ZOA Applauds Israeli PM Netanyahu On Masterful, Powerful & Effective Speech to U.S. Congress On Perils Of a Nuclear Iran

NEW YORK, March 3, 2015  -- The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has applauded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on his masterful, powerful and effective address today to a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress on the threat posed by a nuclear armed Iran and the perils of an apparent, dangerous and deeply flawed deal with Iran that permits it to become a nuclear threshold state.

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, "Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech was a very powerful and effective one and we applaud him for delivering it. It is likely that President Barack Obama is unhappy with it, particularly for its detailed exposure of the defectiveness of the proposed nuclear deal currently being negotiated in Switzerland, one that will leave Iran with the ability to become a nuclear threshold state and, after the agreement's lapse in ten years, a full, nuclear powerhouse.

"In his speech, Prime Minister Netanyahu correctly emphasized the dangers of a nuclear Iran for Israel. He was incisive in noting the failures of diplomacy and inherent limitations of inspections with North Korea that enabled it to become a nuclear power and how these mistakes are being repeated now in the case of Iran.

"The Prime Minister also pointed to the many dangerous and deeply flawed aspects of the the proposed nuclear agreement with Iran -- the fact that its intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBMs) program remain untouched by the agreement, with Iran refusing to even discuss it in these negotiations; that Iran is seeking to massively expand its centrifuges from some 19,000 now to 190,000; and that many of its nuclear sites are either excluded from inspection or even unknown. These ICBMs will be able to reach the United States and their only purpose is to carry nuclear warheads. They are called 'intercontinental' for good reason -- they're designed to reach from one continent from another.

"The Prime Minister was also particularly insightful in observing that Iran may be an opponent of the Islamic State in Iraq & Syria (ISIS), but it remains a virulent enemy of the United States, Europe, Israel and the world.

"The fact is that Iran poses not only an existential threat to Israel, but also to the United States, something that the Prime Minister might have emphasized more strongly. After all, the day Iran becomes a nuclear power, America, Europe sand the whole world will be obliged to live under the  shadow of nuclear blackmail. The Middle East will become a scene of nuclear proliferation by several regimes -- Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. And even if Iran never fires nuclear-tipped ICBMs at the U.S., who really believes Iran won't give such weapons to terrorists? And who believes that, once having such weapons, terrorists won't use them on the U.S.? And even if neither uses them, what unending series of concessions and retreats will America have to undertake to ensure that this continues?

"Prime Minister Netanyahu rightly said that Iran needs to do three things: stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East; stop supporting terrorism around the world; and stop threatening to annihilate Israel. I would add two more: stop their outrageous human rights abuses, and stop threatening the United States with destruction and chanting 'Death to America' and calling the U.S. 'the Great Satan.' Few seem to know that the Iranian Defense Ministry produced a report last December declaring that "the Iranian nation still sees the U.S. as the No. 1 enemy.

"Another point that the Prime Minister might have made is that the Iranian regime of today is very similar to the the Nazi regime of of the 1930s and 1940s."

