Why I Support Netanyahu’s Speech (After I didn’t Support it)

Ron Cantor —  March 1, 2015 — 12 Comments
889 Shares

I began writing this article about three weeks ago and had been unable to finish it. I have gone back and forth regarding the Prime Minister’s upcoming speech on Iran. However it was a poll I saw today on Politico.com that encouraged me to finish this blog and publish it. I’ll get to the poll in a minute, but first, the article…

When I first heard that John Boehner had extended an invitation to Benjamin Netanyahu to speak before Congress, I was uneasy. For a head of state to bypass the head of state of another country in order to speak against the policies of that leader, before Congress or Parliament, is unheard of. Imagine Obama going to Israel, at the invitation of the opposition, to speak before the Knesset, in order to convince them to give up Jerusalem or negotiate with Hamas. We’d be up in arms here in Israel.

Historic Breaking of Protocol

Many people have pointed out that this is an historic breaking of protocol. And I agree. In most cases it would be wrong. In fact, many Israelis are concerned over their PM going head to head with U.S. President. The center/left party leaders have accused Netanyahu of ruining Israel’s historic relationship with the U.S.. Susan Rice, Obama’s hatchet-woman, agrees, “calling the move ‘destructive of the fabric of the relationship,’ between the United States and Israel.”

Of course Prime Minister’s enemies at home have something to gain with elections around the corner—and something to lose if he hits a homerun. And let’s not forget, Obama has been the aggressive one in this relationship. The turmoil began many years ago with the President refusing a photo-op with Bibi on his first visit to Obama’s White House and then continued with Obama storming off in anger to eat dinner with his family, leaving Netanyahu’s delegation to fend for themselves. Talk about a break in protocol. You have the head of state of your closest Middle East ally in your home and instead of eating dinner with him, you lose your temper and march out. I bet he wouldn’t do that to the Supreme Leader of Iran! So let’s be clear, the break in protocol cuts both ways.

Two years later Bibi was invited to speak to Congress. In the history of the United States of America, I do not believe that a foreign head of state has given a speech before Congress, in which he blatantly disagreed with the President, and then was given nearly 30 standing ovations! The New York Times wrote,

“Mr. Netanyahu received so many standing ovations that at times it appeared that the lawmakers were listening to his speech standing up.”

Congress needs Bibi

The relationship between Netanyahu and Obama has been frosty for a long time. But Congress loves him and now needs him as the President has shut them out regarding Iran. The President has emasculated Congress as he is simply making up laws, because he can’t get what he wants [immigration, gun control] via the constitutionally outlined process. Now, Obama is seeking to make a weak deal with the radical fundamentalist regime of Iran. These Islamic fanatics are not far from ISIS in ruthlessness. Obama fails to understand that attacking the west, for Iran, is an Allah-given call.

Change of Heart

Thus, I have changed my initial opinion on this issue and for one simple reason. President Barack Obama is guilty of dereliction of duty when it comes to upholding the law of the land. You cannot pick and choose which laws you will enforce. Regarding the terror threat, he is simply in denial.

  • He refuses to name our enemy—Radical Islam.
  • He refuses to deal decisively with ISIS.
  • He is being soft on Iran and is willing to allow the hardline regime to have a “nuclear program” if it “is for exclusively peaceful purposes.”
  • He is not willing to arm states like Jordan, who are willing to defeat ISIS.
  • He was angry at Egypt when they responded powerfully against ISIS in Libya for killing 21 Egyptian Christians.
  • He went against U.S. Law in making a deal for the accused deserter, Sgt. Bergdahl.
  • He recently authorized a secret meeting with reps from the Muslim Brotherhood [that Jen Psaki referred to merely as former Egyptian Parliamentarians] and our State Department. In other words, he has a frigid relationship with Egypt’s elected President, but reaches out to Islamic radicals in the same country.
  • He took time at the Prayer Breakfast to chide American Christians regarding events that happened 1,000 years ago by so-called Christians, reasoning that their actions should keep us from judging Islamic fanatics.
  • And the latest bizarre behavior is hosting a Summit on Violent Extremism that focused primarily and extoling the virtues of Islam and defending the terrorists, saying that they have, “legitimate grievances” [against the west].

(Amazingly, most of the items listed were added since I began writing this article!)

Does Obama love America?

All this led America’s Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, to say, probably out of utter bewilderment at Obama’s behavior, what so many of us sadly feel: He doesn’t believe that the President loves America. It certainly seems that way… at least not in the patriotic way that Presidents, Republicans and Democrats, before him did.

It appears that President Obama is asleep at the wheel. Each day I am more and more dumbfounded at his lack of decisiveness. I see no outrage at terrorism. A Jordanian soldier is burned alive and Jordan acts within hours against ISIS. Americans are beheaded and our President is back on the golf course within six minutes of ending his press conference—six minutes!

When to Break Protocol: Esther

Protocol is there for a reason. To provide order. However it serves another unintended purpose: To be broken in times of distress, thus drawing attention to the special need or circumstance. Esther broke protocol because her people were about to be annihilated through genocide. She entered the king’s presence without having been summonsed. It was a horrific breaking of the rules of conduct. But the wise king understood that Esther would only do such a thing if the need were great.

  • By breaking protocol Bibi has gained the world’s attention.
  • By breaking protocol more people will watch his speech tomorrow than probably watched the last State of the Union address.
  • By breaking protocol he will draw the world’s attention to the fact that Iran cannot be allowed to go nuclear.

Could it be that Netanyahu has been called to America ‘for such a time as this”?

Most Americans want Bibi to Speak

Even Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Qatar are expressing deep concern at Obama’s reluctance to deal firmly with Iran. And this morning I saw this. A recent poll “found that 59% of Americans support Netanyahu’s speech to Congress and only 23 % oppose.” The poll also revealed that 36% strongly supported the speech while only a mere 11%, less than one third, strongly opposed it.

If the American people have no problem with Boehner and Netanyahu breaking protocol because of the dire situation with Iran, then I guess I don’t either. How much worse can it get?

Wait… it just got worse! As I am sitting here, I just heard an Obama administration official tell a Senate committee that one primary reason that we must close GITMO is because ISIS is clothing hostages in the similar orange prison uniforms. In other words, if not for GITMO, this would not be happening. Fortunately, a senator grilled the official asking, “How many prisoners were in GITMO when terrorists flew planes into the World Trade Center on 9/11”?

“None,” came the sheepish answer from the Obama team official.

889 Shares