcome to add an annotation at Click on the gray highlights to read the annotations.


Mondoweiss Editors

Other posts by .

Posted In:

64 Responses

  1. amigo on March 3, 2015, 3:43 pm

    “Iran’s Supreme Leader says that openly. He says, Iran plans to have 190,000 centrifuges, not 6,000 or even the 19,000 that Iran has today, but 10 times that amount — 190,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. With this massive capacity, Iran could make the fuel for an entire nuclear arsenal and this in a matter of weeks, once it makes that decision. ” nietanyahu

    Does anyone know where I can buy stock in the centrifuge industry.

  2. W.Jones on March 3, 2015, 4:07 pm

    42 times it says applause here.

    A record?

  3. Kathleen on March 3, 2015, 4:10 pm


  4. W.Jones on March 3, 2015, 4:46 pm

    By the way, those were 25 standing ovations.

    Remember that part where Feinstein said:

    Feinstein: I’ll Be at Netanyahu Speech — But I Won’t Be ‘Jumping Up and Down’
    (Source: National Review Online‎)

    Well, was she?

  5. annie on March 3, 2015, 4:49 pm

    omg, those laugh lines are hysterical! even sally field (thank you!) and robery de niro!

    if anyone not clicked an embed and watched the pop ups(or whatever they are called) i urge you to click around.

    this is brilliant. allison, adam eamon, hats off.

    • Kathleen on March 3, 2015, 10:40 pm

      going to read tomorrow night. Can’t wait to read the grey highlights and who said what about the speech

    • justicewillprevail on March 4, 2015, 12:05 am

      They don’t work on an ipad, sadly.

    • ziusudra on March 4, 2015, 4:07 am

      Greetings Annie,
      Dear Annie, allow me some space.
      I agreed to your thought not to mention ancient biblical history where it has no connection to the Topic at hand.
      BB brought up the Ester Purim Episode.
      Scene: time 2500BC; Maiden Ester, a Jewess, Purim a Festival.
      In 586BC, the last 2 tribes were carried off to the slammers by the Babylonians.
      They were freed by the Persians in 536BC under King Cyrus.
      Queen Ester is a persian name meaning Star.
      Queen Ester reigns in 539BC!? King Cyrus reigned untill 530BC.
      Purim is an Akkad Name of an Akkadian festival.
      This tale is typical of the writings of the ancient Clergy manifesting Hebraic figures in great scenes of the past histories of other cultures. Ironic that biblical foreignors have Hebrew names: Jezabel,Goliath, etc. Hebrew figures have foreign names: Abraham, Moses, etc.
      Here BB brings up the O.T. to a majority of N.T. listeners who have no knowlege or care, where no one is going to answer when BB speaks & even bestowe a Standing Ovation for such muck.
      Pump up de jam, BB times running out for you personally.
      PS Thanking you Annie in advance for posting my 2 Cents.

      • seafoid on March 4, 2015, 4:36 pm

        Jezebel is a great name.

    • just on March 5, 2015, 9:13 am

      Hats off, indeed!

      Many thanks.

  6. Walker on March 3, 2015, 6:31 pm

    Mondoweiss, great overall coverage of the visit.

    Here is a terrific discussion of the topic by Stephen Walt:
    Bibi Blows Up the Special Relationship

    It’s a very refreshing antidote to posts on this site that say that opposition to Netanyahu’s speech is all based on antisemitism (or Jewish self-hatred), by one who has been unfairly accused of the same.

    • JWalters on March 3, 2015, 8:56 pm

      Thanks for that link. Irrational fears keep the war profits flowing. Bibi’s mission was to manufacture fear to manufacture war.

  7. kalithea on March 3, 2015, 7:34 pm

    I read on another site someone who posted a picture of a woman with a black eye implying that Nancy Pelosi suffers from battered wife syndrome, and frankly it’s a great analogy and describes the U.S./Israel relationship perfectly:

    He makes me want to cry, but I know he loves me (cue excuses) it’s just that sometimes I’m too intelligent, outspoken and independent and it aggravates him – but there’s nothing wrong with our relationship – I still love…Israel…(sob)

    Sure, Madam Pelosi, try convincing your shrink!

    This relationship is very sick.

    • piotr on March 4, 2015, 8:47 am

      To me, the best analogy is Mikado and “his daughter in law elect”

      MIKADO: In a fatherly kind of way
      I govern each tribe and sect,
      All cheerfully own my sway

      KATISHA. : Except his daughter-in-law elect!
      As tough as a bone,
      With a will of her own,
      Is his daughter-in-law elect.

