Netanyahu Addresses Congress

Is Israel a theocracy?

If yes..yep..most liberals are against theocracy..most conservatives are for them.

If no..then pointing out Israel is a bad player in the region sometime has nothing to do with the Jewish religion.

Your choice.:lol:

why do the left hate jews so much? doyathink?

Most of the left are jewish.

So they must be self hating..:lol:

I can't understand that either.
 
Why do you guys have to lie about what the President actually said.

Almost always you'll leave out "with mutually agreed landswaps".

Is it because you can't find any other way to denigrate your enemy, the President?

The PA Constitution begins by stating that the territory of the "State of Palestine" is an "indivisible unit based upon its borders on the even of June 4, 1967" - which include, of course, all of Jerusalem and many of its Jewish suburbs. It also states, "All residents of this territory shall be subject to Palestinian law exclusively." Article 3, states, "Palestine is a peace loving state that condemns terror, occupation and aggression.." The PA Constitution's Article 5, states: "Arabic and Islam are the official Palestinian language and religion. Christianity and all other monotheistic religions shall be equally revered and respected." It is important to understand what this means under Sharia Islamic Law. Under Sharia Law that means, other religions, such as Christianity, let alone Judaism, will be openly, legally, and constitutionally PERSECUTED. Any religion other than Islam will be denied any juridical status under the new Palestinian State Constitution." Similarly, Article 7 states, "The principles of Islamic Sharia are a major source for legislation."

I don't believe President Obama endorsed the PA's Constitution when he added the phrase "with mutually agreed landswaps".
 
It's about the Jews....no more and no less.

My Grandfather followed the Jewish faith when he moved into Baldwin Long Island. He had to show a few "Good Christians" who burned a cross on his lawn that a louisville slugger was a multipurpose tool..that just wasn't used for sports.

It's laughable now that those "Good Christians" are giving card blanche to Israel now..even over their own country.

Very laughable.:lol:

Trust me, if they did that...they where not "Good Christians". If you're gonna knock the Christian faith, at least use a good example to do so instead of distorting a sad incident by making it out to be like the whole Christian faith does shit like this.
If anything, it would have been a left wing radical group of Christianity that did this, being that they are all about hating jews and national socialism like the nazis where.

The Nazis were mostly Christian. So was Hitler.

He was following this book:
On the Jews and Their Lies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He got the okay from Pope Pius:
http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=3131

Hitler said what he did, he did as a good Christian:
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow my self to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice… And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows . For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people." –Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922

Christian Europe was trying to purge itself of Jews for ages. This wasn't the first time. Hopefully..it was the last.

Pope John Paul II and the Jews
 
Well if Israel is such a great place..a good thing to do is allow them to be completely independent. So cutting off the funding of the Israeli military by American Tax payers should be a wonderful place to start.

Cutting funding to Hamas would be another good place to start, better yet, let's have Berry cut off funding to all of our enemies, that would save alot of tax payers money right?

Preaching to the choir, boyo.

I am against all this ridiculous waste of money. Including our 700 or so foreign bases.

Yep our foreign bases at an annual cost of around 1/4 trillion.
 
Why do you guys have to lie about what the President actually said.

Almost always you'll leave out "with mutually agreed landswaps".

Is it because you can't find any other way to denigrate your enemy, the President?

The PA Constitution begins by stating that the territory of the "State of Palestine" is an "indivisible unit based upon its borders on the even of June 4, 1967" - which include, of course, all of Jerusalem and many of its Jewish suburbs. It also states, "All residents of this territory shall be subject to Palestinian law exclusively." Article 3, states, "Palestine is a peace loving state that condemns terror, occupation and aggression.." The PA Constitution's Article 5, states: "Arabic and Islam are the official Palestinian language and religion. Christianity and all other monotheistic religions shall be equally revered and respected." It is important to understand what this means under Sharia Islamic Law. Under Sharia Law that means, other religions, such as Christianity, let alone Judaism, will be openly, legally, and constitutionally PERSECUTED. Any religion other than Islam will be denied any juridical status under the new Palestinian State Constitution." Similarly, Article 7 states, "The principles of Islamic Sharia are a major source for legislation."

