WASHINGTON, March 3, 2015 — Standing before a joint session of Congress on December 26, 1941, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill recounted a litany of atrocities committed by Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan against the civilized world. He said it was difficult to reconcile their actions “with prudence or even with sanity.”
“What kind of a people do they think we are?” asked Churchill. “Is it possible that they do not realize that we shall never cease to persevere against them until they have been taught a lesson which they and the world will never forget?”
U.S. House and Senate members rose to their feet and cheered for five minutes. Churchill was committed to re-igniting the flagging flame of the West by marshaling the “irresistible forces of outraged civilization to bear upon the criminals.”
He spoke in moral absolutes. No apologies, no weasel words.
“As long as we have faith in our cause and an unconquerable willpower, salvation will not be denied us. In the words of the Psalmist, ‘He shall not be afraid of evil tidings; his heart is fixed, trusting in the Lord,’” said Churchill.
There will be no such unanimity when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks before a joint session of Congress on Tuesday. Netanyahu seeks to address President Obama and the Democratic Party’s twisted shift of sympathies toward murderous radical Islam, and in particular Iran, as showing a lack of “prudence or … sanity.” That especially describes the Obama administration’s determination to serve as midwife to Iran’s nuclear arsenal.
The left’s philosophy of moral equivalence denies any difference between Israel, a democratic nation forged in the crucible of anti-Semitic mass murder, and the totalitarian Arab states and their terrorist cat’s paws that surround her. These are bodies that publicly state their desire to continue the work begun by Hitler, interrupted by his suicide, work also pursued by radical Islamists.
And then there is Rep. G.K. Butterfield, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, whose philosophy extends no further than pigmentation. He told Capitol Hill reporters he believes Netanyahu’s speech is more “about President Barrack Obama being a black man disrespected by a foreign leader” than it is about the threat posed by a nuclear Iran to the civilized world.
The Israeli National News, citing a Kuwaiti news source, claims Netanyahu’s government planned to strike Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities back in 2014. But when Israeli officials “revealed the attack plan to Secretary of State John Kerry … Obama then threatened to shoot down the Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.”
In 2009, former President Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski told the Daily Beast, “They [Israel] have to fly over our airspace in Iraq [to reach Iran] … We have to be serious about denying them that right … If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not.”
Under Obama’s policies, that airspace is firmly in the sphere of ISIS and Iraq’s Iran-friendly Shiite government.
What frightens Obama and his depraved cult followers is that an articulate Netanyahu threatens to add, as Winston Churchill did, some much needed moral clarity.
They fear that Netenyahu will clearly outline the threat posed to the civilized world by radical Islam as assisted by a totalitarian, nuclear Iran—with the support of congressional Democrats and their man in the Oval Office.