      MIK. : My nature is love and light
      My freedom from all defect

      KAT. : Is insignificant quite.
      Compared with his daughter-in- law elect!
      Bow Bow
      To his daughter-in-law elect.

      CHORUS: Bow Bow
      To his daughter-in-law elect.

      President: Mikado, Israel: Katisha, Congress: Chorus

  8. Bornajoo on March 3, 2015, 7:46 pm

    That was really excellent. Thank you all.

  9. Kay24 on March 3, 2015, 9:13 pm

    Great job fact checking out the (predictable) lies for us. Initially, we never are sure exactly what the lies are. How he can stand in front of the world, and lie this way, we will never know. So far, the reaction has been negative, from what I see. Even the New York Times Op-ed criticizes his lame speech:

    “Mr. Netanyahu’s Unconvincing Speech to Congress

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel could not have hoped for a more rapturous welcome in Congress. With Republicans and most Democrats as his props, he entered the House of Representatives to thunderous applause on Tuesday, waving his hand like a conquering hero and being mobbed by fawning lawmakers as he made his way to the lectern.

    Even Washington doesn’t often see this level of exploitative political theater; it was made worse because it was so obviously intended to challenge President Obama’s foreign policy.

    Mr. Netanyahu’s speech offered nothing of substance that was new, making it clear that this performance was all about proving his toughness on security issues ahead of the parliamentary election he faces on March 17. He offered no new insight on Iran and no new reasons to reject the agreement being negotiated with Iran by the United States and five other major powers to constrain Iran’s nuclear program.

    His demand that Mr. Obama push for a better deal is hollow. He clearly doesn’t want negotiations and failed to suggest any reasonable alternative approach that could halt Iran’s nuclear efforts.

    Moreover, he appeared to impose new conditions, insisting that international sanctions not be lifted as long as Iran continues its aggressive behavior, including hostility toward Israel and support for Hezbollah, which has called for Israel’s destruction.

    Mr. Netanyahu has two main objections. One is that an agreement would not force Iran to dismantle its nuclear facilities and would leave it with the ability to enrich uranium and, in time, to produce enough nuclear fuel for a bomb. Two, that a deal to severely restrict Iran’s ability to produce nuclear fuel for a decade or more is not long enough. He also dismisses the potential effectiveness of international inspections to deter Iran from cheating.

    While an agreement would not abolish the nuclear program, which Iran says it needs for power generation and medical purposes, neither would walking away. Even repeated bombing of Iran’s nuclear plants would not eliminate its capability because Iran and its scientists have acquired the nuclear know-how over the past six decades to rebuild the program in a couple of years.

    The one approach that might constrain Iran is tough negotiations, which the United States and its partners Britain, France, China, Germany and Russia have rightly committed to. If an agreement comes together, it would establish verifiable limits on the nuclear program that do not now exist and ensure that Iran could not quickly produce enough weapons-usable material for a bomb. The major benefit for Iran is that it would gradually be freed of many of the onerous international sanctions that have helped cripple its economy.

    While no Iranian facilities are expected to be dismantled, critical installations are expected to be reconfigured so they are less of a threat and the centrifuge machines used to enrich uranium would be reduced. Iran would be barred from enriching uranium above 5 percent, the level needed for power generation and medical uses but not sufficient for producing weapons-grade nuclear fuel. Absent a negotiated agreement, Iran will continue with its program without constraints.

    • Mooser on March 3, 2015, 10:02 pm

      Of course, no mention in the NYTs that Israel in possession of a nuclear weapons arsenal of unknown extant, with unknown allocation of command. For all we know, an Israeli field commander can order a tactical nuclear strike, if the spirit moves him.

      • justicewillprevail on March 4, 2015, 12:02 am

        Good point. Who could be one of the many extreme right wing settlers. Or, in other words, a crazy fundamentalist with the bomb. Exactly what Yahoo says we should be terrified of.

      • Mooser on March 4, 2015, 7:03 pm

        If I wanted to throw a nuclear bomb at somebody, but wanted to divert responsibility for it, that’s just what I would do. I’d give field commanders tactical nuclear weapons, and tell them they are only for the direst of emergencies.
        And the field commander is disposable. You can say he’s nuts and sack him.