I don't believe President Obama endorsed the PA's Constitution when he added the phrase "with mutually agreed landswaps".

"Mutually agreed landswaps" these days is code for Israel giving into Palestinian demands. Otherwise is pretty meaningless.
 
Cutting funding to Hamas would be another good place to start, better yet, let's have Berry cut off funding to all of our enemies, that would save alot of tax payers money right?

Preaching to the choir, boyo.

I am against all this ridiculous waste of money. Including our 700 or so foreign bases.

Yep our foreign bases at an annual cost of around 1/4 trillion.

Stop preaching your hate you jew hater.
 
The PA Constitution begins by stating that the territory of the "State of Palestine" is an "indivisible unit based upon its borders on the even of June 4, 1967" - which include, of course, all of Jerusalem and many of its Jewish suburbs. It also states, "All residents of this territory shall be subject to Palestinian law exclusively." Article 3, states, "Palestine is a peace loving state that condemns terror, occupation and aggression.." The PA Constitution's Article 5, states: "Arabic and Islam are the official Palestinian language and religion. Christianity and all other monotheistic religions shall be equally revered and respected." It is important to understand what this means under Sharia Islamic Law. Under Sharia Law that means, other religions, such as Christianity, let alone Judaism, will be openly, legally, and constitutionally PERSECUTED. Any religion other than Islam will be denied any juridical status under the new Palestinian State Constitution." Similarly, Article 7 states, "The principles of Islamic Sharia are a major source for legislation."

I don't believe President Obama endorsed the PA's Constitution when he added the phrase "with mutually agreed landswaps".

"Mutually agreed landswaps" these days is code for Israel giving into Palestinian demands. Otherwise is pretty meaningless.

Bush advocated for the exact same thing in 2007, yet there was no fake pretend outrage from republicans.

This has nothing to do with principles, it's all about american partisan hackery at its finest.
 
Amazing how ahppy some Americans are about the amount of influence another nation has in OUR government.

How many times has an American leader spoken to the Israeli assembly?

or leaders from other countrys for that matter?
 
I don't believe President Obama endorsed the PA's Constitution when he added the phrase "with mutually agreed landswaps".

"Mutually agreed landswaps" these days is code for Israel giving into Palestinian demands. Otherwise is pretty meaningless.

Bush advocated for the exact same thing in 2007, yet there was no fake pretend outrage from republicans.

This has nothing to do with principles, it's all about american partisan hackery at its finest.

Don't you guys ever get tired of using 'Bush did it too' as the excuse to defend something really disingenuous or stupid?
 
"Mutually agreed landswaps" these days is code for Israel giving into Palestinian demands. Otherwise is pretty meaningless.

Bush advocated for the exact same thing in 2007, yet there was no fake pretend outrage from republicans.

This has nothing to do with principles, it's all about american partisan hackery at its finest.

Don't you guys ever get tired of using 'Bush did it too' as the excuse to defend something really disingenuous or stupid?

Okay.

Clinton did it too.

Happy now?:lol:
 
"Mutually agreed landswaps" these days is code for Israel giving into Palestinian demands. Otherwise is pretty meaningless.

Bush advocated for the exact same thing in 2007, yet there was no fake pretend outrage from republicans.

This has nothing to do with principles, it's all about american partisan hackery at its finest.

Don't you guys ever get tired of using 'Bush did it too' as the excuse to defend something really disingenuous or stupid?

I'm not a democrat, have never voted for a single one.

I'm saying if you were against the principles of using 1967 borders as a starting point and both sides having to concede things than you would have shown your disgust when Bush said this, when Clinton said this, etc.

It shouldn't only be a big deal if Obama says it, it's either a big deal when everyone says it or it's never a big deal no matter who says it.

Again, it's just good ol' partisan hackery.
 
