Twenty year pastor?" But he's a MUSLIM, Steve, a MUSLIM. Please follow the right-wing script properly. Don't you read your Caroline Glick enough?

SUPERB journalism, Mr. Goldberg. As good as it gets. We are extremely fortunate to have access to it.
Kol hakavode! Chag Sameach!

Netanyahu is right as often as Bill Kristol. Never. He is doing for Israel what Milosevic did for Serbia. Seriously.

"His views are often accepted on the American right, particularly among conservative American Jews, as if they represent an Israeli security consensus..."
Indeed. They are almost 180 degrees FROM those of the security experts. That is why 200 former generals, Mossad and Shin Bet leaders urged voters not to reelect him. (Tragically, not enough Israelis heeded those wise words from Israeli heroes.)

That is why Netanyahu forbade his current Mossad chief from speaking to members of Congress. That is why Efraim Halevy, the former Mossad chief who Netanyahu himself appointed, is doing all he can-speaking, writing-to see that the agreement with Iran is affirmed. That is why so many former Shin Bet, Mossad and IDF chiefs view Netanyahu a greater danger to Israel than Iran.

There is a highly significant op-ed by a “Jew in name only”, Efraim Halevy. It is entitled "Obama was right, Iran capitulated" and can be found on YNET. Halevy served in the Mossad for about 30 years, rising to be head of it, appointed BY NETANYAHU. He also served as head of Israel's National Security Council. Halevy served as the personal envoy of, key advisor to and confidant of five Prime Ministers, from the left and the far right: Shamir, Rabin, Netanyahu, Barak and Sharon. He is credited with being the most critical individual in bringing about the critical Israel–Jordan Peace Treaty.

With no personal or political ax to grind, lays out seven critical reasons why Israel should support the agreement with Iran. It is an important piece.

There is an extremely significant op-ed written by former Mossad Chief Efraim Halevy. It is entitled "Obama was right, Iran capitulated" and can be found on YNET. Mr. Halevy, appointed to lead the Mossad BY NETANYAHU and with no personal or political ax to grind, lays out seven critical reasons why Israel should support the agreement with Iran. I only hope and pray that members of Congress read that piece and listen to the wise words of a former head of the Mossad who obviously cares greatly about Eretz Yisrael.

“...Howard Dean opined that the Obama Administration should walk away from the talks and let the sanctions continue to bite Iran until it begs for mercy. A week earlier, the incredible–that is, not credible–former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton modestly proposed that we should just bomb the Iranian nuclear facilities and be done with it...It would be nice to think that melodrama–walking away from the table, bombing Iran–would have some sort of conclusive effect. But Dean’s plan assumed that the international sanctions would remain in effect if we walked away–a very unlikely proposition, as the Russian and Chinese foreign ministers made it clear that they were satisfied with the outline of the deal the Americans and Iranians were still squabbling over.Bolton’s bomb throwing assumed that Iran would react as Iraq and Syria did when Israel bombed their nuclear reactors–that is, not at all. But Iran is completely different from the almost-states of Syria and Iraq. It is a real place. It has natural borders on all but one side. It has a 4,000-year history and a distinct culture. It is Persian, not Arab. It has a sophisticated, well-educated populace, which may not like the authoritarian government but is proud and patriotic and very sensitive to disdain from Western imperial powers. Indeed, if we were to bomb its nuclear facilities, the Iranians would quickly rebuild them and rush toward the creation of a nuclear deterrent.” -Joe Klein at TIME

I pray that the members of Congress and/or their staffs listen to EXPERTS and not lobbyists, far right wing, undemocratic billionaires, knee-jerk anti-Obama-ists and Likudnik automatons. Almost every non-partisan, respected expert says that this agreement is a good one for the US and the world. Indeed, it accomplished more than experts felt was able to be accomplished.

Google "Iranian Nuclear Deal-What the Experts Are Saying". More significantly, learn the views of one of the foremost ISRAELI experts on Iran, Professor Haggai Ram, head of Middle East Studies Department at Ben-Gurion University. He has been studying Iran for more than 30 years. In a nutshell, he maintains that, despite the rhetoric of the aging ayatollahs and other hardliners, Iran has no evil intent on Israel or any other nation. Iran is governed by pragmatic decision-making. Is it really going to get into a conflict with a nation that has a nuclear arsenal of possibly 300 weapons? Prof. Ram states, "Iran serves as a fig leaf to the real danger to Israel’s fate – the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
Most significantly almost every former head of the IDF, the Mossad and the Shin Bet supports the agreement. Indeed, Ephraim Halevy, a former head of the Mossad, who was APPOINTED BY NETANYAHU, identifies Netanyahu as a greater threat to Israel than Iran! This is probably why Netanyahu prohibited the current head of the Mossad from speaking with members of Congress.

If members of Congress vote based on the facts and the opinions of experts and NOT on the persuasion of lobbyists and right-wing pundits or the desire to win Jewish votes and the contributions of Israel-First billionaires, these bills will be soundly defeated.

BTW, in 2012, the Public Religion Research Institute found that among self-identified Jewish adults, 51% of those registered to vote cited the economy as the most important issue driving their voting decision. 15% cited the growing gap between the rich and the poor, while 10% cited health care and 7% the deficit. Only 4% cited Israel as the most important issue to their vote.

That is most encouraging. Elected officials in the US are elected to represent and protect the interests of the United States and Americans, not those of any other nation. I only wish they would always do so and not be swayed by lobbyists and the deep, deep pockets of far, right wing, undemocratic billionaires. If they did, many less young Americans—none of them named Kristol or Adelson or Bolton or Krauthammer or Wolfovitz—would lose their lives around the globe.

This is a most interesting statistic cited in the article: “attitudes toward Israel influence the vote of 73% of British Jews”. What is surprising is that there is not more support for Milibrand.
A 2010 JERUSALEM POST article by Professor David Newman of Ben Gurion U. cited a study of 4,000 respondents by the Jewish Policy Research Institute of London on the attitudes of the British Jews towards Israel. The findings as stated in the POST article included:
1) Nine out of ten British Jews have visited Israel, and a similar number consider it their “ancestral homeland.”
2) Over ten percent of Anglo-Jewry have, during the past 60 years, made aliya and reside in Israel with their families – the highest percentage of any western country.
3) British Jews clearly desire peace and are eager to see the Israeli government take steps to achieve it. Over three-quarters favor a “two state solution” as the “only way Israel will achieve peace with its neighbors in the Middle East,” and two-thirds favor trading land for peace. Most significantly, three-quarters oppose the expansion of settlements in the West Bank. Some go further still – just over half (52 percent versus 39%) would support Israeli government negotiations with Hamas.

Again, this article and the study are five years old. Have attitudes changed that much in Britain? Or is there personal antipathy toward Milibrand? I'm sure Cameron supports a “two state solution” and the trading of land for peace. And I am certain he opposes the expansion of settlements in the West Bank. Moreover, last year, when the UN Human Rights Council initiated a War Crimes Investigation of Israel's actions in the most recent Gaza fighting, there was only ONE nation that voted against the commencement of that investigation—the US under President Obama. Britain under Cameron abstained.

So it seems there is more a problem with Milibrand's style and rhetoric. Or maybe British Jews just don't want a Jew with Jewish values.