      • Kay24 on March 4, 2015, 10:29 pm

        I agree. It is the usual do as I say, not as I do rhetoric, which is laughable sometimes. As if anyone can trust Israeli leaders to adhere to the rules, they have not signed the NPT, not allowed any inspections of their nuclear facilities, and are constantly attacking it’s neighbors, sometimes with banned weapons. This is one dangerous nation, and it’s leaders appear to be unhinged sometimes, and lie with an angry face, like we just saw in Congress.

        We have to be idiots to trust them.

      • Keith on March 5, 2015, 5:27 pm

        MOOSER- “I’d give field commanders tactical nuclear weapons, and tell them they are only for the direst of emergencies.”

        As far as I know, American field commanders have that prerogative. Russians too. Presidential authority to use nukes applies to STRATEGIC weapons only. Tactical nukes (no more than 100 kilotons) can be introduced by a three star general. Unless we eliminate all nuclear weapons it is only a matter of time until the big one. We have come extremely close several times already, however, Russian caution saved the day. Obama, anti-nuke talk notwithstanding, is planning on upgrading the US nuclear arsenal in yet another US violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which requires all of the existing nuclear powers to make good-faith efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons while the US does just the opposite. And the hypocrisy regarding Iran which is in compliance with the treaty and supports a nuclear weapons free Middle East which existing nuclear powers US and Israel oppose. I am afraid that the sorrows of empire may soon include nuclear annihilation.

      • Mooser on March 7, 2015, 9:22 pm

        I’d love to see all nuclear weapons gone. I’ve lived in the shadow of those goddam things since I was born.

        I consider it a miracle nobody’s chucked one at anybody since Nagasaki. Unless you want to consider (and I would) the DU used by the US in Iraq a form of atomic attack.

    • DavidDaoud on March 5, 2015, 5:32 am

      Kay24, to the best of your knowledge has Iran ever been caught cheating in any meaningful way by the IAEA?

      • Kay24 on March 5, 2015, 8:40 am

        I don’t know about cheating, but they have not been cooperative sometimes to inspections, but that is not surprising. Saddam Hussein was the same, in fact he kicked out some inspectors out, but at the end it was for nothing, he had NONE. No country likes to be treated this way, and they, like their neighbors do have national pride. That said, this is why negotiations are important, and why all sides must agree. Iran has a right to nuclear power for domestic consumption, although some neighbors sound envious of that too.
        LIttle steps at a time, and it is far better to try to close a deal with Iran, rather than having to send American kids to die in a war, that the US and not Israel, will have to pay for.

        “An Iranian proposal to close down a third of its centrifuges and relinquish most of its low-enriched uranium has led to progress in talks with the six world powers in Geneva, according to Western diplomats. However, many issues remain unresolved and the chances of reaching an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program by March 30 are low, they add.”

  10. talknic on March 3, 2015, 9:24 pm
    • Bornajoo on March 4, 2015, 4:20 am

      Thanks for the link Talknic. Unfortunately we didn’t find any of those bags big enough so we’ve had to use buckets and they’re all overflowing

  11. W.Jones on March 3, 2015, 9:55 pm

    NETANYAHU: In the Middle East, Iran now dominates four Arab capitals, Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Sanaa. And if Iran’s aggression is left unchecked, more will surely follow. So, at a time when many hope that Iran will join the community of nations, Iran is busy gobbling up the nations.


    OK, so exactly which part of that statement were the Congress applauding?
    1. Iran dominating capitols?
    2. Iran gobbling up nations when many hope it will join the global community?

    Or are they just clapping for whatever comes out of his mouth like he was a pachinko machine?

    • W.Jones on March 3, 2015, 10:28 pm

      At this point, you have to realize that the Congress would applaud for him for WHATEVER he says to characterize Iran.

      He could say: “Our researchers have found that Iran was with OBL and did 911.”
      And he would get applause. Once anti-Iranian congressmen are clapping for Iran dominating capitols, practically anything is possible, even logically incoherent statements.

    • piotr on March 4, 2015, 8:57 am

      The Levant for centuries was a ground were armies of the King of Kings were fighting the Emperors. Traian had a decent success, but alas! the Empire was backstabbed by recalcitrant sectarians who raised in heinous and murderous rebelions (see Kitos War and Bar-Kochba).

      Borrowing the book from Parthians, now is the Empire turn to support murderous sectarians (taqfiris AND others). But another tradition was that in the aftermath of armies being wiped out in Mesopotamia, the Empire was reducing the presence in the region for a generation.