The PA Constitution begins by stating that the territory of the "State of Palestine" is an "indivisible unit based upon its borders on the even of June 4, 1967" - which include, of course, all of Jerusalem and many of its Jewish suburbs. It also states, "All residents of this territory shall be subject to Palestinian law exclusively." Article 3, states, "Palestine is a peace loving state that condemns terror, occupation and aggression.." The PA Constitution's Article 5, states: "Arabic and Islam are the official Palestinian language and religion. Christianity and all other monotheistic religions shall be equally revered and respected." It is important to understand what this means under Sharia Islamic Law. Under Sharia Law that means, other religions, such as Christianity, let alone Judaism, will be openly, legally, and constitutionally PERSECUTED. Any religion other than Islam will be denied any juridical status under the new Palestinian State Constitution." Similarly, Article 7 states, "The principles of Islamic Sharia are a major source for legislation."

I don't believe President Obama endorsed the PA's Constitution when he added the phrase "with mutually agreed landswaps".

"Mutually agreed landswaps" these days is code for Israel giving into Palestinian demands. Otherwise is pretty meaningless.

Of course. Sorry I forget to look at my Rush Limbaugh secret decoder ring for what he really means when he says........

But the meaningless part I do agree with. The polcy calling for a return to the 67 border with a mutually aggeed on land swap has been Standing US policy for a couple of decades now endorsed by both Clinton and Bush. The continuation of the status quo is a victory for the Settlers and the illegal West Bank Settlements. So every president since Bushes father has been giving the Likud a victory.
 
I don't believe President Obama endorsed the PA's Constitution when he added the phrase "with mutually agreed landswaps".

"Mutually agreed landswaps" these days is code for Israel giving into Palestinian demands. Otherwise is pretty meaningless.

Of course. Sorry I forget to look at my Rush Limbaugh secret decoder ring for what he really means when he says........

But the meaningless part I do agree with. The polcy calling for a return to the 67 border with a mutually aggeed on land swap has been Standing US policy for a couple of decades now endorsed by both Clinton and Bush. The continuation of the status quo is a victory for the Settlers and the illegal West Bank Settlements. So every president since Bushes father has been giving the Likud a victory.

Every time Israel has tried to give back land taken in the '67 war, which Israel did not initiate but Arabs intent on destroying Israel, the PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah, or whomever the "We hate Israel" group of the day was involved has used that land to conduct kidnappings, bombing raids targeting innocent citizens and school children, to launch rockets and mortars into Israel hoping to hit and maim or kill somebody, anybody.

Okay that was 43 years ago. We've had a whole lot of countries change hands, names, borders, leadership over that length of time.

At what point does Israel get tired of trying to deal with people who want nothing more than to destroy Israel? At what point should they be able to say f*ck it. You do your thing. We're keeping and using the land you used to attack us from and it's ours now?

Why do those who accuse Israel of 'illegal land possession" never EVER look at WHY Israel has kept that land? Why do they focus on Israel as the bad guys rather than those who attacked them and continue to do so?
 
Why do you guys have to lie about what the President actually said.

Almost always you'll leave out "with mutually agreed landswaps".

Is it because you can't find any other way to denigrate your enemy, the President?

There will be no agreement to any land swap. So the phrase "mutually agreed land swap" was and remains disingenuous and meaningless.
 
How many foreign heads of state have been allowed to address congress?

By my count, Prime Minister Netanyahu's address is the 106th given to a joint session of the United States Congress by a foreign head of state.