Important excerpts from Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech:
"Today the Jewish people face another attempt by yet another Persian potentate to destroy us. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameneispews the oldest hatred, the oldest hatred of anti-Semitism with the newest technology. He tweets that Israel must be annihilated -- he tweets ... he tweets in English that Israel must be destroyed."
"For those who believe that Iran threatens the Jewish state, but not the Jewish people, listen to Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, Iran's chief terrorist proxy. He said: 'If all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of chasing them down around the world.'"
"Iran's regime is not merely a Jewish problem, any more than the Nazi regime was merely a Jewish problem. The 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis were but a fraction of the 60 million people killed in World War II. So, too, Iran's regime poses a grave threat, not only to Israel, but also the peace of the entire world."
"Just last week, near Hormuz, Iran carried out a military exercise blowing up a mock U.S. aircraft carrier. That's just last week, while they're having nuclear talks with the United States. But unfortunately, for the last 36 years, Iran's attacks against the United States have been anything but mock."
"Iran took dozens of Americans hostage in Tehran, murdered hundreds of American soldiers, Marines, in Beirut, and was responsible for killing and maiming thousands of American service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan. Beyond the Middle East, Iran attacks America and its allies through its global terror network. It blew up the Jewish community center and the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires. It helped Al Qaida bomb U.S. embassies in Africa. It even attempted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, right here in Washington, D.C."
"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."
"Two years ago, we were told to give President Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif a chance to bring change and moderation to Iran. Some change! Some moderation! Rouhani's government hangs gays, persecutes Christians, jails journalists and executes even more prisoners than before. Last year, the same Zarif who charms Western diplomats laid a wreath at the grave of Imad Mughniyeh. ImadMughniyeh is the terrorist mastermind who spilled more American blood than any other terrorist besides Osama bin Laden. I'd like to see someone ask him a question about that."
"Iran's regime is as radical as ever, its cries of 'Death to America,' that same America that it calls the 'Great Satan,' as loud as ever." Now, this shouldn't be surprising, because the ideology of Iran's revolutionary regime is deeply rooted in militant Islam, and that's why this regime will always be an enemy of America."
"Don't be fooled. The battle between Iran and ISIS doesn't turn Iran into a friend of America. Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic. The other calls itself the Islamic State. Both want to impose a militant Islamic empire first on the region and then on the entire world. They just disagree among themselves who will be the ruler of that empire. In this deadly game of thrones, there's no place for America or for Israel, no peace for Christians, Jews or Muslims who don't share the Islamist medieval creed, no rights for women, no freedom for anyone. So when it comes to Iran and ISIS, the enemy of your enemy is your enemy."
"ISIS is armed with butcher knives, captured weapons and YouTube, whereas Iran could soon be armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs. We must always remember --I'll say it one more time -- the greatest dangers facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. To defeat ISIS and let Iran get nuclear weapons would be to win the battle, but lose the war. We can't let that happen."
"But that, my friends, is exactly what could happen, if the deal now being negotiated is accepted by Iran. That deal will not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. It would all but guarantee that Iran gets those weapons, lots of them. Let me explain why. While the final deal has not yet been signed, certain elements of any potential deal are now a matter of public record ... Absent a dramatic change, we know for sure that any deal with Iran will include two major concessions to Iran. The first major concession would leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure, providing it with a short break-out time to the bomb. Break-out time is the time it takes to amass enough weapons-grade uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb. According to the deal, not a single nuclear facility would be demolished. Thousands of centrifuges used to enrich uranium would be left spinning. Thousands more would be temporarily disconnected, but not destroyed. Because Iran's nuclear program would be left largely intact, Iran's break-out time would be very short -- about a year by U.S. assessment, even shorter by Israel's. And if Iran's work on advanced centrifuges, faster and faster centrifuges, is not stopped, that break-out time could still be shorter, a lot shorter."
"Inspectors document violations; they don't stop them. Inspectors knew when North Korea broke to the bomb, but that didn't stop anything. North Korea turned off the cameras, kicked out the inspectors. Within a few years, it got the bomb. Now, we're warned that within five years North Korea could have an arsenal of 100 nuclear bombs. Like North Korea, Iran, too, has defied international inspectors. It's done that on at least three separate occasions -- 2005, 2006, 2010. Like North Korea, Iran broke the locks, shut off the cameras ... The U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, said again yesterday that Iran still refuses to come clean about its military nuclear program. Iran was also caught -- caught twice, not once, twice -- operating secret nuclear facilities in Natanz and Qom, facilities that inspectors didn't even know existed."
"The first major concession is a source of great concern. It leaves Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and relies on inspectors to prevent a breakout. That concession creates a real danger that Iran could get to the bomb by violating the deal. But the second major concession creates an even greater danger that Iran could get to the bomb by keeping the deal. Because virtually all the restrictions on Iran's nuclear program will automatically expire in about a decade."
"If Iran's Intercontinental Ballistic Missile program is not part of the deal, and so far, Iran refuses to even put it on the negotiating table. Well, Iran could have the means to deliver that nuclear arsenal to the far-reach corners of the earth, including to every part of the United States ...  this deal has two major concessions: one, leaving Iran with a vast nuclear program and two, lifting the restrictions on that program in about a decade. That's why this deal is so bad. It doesn't block Iran's path to the bomb; it paves Iran's path to the bomb."
"So why would anyone make this deal? Because they hope that Iran will change for the better in the coming years, or they believe that the alternative to this deal is worse? Well, I disagree. I don't believe that Iran's radical regime will change for the better after this deal. This regime has been in power for 36 years, and its voracious appetite for aggression grows with each passing year. This deal would wet appetite -- would only wet Iran's appetite for more."
"Would Iran be less aggressive when sanctions are removed and its economy is stronger? If Iran is gobbling up four countries right now while it's under sanctions, how many more countries will Iran devour when sanctions are lifted? Would Iran fund less terrorism when it has mountains of cash with which to fund more terrorism? Why should Iran's radical regime change for the better when it can enjoy the best of both worlds: aggression abroad, prosperity at home?"
"This deal won't be a farewell to arms. It would be a farewell to arms control. And the Middle East would soon be crisscrossed by nuclear tripwires. A region where small skirmishes can trigger big wars would turn into a nuclear tinderbox."
"Before lifting restrictions [on Iran], the world should demand that Iran do three things. First, stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second, stop supporting terrorism around the world. And third, stop threatening to annihilate my country, Israel, the one and only Jewish state."
"Iran's nuclear program can be rolled back well-beyond the current proposal by insisting on a better deal and keeping up the pressure on a very vulnerable regime, especially given the recent collapse in the price of oil. Now, if Iran threatens to walk away from the table -- and this often happens in a Persian bazaar -- call their bluff. They'll be back, because they need the deal a lot more than you do. And by maintaining the pressure on Iran and on those who do business with Iran, you have the power to make them need it even more. My friends, for over a year, we've been told that no deal is better than a bad deal. Well, this is a bad deal. It's a very bad deal. We're better off without it."
"We're being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That's just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal. A better deal that doesn't leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and such a short break-out time. A better deal that keeps the restrictions on Iran's nuclear program in place until Iran's aggression ends. A better deal that won't give Iran an easy path to the bomb."