  12. Kathleen on March 3, 2015, 10:48 pm

    Phil, Annie Chris Matthews really went out on a limb tonight ripping Netanyahu up.


    Chris “No one seriously believes he (Netanyahu) supports a two state solution. He keeps raising the bar. He says well I want the Arab states to recognize Israel now they have to sign on and say it should be a Jewish state. He keeps raising the bar. No one believes he wants a two state solution” Chris grew some tonight.

  13. Atlantaiconoclast on March 3, 2015, 10:50 pm

    I wish some brave journalist would ask Netanyahu if he would rather have Syria under the control of Iran or Isis. And then the journalist should ask how the Muslim extremists Israel supports in Syria are any better than Iran.

    • W.Jones on March 4, 2015, 12:06 am

      They would just deny that they support the ISIS headchoppers. They just supply humanitarian assistance to the “moderate rebels” (apparently that means Nusra).

      • Atlantaiconoclast on March 4, 2015, 1:42 pm

        Of course, but any good journalist would come back with, So how are attacks on Syria’s regime forces NOT helping ISIS, given that Syria is in a life and death struggle with ISIS?

      • W.Jones on March 5, 2015, 12:13 am

        In a discussion I had on this topic, the other person replied that this is still not direct evidence for my claim of collusion.

        Perhaps the Israelis made a “miscalculation” in judging the strength of ISIS, or perhaps the Israelis are not supporting the attacks on Assad so greatly that he will fall to ISIS, etc. For them it came down to lack of evidence for the claim of Israeli support for ISIS.

        (Some Muslims BTW claim there is a direct link between ISIS and the Israelis nonetheless).

      • annie on March 5, 2015, 12:58 am

        w.jones, that israel works w/nusra is not in dispute (i watched a TV2 israeli news broadcast about it a week or so ago) and nusra is affiliated w/isis. also, awile back a bunch of neocons agreed it was better to support or “balance” the fanatics then let assad get off. so they are just funding everything enough for it to fall apart. this is what we do there, it is a strategy. there are next to none organized armed moderates fighting against assad. they do not exist in that form. this was the probelm all along w/the US finding people to funnel the money to. they had moderate leaders but those leaders had no brigades.

        For them it came down to lack of evidence for the claim of Israeli support for ISIS.

        the ol plausible deniability. what do you think they’ll do, hang up billboards stating they are supporting jhiadists? this is how the empires fight wars. do you think they care about dead muslims? they don’t care, the less the better in their minds. show me these moderate leaders w/troops fighting assad. they do not exist in any significant numbers.

      • Walid on March 5, 2015, 2:08 am

        “In a discussion I had on this topic, the other person replied that this is still not direct evidence for my claim of collusion. (W,Joners)

        It’s not collusion but downright overt cooperation. Some revealing news from the pro-Israel Monitor last week:

        “… In December 2014, the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, which maintains peace in the Golan Heights, released an intriguing report on contacts between the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and the Syrian rebels. The report disclosed, if only in part, that the two parties have held dozens of meetings, and that Israel transferred certain unidentified objects to anonymous individuals across the border fence. Furthermore, rebels on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights know that if they are injured in battle, they can receive medical care in Israel. According to official IDF sources, some 1,500 wounded individuals arrived at the border fence over the past two years and then received treatment in Israel. These included innocent women and children, but there were also many men who were injured in battle, or in other words, fighters. Not one of these was a soldier in the Syrian army. And their arrival is coordinated in advance, meaning that someone is informing the Israelis that they are on the way.

        What this shows is that after four years of fighting in Syria, Israel apparently is no longer sitting on the fence. These facts indicate that Israel is ostensibly taking a side in the crisis, and between the two sides, it chose to support the Sunni rebels. But who are these rebels, and what do they want? It is hard to tell, because, unfortunately, there is no public discourse in Israel about these contacts, nor is there any discussion about our new partners across the fence.

        Anyone who delves into the situation in Syria, if only just a little, will find a confusing jumble of armed factions, including the Free Syrian Army, but also some other more extreme factions that have adopted extremist ideology. First and foremost among these are Ahrar al-Sham and Jabhat al-Nusra (the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda). The latter is a deadly group, which has been declared a terrorist organization by the United States and the United Nations.