1874 - King Kalakaua of Hawaii
1939 - King George VI of Canada
1947 - President Miguel Aleman Valdes of Mexico
1949 - President Eurico Gaspar Dutra of Brazil
1951 - President Vincent Auriol of France
1951 - President Galo Plaza of Ecuador
1951 - Prime Minister Alcide de Gasperi of Italy
1952 - Prime Minister Winston Churchill of the United Kingdom
1952 - Queen Juliana of the Netherlands
1954 - President Celal Bayar of Turkey
1954 - Governor General Vincent Massey of Canada
1954 - Emperor Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia
1954 - President Syngman Rhee of South Korea
1955 - President Paul Magloire of Haiti
1956 - President Giovanni Gronchi of the Italian Republic
1956 - President Sukarno of Indonesia
1957 - President Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam
1958 - President Theodor Heuss of West Germany
1958 - President Carlos Garcia of the Philippines
1959 - President Arturo Frondizi of Argentina
1959 - President Jose Maria Lemus of El Salvador
1959 - President Sean T. O'Kelly of Ireland
1959 - King Baudouin of the Belgians
1960 - President Alberto Lleras Camargo of Columbia
1960 - President Charles de Gaulle of France
1960 - King Mahendra of Nepal
1960 - King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand
1961 - President Habib Bourguiba of Tunisia
1961 - President Ayub Khan of Pakistan
1961 - President Manuel Prado Ugarteche of Peru
1962 - President Joao Goulart of Brazil
1962 - Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi of Iran
1964 - President Antonio Segni of the Italian Republic
1964 - President Eamon de Valera of Ireland
1966 - President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines
1967 - President Gustavo Diaz Ordaz of Mexico
1970 - President Georges Pompidou of France
1970 - President Rafael Caldera of Venezuela
1972 - President Luis Echeverria of Mexico
1975 - President Walter Scheel of West Germany
1975 - President Anwar El Sadat of Egypt
1976 - Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin of Israel
1976 - Taoiseach Liam Cosgrave of Ireland
1976 - President Valery Giscard d'Estaing of France
1976 - King Juan Carlos I of Spain
1976 - President William R. Tolbert, Jr. of Liberia
1977 - Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau of Canada
1982 - Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands
1983 - President Karl Carstens of West Germany
1984 - Taoiseach Garret FitzGerald of Ireland
1984 - President Francois Mitterand of France
1984 - President Miguel de la Madrid of Mexico
1985 - Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of the United Kingdom
1985 - Prime Minister Bettino Craxi of Italy
1985 - President Raul Afonsin of Argentina
1985 - Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of India
1985 - Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore
1986 - President Jose Sarney of Brazil
1986 - President Corazon Aquino of the Philippines
1987 - President Chaim Herzog of Israel
1988 - Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada
1988 - Prime Minister Bob Hawke of Australia
1989 - Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan
1989 - President Carlos Salinas de Gortari of Mexico
1989 - President Roh Tae-woo of South Korea
1990 - President Vaclav Havel of Czechoslovakia
1990 - Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti of Italy
1991 - President Violeta Chamorro of Nicaragua
1991 - Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom
1991 - President Carlos Menem of Argentina
1992 - President Richard von Weizsacker of Germany
1992 - President Boris Yeltsin of Russia
1994 - P.V. Narasimha Rao of India
1994 - King Hussein of Jordan
1994 - Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin of Israel
1994 - President Nelson Mandela of South Africa
1995 - President Kim Young-sam of South Korea
1995 - Prime Minister Shimon Peres of Israel
1996 - President Jacques Chirac of France
1996 - Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel
1996 - Taoiseach John Bruton of Ireland
1997 - President Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle of Chile
1998 - President Kim Dae-jung of South Korea
1998 - President Emil Constantinescu of Romania
2000 - Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee of India
2001 - President Vincente Fox of Mexico
2002 - Prime Minister John Howard of Australia
2003 - Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom
2004 - Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar of Spain
2004 - President Hamid Karzai of the Afghan Transitional Administration
2004 - Interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi of Iraq
2005 - President Viktor Yushchenko of Ukraine
2005 - Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India
2006 - Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy
2006 - President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia
2006 - Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel
2006 - President Vaira Vike-Freiberga of Latvia
2006 - Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq
2007 - King Abdullah II of Jordan
2007 - President Nicolas Sarkozy of France
2008 - Taoiseach Bertie Ahern of Ireland
2009 - Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the United Kingdom
2009 - Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany
2010 - President Felipe Calderon of Mexico
2011 - Prime Minister Julia Gillard of Australia
2011 - Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel
 
Amazing how ahppy some Americans are about the amount of influence another nation has in OUR government.
Prime Minister Netanyahu has the moral courage to address the American people through their national legislature today and speak the truth, even at the cost of angering this nation's ostensible leader. Obama is using his power to coerce truest ally in the Middle East into national suicide. For Netanyahu to stand up to a bully in that bully's own house takes a lot of cojones. If Israel had as much influence in our government as you seem to think it does, we wouldn't have a president calling for its unilateral surrender. As for Americans cheering Netanyahu's speech, one can hardly blame Americans for clamoring over the truth when they hear it, regardless of whose lips it comes from, particularly in the absence of genuine leadership from our executive branch since January 20, 2009.
 

Forum List

Back
Top