Posted on 02/23/2015 6:10:42 AM PST by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis
Controversy surrounds the Prime Minister of Israel’s forthcoming appearance on Capitol Hill.
Invited by Republican House Speaker John Boehner to address Congress about the threat of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Benjamin Netanyahu welcomed this opportunity to share his country’s existential concern as the Iranian regime comes ever closer to achieving the capability of fulfilling its avowed goal of the total annihilation of Israel. But the White House has made known its displeasure. A growing number of Democratic lawmakers said they would boycott his talk. Vice President Joe Biden, who as president of the Senate would normally oversee Netanyahu’s address, said he would be out of town. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said she hoped the speech “doesn’t take place.”
Why all this animosity toward the leader of a long-standing ally, the only democracy in the middle east, to whom President Obama has long pledged his unswerving loyalty? Because the administration has made clear its fury at a supposed breach of protocol. The White House insists it was not consulted before the invitation was given. That breach of etiquette, it stoutly maintains, trumps any benefit Congress might gain from the insights of the Prime Minister of the country to be most immediately and severely affected by the present negotiations being concluded with Iran.
Remarkably, this is not the first time the issue of protocol lies at the heart of an Iranian threat to destroy the Jewish people. There is biblical precedent. Eerily echoing today’s story, the Book of Esther recounts the first recorded instance of attempted genocide against Jews in the ancient empire of Persia, today known as Iran....
(Excerpt) Read more at aish.com ...
At least Bibi is loyal to his nation and his people.
The whole “breach of protocol” is pretty funny coming from President Executive Order.
I thought it was a breach of protocol for the president of the United States to be a Muslim...
Despite Obama’s delusions and painful rationalizations, Western culture faces an existential threat from Islamic jihadism. In 1946 Churchill gave a clarion call with his “iron curtain” speech in Missouri that galvanized the resistance to the threat of communism. Netanyahu has the potential to do the same with his speech before Congress.
0bama doesn’t like the fact that people are finally starting to understand he’s the enemy.
Netanyahu figured it out and will address the American people (the house) directly.
0bama not having a say in it just pisses him off.
good.
The ‘treasonist-in-chief’ mouthing off about “breach of protocol”...
I think he’s getting backed into a corner as far as his viewing himself as ‘king (caliph) of America’.
Isn’t issuing all these executive orders a “breach of protocol”?
Echoes of “The Harbinger”.
And Esther wasn't?
What about separation of powers? Congress is its own branch of government, Seperate from the presidency. Obama has nothing to do with this decision. Unless he has become a dictator and Congress has given him their power......oh wait....
So whats the big deal Netanyahu to address Congress...
He’s done it twice before.
May 24, 2011 Binyamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel addressed a Joint Meeting of Congress. and on 12/12/95
Democrats get a life and grow up, you might learn something.
THIS is why Obama is so desperate to keep Bibi from giving that speech or to discredit him before he does:
Column one: Netanyahu’s true electoral rival (by Carolyn Glick)
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Column-one-Netanyahus-true-electoral-rival-391626
Excerpt:
Obama’s insistence that Islamic State and its ilk attack because of perceived Western misbehavior is completely at odds with observed reality. As The Atlantic’s Graeme Wood demonstrated this week in his in-depth report on Islamic State’s ideology and goals, Islam is central to the group. Islamic State is an apocalyptic movement rooted entirely in Islam.
Most of the coverage of Netanyahu’s scheduled speech before Congress has centered on his opposition to the deal Obama seeks to conclude with Iran. But it may be that the second half of his speech – which will be devoted to the threat posed by radical Islam – will be no less devastating to Obama. Obama’s stubborn refusal to acknowledge the fact that the greatest looming threats to global security today, including US national security, stem from radical Islam indicates that he is unable to contend with any evidence that jihadist Islam constitutes a unique threat unlike the threat posed by Western chauvinism and racism.
It is hard to understand either Israel’s election or Obama’s hysterical response to Netanyahu’s scheduled speech without recognizing that Obama clearly feels threatened by the message he will deliver. Surrounded by sycophantic aides and advisers, and until recently insulated from criticism by a supportive media, while free to ignore Congress due to his veto power, Obama has never had to seriously explain his policies regarding Iran and Islamic terrorists more generally. He has never endured a direct challenge to those policies.
Today Obama believes that he is in a to-the-death struggle with Netanyahu. If Netanyahu’s speech is a success, Obama’s foreign policy will be indefensible. If Obama is able to delegitimize Netanyahu ahead of his arrival, and bring about his electoral defeat, then with a compliant Israeli government, he will face no obstacles to his plan to appease Iran and blame Islamic terrorism on the West for the remainder of his tenure in office.
Is Obama ... HAMAN, then?! ... :-) ...
I was just knocking our lack of heroism in our leadership...
Right on the money.
Give it all Bibi. Israel experiences death everyday at the hands of Islam....
That's what they're afraid of.
Specifically pardoning illegal trespassing lawbreakers is not a breach of protocol?
Targeting opposition groups for extensive audits and denying them applications is not a breach of protocol?
Using a Pen and Phone to bypass the entire legislative branch is not a breach in protocol?
Obama has breached so much protocol his breeches are on fire constantly....
The big difference is, I don’t see the King extending His scepter and on the other hand, His Majesty seems to be building gallows.
Esther was very. But Obama ISN’T.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.