        While Israeli intelligence sources are likely to attribute the secrecy surrounding their support for these groups to security needs, it is actually a political issue. It should be utterly inconceivable that Israel’s security forces would maintain contact with such fickle militias, not subject to any laws, or that if they did, the Israeli public would know nothing about it. Imagine if the Shin Bet established clandestine relations with Hamas as politicians promoted a monstrous image of the group to the broader public.

        Here are a few questions that should be of some interest to Israelis: Why did Israel decide to wade into the sullied waters of the Syrian crisis after a lengthy period of neutrality? What was the basis of the alleged decision to side specifically with the Sunni rebels? Why did Israel prefer to establish contact with a non-state actor, rather than with the capital of a sovereign state? Are Israeli intelligence elements in contact with extremist groups?

        … But as far as Israel is concerned, experience teaches that the Shiite-Alawite camp is led by pragmatic individuals. While they may be motivated by the urge to attack Israel and shed its blood, this is not the result of some bloodthirstiness or messianic religious fervor, as it is with the various Sunni extremist factions. Yes, Damascus is Jerusalem’s traditional enemy, but it also knew how to keep the border quiet for four decades. Even in the numerous instances when Bashar al-Assad was allegedly attacked by the IDF (some of these instances according to foreign news sources), Assad was reluctant to respond, so as not to open up a front with Israel. With the Middle East experiencing a rising tide of fundamentalism, it is better to face a secular rather than a religious enemy.

        … Israel has a bitter score to settle with Hezbollah, too, but at least it is a disciplined movement … whose word counts for something, and which has a single loyalty. It is a group that can be spoken to (through mediators, of course). Its policies include avoiding attacks on enemy civilians, except in extreme circumstances, or when there is a need to reciprocate in kind. Its fighters do not behead anyone, nor do they set their prisoners on fire. When it wants to attack Syria or Hezbollah, Israel has an address to turn to. The same cannot be said about the Sunni extremist organizations. With them, it’s hard to tell who’s pulling the strings from a distance today, and who will be pulling the strings tomorrow. A retaliatory operation against them can sometimes resemble chasing after the ghosts of yesterday. With that in mind, Israel must know the true identity of the horse it is betting on.

        In the mid-1980s, the IDF’s Civil Administration in the Gaza Strip promoted Islamic organizations as counterweights to Fatah. What ultimately emerged out of those groups was Hamas, a group that has since devoured Fatah and now constitutes a tangible threat to Israel.

      • Walid on March 5, 2015, 3:30 am

        W.Jones, abit more on how Israel is orking with its ISIS pals from Richard Silverstein in a story of how Israel arrested a Druze soldier to be the fall guy to cover up some of its operations with ISIS:

        “… Turning to Syria, Israel would like you to believe it’s neutral in the civil war. But it isn’t. Israel has serially bombed Syrian targets and assassinated Syrian and Iranian generals (two) supporting the regime. Several media outlets and I have also reported Israel established a military encampment for Syrian rebels in Israeli-occupied Golan. Israeli media reports:

        UN observers stated that tents were set up about 300 meters from the Israeli position for some 70 families of Syrian deserters. The Syrian army sent a letter of complaint to UNDOF in September, claiming this tent camp was a base for “armed terrorists” crossing the border into Israel. The Syrians also warned that if the UN would not evacuate the tent camp, the Syrian army would view it as a legitimate target.

        UN peacekeepers have also written reports confirming this. Israel also shared intelligence and transferred weapons to al-Nusra Islamist rebels on the Golan border, and shot down a Syrian fighter jet which spent less than one second over airspace of Israel-occupied Golan (which itself is internationally recognized as Syrian territory.

        That’s what al-Maket further exposed. He followed a group of four Syrian rebel commanders as they crossed into Israel-occupied Golan and made their way to a rendezvous with Israeli intelligence officers. They met near border known in Hebrew as Ramat HaMagshimim (UN outpost 85). He videotaped a report some yards from the meeting and described it in detail. Al-Maket then offered the video to the Syrian regime and it was aired on Syrian national TV… ”

        For full story:

      • lysias on March 5, 2015, 12:47 pm

        The circus: How British intelligence primed both sides of the ‘terror war’:

        Yet according to former British counterterrorism intelligence officer Charles Shoebridge, despite this risk, authorities “turned a blind eye to the travelling of its own jihadists to Syria, notwithstanding ample video etc. evidence of their crimes there,” because it “suited the US and UK’s anti-Assad foreign policy”.

        This terror-funnel is what enabled people like Emwazi to travel to Syria and join up with IS – despite being on an MI5 terror watch-list. He had been blocked by the security services from traveling to Kuwait in 2010: why not Syria? Shoebridge, who was a British Army officer before joining the Metropolitan Police, told me that although such overseas terrorism has been illegal in the UK since 2006, “it’s notable that only towards the end of 2013 when IS turned against the West’s preferred rebels, and perhaps also when the tipping point between foreign policy usefulness and MI5 fears of domestic terrorist blowback was reached, did the UK authorities begin to take serious steps to tackle the flow of UK jihadists.”

        The US-UK direct and tacit support for jihadists, Shoebridge said, had made Syria the safest place for regional terrorists fearing drone strikes “for more than two years”. Syria was “the only place British jihadists could fight without fear of US drones or arrest back home… likely because, unlike if similar numbers of UK jihadists had been travelling to for example Yemen or Afghanistan, this suited the anti-Assad policy.”

        Having watched its own self-fulfilling prophecy unfold with horrifying precision in a string of IS-linked terrorist atrocities against Western hostages and targets, the government now exploits the resulting mayhem to vindicate its bankrupt “counter-extremism” narrative, promoted by hand-picked state-groomed “experts” like Husain and Nawaz.

  14. Kay24 on March 3, 2015, 10:59 pm
  15. Qualtrough on March 3, 2015, 11:59 pm

    The rock star reception at the beginning and the 24 standing fellations, you really have to see it to believe it.

  16. W.Jones on March 4, 2015, 12:05 am

    So do we get to cash in on that betting game sponsored on MW. I called something right:

    IIRC, Phil predicted that Netanyahu would cancel the speech to avoid conflicting Obama. Phil was once more overoptimistic and overestimated them, unfortunately. Sorry, Phil.

  17. German Lefty on March 4, 2015, 3:36 am

    All In with Chris Hayes 3/3/15
    Netanyahu makes his case to Congress
    After weeks of anticipation and controversy, the Israeli Prime Minister argued that a nuclear deal with Iran would embolden the regime to acquire the bomb. (17:09 minutes)

  18. RoHa on March 4, 2015, 6:04 am

    Fact checking? Why did you imagine there would be any facts to check?

  19. gracie fr on March 4, 2015, 6:37 am

    Netanyahu is appealing to the fear and hatred of Islam and Muslims that has been cultivated in the United States by many of the same members of Congress who are listening to Netanyahu to say it’s all this big morass, and if we make a deal with Iran, then we’re in effect supporting so-called militant Islam……..

    • Kay24 on March 4, 2015, 8:09 am

      Let’s give the devil his due…he used Purim, biblical stories, fear of Muslim terrorists, praised Obama first, then insulted him questioning his policies, and treating him like a naive child, as if he does not know what he is doing, negotiating, and dealing with. He also bluffed about Israel able to look after itself, and will act alone, although as an afterthought he mentioned that he KNOWS the US will always be there for Israel. What a joke, without the US Israel would have been flattened long time ago, and they cannot stand without our aid and weapons. His speech was predictable, and he is delusional that it was a major success.

  20. JimMichie on March 4, 2015, 8:23 am

    TimesWarp critique:
    Somebody Needs to Tell The NY Times: Israel Has The Bomb

  21. seafoid on March 4, 2015, 9:10 am

    It’s election kabuki at the end of the day. Like an elite language with flowery phrasing that says very little. Bibi talks the big man talk but he’s not going to attack iran. He needs something to get reelected so he’ll use this PR to go in front of the people.

    If the heat comes early to Israel in the summer and Yossi Israeli feels the testosterone rising along with the stress in the hazy midafternoons with the wind off the sea that isn’t cool enough maybe Bibi will launch another turkey shoot in Gaza. That is about it.

    And Judaism is so lost to be led by such a clown

    The WTF quotient is so high

  22. talknic on March 4, 2015, 9:23 am

    I want to see and hear Obama’s next appearance. Who coaches him? Wonder if speech writers get overtime? They’ll be busy. Or is it an algorythm alegorythm now a days?

    How about “Let’s face it America, we’re not gonna let some Israeli bullshit artist tell us how to run the the world’s most powerful nation!”

    “No, no Mr President, we can’t say that!

    “What do you mean “we”?”

    “Well you can if you wish Sir, but we can’t. “

    “Why not, it’s true isn’t it?”

    “Yes but we can’t say it, as a matter of fact we didn’t just say it was.”

    “Yes you did, I heard you!”

    “Yes, you did sir, but we didn’t say it sir.”

    “Well I’m gonna say it!”

    “OK guys wrap it up … let’s go next door and work on the you know what. Maybe we could just change Lincoln or Kennedy to Oba . . . . . . . . . . ”

  23. dgfincham on March 4, 2015, 9:59 am

    Iran’s Supreme Leader’s policy on nuclear weapons:

    “The Iranian nation has never pursued and will never pursue nuclear weapons. There is no doubt that the decision makers in the countries opposing us know well that Iran is not after nuclear weapons because the Islamic Republic, logically, religiously and theoretically, considers the possession of nuclear weapons a grave sin and believes the proliferation of such weapons is senseless, destructive and dangerous.”

    See also scores of similar statements by dozens of Iranian political leaders over several decades at

    Iran’s Supreme Leader’s policy on Israel:

    The usurping Zionist regime must be dealt with mainly through:

    A) Imprisoning it inside the borders of the occupied Palestinian lands, exerting political and economic pressure on it, and isolating it

    B) Ensuring the Palestinian nation’s resistance inside their country and providing them with what they need until they achieve final victory.

    How many of these idiot politicians have ever looked at the Supreme Leader’s website That is all you need to do to understand Iran’s policy.

    • amigo on March 4, 2015, 10:35 am

      Iran’s Supreme Leader’s policy on Israel:

      The usurping Zionist regime must be dealt with mainly through:

      A) Imprisoning it inside the borders of the occupied Palestinian lands, exerting political and economic pressure on it, and isolating it . DGF

      As they say, one bad turn deserves another.Btw , isn,t Israel isolating itself inside Occupied Palestinian lands and putting economic pressure on them.

      Why does Israel grant Iran,s wishes .You got to love zionist logic.

  24. Brewer on March 4, 2015, 12:44 pm
  25. Bandolero on March 4, 2015, 1:06 pm

    The Guardian published an annotated version of Netanyahu’s speech, too:

  26. Kathleen on March 4, 2015, 4:32 pm

    Former IAEA weapons inspector Scott Ritter has a great one up over at Huff Po.

    Bibi’s Blustery Blunder:

    “The concept of being lectured on the threat of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East by the larges proliferator of nuclear weapons in the Middle East is a bit disconcerting” Classic.

    However far more than “disconcerting.” The definition of pure arrogance and hypocrisy.

    Going to ask Scott to come over to Mondoweiss page of Netanyahu’s transcript maybe he will join in on the grey fact checking opportunities. Never know.. Never hurts to ask

    • seafoid on March 4, 2015, 4:34 pm

      There was no point to the speech. It was more showbiz than anything else.

  27. Stern Gang on March 4, 2015, 6:04 pm

    This is a rhetorical statement, but I can’t believe the garbage this maniac gets away with. In essence, America co-opts it and continues to let him bite that hand that feeds him. He is a bonafide, war mongering, propaganda spinning, manipulative, rogue. Be careful BN, when you claim to speak for the Jewish people you are creating a lot of misdirected and unjust ire/resentment. Is that part of your ploy? Well, that is an affirmative. You love to spin every conceivable conflict, criticism and area where Israel is culpable into fervent claims of anti-semitism. Please go away.

  28. talknic on March 4, 2015, 9:57 pm

    Netanyahu’s private thoughts 101

    The Iranians have said they don’t want nukes, there’s no evidence they are working towards nukes, so if they don’t get nukes, it’s because of me, Bibi Netanyahu, savior of the entire world and leader of the Jews! Of course we’ll still need to invade Iran Iran must still be invaded to prove they don’t have nukes, because even if they don’t have nukes they might have nukes.

  29. MRW on March 5, 2015, 12:45 am

    He looks like Hitler with grey hair and no moustache. Hair parted on the other side.

  30. talknic on March 6, 2015, 12:52 pm

    By the way … maybe even a little off topic … some of us just can’t tell OT from OT without a twist of lemon

    What better source than the horse

    Netanyahu is surely completely insane.

    The IEAE have known from the outset the Hall in Nataz was to house 500,000 centrifuges.

    The IAEA know, because they’ve observed and advised since the design stages. That’s one of the advantages of being in the IAEA. They help build nuclear stuff for peaceful purposes. Israel takes advantage of it despite not being a signatory to the NPT

Leave a Reply